Komentarz do Wyjścia 6:12

ואיך ישמעני פרעה HOW THAN SHALL PHARAOH HEAR ME? — This is one of the ten inferences from minor to major which are found in the Bible (Genesis Rabbah 92:7).

BEHOLD, THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL HAVE NOT HEARKENED UNTO ME because You have done nothing [for Israel] so that my words should be acceptable to them. AND HOW THEN SHALL PHARAOH HEAR ME? AND besides, I AM OF UNCIRCUMCISED LIPS, and I am not fit to speak before a great king.
It is possible to explain that Moses thought that due to his deficiency — for he was of uncircumcised lips — the children of Israel would not hearken to him, for he could not frame [words] to speak⁶¹Judges 12:6. kindly to them, words of good cheer and comfort, and all the more how could he speak to Pharaoh?
Now the reason that Moses again broached this argument [of his speech-impediment, when he had already mentioned it above in Chapter 4, Verse 10], is that G-d did not originally command him that he was to speak before Pharaoh. He merely said, And thou shalt come, thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of Egypt, and ye shall say unto him.⁶²Above, 3:18. In that case it was possible that the elders should speak [before Pharaoh] and Moses would remain silent. Then Moses said that he was ashamed even to speak to the people, saying, I am not a man of words.⁶³Ibid., 4:10. Whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, answered him, And he [Aaron] shall be thy spokesman unto the people.⁶⁴Ibid., Verse 16. And so indeed Moses and Aaron did when they first came to the people, as it is said, And Aaron spoke all the words which the Eternal had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people.⁶⁵Ibid., Verse 30. But now Moses himself was commanded, Wherefore say unto the children of Israel: I am the Eternal,⁶⁶Verse 6. and he did speak to them as He commanded him, but they did not hearken to him.⁶⁷Verse 9. Now when He again commanded Moses to speak to Pharaoh,⁶⁸Verse 11. Moses said, “How can I speak to him, I who am of uncircumcised lips.” Then the Holy One, blessed be He, associated Aaron with him, and gave both of them a charge unto the children of Israel,⁶⁹Verse 12. that they should say to them whatever He will command them, and unto Pharaoh⁶⁹Verse 12. to bring them forth out of his land. Now Rashi commented: “[And He gave them a charge unto the children of Israel, and unto Pharaoh, king of Egypt]. That is to say, He gave them a command with regard to the children of Israel and His mission on which He had sent them to Pharaoh.” But there is no need for this.⁷⁰According to Rashi, the command of His mission to Pharaoh was the one with regard to Israel. But according to Ramban, there was also a command with regard to Israel, as explained in the text.

הן בני ישראל לא שמעו אלי, he believed that this was due to the fact that from the moment he had started speaking to Pharaoh the latter had become worse in his attitude and the people, putting two and two together, had concluded that his mission had failed. If he felt that way, Pharaoh would certainly not pay any heed to him and continue doing what he liked.

לפני ה׳ לאמור הן בני ישראל לא שמעו אלי, in G'd's presence, saying: "here the Israelites do not listen to me, etc." What is the meaning of the word לאמור in this context? Who was G'd to communicate Moses' comments to? Perhaps we should not understand this verse as Moses' contemplating to refuse this mission but as a comment addressed to himself, bemoaning his failure thus far. The word לאמור could be a rhetorical comment Moses made that instead of results, all his attempts of speaking to Pharaoh would remain just that, words.

הן בני ישראל לא שמעו אלי, “behold, even the Children of Israel have not listened to me, etc.” according to Rashi this was one of the ten occasions when we encounter an “a fortiori” method, i.e. a logical argument in the Torah. This comment seems uncalled for, seeing that the Torah had spelled out that the reason why the Children of Israel did not listen to Moses was because the terrible conditions under which they laboured had which made them unable to think rationally, i.e. they suffered from קוצר רוח, “impaired intellectual judgment.” Seeing that Pharaoh did not suffer from that same ailment, where was the logic that Moses referred to? Seeing that the commentators are obviously aware of this counterargument, they explain Moses’ argument as follows: “if even the Israelites themselves are afraid of leaving Egypt seeing the very discussion of such a plan brought additional hardship upon them, surely this knowledge will fuel Pharaoh’s determination not to let them go.” Alternatively, Moses simply meant that when Pharaoh saw that the Israelites themselves did not pay heed to their leader, why should he pay heed to him?

“ והערל ” [meaning:] and become obstructed. . . In other words, Rashi is saying [ והאטם as] an explanation of והערל .

V. 12. לפני ד׳, nicht אל ד׳. Es kommt dies nicht weiter vor. Nur gleich hier V. 30, wo dies Faktum wiederholt wird. Nicht zu Gott, sondern zu sich äußerte er es, so dass, um menschlich zu sprechen, Gott es hörte. Es war das die natürliche Stimmung und der natürliche Zweifel, der unwillkürlich in ihm laut werden musste. ערל שפתים ist mehr als das obige כבד פה ולשון; dieses bezeichnet nur eine Schwerfälligkeit der Organe, ערל ist aber derjenige, der über das, was ihm organisch oder naturgemäß zu Gebote stehen sollte, keine Macht hat. Wenn ich auch die Schwerfälligkeit des Organs überwinde, fehlt es mir doch an der eigentlichen Kraft der Rede, das Wort erstirbt mir im Munde; mit dem besten Willen dem Volke das Herrlichste zu verkünden und sie dafür zu begeistern, sie damit aufzurichten, gebricht mirs an Kraft, an Geschicklichkeit, gelingt mirs nicht, wie ich soeben erfahren.

הן בני ישראל לא שמעו אלי, “seeing that(even) the Children of Israel do not listen to me, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text what Moses is saying is that the people do not listen to him, so what chance is there that Pharaoh would listen to him. In the event that one would excuse their failure to listen to him to their state of mind, i.e. they did not have a chance to indulge in day dreams, he adds that he attributes their failure to listen to him to his speech impediment, and therefore does not blame them. Alternately, perhaps Moses was not aware of the Torah having told us, the reader, that the reason why the people did not listen to him was their state of mind, i.e. impatience. I have heard from my teacher a Rabbi from Lisbon, that what Rashi meant when describing Moses’ logic here as unassailable, that the reason given as their state of mind, was an additional reason. His logic went as follows. Normally, when a potential redeemer promises his people that he has come to redeem them from slavery, they will be overjoyed. Seeing that the Israelites’ reaction to his message had been so negative, how much more negative would Pharaoh’s response be to their demanding a holiday!

ערל שפתים OF UNCIRCUMCISED LIPS — It really means obstructed as regards the lips. So, too, in respect to all forms derived from ערל I say that they signify obstructed. E. g. (Jeremiah 6:10) “their ear is עֲרֵלָה — stopped up so that it will not hear; (Jeremiah 9:25) “עַרְלִי in heart” — their hearts are closed so that they will not understand; (Habakkuk 2:16) “Drink thou, also וְהֵעָרֵל” — and become thou closed up (in thy senses) through intoxication caused by the cup of curse mentioned in that passage; the foreskin (ערלה) of the flesh is so called because the membrum is closed up and covered by it; (Leviticus 19:23) וערלתם ערלתו signifies, make for it (the tree) a closure (אוטם) and cover by means of an inhibition that will prove a barrier against eating it; (Leviticus 19:23 “Three years shall it be to you as ערלים” — it shall be closed up and covered and barred so that it many not be eaten.

This was especially so, seeing that he was also an ערל שפתים, afflicted with a speech handicap. He mentioned this as he did not believe that Aaron would accompany him other than for the time he identified himself as G’d’s emissary when he spoke to the people.

ואיך ישמע אלי פרעה?, “how can Pharaoh be expected to take me seriously?” We need to understand the sequence of events as follows: originally Moses had been instructed to take the elders with him when they would speak to Pharaoh. (3,18) It is possible that at that point the elders did the talking, while Moses was silently listening. Moses was also too shy to speak to the people, as we know from his having told G’d that he was not איש דברים, someone qualified to appeal to people by his oratory. At that point, G’d had assured him that his brother Aaron would make a good mouthpiece for him, and that he would formulate what Moses intended to say to the people. He would also perform the miracles, etc. Now that G’d suddenly tells Moses to speak to the people himself, without Aaron as his mouthpiece, and after having done so, the people did not respond to him, he asked G’d how he could possibly expect Pharaoh to be more responsive than his own people? G’d now added Aaron to be Moses’ spokesman in all interviews with Pharaoh. The Torah also confirms that Aaron addressed the people conveying all that G’d had said. (4,30) He had commanded both of them to address the people of Israel, but it was enough that one of them should be the actual speaker during these encounters. Now that G’d commands Moses himself to be the speaker, He repeats once more that He is the One Who had appeared to him previously. When G’d now said (verse 13) that he and Aaron are to speak both to the people and to Pharaoh, Moses is satisfied. The procedure was that G’d would tell Moses what was to be said, and he would tell Aaron of the instructions he had received, and Aaron would address these instructions to Pharaoh or the people, in accordance of what the situation called for. Aaron’s part in all this was comparable to the part of a prophet throughout the ages who would be commanded by G’d to relay a message to the people, except that in Aaron’s case the instructions would come from Moses, so that Moses fulfilled the role normally fulfilled by elokim. Hence G’d told him that he would have that role vis a vis Aaron. This was a major promotion for Moses, and enhanced his stature considerably. Moses merited this promotion due to his humility, not wanting to arrogate to himself a role unfitting for someone suffering from a speech handicap. This is also why the Torah testifies at a later stage, (11,3) that “Moses was considered as a person of great stature both in the eyes of Pharaoh and in the eyes of the Egyptians generally.” This does not conform to Rashi’s explanation that the words וידבר ה' אל משה לאמור in verse 10 are an introduction to what follows in verse 13. The fact is that verses 10-12 are, while verse 13 is a separate paragraph, if you will, as is evident by their being written as separate paragraphs. We therefore do not need Rashi’s comment that Moses was to deliver the stark message and Aaron was to elaborate on it. Consequently, we stick by our explanation that Moses delivered the message in the presence of Pharaoh, but that Aaron addressed it to Pharaoh.

This is one of the ten a fortiori inferences in the Torah. Rashi is telling us: Do not say that “How then will Pharaoh listen to me” is a separate statement [from “B’nei Yisrael have not listened to me”], and it means that Pharaoh will not listen for a different reason, which is: “I whose lips are covered.” Therefore, [to exclude this,] Rashi explains: “This is one of the ten a fortiori inferences.” Thus [it follows that] the entire verse is one statement: [because Moshe’s lips are covered, therefore B’nei Yisrael did not listen — how then will Pharaoh listen?] This explains why Rashi switched the order of the verse and explained “I whose lips are covered” before explaining “How then will Pharaoh listen to me.” The a fortiori inference is as follows: To B’nei Yisrael, the redemption is good tidings and they should have listened to me, yet they did not. To Pharaoh, it is bad tidings — all the more so he will not listen! You might object: This inference can be refuted, as B’nei Yisrael did not listen to Moshe for the reason of their great distress, as explained above (v. 9), [whereas Pharaoh is not in distress]. The answer is: Moshe did not know that B’nei Yisrael failed to listen out of distress; he thought it was because his lips are covered. Although the Torah writes that it was because of their distress [that they did not listen], as this was the true reason, Moshe did not know that. Thus he considered his inference to be solid, [although in truth it was refutable]. [You might ask:] Nevertheless, even after Hashem revealed to Moshe that they failed to listen due to their distress, [why is Moshe’s inference incorrect?] He could have incorporated the refutation into the a fortiori, as we find a number of times in the Talmud, [and reasoned as follows: To B’nei Yisrael, the redemption is good tidings and despite their distress they should have listened to me, yet did not. To Pharaoh, it is bad tidings — and despite his lack of distress, all the more so he will not listen!] The answer is: This refutation is [based on a fact] written in the Torah. The Torah itself testifies that the [true] reason they failed to listen was their distress. Such a refutation cannot be incorporated [into the a fortiori]. (thus wrote the Re’m)

Moses may also have alluded to his inability to speak effectively due to his stammer which had made even the Israelites unwilling to respond to him. He implied that G'd should heal his disability in order to make him a more effective spokesman.

הן בני ישראל לא שמעו, "even the children of Israel have not listened, etc." The logic expressed by Moses in this verse seems untenable if Moses accepted the Torah's statement in verse nine that the reason the Israelites did not respond to Moses was their קצר רוח, their understandable impatience. How could Moses compare Pharaoh's potentially negative response to that of the Israelites? What comparable pressure had Pharaoh been under?

Perhaps Moses' logic is valid when we consider some other aspects. While it is true that the Israelites suffered from an impatient state of mind, there were other reasons why they should have listened to Moses. The most important such reason was their faith in G'd. Secondly, this inherent faith should have been reinforced by the good news Moses had brought them. When contrasted with these two factors which certainly did not influence Pharaoh who had blasphemed "who is G'd?", the fact that the Israelites did not listen to him made it seem totally unjustified to expect that Pharaoh should take Moses' demands seriously. Moses suggested that the קצר רוח displayed by the Israelites was minor compared to the קצר רוח which Pharaoh would display once he heard Moses' demands.

The reason Moses added at this juncture that he had a stammer was because he felt this would reinforce Pharaoh's rejection of anything he had to say. Pharaoh would reason- at least to himself- that if the powerful G'd that Moses spoke about had not even cured his spokesman of a simple speech defect, it was laughable to think that He could impose His will on the mightiest ruler in the world. In fact, if this kind of reasoning were to be conveyed to the Israelites, it might further undermine their faith in G'd.

There was another reason for Moses' argument at this point. Whereas in Exodus 4,16 G'd had countered Moses' argument about his stammer by appointing Aaron as his mouthpiece, this was only in order to convey G'd's message to Moses to the Jewish people. We find confirmation of this in 4,30. However, already in 5,1 we find that Moses himself spoke in his mission to Pharaoh (at least also). If we look for confirmation of this thought in the text we may find it in the way Moses describes the Israelites' attitude to him and the attitude he expects from Pharaoh. Concerning Israel he said: "they did not listen to me" seeing Israel only heard the voice of Aaron. When describing Pharaoh's anticipated reaction Moses says ישמעני "he will hear me," meaning he will hear Moses' defective speech. It is important to remember this little detail in order to facilitate understanding of what is still to come.