Комментарий к Шмот 11:5

עד בכור השבי UNTO THE FIRSTBORN OF THE CAPTIVE (these words are used in 12:29 instead of עד בכור השפחה “unto the firstborn of the handmaid” in this verse) — Why were the captives smitten, for they had not enslaved the Israelites? In order that these might not say that their god had claimed satisfaction for the humiliation imposed upon them and had brought this punishment upon the Egyptians (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 12:29).

מבכור פרעה עד בכור השפחה, from the highest layer of Egyptian society to the most lowly. When we read a similar line in 12,19 the meaning is “from the most severe sinner to the relatively least guilty sinner.”

ומת כל בכור, and every firstborn will die, etc. G'd did not say: "I will kill him." The reason, as we have pointed out on previous occasions is, that evil does not originate with G'd. He is the Creator of all that is good. Anything in the nature of evil is initiated by one of the agents He has designated. G'd Himself indicated who was the firstborn, His agents carried out the death sentence. This is why the mention of "destroyers" at the time the Israelites put the blood on their door-posts and the fact that G'd Himself orchestrated the plague are not contradictory.

אשר אחר הרחיים, later on the simile is changed and the Torah speaks about השבי אשר בבית הבור, “the prisoner in the dungeon.”(12,29) There is no contradiction, seeing that we know from Judges 16,21) that Shimshon as well as other prisoners were obliged to act as the “horse-power” turning the millstones while they were incarcerated.

עד בכור השפחה אשר אחר הרחיים, ‘to the firstborn of the maidservant who is behind the millstone.” When the Torah reports about the actual plague happening, it uses a different example when describing the woman at the lowest rung of the social order, namely “the firstborn of the prisoner in jail.” Actually, the Torah refers to the same person each time. When the warning was issued it was daylight, so that the prisoner was at work moving millstones. When the plague occurred it was midnight, a time when all the prisoners are in their cells to prevent them from escaping.

ומת כל בכור, “and every firstborn will die.” The meaning is “regardless of whether he is the firstborn of the male (who provided the sperm) or if he is the firstborn of the female.” The curious wording in the Midrash Hagadol means that if one man impregnated 10 women all of whom had previously not given birth, the males born as a result are considered as “firstborn (of) the women.” If the situation is reversed, and a woman gives birth to ten males each by sperm of another male, then such “firstborn” are considered as “firstborn (of) men.” This is what Assaph means in Psalms 78,51: “He struck every firstborn in Egypt, the first fruits of their vigor in the tents of Cham.” We have another verse in Psalms 105,36 where the firstborn are also described as “the first fruit of their vigor.” It appears that the firstborn of “males” are described as ראשית לכל אונם, whereas the firstborn of women are described as ראשית אונים באהלי חם. The reason is that woman is traditionally associated with the word אהל, “tent.” Compare Judges 6,8 הם ומקניהם יעלו ואהליהם, “they and their cattle ascended together with their “tents,” i.e. with their women.

Why were the captives struck down? You might ask: The verse mentions the first-born of the captives only later (12:29), in connection with the plague itself. Why does Rashi explain it here [in connection with the warning]? An answer is: Rashi explained above, according to our Sages, that Moshe said “about midnight” because Pharaoh’s sorcerers might say that he is a liar. Yet we might object: Here, they surely will say that Moshe lied! For Moshe said [in his warning], “From the first-born of Pharaoh. . . to the first-born of the [Egyptian] slave girl,” including everyone in between, but excluding those lowlier than the slave girl. Yet later on, in connection with the plague itself, it is written that also the captives were smitten, and they are lowlier, as Rashi explains there. Thus Rashi explains here why the first-born of the captives were struck down, to answer the above objection. [The sorcerers would not err] because they knew that Moshe warned only regarding those who oppressed B’nei Yisrael — i.e., the first-born of Pharaoh until the first-born of the slave girl. But Moshe’s warning did not include the captives. [For the plague came primarily to punish those who enslaved B’nei Yisrael, and] the captives did not enslave them. [As Rashi explains, they died only so that they should not say, “Their own god. . . brought retribution upon the Egyptians.”] Nevertheless, [we could object to the above explanation:] Moshe did not say clearly that the captives are excluded, for the term “first-born of the Egyptian slave girl” could be referring to “the lowly ones,” including the captives. Thus another answer is: Rashi is defending what he explained above, that Moshe changed Hashem’s word because of what the sorcerers might say. If we object that this is no reason to change Hashem’s word, Rashi answers us: “Why were the captives struck down? . . .So they should not say. . .” Thus we see that the captives did not really deserve this, as they did not oppress B’nei Yisrael, and were struck down only because of what they might say. And Moshe changed Hashem’s word for the same reason.

V. 5. Es war dies der gleich anfangs angekündigte Moment, Kap. 4, 22. 23. nicht aus Hass gegen ,בני בכרי ישראל וגו׳ שלח את בני וגו׳ הנה אנכי הרג את בנך בכרך deinen Sohn, sondern zur Rettung des meinigen. In dem Tode deines Sohnes magst du meine Gefühle bei der Misshandlung meines Sohnes schätzen lernen.

כל בכור, “every firstborn.” Both the firstborn of a mother and the firstborn of a father were included.

מבכור פרעה עד בכור השפחה FROM THE FIRSTBORN OF PHARAOH UNTO THE FIRSTBORN OF THE HANDMAID — All who were of less importance than the firstborn of Pharaoh and of more importance than the firstborn of the handmaid are included in this description. And why were the sons of the handmaids stricken? Because they, too, treated them (the Israelites) as slaves and rejoiced at their misery (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 7).

Because they too enslaved them and rejoiced in their oppression. Enslavement alone is not sufficient reason, as it was not a complete enslavement. And rejoicing alone is not sufficient reason, for no action was involved. Thus both reasons are needed. (Maharshal)

There may also be another meaning, similar to what we are told in Shabbat 34 where Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai put his eye on a sinner and that sinner died as a result. At first glance, how are we to understand that a pious person of the calibre of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai would summarily "execute" someone by giving him "the eye?" The same Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai had castigated people of the evil eye as possessing a very negative virtue (Zohar 3, page 211). Actually, the exact wording in the Talmud was יהבי עיניה, "he looked at him with his eye" (singular). We would have expected the Talmud to say that "he looked at him with his eyes (pl)." We have to remember that inasmuch as "evil" and "death" are synonymous how is it that evil exists at all? This is because there are no absolutes; just as the attribute of Mercy contains a small part of the attribute of Justice, so every good virtue contains a small element of evil, and vice versa. In the case of evil, death occurs when that small part of "good" or "life" which kept it alive is withdrawn. Keeping this in mind, we can understand the peculiar statement in Sukkah 52 according to which G'd will slaughter the evil urge at an appropriate time in the future in the presence of the righteous. How are to understand this? How can one slaughter an angel (disembodied spirit)? Considering what we have just said we can understand the statement in the Talmud very easily. G'd will remove the part of the evil urge which makes it a viable i.e. active force.

הבכור פרעה, “from the firstborn of Pharaoh,” i.e. a firstborn of the father, to עד בכור השפחה, “including the firstborn of a servant maid,” i.e. the firstborn of a mother.

וכל בכור בהמה AND ALL THE FIRSTBORN OF BEASTS — because they worshipped these as gods. When the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts punishment from a nation, He punishes their gods at the same time (Genesis Rabbah 96:5).

We also need to appreciate the natural tendency of identical or basically similar virtues to coalesce with each other. The good attracts the good, the evil tends to attract more evil to itself. This is the secret of how the souls of the Israelites which had their origin in the positive emanations could "draw" to themselves the "lost" souls which we described as being particularly prevalent in Egypt. [The author has repeatedly described these souls as having been captured by the negative side of the emanations as a result of Adam eating from the tree of knowledge (compare his comments on Genesis 49,9). Ed.] G'd had given outstanding Torah scholars the ability to attract to themselves the "good" part of any sinner. When Rabbi Shimon looked at the sinner in question he extracted the good part of that sinner, thus leaving no viable element within that person. As a result the sinner died. When G'd passed through Egypt on that night, He extracted the good that was within any of these firstborn; as a result such a firstborn simply dropped dead. It was as if Rabbi Shimon had put his eye on such an individual.

עד בכור השפחה, according to Rashi, seeing that most commentators here understand the words בכור השפחה, to be identical to בכור השבי in 12,29, they use that term in their commentary on this verse. They assume that Rashi agreed seeing that nearly all prisoners of war become slaves. [According to my understanding of Rashi on 2,29, there are degrees in the hierarchy of slaves. The Torah uses both terms, as the slave who was a prisoner of war is considered as at the rockbottom of that hierarchy. Ed.] Another reason for the two terms being used by the Torah for servant women; when the firstborn sons of servant maids heard Moses use the term שפחה in our verse, they decided to become captives so as to escape the threat of being killed. Upon noticing this, G-d said: while it is true that I had only spoken about the firstborn of the servant maid being killed, now I must include also the firstborn of a woman prisoner. A different interpretation: the expression בכור השבי is subordinate to the general heading of בכור השפחה. The prophets in their way of expressing themselves (as opposed to the Torah itself) do not bother with stylistic effects but are concerned with the basics. Such nuances as השקני “let me drink,” as opposed to הגמאיני, “let me sip,” when Eliezer is quoted as speaking to Rivkah, (Genesis 24,38) or the two versions of the commandment to keep the Sabbath in the Ten Commandments no less, i.e. in Yitro it says: זכור for “remember,” whereas in the Book of Deuteronomy, the text of which is attributed to Moses, it says: שמור to express the same commandment, or minor differences such as swearing a false oath which in Yitro is described as לשוא, and in Leviticus 19,12, לשקר, or differences such as לא תחמוד, for “do not covet,” and לא תתאוה, in the version of the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5,18, are to be viewed as if two sides of the same coin. [My words, Ed.] Both expressions convey the same basic thought. Still another explanation: when Moses said: ומת כל בכור, “and every firstborn will die,” the firstborn of the maidservants rejoiced noting that they are not considered in the eyes of the Jewish G-d from the firstborn of the nobility. When their masters noted their joy, they threw them in a dungeon to teach them a lesson and not to forget their place in the Egyptian hierarchy. As a result they died, while still in the dungeon. In effect what happened is simply that the first born who had been only slaves at the time the plague had been announced had become also prisoners by the time the plague became effective.

וכל בכור בהמה, “and the firstborn of every domestic animal.” If man sinned, what did the animals do that they too had to pay the penalty? The reason the firstborn animals had to die was because the Egyptians had made deities of them. When G’d exacts retribution from a nation, He commences by punishing their livestock first (compare Mechilta Pisscha 13). Our sages Bereshit Rabbah 96,5 explain that just as the worshipers are punished so are those being worshipped.”

The meaning of ומת כל בכור is not simply that the soul of that person would die leaving the body as it had been, but the element which had made that person different from others because he was a firstborn would die with him. In other words there would never again be Egyptians (or even other Gentiles) whose characteristics would include elements of what had been known as the "firstborn" of the people beholden to the powers of the קליפה, the forces of negative virtues. Perhaps this is why no exile ever again assumed the dimensions of the exile in Egypt. G'd had weakened the powers of the קליפה permanently.

אשר אחרי הרחים, “who walks behind the millstones to help grind. When the plague was over the Torah describes these people as having been in a dungeon. This is another example of what we discussed earlier on this page. Some commentators believe that these two verses are actually to be understood as a single verse, i.e. that these lowly slaves performed one kind of task by day and another by night. We find an example of this in the Book of Judges when Shimshon had to perform the task of pushing the millstone by day, whereas at night he was put back into the dungeon and the millstone was placed on to prevent him from escaping. (Judges 16,21.)

I have tried to find a reason why the dying of the firstborn was a necessary prerequisite for the Exodus, as well as why even non-Egyptian firstborn (compare 12,29) had to die if they happened to be in Egypt on that fateful night. The reason is connected to G'd having described Israel as "My firstborn son" (4,22). We have a tradition (Zohar 2, page 263) that whenever G'd created some phenomenon which is clearly recognisable as something good, He also created its counterpart, i.e. something potentially evil at the same time. Every sacred phenomenon in our world is matched by a parallel phenomenon under the control of Satan, or what is known in Kabbalistic parlance "the forces of the קליפה." The latter make every effort to gain dominance over the former. We must therefore understand the forces of the קליפה which represented their firstborn as exerting every effort to frustrate the emigration of the Jewish people from Egypt. These efforts did not cease until G'd had "killed" the firstborn of the powers of the קליפה which opposed His will. What G'd had to do was to eliminate the concept of the firstborn being special, otherwise the relief as a result of the death of the Egyptian firstborn would have been only temporary. When the Torah (12,29) stresses that: "the firstborn of the captive, the firstborn of the maidservant and the firstborn of the animals died," this is in contrast to the firstborn of the Israelites who were subsequently sanctified (Numbers 8,17). The reason this sanctification of the Jewish firstborn became necessary is that G'd had done away with the concept of the firstborn being somebody special at the time He eliminated the firstborn on the night of the 15th of Nissan. Had this not been the case we would not understand why the firstborn of the animals had to die also. In Numbers 8,17 G'd declared that henceforth the firstborn of the Jews would be sacred to Him, i.e. there should no longer be a firstborn associated with the powers of the קליפה. If we find that the Egyptians still engaged in hot pursuit of the Israelites even after the death of the firstborn, this was because they had not yet realised that their former power had vanished. As a result, not a single one of them survived the debacle at the Sea of Reeds.

וכל בכור בהמה “and every firstborn of the domestic animals.” According to Rashi, G-d first punishes a people’s deities and then the people themselves. We see this from Exodus 7,17, where the river Nile, a major deity of the Egyptians was struck before the people suffered as a result of this.