Comentários de Citação sobre Êxodo 18:19

Our Rabbis have already differed concerning this section.¹Zebachim 116 a, and Mechilta in beginning of this Seder. The difference of opinion is between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eleazar of Modi’im, Rabbi Yehoshua maintaining that Jethro arrived before the Giving of the Torah, and Rabbi Eleazar saying that he came after the Torah had been given. Some say that Jethro came to Moses before the Giving of the Torah, as the sequence of the sections of the Torah indicate, and some say that he came after the Giving of the Torah. Now this [latter] opinion [that he came after the Giving of the Torah] is certainly assisted by the verse [here] which states, And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness where he was encamped, at the mount of G-d.²Verse 5. Thus Scripture states that Jethro came to Moses when he was encamped before Mount Sinai, the place in which the Israelites camped for one year,³They arrived before Mount Sinai on the first day of Sivan (further, 19:1), and they first journeyed from there on the twentieth day of the second month in the second year after the exodus (Numbers 10:11). They thus stayed there for twelve months less ten days. this being the meaning of the expression, where he was encamped.²Verse 5. Moreover, Moses said to Jethro, and I make them know the statutes of G-d, and His laws,⁴Further, Verse 16. [thus indicating that the Torah had already been given]. Besides, it says here, And Moses let his father-in-law depart; and he went his way unto his own land.⁵Ibid., Verse 27. This had taken place in the second year when they journeyed from Mount Sinai, as it is said in the parashah (section) of Beha’alothcha:⁶Numbers 8:1 — 12:16. And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Reuel the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law: we are journeying⁷Ibid., 10:29. Hobab is identified as Jethro (Rashi). Now if all this happened before the Giving of the Torah, how could Moses say, We are journeying, etc.? There it is written: And he [Hobab] said unto him [Moses]: I will not go; but I will depart to mine own land and to my kindred,⁸Ibid., Verse 30. this being identical with the departure mentioned here, and he went his way unto his own land.⁵Ibid., Verse 27.
They⁹I.e., the commentators. The proof is found in Ibn Ezra here. have further brought proof [that Jethro came after the Torah had been given] from that which Scripture says, The Eternal our G-d spoke unto us in Horeb, saying: Ye have dwelt long enough in this mountain; turn you, and take your journey.¹⁰Deuteronomy 1:6-7. There it is said, And I spoke unto you at that time, saying: I am not able to bear you myself alone… So I took the heads of your tribes, wise men, etc.¹¹Ibid., Verses 9-15. This is the advice that Jethro [gave Moses on the morning after he arrived at the camp, as mentioned here further on in Verse 13]. There — [in Moses’ narration of the account in the Book of Deuteronomy] — it is written, And we journeyed from Horeb,¹²Ibid., Verse 19. for they journeyed immediately [after they appointed judges in accordance with Jethro’s advice. All of this serves to prove that Jethro came to Moses after the Giving of the Torah]. And if this is so, we are in need of a reason for this section being written here before [the account of the Giving of the Torah]!
Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that this was because of the affair of Amalek. Having mentioned the evil which Amalek inflicted upon us and how G-d commanded us to requite him accordingly, Scripture [by way of contrast], now mentioned the good which Jethro did for us in order to instruct us that we should show him kindness. When we will come to exterminate Amalek, as is mandatory upon us, we should warn the Kenites, [the descendants of Jethro], who dwelt near Amalek, and not destroy them together with Amalek. This was indeed done by Saul when he so spoke to the Kenites.¹³I Samuel 15:6, And Saul said unto the Kenites: Go, depart, get ye down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them; for ye showed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt.
Yet with all this, I find it difficult to understand this opinion [that Jethro came after the Revelation, for the following reasons]: When Scripture says, Now Jethro…heard of all that G-d had done for Moses, and for Israel His people, how that the Eternal had brought Israel out of Egypt, why does it not say that he heard what G-d had done to Moses and to Israel by giving the Torah, which is among the great wonders that were done for them, as He said: For ask now of the days past, which were before thee, since the day that G-d created man upon the earth, and from the one end of heaven unto the other, whether there had been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it? Did ever a people hear the voice of G-d speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?¹⁴Deuteronomy 4:32-33. And when Scripture states, And Moses told his father-in-law all that the Eternal had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the travail that had come upon them by the way,¹⁵Further, Verse 8. on the basis of which Jethro said, Now I know that the Eternal is greater than all gods,¹⁶Ibid., Verse 11. why did not Moses tell him about the Revelation¹⁷Literally: “‘the stand’ (ma’amad) at Mount Sinai,” or “the Revelation on Mount Sinai.” It is based on Deuteronomy 4:10, the day that thou ‘stoodest’ before the Eternal thy G-d in Horeb. The expression ma’amad har sinai appears in Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 8:1. on Sinai? Jethro would thereby know that the Eternal is the true G-d and that His Torah is the truth, there being no other but He, as Moses said, Unto thee it was shown, that thou mightest know that the Eternal He is G-d, there is none else beside Him. Out of Heaven He made thee to hear His voice, etc.¹⁸Deuteronomy 4:35-36.
Perhaps we may say that while he was yet in his country, Jethro immediately heard that G-d had brought Israel out of Egypt, whereupon he left his country and reached Moses where he camped before Mount Sinai following the Giving of the Torah. Scripture, however, does not narrate that Moses related the matter of the Revelation¹⁷Literally: “‘the stand’ (ma’amad) at Mount Sinai,” or “the Revelation on Mount Sinai.” It is based on Deuteronomy 4:10, the day that thou ‘stoodest’ before the Eternal thy G-d in Horeb. The expression ma’amad har sinai appears in Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 8:1. to him, for it had just happened and they were still at that site, and it is self-understood that he told him about it.
The most likely explanation seems to me to be to follow the sequence of the sections of the Torah, i.e., that Jethro came before the Giving of the Torah when the Israelites were yet in Rephidim, just as the Rabbis have said in the Mechilta:¹⁹Mechilta here in Verse 1. On the word “Mechilta,” see Seder Bo, Note 205. “Rabbi Yehoshua says, ‘[Now Jethro…heard. What particular event did he hear of that he came?] He heard of the war of Amalek, as mentioned in the preceding passage,²⁰Above, 17:8. and he came.’” He then journeyed with the Israelites from Rephidim to Mount Sinai. The purport of the verse which states [that Jethro came] unto the wilderness where he was encamped, at the mount of G-d,²¹Verse 5. Now this verse clearly states that Jethro came to Moses, not in Rephidim, but to where he was camped before Mount Sinai. But the true meaning of the verse is that Mount Sinai, etc. is that Mount Sinai was on the way from Midian, near that country. Moses went there to feed the flock of Midian,²²Above, 3:1. and in connection with Aaron’s [going forth to meet Moses upon his arrival in Egypt], it is said, And he met him in the mountain of G-d.²³Ibid., 4:27. Thus Jethro left Midian with his daughter and the children and came to Mount Sinai.
At that time, Moses was in Rephidim, which is a locale in the wilderness of Sin. Scripture says, And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai,²⁴Ibid., 16:1. thus stating that the wilderness of Sin stretches until Mount Sinai and includes the locales of Dophkah, Alush, and Rephidim.²⁵Numbers 33:12-14. See Ramban above, 16:1, where the same explanation is expounded briefly. Here, since it affects a major problem in the background - i.e., whether Jethro’s arrival occurred before or after the Giving of the Torah — Ramban discusses his explanation at greater length. Even though it says, And they journeyed…from the wilderness of Sin…and encamped in Rephidim,²⁶Above, 17:1. [which would seem to indicate that Rephidim was not in the wilderness of Sin], it nevertheless also says, And they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, and pitched in Dophkah,²⁷Numbers 33:12. [and from Dophkah they came to Alush, and from Alush to Rephidim, as stated in the following verses²⁸Ibid., Verses 13-14. there]. Alush and Rephidim are all part of the wilderness of Sin itself,²⁹And yet it says (above, 17:1) that they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin and came to Rephidim! But how could this be, for it says in the Book of Numbers that they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin and came to Dophkah and then to Alush and finally to Rephidim? It must be, Ramban concludes, that the name “wilderness of Sin” applies in general to an entire area, as well as to one particular locale, as explained in the text. as the whole desert there was called “the wilderness of Sin,” and the place before Mount Sinai was [also] called “the wilderness of Sin.” A similar case is the verse, And they returned unto the land of the Philistines.³⁰Genesis 21:32. See Ramban there (Vol. I, p. 274) that “the sense of the verse is that they [Abimelech and Phicol] returned to their city which was in the land of the Philistines.” Here too “the wilderness of Sin” includes Dophkah, Alush, and Rephidim. Thus, the sense of the verse, and they encamped in Rephidim (above, 17:1), is that they encamped in Rephidim, which was in the wilderness of Sin.
Thus, the explanation of the verse here is: And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses unto the wilderness where he was encamped, and he [Jethro] came to the mountain of G-d.³¹Verse 5. It was to the mountain that he [Jethro] came, and he stopped there, this being similar in meaning to the expression, and he came to the mountain of G-d,³²Above, 3:1. [which means that he stopped there]. In a similar sense also is the verse, Ye have sat long enough at this mountain,³³Deuteronomy 1:6. [which means “you have dwelt long enough at this place”]. From Mount Sinai, Jethro sent [a message] to Moses, [who was in Rephidim], saying, ‘I thy father-in-law Jethro am coming unto thee,’³⁴Verse 6. and Moses went out³⁵Verse 7. to meet him. In this case, it would not be necessary for us to say, [as Ibn Ezra did], that the expression, And he [Jethro] said to Moses: ‘I thy father-in-law Jethro am coming,’³⁴Verse 6. means that he said so before [he arrived at the mount of G-d, as stated in the preceding verse].³⁶But according to Ramban’s interpretation, the verses are in chronological order. First, as stated in Verse 5, Jethro arrived at the mount of G-d, and from there, as stated in Verse 6, he sent Moses — who was in Rephidim — the message: I thy father-in-law Jethro am coming to thee. In order to show respect to him, Moses went out to meet him, as related in Verse 7. Even if Rephidim was not in the wilderness of Sin, it was at any event in the desert, for Israel did not come to an inhabited land during all of the forty years.³⁷Above, 16:35. Further, Rephidim was near Mount Sinai, as [is evidenced by the fact] that a great multitude of people like them came from Rephidim to the mount of G-d in one day,³⁸I have not found any source for this statement of Ramban that the journey from Rephidim to Sinai was accomplished in one day. and as has been explained in the matter of the rock from which they drank in Rephidim, as I elucidated the subject there.³⁹Above, 17:5. Thus the explanation I have offered here is correct.
I have also seen this text in the Mechilta:⁴⁰Mechilta here on Verse 5. “Into the wilderness where he was encamped. Scripture thus expresses surprise at him. Here is a man who dwells in the midst of the glory of the world and yet desires to go out into a desolate wilderness which has nothing to offer.” The Rabbis’ intent was to explain the phrase, unto the wilderness where he was encamped, as referring to [that part of] the wilderness where the mount of G-d was, for the wilderness of Sin extended from Elim²⁴Ibid., 16:1. until Mount Sinai. Thus, Scripture here relates that Jethro came to the edge of the wilderness where Moses was camped, this being the desert where the mount of G-d was, i.e., unto Horeb.⁴¹See above, 3:1. Scripture mentioned this in praise of Jethro, who left his country and came to the wilderness where Moses was, because he knew that this was the mount of G-d, for on it G-d had appeared to Moses. He [Jethro] had already heard of the entire affair, i.e., that Israel went out from Egypt in order to serve G-d upon this mountain,⁴²Ibid., Verse 12. and he came for the Name of the Eternal, the G-d of Israel.⁴³II Chronicles 6:7. This too is correct.
It also appears to me concerning that which the verse states here, And Moses let his father-in-law depart; and he went his way unto his own land,⁴⁴Further, Verse 27. that this took place in the first year [of the exodus] and he betook himself to his own land and returned there. It is possible that he went there to convert his family and then returned to Moses while he was yet at Mount Sinai, since it was near to Midian, as I have mentioned. When they broke camp in Iyar of the second year,⁴⁵Numbers 10:11. and Moses said to him, We are journeying… come thou with us,⁴⁶Ibid., Verse 29. and he answered him, I will not go; but I will depart to mine own land, and to my kindred,⁴⁷Ibid., Verse 30. Moses in turn pleaded with him very much and said to him, Leave us not, I pray thee… and thou shalt be to us instead of eyes. And it shall be, if thou go with us, yea, it shall be, that what good soever the Eternal shall do unto us, the same will we do unto thee.⁴⁸Ibid., Verses 31-32. and he did not answer him at all. It would appear then that he accepted Moses’ plea and did according to his will and did not leave them. However, in the days of Saul, we find Jethro’s descendants with Amalek,⁴⁹I Samuel 15:6. See above, Note 13. and [after they departed from the Amalekites], they came and attached themselves again to Israel. [We also find that] the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab — [i.e., descendants of Jethro] — were in Jerusalem.⁵⁰Jeremiah, Chapter 35. Perhaps Jethro or his sons returned to their land after the death of Moses. It is possible also that the Kenite that dwelled with Amalek were of the family of Jethro but not his direct descendants, and Saul showed kindness unto the entire family on account of Jethro, just as Joshua dealt kindly with the [whole] family of Rahab⁵¹Joshua 6:23. [because of her]. The opinion of our Rabbis is thus that Jethro did go along with the Israelites [in the wilderness]. Thus they said in the Sifre⁵²The Sifre is a Tanaaitic Midrash on the Books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. The text quoted is in Beha’alothcha, 81. The Sifre is to be distinguished from the Sifra, which is a work of a similar nature on the Book of Leviticus. The Sifra is also referred to as Torath Kohanim [literally: “the law of the priests”]. that [at the time they divided up the land], the Israelites gave him the most fertile part of Jericho, and they [Jethro’s descendants] used it until the Sanctuary was built four hundred and forty years later.⁵³The building of the Temple was begun four hundred and eighty years after the exodus (I Kings 6:1). Subtract the forty years of the stay in the wilderness, and you have four hundred and forty. [It was then given as a substitute to him who gave up the land upon which the Sanctuary was to be built.] Rashi himself wrote this tradition in Seder Beha’alothcha.⁵⁴Numbers 10:32. Thus it is clear that Jethro returned to Moses, [as we have explained above, after he had returned to his land in the first year of the exodus]. In the Mechilta,⁵⁵Mechilta here on Verse 27. we also find: “Jethro said to Moses: ‘I am going to my land to convert the people of my country, for I shall bring them under the wings of Heaven.’ I might think that he merely went back and did not return; Scripture therefore says, And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm-trees, etc.”⁵⁶Judges 1:16.

Know that actually the Torah should have written ויקרא ה' אל משה ויאמר אליו; the fact that the subject of who was speaking i.e. the Lord, was not mentioned indicates that although the Book of Leviticus is a Book in its own right, it is an integral part of what came before it; the entire Torah is one continuous document, a single structure. The word ויקרא is simply a reference to the attribute of כבוד which was last mentioned in Exodus 40,35 when the Torah wrote that this attribute filled the Tabernacle.
The attribute which called to Moses was the “small” letter א in the word בהבראם In Genesis 2,4. In order to make this clear the letter א in the word ויקרא here is also written small.
When the Torah continues with מאהל מועד, “from the Tent of Meeting,” our sages in Torat Kohanim 1-2,10 state that the voice of G’d reached only the walls of the Sanctuary and was not audible outside. In order that we should not think that this was due to the voice of G’d being weak, close to a whisper, the Torah wrote הקול with the letter ה in front to teach us that the voice was powerful but that G’d deliberately restricted the sound waves to the inside of the Tabernacle. We have other verses in Scriptures where the word קול ה' occurs, such as in Psalms 29,4-5 קול ה' בכח, קול ה' בהדר, קול ה' שובר ארזים “the sound of G’d’s voice is power; the sound of the Lord’s voice is majesty; the sound of the Lord’s voice breaks cedars, etc. etc.” The letter ה in our verse before the word קול, while referring to a voice which is familiar to us from other occasions, did not mean that the voice of G’d was especially overpowering such as at Mount Sinai, but it simply meant that it was neither weak nor eardrum-shattering. If this is so, why did the Torah write מאהל מועד, “from the Tent of Meeting,” if the voice was not actually heard beyond the walls of the Tabernacle? The fact is that we encounter something similar in Ezekiel 10,5 where the prophet writes: “and the sound of the wings of the cherubs was heard up to the outer courtyard as the voice of El Shaddai when He speaks.” Another verse in which the voice of G’d is mentioned is in Ezekiel 1,24: “Then I heard the sound of their wings like the sound of great waters, like the sound of Shaddai as they moved, the sound of the words like the sound of the company; when they halt they release their wings.” The meaning of these verses is that the prophet Ezekiel compared the heavenly voice to four different phenomena; 1) he compared it to large bodies of waters the sound of which is steady, continuous; 2) he compared it to the voice of Shaddai, a voice which is neither too loud nor too weak. 3) The words “to the sound of a company (of angels) when they halt they release their wings,” describes the variety of sounds. 4) “The sound of a camp,” describes the sounds of the trumpets when the people in the camp are being alerted to break camp, etc. The remarkable thing was that this voice did not penetrate beyond the walls of the Temple’s courtyard.
The meaning of כקול אל שדי בדברו in Ezekiel 10,5 is: “similar to the voice of the G’d Shaddai when He was speaking,” It is a reference to the voice of G’d speaking during the revelation at Mount Sinai. That voice had been described as קול גדול ולא יסף, “a great sound which would not be repeated,” in Deut. 5,19, and as נפשי יצאה בדברו, “my soul departed when He spoke” in Song of Songs 5,6. At the time of the revelation G’d’s voice was inaudible beyond the confines of the camp of the Israelites, whereas here it was inaudible beyond the confines of the Tabernacle. The sound of the wings of the cherubs in Ezekiel’s vision were not audible beyond the walls of the courtyard of the Temple.
When you study the beginning of the Book of Samuel where Samuel is described as being called and the High Priest Eli had not heard the voice which called Samuel, he answered him: “go back to sleep” as he had thought that Samuel had mistakenly though that he, Eli, had called him (Samuel I 3,4). Eli thought hat Samuel’s imagination had played a trick on him. When Samuel experienced a second call Eli realized that Samuel had not imagined the call, but Eli was still not certain whether Samuel had heard a human voice or a divine call. In either event, he, Eli, had not heard any voice. This is why he told Samuel again to lie down and to continue sleeping. Only when Samuel reported hearing a voice calling him a third time did Eli understand that this was a heavenly voice. In the interval Eli had made a point of listening closely, and when he noted that Samuel had heard a voice which he himself had not heard, he realised that an angel had called to Samuel. This is the meaning of “Eli understood that G’d called to the lad” (3,8). Just as we find that voices heard by the prophet addressed by G’d or His angel are not heard by those whom G’d does not address, the same is true of visions which prophets are shown. G’d may show something to a person whom He has selected for that purpose, whereas others standing at the same spot will not experience the vision at all. We have clear proof of this in Daniel 10,7 where Daniel reports a vision he saw (obviously while awake and in the company of others) which the people next to him did not experience. This explains why the plagues inflicted by G’d upon the Egyptians were not noticed by the Israelites as affecting them at all. This was particularly true of the plague of darkness where the Torah states that the Israelites could even see in the very houses in which the Egyptians felt a palpable darkness so that they were unable to move (Exodus 10,23).
Rabbi Saadyah Gaon, in his Emunot Ve-deyot describes the matter in approx. these words: “it is clear that the sound (voice) which the prophet hears is a sort of new creation by the Lord. Whereas ordinary prophets heard this voice of G’d through an angel who was the intermediary, Moses heard it without needing recourse to an angel as his intermediary. In other words, Moses himself took the place of the angel. This is what the Torah meant when it wrote that G’d spoke to Moses “face to face.” This is also what the Torah meant when it reported about Moses אשר ידעו ה', “with whom G’d was on intimate terms.” To remind us of this for all times, the Torah wrote (Deut. 34,10) that “never again did there arise a prophet of the unique qualities of Moses.” Moses was in a class by himself as prophets go through three distinctive features: 1) his prophetic insights were received without intermediary. 2) He was able to respond to prophetic visions immediately, without trepidation, without feeling physically weakened by the mere fact that he had experienced a call from G’d or a vision. Even great prophets such as Isaiah and Ezekiel describe that they were overwhelmed by their visions (Isaiah 6,1, and Ezekiel 1,28). Moses could immediately involve G’d in a dialogue as we know from Exodus 18,19: “Moses would speak and G’d would respond.” 3) Moses saw his prophetic visions by means of a single מחיצה, “screen, or filter, ”whereas other prophets’ visions had been filtered through no fewer than 9 such screens (based on Vayikra Rabbah 1,14). The fact that Moses did not need multiple “screens” or “mirrors” making such visions into riddles is spelled out in Numbers 12,8. On the other hand, Ezekiel and Daniel, for instance, needed 9 such “filters.” (They are quoted as using these words “such as the vision which I have seen no fewer than nine times for the same vision.” (Ezekiel 43,3). The word “vision” is in the plural on one occasion). The same is true in Daniel 10,5, 10,7-8. What Ezekiel and Daniel saw as מחיצות, barriers or filters, is described in the Torah by the word חידות in the verse from Numbers 12 which we quoted earlier. Thus far Rabbi Saadyah gaon.

AND I COMMANDED YOU AT THAT TIME ALL THE THINGS WHICH YE SHOULD DO. “These are the ten differences between monetary and capital cases.” This is Rashi’s language quoting the Sifre.⁹²Sifre, Devarim 18. See Sanhedrin 32a for these ten distinctions between monetary and capital cases. And if so, Moses is speaking here to the judges [previously] mentioned, and he abridged on the ten differences [by not enumerating them], for they are all deduced from verses.
And in line with the plain meaning of Scripture, the reference here is to the statutes and laws, the way wherein they must walk, and the deeds they must perform,⁹³Exodus 18:20. for he [Moses] personally commanded, warned, and taught Israel all these matters. And the reason for mentioning this [subject] here is because it is known that this was the substance of Jethro’s counsel when he told Moses, Be thou for the people before G-d,⁹⁴Ibid., Verse 19. meaning that he was to pray in their behalf in the time of their affliction, and he further told him, And thou shalt teach them the statutes and the laws etc.,⁹³Exodus 18:20. meaning that he, himself, was to teach them the Torah. But regarding the execution of the law, Jethro advised him to appoint judges to assist him, and I have already explained it there.⁹³Exodus 18:20. Therefore, Moses related here that when he designated the officers over thousands and hundreds he delegated them only over the execution of justice. He, however, would personally teach them [the people] everything they were to do in accordance with the Torah, because he hearkened to his father-in-law’s counsel and did all that he had said.⁹⁵Ibid., Verse 24. Now Moses did not mention Jethro’s advice here, nor did he attribute to him anything that Jethro proposed. It appears to me that Moses did not want to mention it [the fact that he was following his father-in-law’s advice] in the presence of all Israel because of his humility,⁹⁶For people would think that, were it not for Jethro’s counsel, Moses would not have needed any assistance from the other judges. But would he have brought in Jethro’s name into this affair it might have appeared that Moses himself never thought that he would need assistance of other people. Moses humility is thus made apparent when he states his own inability to cope with all the problems of the people (Keseph Mezukak). See further in my Hebrew commentary p. 349. or it may be that it would not be to his honor to mention to that generation that he had married a Cushite woman.⁹⁷Numbers 12:1. — Since in the case of Zimri the son of Salu they chided Moses about the Cushite woman [that he had married before the Torah was given — see Rashi, Numbers 25:6], he therefore avoided referring to it in order to prevent them from stumbling into evil speech (see my Hebrew commentary, p. 533). It is also possible that the reason [for not mentioning Jethro’s name] was because he had consulted the Divine Glory and this matter was done at the command of the Almighty.⁹⁸Mechilta, Yithro 2: “And Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that ‘amar’ (he, [i.e. G-d] had said” Exodus 18:24). The Mechilta thus explains the word amar as referring to G-d, and not to Jethro.