ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף משלי 24:21

One of the wonders and axioms of nature is the fact that all things created earlier are inferior to those created later. Nature proceeds from the primitive towards the sophisticated. Man being the last in a string of creations is therefore the most perfect and the most sophisticated (Bereshit Rabbah 19). Rabbi Yehudah son of Rabbi Simon states that all things created subsequent to something else enjoy dominion over those things created prior to them. Man is therefore the most dominant creature, none daring to raise their heads against him. We do not observe fully-grown camels attack lion cubs or baby tigers, since in the order of things the species created earlier is instinctively aware of its inferior status vis a vis the products of a later stage of creation (Psalms 104,2). "How great are Your works, O Lord." The Talmud Shabbat 121 asks, "Why is it that a live baby does not need to be guarded against mice? The answer is that nature operates in such a way that even helpless, unarmed man is superior to the animals.” "The fear and dread of you will be on all living creatures of the earth." (Genesis 9,2). Natural laws apply on the assumption and with the proviso that man-- supreme creature that he is-- lives up to his purpose and abilities. Natural laws are suspended on the occasion when a miracle is performed. This can be due to part of mankind having lost "the image of G-d in which he was created," or to all of mankind having forfeited this image due to their collective sinful conduct. The miracle is in fact based on the covenant made by G-d with His entire creation that when the occasion arises, its subservience to the will of the Creator will be demonstrated by its deviating from its normal behavior. Generally, the "normal" behavior is proof that nature is not a deity, but that its conduct is controlled, not free. This "normality" is reversed on occasion in order to demonstrate the same point by nature's inverted behavior. The fact that nature, after having once "run wild," returns to its usual pattern is proof that the very deviation was due to the will of G-d. Example is Exodus 14,27, "The sea returned to its normal state at the turn of morning." There are numerous other examples of this. When nature acts totally out of character on a prolonged regular basis, that fact reflects on the state of man. When the animal kingdom has observed man acting animalistically, it ceases to show obeisance to man, and the rules we read in this Parshah concerning the natural awe that animals display for humans no longer apply. The same is true of such phenomena as wind, fire, and water, all of which demonstrate their destructive potential against man under such circumstances. Had man lived up to his destiny, those elements would not represent any danger to us, and harnessing their useful potential would not be a struggle, but they would willingly put all their power at our disposal. A king whose closest advisors act rebelliously cannot expect loyalty and obedience from the populace at large. Similarly, disobedience by man against G-d leads to corruption in other sections of the universe, right down to the basic elements. When Hillel said, "When I am present, everyone is present" (Sukkah 53), what he meant was, "When man is O.K.,every thing is O.K.," i.e. all other creatures and parts of the universe behave predictably and beneficially. When the leaders of the people behave in exemplary fashion, the population at large is apt to emulate such behavior. The reverse is true also. This is why the Talmud in Shabbat 151 interprets Psalms 49,13, "But man with all his honor will not outlast the night," to mean that under the adverse conditions man has created himself, he will not be better off than the beasts. When stating that lions do not attack humans when there are at least two humans-- and the observation is made that we know from experience that this simply is not so-- the Talmud answers that this only proves that the men who have been attacked by the lions lacked the qualities that make up the kind of person who is entitled to enjoy mastery over the beasts. The tribes of Reuben and Gad exhorted Joshua to "be strong and brave." The first time they refer to the self confidence he needs to display as a leader. The second time they refer to the mastery over inner temptations he must acquire in order to command the unswerving loyalty and obedience of the people (compare Joshua chapter 1). While he had been in the ark providing for all the animals, Noach-was protected, although the animals had previously been corrupted through the perversion of mankind. When Isaiah describes his vision of the lion eating straw, this refers to the restoration of a state of nature as had occurred after the deluge in Parshat Noach (Isaiah 11,7). When the lions fail to attack Daniel in the den, this is merely a demonstration of the natural order of things, the lions having become sensitive to the type of man who faced them (Daniel chapter 6). Daniel describes the impotence of the lion against him as being a result of his upright behaviour towards G-d and his loyal conduct vis a vis the king. Not having eaten any treyfah food or drunk prohibited wine intended for pagan libations was part of the control over the evil urge that Daniel had exercised. This had imprinted on his face the aura of being a moral man, something animals can sense. The same idea is true concerning other elements of nature that can hurt or even destroy man. Such destruction, if and when it occurs, is due only to man's corruption and nature's subsequent insensitivity to man. Chananyah and his companions were unharmed by the fire in the furnace Nebuchadnezzar had thrown them into, because they, like Daniel, represented man as envisaged by G-d. They had therefore been able to hold nature in check. The discussion cited in Pessachim 118 between the angel in charge of hail and Gabriel illustrates our point. The angel in charge of hail had volunteered to quench the fire in the furnace. Gabriel replied that this would not be meaningful since water, the natural enemy of fire, would simply have been viewed as having had the upper hand over the fire in the furnace. However, the angel Gabriel being the angel in charge of fire, would descend and, while heating the furnace from the outside, cool the inside, and thus save the three men. This would be a far more convincing miracle. When Abraham had been thrown into Nimrod's furnace, G-d handled his salvation personally, drawing a parallel between His own uniqueness and the unique personality of Abraham the monotheist. Abraham deserved to be saved by the One and Only One whom he served directly. The reverse can be true also. The wild ass that bit Rabbi Chaninah died of its bite, since it had attacked a man who had been free from sin (Berachot 33). As the latter proclaimed, "Death is not caused by the snake but by sin." Kings I Chapter 20, tells of an incident when someone not normally afraid of lions due to his superior moral level was nonetheless killed by a lion as a penalty for having disregarded the order of a prophet.

or other similar reasons, as the wise man said: "My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent" (Mishlei 1:10), and "My son, fear the L-ord and the king; and meddle not with them that are given to change" (Mishlei 24:21).

(1) All the Jews in Egypt at that time were descended from only twelve ancestors; at the time they arrived in Egypt they numbered seventy. Now that Joseph and his brothers had died, they started multiplying at such a rate that they posed a physical problem for the Egyptians due to their prowess. (2) To prevent the Jews from also outnumbering the Egyptians, called for the combined wisdom and talents of the whole nation. They hoped to compensate for their numerical inferiority, or at least for their physical inferiority at that stage, by superior intelligence. The original intent of the Egyptians may have been to enslave the Jews permanently and sell them on the slave markets to foreign countries. It seems that Egypt was exporting horses in this manner (at least female horses). (3) They were afraid that if war broke out, the additional burden of keeping a hostile population under control inside the country would prove to be too much for them. To fight invaders at the same time might be more than they could handle. As a result, the Jews might take advantage of that situation to escape their owners by emigrating. They might even join the enemy by acting as a fifth column inside the country and revolt. Therefore, they planned to assign demeaning work to the Jews, and to aquire them as physical slaves only gradually. The cities to be built by Jewish labor were well fortified border towns positioned at opposite ends of the country to ward off invaders. However, the Jews, loyal by nature, far from feeling humiliated, reinforced their efforts to procreate and provide manpower against possible enemies of Egypt. The Egyptians now felt so frustrated that the Jews appeared a thorn in their sides wherever they turned, i.e. vayakutzu (1,12). They proceeded to re-evaluate their policy and employed the Jews both for building and for work in the fields. They made sure that all work performed was under constantly tense conditions. After that they decided to reduce the male Jewish population by "accidentally" killing boys, but at the same time making sure that a good supply of female slaves would be raised from them. They did not fear that female slaves would revolt or join potential enemies. (5) They were again frustrated in their efforts when the midwives turned out to be G-d-fearing, shunning participation in child murder. These midwives, though G-d-fearing, did not want to contravene the king's order either, a perfectly legitimate desire, as demonstrated by the prophet Samuel when the latter questioned G-d’s orders which endangered his life (Samuel I 16,2). The midwives ignored the part of the orders dealing with murder, but concentrated on giving post natal care, something that did not contradict the instructions they hade received. The Torah therefore first describes what the midwives did not do, and subsequently tells us what they did do. The king, unaware of the technical innocence of the midwives, accused them of helping the babies to be born alive. The widwives in their defence made the point that the Jewish women usually had already given birth by the time a midwife arrived on the scene, and that therefore they had not had a chance to carry out the king's instructions. As a result, the only thing left for them to do once they had arrived at the home of a Jewish mother without arousing suspicion, was to administer post-natal care. Of course, this was something the king did not want. "G-d was good to the midwives," i.e. Pharaoh accepted their defense, and the people kept on increasing, again thwarting the plans of the Egyptians. Even normal baby mortality or deformity did not occur, in order that it could not be blamed on the activities of the midwives. "He made houses for them," may well refer to Pharaoh. (1,21.) He made sure the midwives would live in places whence their coming and going could be observed, so that if a newborn baby boy was found by those trailing the midwives, it could be drowned. In other words, instead of unobtrusive killing at birth, things had now reached a stage where open murder was the Egyptians' only recourse. (6) The anonymity implied in the formation of the decree "every son," was to create the fiction that not only Jewish babies were to be drowned but all baby boys. This would keep the Jews from thinking that the law was discriminatory. By this stratagem, Jews would not be encouraged to practice continence and thereby deprive the Egyptians of a supply of female slaves. (7) It is normal for any man who wants to get married to choose a partner who is socially his equal or his inferior. In this case, a distant descendant of Levi married a direct descendant of Levi, i.e. the husband's social position would be inferior to that of his wife. The unusual nature of this match deserved mentioning. Since Amram had not attained the position of leadership until his children had reached the status of being prophets, he is not yet mentioned by name. This view is supported by the fact that when his wife was engaged by the daughter of Pharaoh to nurse the baby Moses, she is also treated as an anonymous lady, her status not yet having become public knowledge amongst the Egyptians. (8) The fact that the Torah states that Yocheved described Moses as "good," proves that he was born prematurely. Other Jewish mothers giving birth to babies after full pregnancies would consider such babies as "doomed" rather than as "good." It is the very fact that Moses seemed perfectly normal and healthy, in spite of being premature, that gave rise to the plan to hide him, something that could be done with relative safety until the end of the ninth month of Yocheved's pregnancy. During those three months, Yocheved dressed as if she were still pregnant, thus allaying any suspicions. After that, either because of suspicious neighbors or the increasingly loud voice of the baby, such stratagems could no longer be applied successfully. Yocheved hid Moses in exactly the place where Egyptian child murderers would normally cast out the babies they had murdered. Perhaps Yocheved felt that if a special fate was in store for her baby, this exposure might trigger the events leading to such a special fate. This is the reason Moses’ss sister stood nearby waiting to see what would happen. The Midrash suggests that placing the potential savior of Israel in the Nile, would mislead Egyptian astrologers into concluding that the dreaded danger to Egypt had already passed, and that therefore the decree concerning indiscriminate child murder could be revoked (Midrash Rabbah). (9) The fact that the princess's attendants walked elsewhere along the river, explains why the princess herself who was accompanied only by a single attendant sworn to loyalty, did not need to fear that her act of mercy would be reported. It was this fact that enabled Moses’ss sister to approach and suggest that the princess might wish to employ a Jewish nurse to tend the baby. Because of the decree, and the probable search if she would be seen bringing home a baby, the princess agreed to have the baby raised amongst his own people, initially. (4) When the child was eventually brought to Pharaoh's palace, the decree against baby boys had already been lifted. Moreover, we see the marvellous ways of the Lord, who arranges for the arch enemy of the Jewish people to raise their savior in his very own palace. (10) The Egyptian whom Moses slew was one who used to strike his Jewish victim habitually, and Moses had awaited an opportunity to find him when no other witnesses were present. That is why he looked in all directions. The fact that unbeknown to him someone did see his deed, was what caused his surprise on the following day. Moses’s deed was one of the qualifications that fitted him for a role of leadership amongst his people. The second such qualification was his urge to see that social justice should prevail. This is why he involved himself in the quarrel between Jews on the morrow of his having slain the Egyptian thug. (11) Permission to kill a pursuer in self defense is contingent upon such pursuer not having killed his intended victim as yet. Once an act of murder had already been committed, the regular procedure involving a trial of the murderer has to be followed. The rasha, wicked person, believed that Moses’s use of the words "Why are you going to kill your fellowman?" was designed to give Moses the pretext to kill him as a rodeph, pursuer. He therefore said, "Are you saying this in order to establish a right to kill me?" (2,14). The reason for Moses’s fear was either that he had been unaware that the killing of the Egyptian had been witnessed, or that his real identity of being a Jew rather than an Egyptian prince had become known. Either way the "so the matter has indeed become known," does not need aggadic interpretation. (12) The daughters of Yitro may have been in the habit of watering their flocks before the arrival of the male shepherds for reasons of modesty, so as not to have to spend long hours in the company of the male shepherds. The latter misinterpreted the motivation of those girls, thinking they wanted to demonstrate their superior social position as daughters of the presiding priest and claim special privileges. Therefore, on that particular day, the male shepherds decided not to acknowledge such privileged status of Yitro's daughters. They did this by using water drawn by the girls to water their own flocks, rather than the flock of Yitro. Moses assisted the girls on that day, and explained to the male shepherds the true motivation of the girls, thus restoring a harmonious relationship. This was evidence of a third qualification of Moses as a leader. He stepped into the breach when he observed injustice being perpetrated on the weak and downtrodden. (13) The first son was not called "Eliezer," signifying that G-d had saved him from his pursuers, since at the time his pursuers were still very much alive and had not abandoned their efforts to apprehend Moses. On the contrary, Moses wanted to indicate that the fact that he lived in a country other than his birthplace was quite involuntary. The letters in the name "Gershom" when re-arranged spell megurash, expelled. Before Moses’s return to Egypt, when G-d had told him that all those who had wanted to kill him had died (4,19), he called his second son, born around that time, Eliezer, to acknowledge gratefully that events had taken such a favorable turn.