Cytowanie Komentarza do Wyjścia 2:13

The Maggid has said כמה מעלות טובות למקום עלינו “How many favors has the omnipresent bestowed upon us.” when it would have been more proper to say, כמה מעלות טובות עלינו למקום “How many degrees²³⁹The word ma’alot could be translated a number of ways. Rabbi Foa suggests that ma’alot are not favors but decrees of service. have been bestowed upon us for the Omnipresent.” One should not be surprised, for it is similar to the language we are taught: “These are the commandments for the parents that are incumbent on the child…”²⁴⁰See Mishnah 1:7 This should be explained as follows: these are the commandments that are placed on the child to perform for his/her parent. Similarly here, (this should be explained), “These are the degrees of service placed us so we can praise God.” It then begins with, “God took us out of Egypt…” since this is the one thing for which we asked. But it is also possible to explain that this statement comes to answer the question which Rabbi Elazar asked his father, Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai: “If a person has a slave and promises to free him and give him a lot of money, wouldn’t it be appropriate for the master to be praised? But if a regular person does a favor for his fellow and then constantly reminds him of it, is it not unseemly? This is the statement of King Solomon, “In the mouth of the foolish is a rod of pride; but the lips of the wise shall guard them.” (Pro. 14:3) This verse means: The fool is prideful even though he only has one good ‘rod’ or ‘branch' of something good while the wise person, even though he has many ‘branches,’ keeps them to himself and does not constantly mention them. How much more is this the case with the Blessed Holy One! If that is so, why does God mention the Exodus so many times in the Torah? One answers this - this is a reflection of God’s humility. God mentions the Exodus from Egypt fifty times to make known that they went forth through the divine aspect of . This is alluded to in the statement, “Now the Israelites went up armed (chamushim)²⁴¹ The actual meaning of the word chamushim is uncertain; however it is closely connected in kabbalah with the number 50, chamishim. Israel is redeemed from the fiftieth gate of impurity through which is associated with the fifty gates of purity. This is hinted at by the fifty times the Exodus is mentioned in the Torah. Note that Rabbi Foa’s commentary refers to the exodus with the letters mem-yud which add up to fifty. By mentioning the Exodus God alludes to the true miracle which was Israel’s redemption through the mystery of without ever mentioning it! out of the land of Egypt.” (Ex. 13:18) This is the mystery of the fifty gates of understanding. It was through the power of , that Israel was redeemed from Egypt for that is the source of their redemption. And it is from there in the future that redemption will again take place, as Scripture states, “Who (Mi, Mem-Yud) can heal you?” (Ex. 2:13)
אמנם However one might explain the plain meaning (of the expression, kama ma’alot) as follows: God performed many deeds for us just as a person performs favors for his fellow, each greater than the one before. One should mention them (and give thanks for) them so as not to appear ungrateful and prevent the person from acting kindly again. Therefore, (the person who performs the favors) mentions the smallest favor first which he did for his fellow, and in that way it won’t appear that he mentioned it so as to be praised. If that was the case, he would have mentioned all of the favors at once, or he would have mentioned the greatest favor first and then the lesser ones. Also it is not appropriate to demean one who did favors for you but to praise him. In this way, one lessens the obligation one has to his fellow. This is what the Holy Blessed One did with us. By mentioning the Exodus from Egypt as the lesser kindness which God performed for us, God does so in a way that we won’t appear ungrateful for the favors God performed for us, and it allows us to mention one and then another.
And to prove that it is the smallest among the many favors, the Maggid begins by saying, "If God had taken us out of Egypt…” which is such a small favor, that “would have been enough.” That is all we ask for and not that God also take vengeance on Egypt. We asked simply that God redeem us. But the Blessed One did so much more, passing judgment upon Egypt. God brought judgment upon Egypt to show the other nations that Israel is God’s children, as Scripture states, “Israel is My first born son.” (Ex. 4:22) Anyone who causes suffering to the child, causes suffering to the parent.

V. 3. ׳לא תאכל עליו וגו. Das Chamez- und Mazzagesetz ist bereits Schmot Kap. 12 u. 13 ausgesprochen und haben wir dort daßelbe erläutert. Dass das Chamezgesetz schon mit der Zeit der Peßachopferdarbringung am vierzehnten Nissan in Wirkung tritt, ist bereits daselbst Kap. 12, 15 ׳אך ביום הראשון תשביתו וגו und Kap. 23, 18 ,חמץ ausgesprochen. Hier wird nun auch das Genussverbot des לא תובח על חמץ וגו׳ der איסור אכילה והנאה des Chamez (daselbst 15, 19 u. 20) noch als ausdrückliches Verbot עליו, mit Beginn der Pesachopferzeit ausgesprochen (Peßachim 28b) und das Chamezverbot mit dem Mazzagebot in enge gesetzliche Verbindung gesetzt, in welcher Verbindung – לא תאכל עלין חמץ שבעת ימים תאכל עליו מצות – die Halacha niedergelegt ist, daß das Mazzai>gebot sowohl stofflich, als persönlich und zeitlich durch das Chamezi>verbot bedingt ist. Stofflich: דברים הבאים לידי חימוץ אדם יוצא בהן ידי חובתו במצה (daselbst 35a), die Mazza, mit deren Pflichtgenuss am ersten Peßachabend wir der historischen Tatsache unserer Unselbständigkeit im Momente der Erlösung, sowie unserer Gott gegenüber ewig dauernden Unselbständigkeit positiven Ausdruck verleihen sollen, kann nur von gärungsfähigen Stoffen zum symbolischen Ausdruck dieses Bekenntnisses taugen. Was Mazza sein soll, muss Chamez haben werden können. Nicht natürlicher Mangel an Kraft zur Selbständigkeit war die Ursache unserer Sklaverei in Ägypten, oder ist die Ursache unseres Gottesdienstes aller Zeiten. Gewaltsame Unterdrückung war unser עבדות פרעה und freie Unterordnung heißt unsere ׳מצה .עבודת ה selbst heißt ja sprachlich: unterdrückte Gärung (siehe zu Schmot 2, 13). – Persönlich: נשים היבות באכילת מצה דבר תורה שנאמר לא תאכל עליו חמץ וגו׳ כל שישנו בבל תאכל חמץ ישנו באכילת מצה והני נשי הואיל וישנן בבל תאכל המץ ישנן בקום אכול מצה (Pesachim 43 b). Obgleich von an Zeit gebundenen Geboten, מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא, in der Regel Frauen nicht betroffen werden (siehe Wajikra 23, 43), so sind sie doch zu dem Mazzagenuss am ersten Peßachabend verpflichtet; denn dieses Mazzagebot trifft alle, für welche das Chamezverbot Geltung hat. Alle, die aus völliger Unselbständigkeit in völliger Unselbständigkeit durch Gott Erlösten, die diese historische Unselbständigkeit im Momente der Erlösung durch Nichtgenuss des Chamez zu bekennen haben, alle die haben bei jeder Wiederkehr dieser Erlösungsstunde, die zugleich die Stunde unserer Geburt zu unserer nationalen Bestimmung ist, sich auf Grund dieser Erlösung zu dieser Bestimmung durch den Genuss des "Brotes der Unselbständigkeit vor Gott" freudig zu bekennen. Zu diesem grundlegenden Bekenntnis – ebenso wie ja auch zu den positiven Begehungen הקהל שמחה ,פסח – sind auch Frauen verpflichtet, obgleich für manche andere מצות das Gesetz für sie kein Verpflichtungsbedürfnis erkannte (siehe Wajikra עשה שהזמן גרמא 43, 23). – Zeitlich: לקובעו חובה בזמן הזה (daselbst 28b). Obgleich das Mazzagebot zuerst als das Peßach begleitender Genuss ausgesprochen ist, צלי אש ומצות על מרורים יאכלוהו (Schmot 12, 8), so ist doch ebenso wie das חמץ-Verbot auch das Mazzagebot ein selbständiges und unabhängig vom פסח, so daß auch bei zeitlicher Verhinderung der פסח-Darbringung doch die Mazzapflicht am ersten Abend in Kraft bleibt, sei es bei individueller Verhinderung wie טמא ושהיה בדרך רחוקה, wofür das קבעו חובה, die von פסח unabhängige Verpflichtung bereits in dem בראשון בארבעה עשר יום לחדש בערב האכלו מצות (Schmot 12, 18) niedergelegt ist, sei es bei zeitlich allgemeinem Wegfall der פסח-Opferdarbringung, wie בזמן הזה, für welche Galutzeit die Mazzapflicht hier mit dem zeitlich unbeschränkten חמץ-Verbot zusammengestellt ist (Peßachim 28b). Hat doch die weltgeschichtliche Bestimmung, die wir in der Stunde unserer nationalen Geburt angetreten, mit dem Galut keine Änderung erlitten, und haben wir auch im Galut, wo das פסח-Opfer in wehmütigem Erinnerungsmerkmal vor uns liegt, doch mit dem Mazzagenuss unserer ewigen Aufgabe vor Gott mit freudiger Unterordnung unter Seinen Willen und Seine Fügung uns zu weihen, und wohl dürfte, wie überhaupt die wiederholte Verpflichtung zum Mazzagenuss, so insbesondere die Niederlegung der Galutmazzahalacha an dieser Stelle des Landbesitzkompendiums von ernst mahnender Bedeutung sein (siehe jedoch auch Peßachim 120a und Kiduschin 37b).

WILT THOU SPEAK TO KILL ME? “From here we learn that Moses had killed the Egyptian by merely pronouncing the Tetragrammaton.”⁸⁴The Tetragrammaton (Shem Hamphorash or Shem Hamyuchad) is the Proper Name of G-d. It consists of four Hebrew letters, the utterance of which is now forbidden. It is translated here as the Eternal. By pronouncing this Name, Moses needed no weapon to accomplish his purpose of bringing about the deserved death of the Egyptian. Thus the language of Rashi, and it is also a Midrash of our Rabbis.⁸⁵Shemoth Rabbah 1:35.
But I wonder. If so, who told the wicked one⁸⁶“The wicked one” — so called by the Torah in Verse 13: and he [Moses] said to the wicked one, ‘Why do you smite thy fellow?’ that Moses killed him? Perhaps Moses placed his hands upon the Egyptian and cursed him in the Name of G-d,⁸⁷See II Kings 2:24. [and the Hebrew who was now quarrelling with Moses saw him doing that]. This would explain the term vayach (‘and he smote’ the Egyptian).⁸⁸A similar use of the term is found in the case of the Assyrian army that was smitten outside Jerusalem by the angel of G-d. It says there, And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Eternal went forth ‘vayach’ (and smote) in the camp of the Assyrians (II Kings 19:35). Now just as in that case vayach does not signify a physical act of striking by hand but rather the inflicting of defeat by supernatural power, so also here in the case of Moses. (Bachya.) It may be that because the Egyptian had fallen dead before him [after he had pronounced the Tetragrammaton over him], Moses feared that they may report him and so he buried the Egyptian in the sand. The Hebrew who saw him doing that reckoned that Moses had caused [the Egyptian’s death somehow, even though he did not know that he had killed him by pronouncing the Tetragrammaton]. Perhaps he thought Moses had killed him by the sword, as he saw only the burial.
In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, scholars say⁸⁹Ibn Ezra in his commentary here, and R’dak in his Book of Roots, under the root amar. that the expression, wilt thou ‘omer’ (speak), means “think,” since we find amirah (speaking) referring to the thought of the heart. I said in my heart;⁹⁰Ecclesiastes 2:1. I say, that an untimely birth is better than he.⁹¹Ibid., 6:3. It is obvious that Ramban’s intent in selecting these two verses from the Book of Ecclesiastes is to show that the term amirah (saying) as such is equivalent to amirah b’leiv (speaking in one’s heart). Hence the Book of Ecclesiastes uses them interchangeably. But here there is no need for this, for [the intent of the Hebrew’s words to Moses] is as follows: “Who made thee a ruler and a judge over us? Is it because thou dost desire to kill me as thou didst kill the Egyptian that thou reprovest me and sayest, ‘Why smitest thou thy fellow?’”⁹²In other words, Ramban is saying that the expression atah omer (thou sayest) alludes to that which Moses had said in Verse 13: Why smitest thou thy fellow? The Hebrew thus said to Moses: “Is it because you desire to kill me as you killed the Egyptian that you reproved me by saying, ‘Why do you smite your fellow?’”