וַיְדַבֵּ֧ר יְהוָ֛ה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹ֖ר אֲנִ֣י יְהוָ֑ה דַּבֵּ֗ר אֶל־פַּרְעֹה֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ מִצְרַ֔יִם אֵ֛ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲנִ֖י דֹּבֵ֥ר אֵלֶֽיךָ׃
האָט גאָט געזאָגט צו משהן, אַזױ צו זאָגן: איך בין ה׳; רעד צו פַּרעה דעם מלך פֿון מִצרַיִם אַלץ װאָס איך רעד צו דיר.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ושם אמו, “and the name of his mother, etc.” Whenever someone displays signs of effrontery and disdain towards the Jewish religion and G’d it is time to examine his maternal genealogy as it is certain that the droplet of sperm which such an individual grew out of reflected a negative deed or thought at the time when marital relations which produced that baby took place. Unless the Torah wanted to teach us something beyond the meaning of the mere information contained in the text it should have simply written: ויצא בן אשה ישראלית ושמה שלומית בת דברי למטה דן, “the son of an Israelite woman by the name of Shlomit bat Divri from the tribe of Dan went out.” The reason the Torah followed a circuitous route before revealing the name of the blasphemer’s mother was that it wanted to keep it secret until after telling us what her son became guilty of. This is why we were first told that he cursed the name of the Lord (Verse 11). By mentioning her name last, the Torah suggested that the original cause of such a terrible sin being committed was the mother of the sinner who had been guilty of a trespass.
The baby grows out of the mother’s blood, is nurtured for the length of the pregnancy by the mother’s blood and even after the mother has given birth she nurses the child thus transmitting milk which originally was her blood. As a result of all this it is no more than reasonable that the child absorbs greater genetic input from his mother than from his father. This will eventually be reflected in his deeds which will reflect the mother’s character more than that of the father. This is the reason why we find that the prophets who wrote the Books of the prophets, particularly the Books of Kings always made a point of mentioning the name (and sometimes origin) of the king’s mother. An interesting example is Kings I 22,42 where the mother of King Yehoshaphat, Azuvah daughter of Shilhi, is mentioned. In Kings I 15,2 we are told that the mother of King Aviyam of Yehudah was Maachah daughter of Avishalom. The reason the prophet Jeremiah saw fit to include this information was to give us a little more psychological insight into any character weakness displayed by the sons of such women. (Or, vice versa, if the mothers were outstandingly good women). If a person is an outstandingly righteous individual this reflects credit on his mother who transmitted to him so many of her positive genetic qualities.
A good branch is always testimony that the root is healthy. This is reflected in the Torah writing in Exodus 6,29: “Amram took Yocheved his aunt as a wife.” The Torah mentions that a righteous person married a righteous woman and that the children were two outstandingly righteous sons, Aaron and Moses, and one outstandingly righteous woman, Miriam. The Torah reports something similar when reporting the marriage of Eleazar, son of Aaron to one of the daughters of Putiel, i.e. a descendant of the righteous Joseph (Exodus 6,25), and the son born to this union was Pinchas. We are told in Psalms that David described himself as: “I am Your servant, son of your servant maid” (Psalms 116,16). According to Kimchi, what David meant was that he had the good fortune of having been born to a father and a mother both of whom excelled in virtues.
Seeing that the Torah chose to reveal the name of the blasphemer’s mother we may deduce that this was a unique occurrence during the whole forty years the Israelites wandered in the desert and that amongst the other six hundred thousand families no genealogical flaw of this kind could be found. Moreover, you must not wonder how it could be that the blasphemer’s mother was an adulterous woman. She had been quite inactive in the matter. When the Egyptian climbed into her bed at night she had presumed that it was her husband joining her. The Torah applies the term זונה, (whore), to any woman who has had sexual relations with a man forbidden to her under Biblical law, regardless of whether such a union occurred voluntarily or not (Compare our comments on Leviticus 21,6).
The baby grows out of the mother’s blood, is nurtured for the length of the pregnancy by the mother’s blood and even after the mother has given birth she nurses the child thus transmitting milk which originally was her blood. As a result of all this it is no more than reasonable that the child absorbs greater genetic input from his mother than from his father. This will eventually be reflected in his deeds which will reflect the mother’s character more than that of the father. This is the reason why we find that the prophets who wrote the Books of the prophets, particularly the Books of Kings always made a point of mentioning the name (and sometimes origin) of the king’s mother. An interesting example is Kings I 22,42 where the mother of King Yehoshaphat, Azuvah daughter of Shilhi, is mentioned. In Kings I 15,2 we are told that the mother of King Aviyam of Yehudah was Maachah daughter of Avishalom. The reason the prophet Jeremiah saw fit to include this information was to give us a little more psychological insight into any character weakness displayed by the sons of such women. (Or, vice versa, if the mothers were outstandingly good women). If a person is an outstandingly righteous individual this reflects credit on his mother who transmitted to him so many of her positive genetic qualities.
A good branch is always testimony that the root is healthy. This is reflected in the Torah writing in Exodus 6,29: “Amram took Yocheved his aunt as a wife.” The Torah mentions that a righteous person married a righteous woman and that the children were two outstandingly righteous sons, Aaron and Moses, and one outstandingly righteous woman, Miriam. The Torah reports something similar when reporting the marriage of Eleazar, son of Aaron to one of the daughters of Putiel, i.e. a descendant of the righteous Joseph (Exodus 6,25), and the son born to this union was Pinchas. We are told in Psalms that David described himself as: “I am Your servant, son of your servant maid” (Psalms 116,16). According to Kimchi, what David meant was that he had the good fortune of having been born to a father and a mother both of whom excelled in virtues.
Seeing that the Torah chose to reveal the name of the blasphemer’s mother we may deduce that this was a unique occurrence during the whole forty years the Israelites wandered in the desert and that amongst the other six hundred thousand families no genealogical flaw of this kind could be found. Moreover, you must not wonder how it could be that the blasphemer’s mother was an adulterous woman. She had been quite inactive in the matter. When the Egyptian climbed into her bed at night she had presumed that it was her husband joining her. The Torah applies the term זונה, (whore), to any woman who has had sexual relations with a man forbidden to her under Biblical law, regardless of whether such a union occurred voluntarily or not (Compare our comments on Leviticus 21,6).
Or HaChaim
וידבר ה׳ אל משה ואל אהרון, G'd spoke to Moses and to Aaron, etc. First of all we need to know what G'd said to them, secondly what did the Torah mean when it added :"He commanded them to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh, etc." According to Shemot Rabbah 7,3 G'd informed Moses and Aaron about how intractable the people could be and how they were apt to heap abuse on their leaders. Moses and Aaron should therefore lead them בנחת, in an easy-going manner. G'd also told Moses and Aaron not to be disrespectul to Royalty, i.e. to the person of Pharaoh. These comments are purely homiletical. Furthermore, where is G'd's response to Moses who had questioned the point of this whole mission? The very least G'd could have told Moses was that his logic was faulty! Whereas it is possible to construe G'd's silence as disapproval of Moses' reasoning, we cannot do so in this instance. Let us look for a moment at the verse that follows. Assuming that Moses had not been concerned about what G'd would answer him in response to his question "how can Pharaoh listen to me if even the Israelites do not listen to me?" Why wouldn't G'd have continued immediately with what He had to say in verse 29? What is the whole point of the Torah repeating Moses' question again in 6,29-30 unless Moses had not received an answer from G'd to his קל וחומר, his logical argument?
Ramban
AND HE GAVE THEM A CHARGE UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. Rashi wrote: “The purport of this command is explained in the second section,71Further, Verses 29-30. after the order of genealogy. [It properly belongs here], but because Scripture mentioned Moses and Aaron here, it interrupted the subject-matter [with the narrative of their genealogy], informing us how each was born and with whom they are connected by descent. And the Eternal spoke unto Moses in the land of Egypt, saying: I am the Eternal; speak thou unto Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I speak unto thee.72Ibid., Verse 29. This is the selfsame command which is mentioned here [in Verse 11]: Go in, speak unto Pharaoh king of Egypt. However, because Scripture broke off the subject-matter in order to record their genealogy, it reverts to it [further in Verse 29] and begins it anew. And Moses said before the Eternal: Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, and how shall Pharaoh hearken unto me?73Ibid., Verse 30. This is the selfsame statement Moses made here [in Verse 12]: Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me, etc. However, because Scripture broke off the subject-matter [for the abovementioned reason], it repeats it there [further in Verse 30]. Such indeed is a proper method, just as a person who says, ‘Let us return to the previous subject.’” And so also is the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra.
But I do not agree with this.74The reason is obviously that Rashi’s and Ibn Ezra’s interpretation necessitates the conclusion that one set of verses — either 10-12 or 29-30 — is redundant. Rather, [it is my opinion] that when G-d commanded Moses to speak to the children of Israel — as it is said, Wherefore say unto the children of Israel66Verse 6. — he did so and they hearkened not unto him.67Verse 9. Then He commanded him to go before Pharaoh and bid him to let them go out of his land,68Verse 11. and Moses answered: Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me, etc.69Verse 12. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded both Moses and Aaron to speak to the people and to Pharaoh.75This is in Verse 13 before us. Moses thus thought that both of them — [he and Aaron] — are to take equal part in all the signs they are to do; both of them are to come to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh. But indeed [Moses reckoned that] it is sufficient that only one should speak, for such is the customary way of all pairs of emissaries, that one speaks and the other is silent. This was consented to, and G-d then said to him: “I am the Eternal,72Ibid., Verse 29. Who revealed Myself to you only to speak in My Great Name. Speak thou unto Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I speak unto thee,72Ibid., Verse 29. for it is to you that all communications are given, not to Aaron [primarily] and to you. It is you that I made the emissary to Pharaoh.” Then Moses answered once again: Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, etc.73Ibid., Verse 30. And G-d said to him: “See, I have set thee in G-d’s stead to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.76Further, 7:1. You will go before Pharaoh with Aaron, and there [in Pharaoh’s presence] you will command Aaron while Pharaoh will not hear your words, and Aaron as your emissary will make your words heard.” This is just as G-d commands a prophet and the prophet makes His words audible and chastises [the people] with them. This was a great achievement for Moses,77Moses had thought that his speech impediment would be a handicap. It now turned out to be to his honor, for on account of it he was to state to Aaron every Divine message as it reached him, and Aaron was to address it to Pharaoh, just as G-d commands a prophet and the prophet addresses the message to the people. which he merited by his humility since he was ashamed to speak because of his speech — impediment. And so Scripture says, Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the sight of the people.78Further, 11:3. It was measure for measure. He had been afraid lest he be despised in their eyes [on account of his defective speech, but Scripture testifies to the Egyptians’ admiration of his greatness].
Now Rashi commented: “Thou shalt speak79Ibid., 7:2. each and every message once, just as you heard it from My mouth, and your brother Aaron shall express it in eloquent language and explain it in Pharaoh’s hearing.” This is not correct at all.
But I do not agree with this.74The reason is obviously that Rashi’s and Ibn Ezra’s interpretation necessitates the conclusion that one set of verses — either 10-12 or 29-30 — is redundant. Rather, [it is my opinion] that when G-d commanded Moses to speak to the children of Israel — as it is said, Wherefore say unto the children of Israel66Verse 6. — he did so and they hearkened not unto him.67Verse 9. Then He commanded him to go before Pharaoh and bid him to let them go out of his land,68Verse 11. and Moses answered: Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me, etc.69Verse 12. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded both Moses and Aaron to speak to the people and to Pharaoh.75This is in Verse 13 before us. Moses thus thought that both of them — [he and Aaron] — are to take equal part in all the signs they are to do; both of them are to come to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh. But indeed [Moses reckoned that] it is sufficient that only one should speak, for such is the customary way of all pairs of emissaries, that one speaks and the other is silent. This was consented to, and G-d then said to him: “I am the Eternal,72Ibid., Verse 29. Who revealed Myself to you only to speak in My Great Name. Speak thou unto Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I speak unto thee,72Ibid., Verse 29. for it is to you that all communications are given, not to Aaron [primarily] and to you. It is you that I made the emissary to Pharaoh.” Then Moses answered once again: Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, etc.73Ibid., Verse 30. And G-d said to him: “See, I have set thee in G-d’s stead to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.76Further, 7:1. You will go before Pharaoh with Aaron, and there [in Pharaoh’s presence] you will command Aaron while Pharaoh will not hear your words, and Aaron as your emissary will make your words heard.” This is just as G-d commands a prophet and the prophet makes His words audible and chastises [the people] with them. This was a great achievement for Moses,77Moses had thought that his speech impediment would be a handicap. It now turned out to be to his honor, for on account of it he was to state to Aaron every Divine message as it reached him, and Aaron was to address it to Pharaoh, just as G-d commands a prophet and the prophet addresses the message to the people. which he merited by his humility since he was ashamed to speak because of his speech — impediment. And so Scripture says, Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the sight of the people.78Further, 11:3. It was measure for measure. He had been afraid lest he be despised in their eyes [on account of his defective speech, but Scripture testifies to the Egyptians’ admiration of his greatness].
Now Rashi commented: “Thou shalt speak79Ibid., 7:2. each and every message once, just as you heard it from My mouth, and your brother Aaron shall express it in eloquent language and explain it in Pharaoh’s hearing.” This is not correct at all.