Pensamento Judaico sobre Êxodo 11:2

(1) We have to understand this whole story as a continuation of the previously reported incident, in which G'd had criticised Moses openly for having appeared to doubt His ability to supply the people with large quantities of meat. Under the circumstances, Miriam and Aaron also found reason to criticise Moses. They believed that Moses, having married a woman belonging to another nation, had now become ashamed of this, and that this was the reason he had separated from her. They were convinced that his status as a prophet had nothing to do with this separation, since they too were prophets, and this did not interfere with their family life. If Moses were to use the argument of his being a prophet, they considered that this would be showing off his piety. This was their second sin, in fact. G'd heard all this, and decided to reprimand them more severely than He would have done, had their criticism been more factual, and if they had not chosen a point in time when they believed Moses to be out of favour with G'd. First of all, by testifying to Moses' humility, the Torah squelches the thought that he could have been showing off his piety. Secondly, it states that the separation had nothing to do with Moses having developed a dislike for his wife. Matters which would be considered private by other couples who conduct their sex life in the confines of their bedrooms, would assume a quasi public character in the case of Moses, since he had to be available for communication from G'd on a seven day, twenty four hour basis. He could therefore not afford to be found tamey, ritually impure due to the emission of seminal fluid at any moment. Even the brief space of time it would require to immerse himself in a ritual bath, would mean that he would keep G'd waiting, on occasion. Because Miriam and Aaron did not appreciate the different level of Moses' prophetic powers and stature, they had arrived at an opposite conclusion regarding Moses' motivation. By addressing them suddenly, G'd wanted to demonstrate to Miriam and Aaron that whereas they had not been tuned in to this communication and had been totally unprepared for it, their brother was perfectly at ease, comfortable with this "sudden" communication. Miriam and Aaron were forced to remain outside the tabernacle, whereas Moses was inside it. Only through Moses being in the presence of the shechinah, did they receive any communication at all. (2) G'd then proceeded to outline the qualitative difference between Moses' prophetic powers, and those of Miriam and Aaron respectively. Im yihye nevi-achem, "if he were a prophet according to your definition of the term," G'd would speak to him in a dream or through a reflection. (verses 6-8) Other prophets receive their communications in one of four ways. A) In a dream. B) Through a reflected image, while remaining awake but in a state of trembling. C) In a parable, through a riddle, by means of an angel. D) After having prepared themselves spiritually to a state necessary to receive a communication. In chapter seven of his sefer hamada, Maimonides has elaborated on the Talmudic statement in Yevamot 49, explaining that the prophecy of Moses was in the nature of a "clear vision," whereas all other prophets received only "clouded visions." Our Parshah explains some of the aspects of prophecy discussed by Maimonides, as well as others not dealt with in his sefer hamada. Mar-ah, is the mirror which is the means by which the prophet receives his message while awake or asleep. There are four basic deficiencies when one receives a communication by means of a mirror. They leave the recipient unable to comprehend the message in its entirety. 1) The viewer sees only what is immediately opposite him, anything behind a curtain, for instance, would not be seen, since only the curtain itself is reflected by the mirror. In this way, prophets receive an external view of things, without comprehending its substance. Abraham's belief that Isaac was to be sacrificed is an example of this. Although it appeared as if G'd had changed His mind, lack of comprehension of the true nature of G'ds command, only affected the viewer. Similarly, Samuel erred thinking G'd had wanted him to appoint Yishai's eldest son, until G'd told him not to be guided by the "exterior." i.e. mar-eyhoo. Even at the beginning of his career, he had mistaken the call of Eli, the High Priest, his mentor, no less than three times. (Samuel I chapter 3) This kind of communication is described by Solomon in his Song of Songs as "behold, He was standing behind our wall, observing through the windows, peering through the lattices." (chapter 2,9) Concerning all this, G'd says "not so My servant Moses; he is at home in any part of My house." The second deficiciency when perceiving by means of a mirror, is that all communication is only visual; the viewer cannot hear anything that may be spoken by the figure appearing in the mirror. Consequently, understanding is liable to be fragmentary, the whole picture is not communicated. Gestures may be observed, but no sound is audible. Zacharyah 4, and Daniel 10, are examples of the inadequacy to the prophet of this kind of revelation, unless there is further assistance. Concerning this flaw which other prophets have to put up with when they receive G'ds communications, G'd says about Moses "I speak to him mouth to mouth." His ears, not only his eyes are part of his prophetic visions. The third disadvantage in perceiving by means of a mirror, is that one does not behold the actual form or shape of the object shown, but only its two dimensional reproduction, i.e. reflection. This is like making the recipient of the vision guess at the real essence of something. It is as if asking him to piece together parts of a puzzle, chidot. Mar-eh, spelled with the vowel segal, means a true image, not the reflected one. Moses receives mar-eh, not mar-ah. The fourth disadvantage of viewing by means of a mirror is that whoever wants to view things in a mirror, must first assume a position opposite, directly in front of the mirror. Whatever is seen however, appears inverted. What is right in reality and parallel to the viewer, appears as on the left of the viewer. The viewer must employ his brain to compensate for the distortion inherent in viewing things in a mirror. Moses, on the other hand, sees temunat hashem, the true image, not something distorted in a mirror. After G'd had outlined to Miriam and Aaron how different Moses' level of prophetic perceptions was from theirs, He challenges them "why have you not had enough reverence for him to talk about My servant etc." i.e. "about ME?" Here G'd makes the point that Moses is indeed the spiritual father of all prophets, and as such, a special reverence is required in our attitude towards him. When the Mishnah Avot 4, 15, says "may the reverence for your teacher equal the reverence for Heaven," our Parshah is its source. The sin of Miriam and Aaron was twofold, since in making derogatory remarks about Moses, they had actually criticised G'd by implication. Moses was G'ds chosen instrument, after all. Secondly, Moses' character was so perfect, that they had no right to impute base motives to any of his actions. When G'd had finished explaining to Miriam and Aaron how they had erred, He withdrew, and Miriam was struck by the skin disease, since it had only been she who had actually done the talking. Aaron had been included in the accusation, since by remaining a silent listener, he had become an accessory to the travesty committed. Proof that Aaron had kept silent, is the fact that the Torah does not say "Miriam and Aaron spoke," using the plural form, or the masculine form, which would have included Aaron. (3) The plea "do not lay sin upon us," means "since we have already admitted our guilt, do not reprimand us any further for this sin, but pray for us." In answer to Moses' prayer to heal Miriam of her affliction, G'd says "since even Aaron had not suggested that she go completely free, only that she should not die, her punishment would be temporary banishment. Her sin being also against her father in Heaven, said father would ban her from His presence temporarily." (4) The fact that the people did not continue their journey during Miriam's quarantine, was not an unmixed blessing for her. Though it reflected the fact that they held Miriam in high esteem, it was also the surest way of publicising what had happened to her, since the delay in travelling would lead to questions concerning the reason for the delay. All of this would result in increased respect for Moses and his prophetic powers. The Parshah teaches the lesson that one must be exceedingly careful when criticising one's leaders. Solomon, in Proverbs 18,12-14, summarizes the lesson to be learned from this Parshah. Moses, who enjoyed tremendous prestige and honour was exemplified by his humility, whereas Miriam the greatest prophetess, had let her pride cause her to slander her brother. The principal error to be avoided when criticising one's leaders, is not to apply one's own low standards of conduct to those of one's leaders.

(1) Leading one's sheep in the best manner possible, utilising all that knowledge of natural law, brings one to the threshold of engaging higher norms, the supernatural. Mount Chorev is described by the Torah as the next step a person achieves, after all preparatory steps for such an encounter had been completed. Encountering such a mountain appears to be the gateway to attaining higher knowledge. The encounter was certainly not accidental. The vision of the burning bush alerted Moses to the fact that there are phenomena which cannot be explained rationally. To gain an insight into the significance of such phenomena, he stepped closer to examine the spectacle. He wanted to know if the fact that the bush was not being consumed was due to its fire being only apparent fire, or whether it was real fire and there was something strange about the composition of the bush itself. (2) Moses then became dubious whether his first assessment about this being a burning bush had been correct, and he wanted to know why such a bush would not be consumed by the fire. The term "burning" in the present tense, reflected only his original impression. He wanted to know what it is that looks like fire and yet does not "burn" i.e. disintegrate, become consumed. (3) When G-d saw Moses approach, He called to him as elokim, i.e. the midat hadin, attribute of justice, telling him that this was not the moment to step closer. First he had to remove his shoes. As long as natural law operates, the shoe has to be fitted to the size of the foot. Once on holy ground, Moses was taught that effect no longer represents the result of cause as it does in natural law. The removal of both shoes was necessary, one representing the ability to defeat enemies by supernatural means, the other to provide sustenance for the Jewish people by supernatural means. Joshua, whose people did not receive their sustenance by supernatural means, had to remove only one shoe, to signify that his enemies would be defeated by supernatural means. Another aspect of the lesson learned was that although Heavenly fire is more powerful than natural fire, as evident from Elijah at Mount Carmel, Gideon and the fire that consumed the sacrifices on the altar, the burning bush which represented such Heavenly fire was not destructive in nature as is the case with natural fire. Even if we accept the whole vision as a lesson teaching Moses that the acceptance of G-ds mission would not harm him, the lesson that once one is exposed to G-ds personal Providence no protective clothing is needed, is sufficient. Those who are close to G-d qualify for the promise "for He has commanded His angels to guard you, to carry you on hands so that your feet will not be hurt." (Psalms 9,11) The holiness of the site demonstrated that contact with holiness did not by itself cause harm to man. For this reason, we have a tradition that Jews used to walk barefoot on the Day of Atonement, just like angels. Before such a lesson has been learned, we find both Jacob and Moses afraid when they first realise that they are on holy ground. (Genesis 28,16;-17,Exodus 3,6) Once Moses had convinced himself of the illusory nature of at least some of the so called natural processes, he proceeded to investigate more closely, i.e. sar lirot. By repeating the call "Moses, Moses," he was reminded that there was a limit to what a human being can achieve in this direction, that he had to remain human after all, i.e. "Moses." (4) However, significantly, at this stage it is no longer elokim addressing Moses but hashem. In effect, G-d is saying that until now, though He had, of course, been aware of the sorry state of the Jewish nation, this had been so only in His capacity as elokim. His knowledge had not called for any action on His part. Now that Moses had gained deeper insights, these insights would also benefit Moses’s people. However, at this stage G-d did not refer to eventual entry into the land of Israel being part of Moses’s immediate mission. He seemed to separate Israel's eventual objective from Moses’s ultimate destiny. (5) Since Moses had had to flee for his life from Egypt, he could not see how his appointment would be of benefit to his people. This is not unlike the time the prophet Samuel could not see the point in anointing David, when he was afraid that Saul would kill him. (Samuel I ,chapter 17)

(1) Moses argues, that after confession of the sin and an advocate such as himself of whom G-d had said "I have known you by name," no further lack of grace should exist. Nevertheless, You have said "I will send an angel before you," i.e. not like the angel mentioned in Parshat Mishpatim. When talking about the function of this angel, no mention was made by You, that he would be like the angel that accompanied us up to now. Of the previous angel, the Torah had said "and the Lord was walking ahead of them by day and by night in a pillar of cloud...and during the night in a column of fire." (Exodus 13,21) (2) Now however, Moses argues "You state for I will not go up in your midst." (33,3) All this points to the fact that You are still angry, and that You are entrusting the supervision of my people to someone who is equivalent to those who supervise the fate of all other nations. Therefore, Moses asks "let me know Your ways, so that I will know You and be able to find favour in Your eyes, and this will demonstrate that this people is really YOUR people." G-d responds "My face, i.e. My personal hashgachah will lead you." Moses continues that G-d should not think that he was unaware that without "YOUR Presence we cannot even progress one step on the way," but I wanted You to assure me that by teaching me Your ways we qualify for the superior type of hashgachah reserved for the tzaddikim. How else would I know that not only I, personally, but also Your people have found favour in Your eyes? This could only be by means of veniflinu ani ve-amcha that both I and Your people will be granted miraculous distinctions! (3) G-d responded by saying that He would perform miracles in the presence of both Moses and His people, the like of which had never been performed. (34, 10) This would prove that all the Jewish people are under the protection of the third and most exclusive type of hashgachah peratit the most personalised supervision by G-d. This is also the meaning of "I will be gracious to whomever I choose to be gracious to;" (33, 19) it will be an act of grace, not entitlement or automatic response by Me. Since G-d had explained His response to the needs of the people already twice, Moses asks for a personal favour, an act of grace for himself, when he says "please show ME Your glory." He wanted to be shown this at once, not to have to wait until some future national crisis would trigger the need for that kind of revelation of G-d’s Majesty. The word na, is frequently used as prefacing a request for immediate fulfilment. Examples are Numbers 12, 13, "heal her now!," or Exodus 11,2, "speak now!" (4) G-d responds by saying "I will let all My goodness pass before you." You will then understand the relationship of all the things that exist, and how they are all traced back to Me, the original Cause of all existence and all happenings. I will proclaim the four lettered name before you" i.e. I will use the four lettered name of which I once said to you "this is My name and this is My memorial." (Exodus 3, 15) "I will reveal the significance of this name so that you will know that whosoever knows it and calls upon it, I will respond to such a person by performing miracles in this (otherwise) orderly world. In this manner I will demonstrate that I will bestow grace on those I decide to grant grace to." When G-d says "you cannot see My face," this is not to be construed as a denial of Moses’s request, but as a teaching and an instruction. The ultimate wisdom of the sage is to know what element of theology needs to remain beyond his understanding. This is the difference between a chacham, a wise man and someone who is still wiser than a chacham. The latter can add to his knowledge of "causes" without getting to know the essence. This is why G-d tells Moses that the highest level of his perception is to know that one cannot see "MY FACE," i.e. understand "My" attributes in a manner that would form a composite picture of "My" essence. As long as a human being is alive, i.e. ha-adam vechay, such perceptions are not possible. The nature of your life, Moses is told is the combination of matter and spirit. This precludes the comprehension of the essence of the pure spirit. Once you are no longer part of an earthly shell, part of a primitive form of life, you would be able to realise some of My positive attributes. Berachot 17, phrases it "In the world of the future, the righteous will sit with their crowns on their heads, and enjoy the outpourings of the Divine Presence." Put another way: as long as man has a normal intellect, cognition of My essence is beyond him, as we find in Numbers 21, 9, "when he would look at the copper snake he would live." When looking at the copper snake, some people were under the illusion that they had seen G-d. A blind man who has never seen light, sometimes imagines himself as competetnt to define light because he is not satisfied with his state of blindness and longs to advance beyond that stage. This may be what the prophet Isaiah 6,5, refers to when he said "woe unto me: I thought I was a person of unclean lips, dwelling amongst a people that are impure, for I have seen the Lord of hosts with my eyes." What is described here is a reference to this vision of the Divine entourage, merkavah which the prophet had experienced, in which he saw the throne of G-d. As Maimonides comments, the power of the prophet is that he can make relevant comparisons between the form and the Creator, between exterior form and inner content. (5) "He said, here there is a place near Me, stand there on the rock etc." Afterwards G-d said "you cannot see." G-d now explains how these matters relate to one another. "I can elevate you to a place from which you can look down on earth, then when My majesty passes, you will stand in this highest place that it is possible for man to achieve, and I will cover you with My hand." This will act as a lid to protect you from that part of Me that is not given to mortal man to understand. But afterwards, "I will remove My hand, and you will see My rear, "meaning the negative aspects of Me. This is the most any human can do. (33,22-23) In chapter 60 of his "Moreh," Maimonides explains this in the famous parable with the ship. The nikrat hatzur, is understood as the summit of the rock. Moses’s vantage point will be above the earth, so to speak. Since things created by G-d directly have no lasting existence, i.e. are by (6) their very nature created only for the brief moment they are needed, such as the manna in the desert, and since the second set of tablets needed to endure, they had to be constructed by human hands. As long as G-d contributed only the writing, the continued existence of these tablets was assured. The reason no one was to accompany Moses to the mountain was, that since the first time the objective had been to let the people hear "so that the people will hear when I speak with you," Aaron and the elders were to accompany Moses part of the way. The fact that Moses would be addressed directly by G-d had been demonstrated already, there was therefore no need for Aaron or elders to accompany Moses again. Animals also were not allowed on the mountain, to underline the sanctity of the site. After this, the Torah says "Moses rose early and ascended the mountain," conclusive proof of Rashi's opinion that conversation between G-d and people up to that time had taken place within his tent. Now Moses took with him the tablets which had as yet not been inscribed. G-d descended on the mountain, that is to the place previously defined as "there is this place with Me." Moses stood on the rock. "He proclaimed in the name of G-d," i.e. G-d now proceeded to instruct him in the thirteen attributes." G-d passed in front of him." This is the fulfilment of "I will let all My goodness pass before you." Normally, Moses would have experienced a transient revelation to be immediately forgotten, dreamlike; however, because G-d had added the words "I will remove My hand," He granted Moses a much longer lasting impression of the revelation that was to follow. Had G-d only stated "I will cover you with My hand," this would not have been the case. The whole revelation would be an indirect (negative) revelation, not a direct (positive) one, as would have been the case had there been a vision of G-d’s "face." At any rate, the comment "I will grant grace to whomsoever I shall decide to grant grace to," is the reference to the instruction in the thirteen attributes as outlined in the Talmud Rosh Hashanah 17. Rabbi Yonathan comments there that if it had not been for that verse, I would not have been permitted to explain it in that vein. G-d instructed Moses how to pray, wore a tallit and showed Moses that whenever Israel sinned, he should likewise drape himself in such a prayer shawl and G-d would be willing to forgive Israel. Rabbi Yehudah says that G-d made a contract with Moses that he would not return empty handed from any entreaty incorporating mention of G-d’s thirteen attributes. This is the meaning of "Here I conclude a covenant in the presence of the people." (34, 10)