Shemot answers

Shemot 5731

Alef.

1.  In both Midrashim, David and Moshe are depicted as reflecting moral uprightness and sensitivity to the individual needs of their charges while carrying out of their shepherding duties.

     Shemot Rabba 2 reflects the concern of the shepherd for specific dietary and hydration concerns of members of their flock.

Shemot Rabba 3 reflects care in not allowing the sheep to graze in lands which are unauthorized for such usage.

2.  In Shemot, while Moshe does become the leader of the Jewish people, there is no specific terminology where a metaphor is used that reflects a comparison between what he does and a shepherd. The verse in Tehillim explicitly makes such a comparison. Once the comparison is articulated, one can go back to the storyline in Shemot and see that the revelation at the burning bush whereby Moshe is told by HaShem that he is to go to Egypt to lead the Jewish people out of slavery takes place while he is occupied with shepherding Yitro’s sheep has a causative relationship.

3. The verse in Mishlei, which could be understood as describing how God’s Mitzvot (“the Imrot Eloka”) are pure, without dross and imperfection, regardless of their historical context, also supports the interpretation that HaShem’s Directives to specific individuals is the result or part of the process of Testing them to see if they are qualified for various tasks and assignments prior to sending them on their missions. In this case, Moshe and David’s performance while shepherding becomes the qualifying factor for their being chosen to lead the Jewish people.

Beit.

1.  RaShI: While “Midbar” reflects an area that is ownerless and therefore should have no restrictions upon it for a herd to graze, Moshe takes his charges “Achar HaMidbar”, i.e., beyond the desert to an even more remote and desolate area, just in case the “Midbar” itself does belong to some individual.

Seforno: The phrase “Achar HaMidbar” is not intended to reflect Moshe’s concern for the property of others, but rather his intention to engage in “HitBodedut”, i.e., lonely, undisturbed isolation from others in order to engage in personal, spiritual activities. Being a shepherd then was only a pretense to allow Moshe to get away from social contexts and be alone with his thoughts. (This is reminiscent of Beraishit 24:63 “And Isaac went out to meditate in the field at the eventide; and he lifted up his eyes, and saw, and, behold, there were camels coming”, which is interpreted by the Rabbis [Berachot 26b] as the basis for the Mincha prayers.)

2.  RaShI emphasizes Moshe’s correctness with respect to Bein Adam LeChaveiro, a sensitivity to people’s property and possessions when going “the extra mile” to avoid being responsible for trespassing on someone’s land.

     Sephorno stresses Moshe’s engagement with Bein Adam LaMakom, looking for an appropriate place to be able to commune with the Divine.

3.  One RaShI that emphasizes how the Forefathers were particular about not engaging in trespassing someone’s else’s property with their herds is an explanation for why the shepherds of Avraham and Lot fought with one another:

רש"י על בראשית פרק יג פסוק ז

(ז) ויהי ריב - לפי שהיו רועיו של לוט רשעים ומרעים בהמתם בשדות אחרים ורועי אברם מוכיחים אותם על הגזל והם אומרים נתנה הארץ לאברם ולו אין יורש ולוט יורשו ואין זה גזל והכתוב אומר והכנעני והפרזי אז יושב בארץ ולא זכה בה אברם עדיין (ב"ר):

Another RaShI that makes the same point about the Forefathers being careful with regard to thievery, interprets a verse in the story of Eliezer, on a mission to find a wife for Yitzchak:

רש"י על בראשית פרק כד פסוק י

(י) מגמלי אדוניו - (ב"ר) נכרין היו משאר גמלים שהיו יוצאין זמומין מפני הגזל שלא ירעו

בשדות אחרים:

4.  While RaShI’s interpretation parallels Beraishit Rabba 2, Sephorno is unlike either of the Midrashim cited in Alef. Sephorno introduces the additional dimension of Moshe’s spirituality, whereby the herds were just a pretext to allow Moshe “to get away from it all” and be alone with his thoughts and prayers. (While depicting Moshe as on a spiritual quest makes sense in terms of HaShem’s Revelation to him at the Burning Bush—he is like one of the Bnai HaNevi’im, preparing himself to be tapped by HaShem—there is nothing to indicate in any other of the preceding verses that Moshe had spiritual tendencies or aspirations. Avoiding thievery is one of the seven Noachide Commandments, and perhaps it could be understood that Moshe fulfilled this precept “Lifnim MiShurat HaDin” reflecting a high level of moral sensitivity. But to project upon him spiritual aspirations appears to be retroactively attributing to him thoughts that become clear only in the future.)

Gimel.

Rabbeinu Bechaye is trying to explain Shemot 3:2-4 :

(ב) וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ יְדֹוָד אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה

      וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל:

(ג) וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה אָסֻרָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת הַמַּרְאֶה הַגָּדֹל הַזֶּה מַדּוּעַ לֹא יִבְעַר הַסְּנֶה:

(ד) וַיַּרְא יְדֹוָד כִּי סָר לִרְאוֹת וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו אֱלֹקים מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה משֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי:

There are apparently three different elements that are either attracting Moshe’s attention or interacting with him: a) a bush afire; b) an angel; c) HaShem. In order to account for these three elements, the commentator posits a progression: 1) Moshe sees a strange phenomenon, i.e., a bush that is burning but is not consumed, which leads him to think that there is something profoundly out-of-the-ordinary regarding what he is perceiving; 2) Upon approaching, he gains greater clarity and now sees an angel in the bush, which accounts for the supernatural fire; 3) The Voice of HaShem Issues forth from the bush once Moshe has perceived the presence of an Angel.

Daled.

Ibn Kaspi adds to Yefet’s interpretation of the symbolism of the vision that Moshe has, Moshe’s personal experience prior to his fleeing to Midian. The reason why Moshe understood the vision to represent the attacks of Israel’s enemies against it, is because of what he personally witnessed in Egypt, leading him to kill a taskmaster in order to protect a Jew from being beaten to death. The harsh treatment of the Jewish people was etched into his consciousness and therefore became a frame of reference for many of the things that he subsequently experienced.

Heh.

1. “Shalhevet” could be considered synonymous with the midst, i.e., the “heart” of the fire, or “Shalhevet” could refer to the entire flame, not only its center but its outward portions as well, and therefore the “heart” of the flame is a more specific location than the “Shalhevet”.

2. 

(ב) וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ יְדֹוָד אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל:

(ג) וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה אָסֻרָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת הַמַּרְאֶה הַגָּדֹל הַזֶּה מַדּוּעַ לֹא יִבְעַר הַסְּנֶה:

(ד) וַיַּרְא יְדֹוָד כִּי סָר לִרְאוֹת וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו אֱלקים מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה משֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי:

(ה) וַיֹּאמֶר אַל תִּקְרַב הֲלֹם שַׁל נְעָלֶיךָ מֵעַל רַגְלֶיךָ כִּי הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עוֹמֵד עָלָיו אַדְמַת קֹדֶשׁ הוּא:

(ו) וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֱלֹקי אָבִיךָ אֱלֹקי אַבְרָהָם אֱלֹקי יִצְחָק וֵאלֹקי יַעֲקֹב וַיַּסְתֵּר משֶׁה פָּנָיו כִּי יָרֵא מֵהַבִּיט אֶל הָאֱלֹקים:

(ז) וַיֹּאמֶר יְדֹוָד רָאֹה רָאִיתִי אֶת עֳנִי עַמִּי אֲשֶׁר בְּמִצְרָיִם וְאֶת צַעֲקָתָם שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפְּנֵי נֹגְשָׂיו כִּי יָדַעְתִּי אֶת מַכְאֹבָיו:

(ח) וָאֵרֵד לְהַצִּילוֹ מִיַּד מִצְרַיִם וּלְהַעֲלֹתוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא אֶל אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה וּרְחָבָה אֶל אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ אֶל מְקוֹם הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי:

(ט) וְעַתָּה הִנֵּה צַעֲקַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאָה אֵלָי וְגַם רָאִיתִי אֶת הַלַּחַץ אֲשֶׁר מִצְרַיִם לֹחֲצִים אֹתָם:

(י) וְעַתָּה לְכָה וְאֶשְׁלָחֲךָ אֶל פַּרְעֹה וְהוֹצֵא אֶת עַמִּי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּצְרָיִם:

(יא) וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה אֶל הָאֱלֹקים מִי אָנֹכִי כִּי אֵלֵךְ אֶל פַּרְעֹה וְכִי אוֹצִיא אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּצְרָיִם:

(יב) וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱלֹקים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה:

When Moshe originally turns aside from the path upon which he was walking to see the burning bush, he was not thinking about any specific context, just what sort of phenomenon is taking place. However, once HaShem Addresses him and Brings up the idea that He is Interested in Redeeming the people from their bondage, Moshe understands that the bush was not a random strange sight intended to attract his attention, but that in fact it had inherent symbolism with respect to the plight of his brethren in Egypt. In verse 12, while the phrase “VeZeh LeCha HaOt” could refer to the end of the verse, i.e., that eventually the Jews will receive the Tora at this place at the culmination of the Exodus from Egypt, it could simultaneously refer to the vision of the burning bush suggesting that HaShem will Accompany Moshe and there would be nothing for him to fear, just as the bush was not consumed by the apparent fire in its midst.