Yitro Answers

Yitro 5728

Alef.

1. Why would there have to be an emphasis upon Moshe’s accurately conveying what he is told by HaShem? Doesn’t that go without saying? Consequently the interpretation stresses that what must be conveyed is a verbatim account rather than something that is approximate or simply retold in Moshe’s own words.
2. א. If different verbs are being used and we assume that they are not simply synonyms that are being used in a poetical manner, then each word carries with it a specific connotation. Since “Bnai” is generally associated with males when taken literally, i.e., “sons”, then by process of elimination, “Beit” would be females. Once the objects are established, then attention can be paid to the verbs. The association between “Gidim” (sinews) and strength, unyieldingness and punishment is being contrasted with “Amira” which by contrast is assumed to represent a softer, more mellow communication where there is less anticipated resistance.

ב. Once the term “תגיד” I used in contradistinction to “תאמר”, then it becomes possible to say something specific about the connotation of “אמירה” which would not be possible if “אמירה” appeared by itself, with nothing to which to contrast it.

Beit.

The entire verse,

(ד) אַתֶּם רְאִיתֶם אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי לְמִצְרָיִם וָאֶשָּׂא אֶתְכֶם עַל כַּנְפֵי נְשָׁרִים וָאָבִא אֶתְכֶם אֵלָי:

is intended to convince the Jewish people of the particular concern that HaShem has for them. Consequently, just as HaShem Carried the people to protect them, so too He Went out of His Way to directly demonstrate to them how much He Cared for them, instead of Informing them of His Intervention by some indirect means.

Gimel.

1.    If the Egyptians were guilty in their own rights, perhaps Hashem Punished them for their own sins as opposed to Trying to Demonstrate to the Jews how much He was Concerned for their welfare.  Consequently the Mechilta states that only with respect to those sins that were perpetrated against the Jews does HaShem Punish the Egyptians to Show that He is particularly Concerned about what happens to His People.

2.   RaShI combines the two separate comments in the Mechilta into one. Since the point is to demonstrate how HaShem Displayed extra concern for His People, just as He Determined to Perform the Plagues in the direct presence of the Jews, so too the idea that He only Punished the Egyptians for the things that they did to the Jews makes the same point. Consequently, why not put both comments in the same Dibur HaMatchil?

3.    Mechilta/RaShI: While God could have Carried out the plagues in a private manner and then informed the Jews afterwards of what He had Done, He Chose to Do things publicly in order to smooth the way for the Jews to believe in Him. 

       Buber: Despite the fact that I had to Deal with the Egyptians in a harsh manner, it was the only way that I could Save you. It was a necessary evil.

Daled.

1.    Mechilta/RaShI: There is no Divine Ruing of the necessity to treat the Egyptians harshly. They deserved punishment and God Carried out such punishment that was directly associated with sins against the Jews.

       Sephorno: It was with great regret that HaShem Punished the Egyptians. He would have Preferred, as it were, if the Egyptians had repented. But they were stubborn and thereby forced God’s Hand, as it were.

2.    Since HaShem Wishes that the Jews agree to accept His Law and thereby become a Treasured people,

(ה) וְעַתָּה אִם שָׁמוֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ בְּקֹלִי וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת בְּרִיתִי וִהְיִיתֶם לִי סְגֻלָּה מִכָּל הָעַמִּים כִּי לִי כָּל הָאָרֶץ:

(ו) וְאַתֶּם תִּהְיוּ לִי מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ אֵלֶּה הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר תְּדַבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:

it does not make sense for Him to Express regrets over the necessity to Punish the Egyptians. Consequently, it would appear that Mechilta/RaShI constitute a closer interpretation of the verse in question than Sephorno.

Heh.

1.    Mechilta D’RaShBI: An eagle gains altitude quickly and can descend quickly. So too the Jews can rise in station in very short order and similarly fall from grace quickly as well.

   RaShBaM: Just as an eagle flies above the fray without mishap, so the Jews were lifted into the air and therefore protected and did not suffer any indignity or injury.

       Bechor Shor: The rising is figurative in the sense that the status of the Jews was raised by means of God Drawing them close to Him.

2.    Devarim 28:49, by emphasizing the distance from which people will be gathered, would suggest that speed is being emphasized. This is in keeping with the approach of Mechilta D’RaShBI.

Vav.

1.    RaShi and Ohr HaChayim mention specific dangers that threatened the Jews and from which they were Protected by HaShem comparable to the actions of an eagle:

   RaShI: The eagle carries its young on its back (it is not clear if biologically this is in fact correct) because no other bird can fly above it. It is only threatened from below and places its body between the source of the danger and the location of its young.

       Ohr HaChayim: The Jews were spared having their feet touch the actual ground by walking on one of the Clouds of Glory, comparable to an eagle not allowing its young to walk on the ground.

2.    Whereas RaShI stresses protection from outer threats, Ohr HaChayim focusses on comfort and the preservation of clothing.

Zayin.

It would appear that Sephorno approaches the metaphor in a manner different from all those noted above in the sense that just as the eagle removes its young from contact with other creatures, so too God Wished the Jewish people to be segregated from other peoples and cultures. (I would hope that this is a temporary situation,  because if not, what do concepts such as Ohr LaGoyim, the pursuit of Kiddush HaShem, the idea to make God beloved to people, etc., mean? In order for these things to happen, Jews must have contact with general society.

Chet.

1.    MaLBIM emphasizes the need to extract the Jews from the impurities of Egypt and take them to a place where they would be safe from additional aggressive attacks.

2.    The idea that the Jews needed to be taken out of Egypt does not necessarily directly lead to an analogy of an eagle and its young. Any parent creature will instinctively try to protect its young from harm. No advantages of height or speed are suggested by MaLBIM.

Tet.

In the instances of Devarim 28:49 and 32:11, very particular characteristics of the eagle are invoked:  the act of swooping down and the act of hovering over the nest. These are exemplified by the actions of a single eagle. The reference in Shemot 19:4 is a general quality of birds in general and eagles in particular, i.e., that they fly their young from place to place. In that vein, eagles can be referred to in the plural.

Yud.

1.   Onkelos always seeks to avoid anthropomorphisms. Since a literal rendering of bringing human beings to God would suggest that God has corporeal form and is located in a particular place, Onkelos interpret s the phrase to refer to bringing the Jews to religious practice rather than literal closeness with God Himself.

2.    Usually the phrase “ואביא אתכם אלי” within the context of the verse is understood as connoting that by means of transporting the people on the wings of eagles, they will be brought away from a negative situation of servitude and brutality and closer to a positive situation of safety and confort. RaShBaM emphasizes a theological dimension, i.e., that I will Serve as your God.

3.    The purpose of the Exodus was to position God as the God of the Jews. Perhaps a good proof to such an approach is the beginning of the Ten Commandments: (Shemot 20:2) “I am the LORD thy God, who Brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.”