Komentarz do Wyjścia 13:17

ויהי בשלח פרעה... ולא נחם AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN PHARAOH HAD SENT [THE PEOPLE AWAY] THAT GOD GUIDED THEM NOT — The word נחם means He guided them, just as, (Exodus 32:34) “Go, guide (נחה) the people”, and (Proverbs 6:22) “when thou goest it shall guide (תנחה) thee”.

AND G-D LED THEM NOT BY THE WAY OF THE LAND OF THE PHILISTINES BECAUSE¹“Because.” Thus Rashi and Ibn Ezra render the Hebrew word ki, as will be explained. Ramban will suggest further on in the text that the word ki should be understood here as “although.” The J.P.S. translation follows Ramban’s explanation. IT WAS NEAR. “It would therefore be easy [for the Israelites] to return to Egypt by the same route. There are many Midrashic explanations, [but the above is the plain sense of Scripture].” Thus the language of Rashi. This is also the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who explained the purport of the verse to be that G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines “because” it was near. They might therefore be filled with regret [when they experience war], and they would immediately return to Egypt.
In my opinion, if their explanations were correct, the expression for G-d said would have been mentioned in first place in the verse, in which case the verse would read: “and G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, for G-d said, Because it is near, lest peradventure the people repent!”²But actually the verse reads: and G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines because it was near; for G-d said, etc. In other words, Ramban argues that according to Rashi and Ibn Ezra, the reason for G-d’s choice of the route by the wilderness and not by the land of the Philistines [because it was near], should have followed after the expression for G-d said. But the correct interpretation is that [the expression in question does not state the reason for G-d’s choice but merely] states that G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines although it was near and it would have been advantageous to lead them by that route, for G-d said: Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt.
The reason they would experience war if they went by the way of the land of the Philistines, is that the Philistines would surely not have given them permission to go peacefully through their land, and thus they might return to Egypt. But by the way of the wilderness, they would not see war until they came to the lands of Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites,³Deuteronomy 3:8. which were given to them [i.e. to Israel]. At that time, they were already far from Egypt, [and there was thus no reason to fear that they would be tempted to return to Egypt because of war]. The war of Amalek in Rephidim⁴Further, 17:8-13. was no reason for the Israelites to return to Egypt, since they did not pass through the land of the Amalekites. Rather, Amalek came from his country and warred against them because of his hatred of Israel. Even if they were to take their own course to return to Egypt, it would be to no avail since Amalek would fight them on the way. Besides, they were already far from Egypt because of the circuitous route which they had followed, and they knew of no other route.
Now Rashi commented: “When they see war. For instance, the war of the Canaanite and the Amalekite.⁵In Numbers 14:45 and so in Rashi here: And the Amalekite and the Canaanite came down. If they had proceeded by the direct route, they would have then turned back. For after He had made them go round by a circuitous way they said, Let us make a captain and go back to Egypt,⁶Ibid., 14:4. and how much more so would they have said it had He led them by a straight road!”⁷Mechilta on the verse before us.
The purport of that which Scripture states, and G-d led them not… But G-d led the people about, by the way of the wilderness,⁸Verse 18. is that when they journeyed from Succoth,⁹Verse 20. a pillar of cloud¹⁰Verse 21. began to go before them. It did not go by the way of the land of the Philistines but instead went by the way of the wilderness of Etham,⁹Verse 20. and the Israelites walked after it. The cloud then rested in Etham and they encamped there, and that was at the edge of the wilderness.⁹Verse 20.

ויהי בשלח...ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלשתים, even though it had been G’d’s plan to lead the Israelites to Mount Sinai to receive the Torah there, and only from there to the land of Israel, as He stated Himself in Exodus 6,7-8 :”I will take you as My people, and I will bring you to the land, etc.,” at this point, G’d’s plan was to lead them to the Sea of Reeds, which was neither the route to the land of the Philistines, nor the route that led to Mount Sinai. [we must remember that Moses had stood at Chorev=Mt Sinai at the burning bush and he did not have to cross the sea to do this. Ed.] The major reason for this was to bring about the drowning of Pharaoh and his army in the sea. [it is important to always remember that due to man’s free will, G’d cannot deal with man in the way He deals with inert objects or even animals, none of which could oppose Him. G’d needs to create a scenario which gives man a chance to delude himself, thus bringing him to act in a manner enabling G’d to insure that His design will be carried out. Ed.] An example of G’d acting in this manner is described in Judges 4,7 where G’d Himself speaks about how He “dragged” Sisera and his army and 900 armoured vehicles across the river Kishon to face Barak. The simplest route to get to the Sea of Reeds was by traversing the land of the Philistines. דרך ארץ פלשתים, G’d did not want them to travel this route

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, It happened when Pharaoh discharged the people, etc. Why does the Torah employ the word ויהי which always indicates some painful experience? The Torah should have described the Exodus in glowing terms! Besides, why does the Torah attribute the Exodus to Pharaoh rather than to G'd? After all, He took us out of Egypt, something the Torah does not tire of mentioning on numerous occasions!

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, when G’d intended to bring them to the land of Canaan, but did not want to lead them through the land of the Philistines although it was the closest route,

ויהי בשלח פרעה....כי קרוב הוא, “It happened when Pharaoh had dismissed the people,… for it was near;” according to Rashi, the meaning of the words “for it was near,” is that it would afford too easy an opportunity for the people to return to Egypt. They would be tempted to do this if they had to face armed conflict. Nachmanides comments that if that were the meaning of the words כי קרוב הוא, the Torah should first have written the words כי אמר אלוקים , ”for G’d had said, etc.” The whole verse should then have read as follows:ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלשתים כי אמר אלוקים כי קרוב הוא, לכן , “and G’d had not led them the route via the land of the Philistines, for He had said that even though it is nearer it is too easy to turn back from, therefore, etc.” It was better therefore to lead them on a more circuitous route as they would not then have the temptation to return to Egypt rather than face immediate armed conflict. [“the land of the Philistines” is a synonym for crossing any inhabited region which would be opposed by such inhabitants. Ed.] We find a similar construction in Psalms 41,5, רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך, “heal me for I have sinned against You.” Clearly, the meaning of the word כי could not be “for I have sinned against You,” but must be: “although I have sinned against You.” Some commentators understand the words כי קרוב הוא as not describing something spatial, but as referring to timing. G’d meant that an immediate arrival at the borders of the land of Canaan would then occur before the fourth generation of Canaanites had forfeited the patience of G’d, so that He could legally deprive them of their land and give it to the Israelites. [the word קרוב בימינו, “soon in our days,” and many other such uses of the word קרוב for relating to something that would occur soon are too numerous to need to be quoted. Ed.] Yet another interpretation of the words כי קרוב הוא understands it as describing the political common interests of the Philistines and the Egyptians that would cause the former to help the Egyptians recapture their slaves. Still another approach to the words כי קרוב הוא, sees in them a reference to the devastating defeat suffered by 200,000 members of the tribe of Ephrayim, who thirty years earlier had decided that the 400 years that G’d had spoken about to Avraham were at an end, and who had decided on their own, to escape from Egypt and when approaching the land of the Philistines were annihilated by them. G’d did not want to risk re-awakening such memories by making the people travel that route. The very word כי with its numerical value of 30 is a veiled reminder to the reader what it is all about. Moreover, G’d feared that if the Israelites would get involved in war before the three days travel into the desert that they had been given permission for were up, and on account of their fear they would return to Egypt, the Egyptians would be willing to let them return, whereas once the three days had passed, even if for some reason other than war, they would decide to return to Egypt, the Egyptians would not welcome them, but treat them as traitors who had broken their word. Therefore, G’d wanted a situation to develop which would make a return to Egypt even more dangerous an undertaking for the people than facing uncertain dangers by moving ahead.

Lead them. . . The ם of נחם is a suffix, not the third letter of the verb root. The word means “lead,” and not “rest” ( מנוח ) or “consolation” ( נחמה ).

ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלשתים, He led them through the desert for a different reason, apart from the fact that the route through the land of the Philistines was the most convenient one. Had He led them in that direction, and He would have convinced the Philistines to allow the Israelites free passage, based on the longstanding treaty between Yitzchak and Avimelech, G’d could not have performed even a fraction of the miracles He had in mind to perform in order to strengthen the people’s confidence in Him.
Therefore, by making the Israelites take a circuitous route, G’d would be able not only to provide the people with manna, meat in the form of the quail, water produced by striking a rock, etc., etc., but the further away the Israelites would be from inhabited areas the greater would be the miracle that G’d could provide for several million people all of their needs. The lesson would also be taught that even in such inhospitable regions of the earth, the human species could survive if G’d wanted it so.
When G’d saved Chanayah, Mishael, and Azaryah from the fiery furnace, G’d could have saved these people by performing a far lesser miracle. However, He wanted to demonstrate His power at that time. (compare Daniel 3,27) G’d did not simply extinguish the flames in the furnace, for instance, but let it roar at its fiercest in order to show that if He wanted man to survive unharmed inside such a furnace it could be done, if only G’d wanted it. Or, to take the example of Daniel in the lions’ den. All G’d had to do was to kill the lions and Daniel would have been saved. The reason why G’d went to the trouble of preventing these starved lions from making a meal out of Daniel was to demonstrate to the onlookers the extent of His control over nature. (compare Daniel 6,23).
Another example of the same kind is found in Judges 7,2. If G’d would have allowed Gideon with 10,000 men to defeat the many times larger army of the Midianites, this would have been miracle enough. Why did G’d shrink the number of soldiers at Gideon’s disposal to 300? For no other reason than to make the miracle so much greater.
G’d wanted to teach the lesson that numbers did not matter at all; what counted was that the soldiers be G’d fearing men who had never bowed their knee to an alien deity. Prowess with a sword was not what was required, but lapping up water by hand and bringing it to one’s mouth is what distinguishes man from the beasts who lower themselves to the water.

(Exodus 13:17) "And it was, when G d sent ("shalach") the people": "sending" in all places is accompaniment, viz. (Genesis 18:16) "And Abraham went with them to send them," (Ibid. 26:31) "And Israel sent them." The mouth (of Pharaoh) that said (Exodus 5:2) "Israel, too, I will not send," it is that (mouth) which said (Ibid. 10:10) "I will send you and your children." How was he rewarded for this? (Devarim 23:8) "You shall not abominate an Egyptian." The mouth which said (Exodus 5:2) "I do not know the L rd," it is that (mouth) which said (Ibid. 14:25) "I will flee from before Israel, for the L rd wars for them against the Egyptians." How was he rewarded for this? (Isaiah 19:19) "On that day there will be an altar to the L rd in the midst of the land of Egypt and a pillar at its border to the L rd." The mouth which said (Exodus 5:2) "Who is the L rd that I should hearken to His voice," it is that mouth which said (Ibid. 9:27) "the L rd is the Tzaddik, and I and my people are the wicked" — wherefore He gave them a place for burial, as it is written (Ibid. 15:12) "You inclined Your right hand — the earth swallowed them up." (Ibid.) "that G d did not lead them ('nacham')." This "nichum" connotes leading, as in (Psalms 77:21) "You have led (nachitha) Your people like sheep," and (Ibid. 78:4) "And He led them (vayanchem) with a cloud by day, and all the night with a light of fire." "by way of the land of the Philistines, for it was near": Near (i.e., "close") is the thing of which the Holy One Blessed be He spoke to Moses (Exodus 2:12): "When you take the people out of Egypt, you will serve G d on this mountain." Variantly: "for it was near": It afforded easy return to Egypt, viz. (Ibid. 5:3) "Let us go a three days' distance in the desert." Variantly: "for it was near": Close (in time) was the oath that Abraham had sworn to Avimelech, viz. (Genesis 21:23) "And now, swear to me here by G d that you will not deal with me falsely (by trespassing on my land), or to my son or my grandson," and his grandson was still alive. Variantly: "for it was near": The first war (that with Egypt) was too close to the second (that with Canaan). Variantly: "for it was near": The Canaanites had only recently acquired the land, and (Genesis 15:16) "And they (the Israelites) shall return here in the fourth generation, for the sin of the Amorites is not yet complete." Variantly: "for it was near": The Holy One Blessed be He did not bring them directly to Eretz Yisrael but by way of the desert, saying: If I bring them there now, immediately each man will seize his field, and each man his vineyard and they will neglect Torah study. Rather, I will keep them in the desert forty years, eating manna and drinking from the well, and the Torah will be absorbed in their bodies. From here R. Shimon would say: The Torah was given to be expounded only by the eaters of manna, and, like them, the eaters of terumah (i.e., the Cohanim). Variantly: "for it was near": The L rd did not bring them in directly. For when the Canaanites heard that the Israelites were coming, they arose and burned all the vegetation and cut down all the trees, and razed the buildings, and stopped up the springs — whereas the Holy One Blessed be He said: I did not promise their fathers to bring them to a ruined land, but one full of all good things, viz. (Devarim 6:11) "and houses full of all good." Rather, I will keep them in the desert until the Canaanites arise and restore what they have destroyed. (Ibid.) "for the L rd said: Lest the people bethink themselves when they see war": This is the war of Amalek, viz. (Numbers 14:45). "Variantly: "for the L rd said, etc.": This is the war of the sons of Ephraim, viz. (I Chronicles 7:20-21), and (Psalms 78:9-72). They transgressed the appointed time (for the redemption) and the oath, viz. (Genesis 50:25). "for the L rd said, etc.": So that they not see the bones of their brethren strewn in Philistia and return (to Egypt). Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If, when He took them in a circuitous way, they said (Numbers 14:4) "Let us make a head and return to Egypt," how much more so if He would take them in a straight way!

V. 17 u. 18. Die ideale Aufgabe des Gottesvolkes war in den vorhergehenden Institutionen des Peßachopfers, des Mazzafestes, der Erstgeburtsweihe und des Tefillingebotes gezeichnet. Die Erzählung kehrt zur konkreten Wirklichkeit des eben erst erlösten, erst an dem Anfang seiner Bestimmung stehenden Volkes zurück, und zeigt uns sofort, wie noch keineswegs das Volk jener idealen Stufe nahe gewesen, zugleich aber auch, wie so ganz und gar in ihnen selbst von jener Kraft und jenem Mute keine Spur vorhanden gewesen, die sich hätte selbst die Freiheit erkämpfen und erhalten können. Nicht nur die Gewinnung der Freiheit, auch die Bewahrung derselben war durch und durch Gottes Werk. Freiwillig, so lesen wir, wären sie in die alte Knechtschaft zurückgekehrt, wenn sie auf dem Wege zu der die Freiheit sichernden Selbständigkeit Kampf zu bestehen vor sich gefunden; und "sie waren doch gewaffnet aus Mizrajim gezogen!" Das Schwert fehlte nicht an der Rippe, aber das Herz fehlte unter derselben, es fehlte der Mut zum Kampfe, und es fehlte noch vor allem der unter allen Umständen vertrauensvoll sich Gott hingebende Sinn, der in dem Bewusstsein seiner Führung Willen und Mut, Kraft und Begeisterung zu allem findet. —

כי קרוב, “because the people were close to the Lord,” as stated in Psalms148.14: לבני ישראל, עם קרובו הללוי-ה, “for Israel, the people close to Him.” This is the reason why He led them as is the custom of the world, not on a magic carpet. An alternate interpretation of the line above: seeing that the land of the Philistines was so close to Egypt, as we know from Genesis 10,13-14:למצרים ילד את לודים...אשר יצאו משם פלשתים, “and Mitzrayim begat Ludim....from whom the Philistines are descended.”

1. AND IT WAS WHEN HE SENT, LED. He directed them as in (Exodus 32:34): "Go, lead the people..." and as in (Job 38:32) "and lead the Ursa Major ("Great Bear") with her sons?"

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, “It was when Pharaoh had let the people go;” the reason why the Torah did not write that “Pharaoh let the Israelites go,” is because the word העם included fellow travelers who had joined the Jewish nation, as well as spies who would report back to Pharaoh on the route they had taken.

כי קרוב הוא BECAUSE IT WAS NEAR, and it would therefore be easy to return by the same route to Egypt. — Of Midrashic explanations there are many (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 13:17).

כי קרוב הוא because this route was too close to Egypt, afforded too easy a way to return to Egypt. Also, seeing it was a much traveled route, too many travelers would be able to report to Pharaoh about the Israelites and also too many Egyptians could keep the Israelites informed of what transpired in their country. If the Israelites would have to face combat

כי קרוב הוא, and G’d feared that when faced with the need to conduct battles they would appoint an alternate leader in order to return to Egypt and submit to the Egyptians. We know that the Israelites tried to do this several times whenever they felt frustrated. (Examples are Numbers 14,3, Numbers 11,5) The disgruntled Israelites on such occasions “suddenly remembered” how good they had it in Egypt, citing the fish they ate for free, etc., as examples of their having been better off in Egypt. In light of what happened, although the Israelites did not have to face the armed might of the Philistines, G’d’s foresight in not leading them on that route seems extremely understandable. As a result of such considerations we find ויסב את העם דרך המדבר, that G’d made the Israelites take a much longer route in the direction of the Sea of Reeds. Moses described that had the Israelites traveled a straight path from their point of departure the whole journey would not have required more than 11 days. (Deuteronomy 1,2). Proof that the route to Egypt via the land of the Philistines is the shortest and most traveled route is furnished by Yitzchok’s declared intention to move to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan if G’d had not ordered him to stay in that land and he settled in the land of the Philistines while already on the way to Egypt (Genesis 26,3-6).

בראותם מלחמה, “when they would face armed conflict.” Rashi understands this as a veiled reference to the war against Amalek and the Canaanites. Nachmanides writes that neither the war against the Amalekites nor that against the Canaanites would trigger a desire by the people to return to Egypt. The Amalekites had attacked the Israelites not because the Israelites threatened them, but because they represented a spiritual threat to their way of life. They would also have attacked the Israelites if they had decided to remain in the desert without looking for a homeland. G’d simply wanted any war to be delayed until the Israelites were so far away from Egypt, that returning to Egypt simply would not be a viable option. Facing war, or rather, avoiding war against the Philistines, would leave open the option of return to Egypt.

And it was therefore easy to return by that route to Egypt. . . Rashi is answering the question: Every כי in Scripture is put there to give a reason. How does [“Because it was the shortest route”] give a reason for the preceding [statement that Hashem did not lead them that way]? On the contrary, Hashem should lead them via the shortest route! Thus Rashi explains that it was easy to return by that route, as it says afterwards, “For Elohim said. . .” I.e., what would cause them to return to Egypt? “Elohim said. . . should they encounter war.” The war would be the cause [for them to return].

The word ויהי may be justified in view of the pursuit by Pharaoh and the resulting fear the Israelites were to experience shortly. The Torah hints that the reason such a pursuit occurred was because Pharaoh had a hand in the Exodus, i.e. G'd had waited till Pharaoh himself had been willing to liberate the Jews. If it had all been G'd's doing such a pursuit would not have occurred. As soon as the Jews departed Pharaoh schemed to find a justification to pursue them and to convince his people that the attempt to bring the Israelites back would be worthwhile. We will explain later Pharaoh's reasoning in greater detail. All Pharaoh's scheming constituted something negative for the Israelites. It was far from a foregone conclusion that G'd would simply kill the Egyptians. We know from Megillah 10 that G'd is greatly concerned when the necessity arises to destroy His creatures. We do not recite the whole of Hallel on the seventh day of Passover when G'd eliminated the last of our Egyptian enemies because "when G'd's creatures drown in the sea it is no cause for rejoicing." Pharaoh had deluded himself that it was up to him to decide whether or not to allow the Israelites to depart. If so, he could just as easily renege as he had done during the course of his protracted encounters with Moses and Aaron. Israel had ample reason to be concerned about such an eventuality. For all these reasons the introductory ויהי is more than justified. In fact the conjunctive letter ו at the beginning of the words ולא נחם, indicates that Israel had additional reasons to be concerned of negative developments on the horizon.

Es wird diese Erzählung von dem gewöhnlichen Gottesnamen אלקים getragen und erst V. 21, wo die außerordentliche Führerschaft Gottes in den voranschreitenden Wolken- und Feuersäulen ihren sichtbaren Ausdruck erhält, kehrt der Name dieser außerordentlichen Führungen, ה׳, wie bei den außerordentlichen Wundertaten in Ägypten wieder. Es war das Ziel des Gottesvolkes, mit dem vollen Gottesbewusstsein in das unter der unsichtbaren Leitung Gottes sich entfaltende Völkerleben einzutreten. In einem solchen Leben gilt es, die eigene Kraft, nach dem ganzen Ausmaß menschlicher Begabung in von Gott gesteckten Zielen zu betätigen und das Gelingen dem für jedes treu gehorchende Wirken verheißenen Beistand Gottes anheimzustellen. Allein für ein solches Leben waren sie noch nicht reif. Zu einem solchen Bewusstsein, dass Gottes unmittelbare Vorsehung die ihr treu Gehorchenden nicht nur aus Untergang drohenden Momenten zu retten, sondern auch Tag für Tag unter allen Umständen zu erhalten wisse, sollten sie erst durch außerordentliche Erfahrungen erzogen werden, und diese Erziehung ist die Bedeutung der Wanderung durch die Wüste, die Bedeutung des "Umzugs", den sie Gott nun antreten ließ.

פן ינחם העם ושבו מצרים, “lest the people would reconsider and turn back to Egypt;” (if they would have to fight for their freedom with lethal weapons) The Philistines being so closely related to the Egyptians would take up arms in support of the Egyptians and they would push back the Israelites to Egypt. Rabbi David, grandfather of Rabbi Moshe, said that legally the land of the Philistines was a part of Palestine, as we do not find that Yitzchok ever left the land of Israel although he sojourned in the section populated by the Philistines for many years. (Genesis 26,6) Rabbi Moshe claims that a narrow tongue of land emanating in the land of the Philistines extended deep into the land of Israel. He concluded this, seeing that the Torah called the land: “the land of the Philistines.” An alternate approach: as soon as the Canaanites heard that the Israelites had left Egypt they reminded themselves of G–d’s promise to Avraham that the fourth generation of his descendants would return to the land of Canaan. (Genesis 15,16). In the event, the fourth generation had not yet been born and raised. In fact, G–d was forced to make the Israelites wander in the desert for 40 years so that they would not invade the land of Canaan prematurely, and without support from Hashem. Instead, they would spend their time studying the Torah, and receive their sustenance by way of miracle, bread from heaven, and water by means of a well which traveled alongside them all the time till the death of Miriam. Nonetheless, the Canaanites were now afraid that the Israelites would try to dispossess them of their country; in order to deny the Israelites the advantages of possessing their land they started a policy of systematically ruining the soil of their land. When G–d saw this, He was faced with a dilemma, seeing that He had promised to bring Avraham’s descendants to a land of bountiful fruit, ample rainfall, etc., if He waited with making good on His promise He could not keep that part of it. This dilemma is what the prophet Hoseah referred to when he wrote in Hoseah 7,15: ואני יסרתי זרועותם ואלי יחשבו רע; “but I braced, I strengthened their arms, and they plot evil against Me!”

2. ALTHOUGH IT WAS NEARER: as we found with Isaac, when he would want to go to Egypt by the way of the land of the Philistines, as it is written: "And Isaac came to Abimelech, king of the Philistines in Gerar and then the Holy One said to him: 'Do not go down to Egypt' --perhaps that he would want to go that way.

ולא נחם אלו־הים, ”and G-d had not led them, etc.” G-d did not lead them on the shortest route that led to the land of Canaan; the letter ו in the word ולא is superfluous (if that was all this meant)

בראתם מלחמה WHEN THEY SEE WAR — For instance the war mentioned in (Numbers 14:45) “Then the Amalekites and the Canaanites came down etc.” If they had proceeded by the direct route they would have then turned back. This is evident, for what would have been the case? If, when He led them about by a circuitous way, they said, (Numbers 14:4) “Let us appoint another chief and go back to Egypt”, had He led them by a direct route how much the more certainly would they have spoken so.

בראותם מלחמה, when they would hear that the Egyptians were mobilizing for war preparatory to chasing after the Israelites, the latter would no doubt return to Egypt out of fear of being killed. This is why G’d decided to lead them on a route not frequented by travelers at all.

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם ולא נחם אלוה-ים דרך ארץ פלשתים כי קרוב הוא, כי אמר אלוה-ים פן ינחם העם בראותם מלחמה ושבו מצרימה. “It was when Pharaoh sent off the Children of Israel that G’d did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although it was near, for G’d said: ‘perhaps the people will reconsider when they see war and return to Egypt.’” The words: “perhaps the people will reconsider” are hard to understand; do we not believe that there is no such thing as the word “perhaps” in G’d’s vocabulary? Does He not know all in advance? Clearly G’d knew for certain how the Israelites would react when they saw they had to fight the Philistines! The meaning of the words פן ינחם העם, therefore must be: “so that the people will not reconsider.” Indeed our sages (Eiruvin 96) are on record that wherever the expression פן or the word ואל, occurs in the Bible the meaning is “so that not.” Example: (Genesis 3,22) ועתה פן ישלח ידו ולקח גם מעץ החיים, “and now so that he will not also stretch out his hand and take from the tree of life, etc.” G’d meant it was not appropriate to give Adam an opportunity to take from the fruit of the tree of life and to nullify G’d’s decree that he had become mortal by eating from it. Similarly, here: G‘d led the people through the desert instead of through the land of the Philistines in order not to grant them an opportunity to regret having left Egypt.

There are many Midrashic explanations. I.e., they give different explanations for, “Because it was the shortest route.” Accordingly, “Elohim said. . .” does not refer to, “Because it was the shortest route.” It rather refers to, “Elohim did not lead them. . ..” It is giving an additional reason why Elohim did not lead them: “Because Elohim said. . .”

Another detail to watch in our verse is the word עם. The Zohar second part, page 45 states that whenever Israel is described as עם it is an allusion to the mixed multitude of converts that joined the Israelites at the Exodus. In our portion you will find the Israelites are variously described as בני ישראל and as העם. For instance, in the next verse already the departing Israelites are referred to as בני ישראל. Apparently G'd wanted to make certain that we realised that the people described as העם were not natural born Jews. Our sages in Shemot Rabbah 42,6 consider Israel's corruption in the desert as inspired by these converts. They were the ones who wanted to appoint a new leader to take them back to Egypt (Numbers 14,4). They were also the ones who said: "make a god for us who will walk before us, etc." (Exodus 32,1). All this is alluded to in the word ויהי at the beginning of our paragraph. מThe meaning of the words בשלח פרעה את העם is that whereas G'd liberated the Israelites, Pharaoh allowed the newly converted fellow travellers to depart. G'd had been interested only in acquiring for Himself a great nation as His inheritance. Pharaoh's reasoning in allowing these newly convertedd Jews to depart with the main body of the Jewish people was that they would somehow prevail on the natural born Israelites to return to Egypt. In view of this we can understand even better why G'd did not let the Israelites travel a route to Canaan which would have taken them through territory owned by the Philistines although it was the shortest route. We may understand the word קרוב as describing people who had only recently converted to Judaism and were not yet rooted firmly in sanctity. When people like that faced the Philistines they might turn back and return to Egypt as the lesser of two evils.

ולא נחם. Während נהג auch, und zwar vorzugsweise das Führen willen- und vernunftloser Wesen bedeutet, ist נחה ausschließlich die Führung mit Willen und Vernunft begabter Wesen zu dem von ihnen ersehnten Ziele. Es ist lautverwandt mit נאה: ansprechend, wünschenswert sein, נהה: sich schmerzlich und unbefriedigt nach etwas sehnen, daher נהי, die Klage. נחה: zu einem ersehnten Ziele führen. — כי קרוב הוא enthält den Grund, weshalb der Weg durch das Philisterland eigentlich der natürlichste gewesen wäre. — וחמשים וגו׳, aus Josua 1, 14 und 4, 12 ist ersichtlich, daß חמוש zum Kampf ausgerüstet bedeutet. Schwierig ist die Ableitung. Sam. II. 2, 23 und 3, 27 und so auch 4, 6 und 20, 10 wird mit חמֶש die Stelle bezeichnet, wohin der Mörder vorzüglich den tödlichen Streich zu führen sucht. Sanhedrin 49 a. wird dies als die fünfte Rippe erklärt, wo die Galle und die Leber sitzt. Man meint nun, dass eben dort auch um die fünfte Rippe das Schwert geschnallt worden wäre, und daher חמושים Ausdruck für gewaffnet sei. Man hätte jedoch aus diesem Grunde eher glauben sollen, man habe diese Stelle durch Panzerung schützen müssen. Möglich, dass חמש verwandt mit חמץ ,חמס ist, und: mit den Mitteln zur Gewaltausübung versehen, bedeutet.

3. LEST THE PEOPLE REGRET: that they had left [Egypt].

דרך ארץ פלשתים כי קרוב הוא, “the route which runs through the land of the Philistines; although (or because), it was the shortest route.” According to our author what is meant is “although,” despite, the fact that it was the shortest route. We find a similar meaning for the word כי in Exodus 19,5: כי לי כל הארץ, “although the whole earth belongs to Me.” Another example of this meaning of the word כי is found in Psalms 41,5, “heal me although I have sinned against You.” רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך. Consider also Genesis 48,14: שכל ידיו כי מנשה הבכור, “he crossed his hands although Menashe was the firstborn.” In our context, although there was an additional boundary to be crossed between Egypt and the land of Canaan, namely the land of the Philistines, as we know from when while in the land of the Philistines G-d had commanded Yitzchok not to continue on to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan, (Genesis 26,1) so that it seemed strange that G-d did not lead the Israelites by this route, He was afraid that if they would find resistance to their traversing that land, they would refer to return to Egypt.

פן ינחם PERADVENTURE [THE PEOPLE] REPENT — peradventure they cherish a different thought (they change their mind) about having gone out and set their hearts on returning (cf. Rashi on Genesis 6:6).

For example, the war of: “And the Amaleikites and Canaanites. . .” [mentioned in Bamidbar 14:45. Rashi is saying] that it does not mean war in general. For they encountered war with the Amaleikites [Shemos 17:8, yet did not return to Egypt]. Although they defeated Amaleik, they were close to Egypt and could have returned, from fear of other wars. (Re”m, based on Mechilta) But the Maharshal explains: Rashi did not mention the nearby war with Amaleik (17:8) because Israel defeated Amaleik then. So there was little concern that they would set their hearts to return to Egypt. But in the war of “the Amaleikites came down,” Yisrael was stricken and smitten. Thus, there was concern that they would return.

The word קרוב may also suggest that these people came close to becoming sinful and as a corollary to also corrupt the (natural born) Israelites. They would indict themselves by their reaction when they would realise they were expected to battle the Philistines. As a result they would regret their recent conversion and would return to Egypt. The letter ו before ולא נחם would refer therefore to another potentially painful aspect of their departure courtesy of Pharaoh.

4. WHEN THEY SEE WAR: Pharoah's war that if they would not go by the way of the Red Sea and they drowned there, they would have pursued after them on a path where there is no sea. But if they needed to fight with him on dry land, then even the Philistines would go tward them and they would have a war before them and behind them.

כי אמר אלוקים פן ינחם העם, “for G-d had said: “lest the people have remorse;” we must not criticize this verse by saying that it cannot be reconciled with G-d’s Omniscience, i.e. that He did know all this in advance; besides, surely if G-d had wanted to He could have led the Israelites through the land of the Philistines without their coming to any harm; however, what is written here is an answer to the attribute of Justice which wanted to exploit that opportunity to accuse the Israelites of lack of faith in their G-d. Precisely, because G-d was aware that the Israelites were not yet in a condition to withstand the Satan, He decided not to give the Satan that opportunity at this time. We find an example of a similar situation in Genesis 3,22 where G-d is portrayed as being “afraid” that Adam and Eve after having eaten from the tree of knowledge and having forfeited immortality might eat from the tree of life in order to regain it, and to thereby nullify the penalty G-d had imposed upon them. The Torah, justifying G-d’s expelling them from the garden, wrote there: ועתה פן ישלח ידו, “and now, lest he will extend his hand, etc.” There too you could have asked: “seeing that G-d knew what would happen, why did He not remove the tree, instead of depriving mankind of access to the garden?”

They said, “Let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt”. . . Rashi is saying that the reason they did not return was because they lacked a leader. It was a long route and required a leader. But were they to have a leader, they clearly would return — despite their distance from Egypt. So if they had a short and straight route back to Egypt, not requiring a leader, they surely would return. Maharshal explains: Although they traveled a round-about route they still said, “Let us appoint a leader and let us return,” after merely hearing about Amaleik from their scouts. So had they taken a straight route, and encountered actual war, they surely would have returned all the way.

We also have a tradition mentioned in Shemot Rabbah 20,3 that Pharaoh accompanied the Israelites begging them to pray for him. The merit Pharaoh acquired by seeing the Israelites off enabled him to survive longer and pose a threat for Israel. We can deduce what negative effect Pharaoh's accompanying Israel had for the people by comparing this with the story related in Sanhedrin 96 according to which Nebuchadnezzar was greatly rewarded for recalling a messenger bearing a letter to Chizkiyah king of Yehudah congratulating him on his recovery from his sickness. In the original draft of that letter Nebuchadnezzar's scribe had extended greetings to Chizkiyah and to G'd in that order. Upon reflection, Nebuchadnezzar realised he should have first extended greetings to G'd. He personally ran after the messenger to recall him and change the order of greetings. The angel Gabriel interfered with Nebuchadnezzar after he had travelled only four steps. Rabbi Yochanan said that if the angel Gabriel had not stopped Nebuchadnezzar there would have been no remedy for Israel. Nebuchadnezzar's gesture of running four steps in order to accord due respect to G'd resulted in his being allowed to destroy the Holy Temple and the Jewish state. Imagine what negative effects for the Jewish people Pharaoh's gesture in accompanying the Israelites must have had on their fate! G'd apparently changed the Israelites's route to one that would discourage Pharaoh from continuing to accompany them. Had the Israelites travelled in the direction of the land of the Philistines, Pharaoh might well have accompanied them all the way and acquired great merit in the eyes of G'd. Put differently: The reason G'd did not lead the Israelites through the land of the Philistines was in order to deny Pharaoh sufficient merit to entitle him to succeed in his quest for the Israelites to return to Egypt.

5. AND RETURN: and even though the Holy One could have struck all of them dead, the Holy One wanted to increase the miracles and wonders to dry the sea and to cross the Israelites over and to drown the Egyptians.

בראותם מלחמה “when they would see they would be involved in war;” The Philistines would attack them, thinking that the Israelites were approaching in order avenge the 30000 men of Ephrayim they had killed 30 years previously when these people having miscalculated the time when their redemption was due had taken matters into their own hands and had marched out of Egypt in order to recapture their homeland. Their miscalculation had been that they thought the 400 years mentioned at the covenant of the pieces in Genesis 15,13 had commenced then and not at the birth of Yitzchok. Actually, the 430 years mentioned in Exodus 12,40 had commenced then, (although Rash’bam has trouble accounting for this). According to Yonatan ben Uzziel this may have been what Pharaoh had counted on. A grandson of Avimelch attacked the members of Ephrayim. According to Chronicles I 7,20, the battle with the Philistines occurred at Gat. According to some scholars the members of the tribe of Ephrayim killed during that battle were the “dried bones” resurrected by the prophet Ezekiel, (Ezekiel 37) כי קרוב הוא, “for he was very close to him;” according to some scholars Pharaoh and Avimelech of the Philistines were politically very close to one another, and Pharaoh counted on the Philistines to bring the Israelites back to him. He also counted on the promise of Avraham to Avimelech valid for 4 generations hence not to engage in hostilities against him. Actually, a grandson of the Avimelech with whom Avraham, had concluded a non aggression pact, a pact that his son Yitzchok had renewed, was still alive when the Israelites left Egypt. Avraham’s descendants did not engage in warfare with the Philistines for seven generations. (Moses was the seventh generation from Avraham). All these considerations prompted G-d not to lead the Israelites on the shortest route to the Holy Land. [Besides, if G-d meant for them to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai, this would have been quite impossible, and G-d had told Moses already at the burning bush that one of the reasons why He redeemed them earlier than expected was that they would receive the Torah at that site. Ed.] Our author also quotes the liturgist who in his poem makes reference to these points. For all the reasons quoted, G-d ensured that the Israelites did not take the route that had proven so tragic for the members of the tribe of Ephrayim some thirty years earlier.

Have second thoughts. ינחם means changing one’s mind. This follows Rashi’s second explanation on Bereishis 6:6. However, in Rashi’s first explanation there, it means “consolation.”

According to this approach, the extra letter ו in ולא נחם is a hint that even the short distance Pharaoh accompanied the Israelites caused the Israelites sufficient discomfort so that they viewed themselves in real danger when Pharaoh pursued them a few days later. Shemot Rabbah 21 refers to this by saying that the words ולא קרב זה אל זה כל הלילה indicate that Pharaoh's merit had not yet been neutralised by the Israelites' repentance until the latter cried out to G'd, i.e. מה תצעק אלי in verse 15.

When the Torah continues: כי אמר, "for G'd had said, etc." this is as if the Torah wrote "and because G'd said, etc." It refers to an additional reason that G'd did not let the people face the Philistines, i.e. the lack of faith in G'd of the newly converted ערב רב.

בראותם מלחמה, “when they come face to face with war.” This would have been a war on two fronts, the pursuing Egyptians at their back and the furious Philistines facing them, trying to force them back to their allies the Egyptians. Our author had explained already on Genesis 21,22 where the fact that the barren Sarah had given birth to a son for Avraham, that the prophecies given to him started to be taken seriously by the rulers of that time. Up until then they had not worried about these prophecies. In Joshua 13,3, we read about the Israelites indeed having had to face enemies on two fronts when Joshua had aged and not yet conquered all of the land of Canaan as he had been instructed to do. ושבו מצרימה. “and they will prefer to return to Egypt.” That this was a logical consideration is born out by the fact that the Israelites, even though not having taken that route, were on the point of voluntarily returning to Egypt on numerous occasions, on most occasions when they faced problems in the desert.