And they embittered their lives

"וַיְמָרְרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם" - and they embittered their lives... (Shemos 1:14)

Hashem told Avraham that his children would be in Egypt for 400 years, and yet they left after 210! Where are the missing 190 years?

There is an answer suggested that Egypt treated the Jews much worse than they should have, so as we say in ברוך המקום:

ש"הקבה חשב את הקץ - Hashem reckoned the end. What is this talking about? Hashem hastened the גאולה and reckoned off קץ - 190 (from 400)- leaving us with 210!

The problem with the suggestion that the slavery was overly bad (if such a term can be used by slavery!) is that we don't see it anywhere - but the Vilna Gaon deals with this!

The notes on וַיְמָרְרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם are קדמא ואזלא, the numerical value of which is 190! They were embittered to a value of 190!

R’ Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld points out that the גאולה from Egypt was only completed 7 days after it began, when the Red Sea when Paroh and his army were destroyed, so where is this reflected in events?

He answers that Isaac was only circumcised 7 days after his birth – so only then he became Jewish, and only 400 years from then were the Jews really free.

All over the place

This is courtesy of D. It is a bombardment of questions, with answers that tie and unify the themes of the questions.

The Orach Chaim asks at Shemos 3:5, when G-d reveals Himself to Moshe, why G-d waits until Moshe is on the mountain and at the burning bush (the bush was on Mt Sinai, this episode occurred there) to tell him he must take his shoes off as he is on sacred ground. But why not warn him before he climbs the mountain?

At 3:11, he asks "who am I take them out?", and G-d responds (3:12) that "וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱ־לֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה - And He said, "For I will be with you, and this is the sign for you that it was I Who sent you. When you take the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain." "

The first question: how is this remotely helpful as a reply to a slave in Egpyt querying his would-be saviour's legitimacy? It's not a proof, it's a statement about the future, but does not ascertain anything at the time the proof is warranted.

The second question, where does תַּעַבְדוּן - worship, enter the equation? Apart from their acceptance, weren't the Jews entirely passive? What worship did they perform on Mt Sinai?

In Beshalach, 17:1, the pasuk informs us that when the Jews camped in Refidim, they had no water. 5 verses later, G-d tells Moses to strike a rock at Horeb (Mt Sinai). Refidim is far from Horeb, so what's going on?

In Yisro, 19:12, instructions are issued to build a boundary around Mt Sinai, and the next pasuk specifies laws "לֹא תִגַּע בּוֹ יָד כִּי סָקוֹל יִסָּקֵל אוֹ יָרֹה יִיָּרֶה אִם בְּהֵמָה אִם אִישׁ לֹא יִחְיֶה בִּמְשֹׁךְ הַיֹּבֵל הֵמָּה יַעֲלוּ בָהָר - No hand shall touch it, for he shall be stoned or cast down; whether man or beast, he shall not live. When the ram's horn (Shofar) sounds a long, drawn out blast, they may ascend the mountain."

Why is it that no one, not even an animal, can stray into the mountain, nor were they even allowed to touch it 3 days before the Torah was given?

There is a concept with Kadshim (sacred items and laws) about there being a permit, a mattir, to use something something that was once Kodesh(sacred). Why is it that there is such a requirement here?

Lastly, after the Ten Commmandments, there is an instruction to build a Mizbeach Adama, an earthen altar (20:21). What is the connection between G-d giving us the Torah and building an altar there?

End of questions.

The Rambam (Maimonides) explains that all instance of G-d speaking to a person are through messengers/angels and the like. The only "face to face" meeting with G-d was with Moshe


To answer our question of why wait until he is there to tell him to remove the shoes, the answer is simple once pointed out; וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ ה' אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל - An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from within the thorn bush, and behold, the thorn bush was burning with fire, but the thorn bush was not being consumed." (3:2)

Only at 3:4 does G-d appear - וַיַּרְא ה' כִּי סָר לִרְאוֹת וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו אֱ־לֹהִים מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי - The Lord saw that he had turned to see, and God called to him from within the thorn bush, and He said, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here I am!"

So this explains why he was only warned once he was there; as he ascended, there was no prohibition, G-d wasn't there, an angel was! Only once G-d appeared did the land become holy so he would need to take off his shoes.

Bearing in mind that the land itself, Mt Sinai, was already holy from that moment, we can further understand the "proof" that Moshe was meant to tell people, which Targum Yonasan ben Uziel explains at 19:5 that the mountain of G-d was the proof; that there was a place waiting for the Jews where the Torah would be given, and the Mishkan would be built, they were now a nation in waiting.

So it has been established that the land was holy before the Torah was given, and the Chizkuni explains that in Refidim, when they had no water, Moshe went to Horeb, and brought back a rock from there, and it was this rock from Mt Sinai that he struck to make water.

What about the permit/mattir to use the land? Where does that enter the equation? The Ibn Ezra quotes R' Hai Gaon that the Shofar was blown when the command to build the Mishkan was given, and this Shofar, coupled with the sacrifices brought on the Mizbeach Adama (earthen altar), transferred the holiness from the mountain to the Mishkan .

So the mountain was forbidden and holy once G-d revealed Himself at the burning bush. In shachris (morning prayers), in the section regarding the sacrifices, we say "olas hatamid ka'asuya b'har sinai" that we bring the Tamid sacrifice like on Mt Sinai. So when did we bring sacrifices on Mt Sinai? At the time the Mishkan was consecrated for the first time, on Mt Sinai!

With this we can understand why the pasuk said תַּעַבְדוּן - worship. They did worship at Mt Sinai, when they consecrated the Mishkan by bringing the sacrifices, using the earthen altar and blowing the Shofar, which transferred the innate holiness of Mt Sinai that had been there since G-d had revealed himself to the Mishkan.

I think that ties up all the loose ends. :)

Prayers... work!

A piece from R' Yehoshua Hartman, from the Maharal (biography here), on a diyuk in Rashi.

וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת עֵינֵיהֶם וְהִנֵּה מִצְרַיִם נֹסֵעַ אַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּירְאוּ מְאֹד וַיִּצְעֲקוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל הֹ - Pharaoh drew near, and the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold! the Egyptians were advancing after them. They were very frightened, and the children of Israel cried out to the Lord. (14:10)

ויצעקו: תפשו אומנות אבותם. באברהם הוא אומר (בראשית יט כז) אל המקום אשר עמד שם, ביצחק (שם כד סג) לשוח בשדה, ביעקב (שם כח יא) ויפגע במקום: - cried out: They seized the craft of their ancestors [i.e., they prayed]. Concerning Abraham, it [Scripture] says: “to the place where he had stood before the Lord” (Gen. 19:27). 2 Concerning Isaac, [it is stated] “to pray in the field” (Gen. 24:63). Concerning Jacob, “And he entreated the Omnipresent” (Gen. 28:11).

The way this is first understood, this is a wonderful praise of the Jews. No doubt some people this week will focus on this point, that the Jews turned to their heritage, lineage and values in their time of need, and they prayed for salvation. You'd assume that this Rashi is singing the praise of the Jews, that they were so righteous to have prayed as their forefathers had.

There is a problem with this. What is Rashi really saying to us? What prayer is, the way our forefathers did? This is incorrect, as at 2:23 the pasuk says וַיְהִי בַיָּמִים הָרַבִּים הָהֵם, וַיָּמָת מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם, וַיֵּאָנְחוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן-הָעֲבֹדָה, וַיִּזְעָקוּ; וַתַּעַל שַׁוְעָתָם אֶל-הָאֱלֹהִים, מִן-הָעֲבֹדָה - Now it came to pass in those many days that the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed from the labor, and they cried out, and their cry ascended to God from the labor.

Rashi does not explain that their cry was prayer (it obviously was), and does not explain the tradition of prayer that dates back to the Patriarchs. So what is our Rashi saying? To reinforce the question of what Rashi is trying to tell us by saying their fathers prayed, the very next pasuk is quite possible the most snide and sarcastic in Tanach: וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל מֹשֶׁה הַמִבְּלִי אֵין קְבָרִים בְּמִצְרַיִם לְקַחְתָּנוּ לָמוּת בַּמִּדְבָּר מַה זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לָּנוּ לְהוֹצִיאָנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם - They said to Moses, Is it because there are no graves in Egypt that you have taken us to die in the desert? What is this that you have done to us to take us out of Egypt? (14:11)

followed by

הֲלֹא זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְנוּ אֵלֶיךָ בְמִצְרַיִם לֵאמֹר חֲדַל מִמֶּנּוּ וְנַעַבְדָה אֶת מִצְרָיִם כִּי טוֹב לָנוּ עֲבֹד אֶת מִצְרַיִם מִמֻּתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר - Isn't this the thing [about] which we spoke to you in Egypt, saying, Leave us alone, and we will serve the Egyptians, because we would rather serve the Egyptians than die in the desert (14:11)

These people are clearly not the most righteous people; they go from prayer to wishing themselves back into slavery and rejecting G-d and Moshe in a heartbeat.

That is the point Rashi is bringing out here.
They did not pray because it was what they felt they should have done, they prayed because it was what their fathers would have done.

If we re-analyze Rashi's words, this is explicit, once we think about it from this angle; תפשו אומנות אבותם - They seized the craft of their ancestors? Their prayer was craftsmanship; it was work, not service!

R' Yitzchok Hutner (biography here) queries this; we say in morning prayers (in Vecharos, just before Az Yashir) how Hashem listened to our cries. But we have established that these crise were hardly the most noble, so what are mentioning this for in our prayers?

He answers with a parable, about a king who has a good friend, whose son is close to the prince. One day, whilst visiting the prince in the royal palace, he bursts into the king's chamber and starts running his mouth off about the area he comes from and things it needs. The king acquiesces, but it's not because of what the prince's friend said: it's because his father is the king's friend.

This also happens to be an explanation as to why we mention zchus avos in the opening paragraph of Shemona Esrei, that in spite of our lack of merit, our lineage should set us in good stead.

Why Moshe?

The book of Shemos starts as one would expect, with a brief conclusion from Bereishis. It explains how Yakov's children thrived in Egypt, and when the brothers had died, only then did the slavery begin. It then continues as one would expect, with the process of how the enslavement began.

But Chapter 2 starts " וַיֵּלֶךְ אִישׁ מִבֵּית לֵוִי - A man of the house of Levi went" - and it is talking about Amram, Moshe's father and the leader of the Jews at the time. But why doesn't Chapter 2 start with the part of the story that matters, Hashem contacting Moshe the shepherd? Would it not make more sense to say "A shepherd of the house of Levi called Moshe etc...."?

Clearly, there is something more for us to learn from the Torah's description of Moshe's early life, as the Torah does not waste ink to tell us stories for the sake of it. We can suggest that we are being told about the nature and personlaity of Moshe, that led to his selection as being suitable to lead the Jews out of Egypt.

When Moshe is first found by Batya, she says " וַתִּרְאֵהוּ אֶת הַיֶּלֶד - and she saw him the child", but then the next words are "וְהִנֵּה נַעַר בֹּכֶה - and behold, he was a weeping lad". He went from being a baby to a lad (a term to describe someone older). Various commentators note that it was a mature cry ie a cry for others, that subsequently led her to conclude " מִיַּלְדֵי הָעִבְרִים זֶה - "This is [one] of the children of the Hebrews." (2:1)

We must note that it is clear that although in 2:10 that he grew up and Batya was like a mother to him, he knew that he was a Jew, as in 2:11 it says" וַיְהִי בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וַיִּגְדַּל מֹשֶׁה וַיֵּצֵא אֶל אֶחָיו וַיַּרְא בְּסִבְלֹתָם וַיַּרְא אִישׁ מִצְרִי מַכֶּה אִישׁ עִבְרִי מֵאֶחָיו - Now it came to pass in those days that Moses grew up and went out to his brothers and looked at their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian man striking a Hebrew man of his brothers". Rashi points out that looking at their burdens distressed him as it was his brothers that were suffering, and yet he was a prince of Egypt! This is derived from the repetition of growing up in 2:10 and 2:11, where the first is in physical stature and the second in greatness, which Rashi interprets as meaning "Pharoh appointed over his house".

This undoubtedly created a schism in his psyche. Here he was, an Egyptian prince, yet he empathised with Egyptian slaves, who were his brothers. He was neither an Egyptian, nor a Jew.

The next Pasuk after we are told how he noticed his brothers suffering "וַיִּפֶן כֹּה וָכֹה וַיַּרְא כִּי אֵין אִישׁ וַיַּךְ אֶת הַמִּצְרִי וַיִּטְמְנֵהוּ בַּחוֹל - He turned this way and that way, and he saw that there was no man; so he struck the Egyptian and hid him in the sand." (2:12)

He made the decision to stand with his brothers, and murdered an Egyptian, which inherently means that he ostracised (cut off) himself from the that nurtured him.
I read an unbelievable explanation that supplements this, said over by Rabbi Nathan Lopes Cardozo in his book, Thoughts to Ponder. This Pasuk is describing the internal conflict that we pointed out! "Moses turned {within himself} this way ({Egyptian?} and that way {or Jew?} and saw there was no {complete} man {ie he was neither}. So he struck the Egyptian {within him} and hid him in the sand."

The beauty of this is that it fits in perfectly with the Pasuk, and it fits perfectly with the first answer we gave as well! Whether or not he killed an Egyptian police officer, he chose to side with the Jews, thereby alienating Egyptian society culture within him, as he would be rejected by them (for siding with them and/or for murdering a police officer! Geshmack!

The point we can draw from this is that the history of Moshe Rabbenu made him into who he was. He was a product of Egypt, and he knew Egypt. In a way, he was Egypt! And he made the choice to become a Jew and severed his ties with Egypt, and this choice made him who he was. It is telling that G-d only speaks to Moshe after these events unfold.

Quantifying Rewards

There is a Tosfos in Sota 11a that quotes a Tosefta. The discussion there is about G-d's kindness and the opening chapters of Shemos. It explains that Hashem punishes for up to 4 generations and rewards up to 2,000, a factor of 500:1 ie G-d rewards 500 times more than he punishes.

Miriam spoke Lashon Hara about Moshe Rabbenu, and got Tzaraas (mis-translated as leprosy) so was sent out the camp, but the Jews waited in the desert for a whole week until she got better before they moved on. And this is not just because it takes a week for someone with Tzaraas to get better, as there is no requirement to wait for their recovery. So why did they wait then?

The Tosfos says that the waiting for a week was a reward for what she did in this week's Sidra:

"וַתֵּתַצַּב אֲחֹתוֹ מֵרָחֹק לְדֵעָה מַה יֵּעָשֶׂה לוֹ - His sister stood from afar, to know what would be done to him." (2:14) - Some commentators point out that there are 7 words in this Pasuk, corresponding to each of the seven days they waited for her.

This is fine, but the comparison is superficial at best, how long did she wait already that they waited a week?

We can quantify this. There are 168 hours in a week ie they waited that many hours for her, and we established that G-d does kindness by a factor of up to 500. 168 divided by 500 is 0.3something or other, or a third, of an hour ie 20 minutes.

Miriam watched Moshe for 20 minutes!