Comentários de Citação sobre Êxodo 3:22

ויאמר ה׳ ..עוד נגע אחד, G'd said to Moses: "one more plague, etc." This chapter tells us about matters G'd had already mentioned to Moses earlier while Moses was still in Midian. At that time (3,19) G'd had informed Moses that Pharaoh would not let the Israelites depart even after He applied a strong hand against him. In 4,22-23 G'd had already warned Pharaoh of the consequences of not letting the Israelites depart. You will observe that the end of the cycle of nine plagues left Pharaoh exactly as obstinate as he had been at the beginning. He had started out by not even considering the demands of G'd, and though he appeared to have softened his stance, making progressively greater concessions, he was now back to square one having ruled out the departure of any of the Israelites. In 7,4 G'd had told Moses that the sign that the plague of the killing of the firstborn was about to occur would be Pharaoh's refusal to listen. As soon as Moses heard that he was not to appear again at court he knew that the time had come for the last plague after which the Exodus would begin. Moses knew that this plague would be the most severe because G'd asked him to instruct the people to "borrow" as many silver and golden trinkets as they could. The word עוד then does not mean an additional plague as much as it means "the plague I have already spoken to you about once before, I am mentioning again." This explains why Moses did not wait after verse four until G'd described the plague to him, though G'd had done so every other time when Moses was told to warn Pharaoh. Moses proceeded to inform Pharaoh on the spot. Whereas it is true that we do not find that G'd had previously told Moses that the plague of the killing of the firstborn would occur at midnight, we may assume that G'd had told Moses that detail also at that time, but that the Torah did not record it there as it had not yet become relevant. This is why it is not difficult to understand that G'd repeated here what He had told Moses originally, i.e. that the Jews would take with them the silver and gold trinkets borrowed from the Egyptians as well as their garments and that they would "empty" Egypt (Exodus 3,22).

Similarly, if they had changed their language, even though they had not changed their names, nevertheless their names would not have indicated the redemption. For specifically in the holy language [Hebrew], the name Reuben points to I have surely seen the affliction of my people, and Simeon to God has heard, but in another language, the name Reuben would not indicate “I have seen,” and likewise for all of them. Because they were fenced in from immorality, they were not fit to be among the Egyptians who were steeped in lewdness, as it says about them: whose flesh is as the flesh of donkeys, and whose issue is like the issue of horses (Ezekiel 23:20). And because there was no evil speech among them, and they kept hidden let every woman ask of her neighbor, therefore they were redeemed. For if this matter had not been kept hidden, the Egyptians would not have lent them anything, and then it would not have been possible to redeem them, lest that elder [Abraham] say: They will serve them and they will afflict them was fulfilled, but afterward they will go out with great wealth was not fulfilled. Therefore it says: These are the names of the children of Israel, for even though Joseph had died and the bondage was about to begin, nevertheless the impression of redemption remained intact, because these names came with them previously, and with them they are coming also now, for their names did not change. And this is proof that they also did not change their language, otherwise there would be no significance to the fact that they did not change their names.

The thoughts of God are deep; who can perceive His secret? To Him alone the plot is clear. Perhaps God caused it to come about that Moshe would grow up in the royal palace, that his soul might be habituated to be on the highest level, not lowly and accustomed to being in a house of slaves. For do we not see that he kills the Egyptian for performing an act of unjust violence? And he saves the Midianite daughters from the shepherds, for they (the shepherds) perform unjust violence in watering their flocks from the water drawn by them (the daughters of Re’uel). And moreover: had he grown up among his brethren, such that they had known him since his youth, they would not be in awe of him, for they would consider him as one of them.