Parshas Yisro - Thoughts on the first Rashi

And Yitro (Jethro) the kohen (a word many of the commentators understood as meaning both "prince" and "priest") of Midian, the father-in-law of Moses, heard of all that G-d did for Moses and His people Israel; that G-d had taken Israel out of Egypt" 
(Exodus 18:1).

Rashi, begins with the question:
And Yitro (Jethro) heard; "Of what did he hear that he came? Of the splitting of the Red Sea and the war against Amalek."

When you consider the literal translation in terms of "all that G-d did to Moses and to Israel, His people - that G-d took Israel out of Egypt" one is left wondering exactly what did he hear about?   After all, it had been one of the most, if not the most miraculous periods in the Torah thus far, so what exactly did he hear about?    The miraculous birth rate of the Jewish people?    The 10 plagues?    The pillar of clouds by day and fire by night that guided them during the exodus?  The "manna" that provided sustenance?   The splitting of the Red Sea perhaps?    That's where Rashi comes in. Rashi answers that actually Yitro (Jethro) was particularly moved by the splitting of the sea and Israel's triumph over Amalek.

His source is the Talmud (Zevachim 116a), where the same question--"Of what did he hear that he came?"--is posed; there, however, three different answers are offered by three different sages: "Rabbi Joshua says, he heard of the war with Amalek... Rabbi Eliezer HaModa'i says, he heard of the giving of the Torah... Rabbi Elazar says, he heard of the splitting of the Red Sea."

Rashi's selective quoting of the Talmud, in which he leaves out Rabbi Eliezer HaModa'i's opinion and combines the opinions of Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Elazar, implies two things: (a) Rashi is of the opinion that Yitro (Jethro) joined the children of Israel before the revelation at Sinai; (b) Rashi sees both the splitting of the Red Sea and the victory over Amalek as crucial to explaining Jethro's coming to the desert.    What was it that he heard that made him up and trek off in search of the Jewish people?

I think that the answer lies in an alternate interpretation of the word Shema.

The word shema is most often translated as meaning "Hear" - we understand the word in this context when it appears at the beginning of the prayer with the same name. But shema can also be translated as meaning to understand or to recognize.   

Maybe what we should understand from this seemingly minor verse is that sure, Yitro heard about many things related to the exodus from Egypt, as did much of the world. But he also understood that something very important was taking place. Yitro recognized that Hashem had liberated a seemingly insignificant band of travelers from slavery, He had split the sea and saved them, and then He had caused them to triumph over an organized army as powerful as Amalek. Hearing all this, he had to journey to meet this people, to find out what made them so special and ultimately to join with them.

Perhaps the lesson for us in our days is that if we try to not just hear what others in our lives have to say but to also understand what they are saying (their point of view, their frame of reference), it can help us to be better Jews, better people, friends, family members, and better role models for our children to follow.

Guest posting by
Marc E. Turansky
Executive Director
Head of Discretionary and Non-Discretionary Advisory Programs
JPMorgan Securities

Parshas Beshalach - A curious Rashi

“And it was when Pharoah sent out the nation that God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, which was near, for God said: ‘Perhaps the people will reconsider when they see a war and they will return to Egypt.’     So God turned the people toward the way of the Wilderness to the Sea of Reeds. And the children of Israel chamushim when they went up from the land of Egypt.”

Shemos 13:17-18

The Biblical commentators grapple with the meaning of the Hebrew word, Chamushim, in the middle of verse 18; apparently, it is either an uncommon word or one that is not simple to translate in this context. Rashi, as do a few others (such as Seforno and Rabbi Samso Raphael Hirsch), translate the word as “armed”. As a proof Rashi notes that the Children of Israel later engage in a number of wars, with Amalek in Sefer Shemos (Exodus) and with Sichon, Og, and Midian in Sefer BaMidbar (Numbers). This verse, then, is merely providing background information on where the Jewish people got their armaments.

The question we could ask on this comment of Rashi is – why is this information offered now? And why is it offered here? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to include this information in the recounting, one chapter earlier (in Parshas Bo), of the different things the Jews took with them when they left Egypt – silver and gold items they Egyptians gave them, unbaked dough that became matzoh, and a lot of livestock (Shemos 12: 34-39)?

Ramban (Nachmonidies) offers one possible way to understand the placement of this information in this week’s Parsha. In his commentary on this verse Ramban, citing the Ibn Ezra, suggests that the Jews regarded the weapons they took as triumphant proof that they were redeemed by God as opposed to escaped slaves (who would, presumably, not have access to weapons stockpiles). This information is placed in this parsha because shortly thereafter we see the Jewish people’s triumphant attitude melt away quickly when they notice the Egyptian military bearing down on them as they encamp at the Red Sea (14:11). The information that they were armed is placed here to tell us a distinct message – that no matter what tools or toys we hold, our self-regard can change in an instant. The only sure factor that offers us protection against a range of dangers is our devotion to God.   

Parshas Bo: Thoughts on the first Rashi

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh.  For I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his courtiers, in order that I may display these My signs among them (Exodus 10:1).”

Rashi:  Go to Pharaoh:  And warn him.

On the face of it Rashi’s very brief comment answers a simple question:  What should Moses say to Pharaoh when he goes to him?  Rashi is simply supplying an obviously missing part of the verse.  Moses should warn Pharaoh, as he and Aaron had done before previous plagues, and as they in fact do regarding the plague of locusts a few verses later (Exodus 10:3-6).

Further, a number of commentators (such as Elijah Mizrachi, 16th century) understand the words "Go to Pharoah" to explain the beginning of the next clause of the verse, ‘For I have hardened his heart’.  Yet the word ‘For’ (ki) sounds like an explanation of what precedes.  But how does this clause explain “Go to Pharaoh?”   According to Elijah Mizrachi, Rashi’s addition of “And warn him” makes this explanation intelligible.  It is as if God says, “Go to Pharaoh and warn him.   Don’t think that a warning is not required because Pharaoh already admitted his guilt (“I stand guilty this time.  The Lord is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong” (Exodus 9:27)).  Rather, Pharaoh still needs to be warned, for I have hardened his heart, etc.”

However, the word ‘ki’  is open to more than one interpretation. In his work Totsot Chayim (cited in Itturei Torah, 2:79), R. Elijah b. Moses de Vidas (16th century) presents a rather creative interpretation of Rashi’s reading of the verse.  Rather than take ‘ki’ to mean ‘for’, R. Elijah de Vidas understands ‘ki’ as ‘that’.   In his view we can take Rashi to  read the verse as follows:  “Go to Pharaoh, and warn him that (ki) I have hardened his heart.”

This understanding of the preposition ki as ‘that’ rather than ‘for’, an understanding of the word that appears in other contexts (though by no means  the plain sense of the text), puts the warning, and the verse as a whole, in a completely different light.  God is issuing a challenge to Pharaoh:  It is I who is making you stubborn.  Are you strong enough to defeat me?  What God wants Pharaoh to understand is how serious this matter is. Pharaoh will feel that he is struggling with God himself, and yet that is what he must do in order truly to live.

In order to apply this lesson to our own lives, it might be helpful to consider Nachum Sarna’s comment on Exodus 4:21 (“I, however, will stiffen his heart”) in his Exodus Commentary (Jewish Publication Society, p. 23):

In the biblical conception, the psychological faculties are considered to be concentrated in the heart.  Regarded as the seat of the intellectual, moral, and spiritual life of the individual, this organ is the determinant of behavior.  The “hardening of the heart” thus expresses a state of arrogant moral degeneracy,  unresponsive to reason and incapable of compassion.  Pharaoh’s personal culpability is beyond question.

If we were to read the comments of  R. Elijah de Vidas in this light, we might say that Pharaoh’s obsession with power, and with his own ego and desires, are so deeply embedded in him that they seem to come directly from God.   To overcome them would appear to be an impossible task.  And yet, God is here telling Pharaoh that he can achieve this goal, if only he sets his mind to it. Through careful attention to one’s thoughts and deeds, it is always possible to overcome deeply entrenched, habitual ego-driven behavior, and to choose the right path.   This is the warning that, in R. Elijah de Vidas’s reading of Rashi, God wants Moses to transmit to Pharaoh, and to all of us who struggle to subdue the Pharaoh within us.  

Guest posting by

Irving Mandelbaum

Highland Park, NJ

Parshas Veira - Thoughts on the first Rashi

In last week’s parsha, Moshe first appeared (as God’s agent) before Pharoh and asked him to release the Jews from slavery. Pharoh refused and, to demonstrate his power, increased the severity of their work. Moshe appealed to God: “My Master, why have you brought harm to this people? Why did you send me? Ever since I came to Pharoh, he has done harm to this people and You have not rescued your people.” (Shemos 5:22-23). God begins to answer Moshe and continues his reply in this week’s parsha.

“Elohim spoke to Moshe and said to him: I am Adonoy.”

Shemos 6:2

Elohim spoke to Moshe. He (God) spoke to him with severity for he (Moshe) had spoken harshly, saying: Why have you brought harm to this nation?”

Rashi on Shemos 6:2

Rabbi Avrohom Davis, in his translation and elucidation of Rashi, notes that the name Elohim denotes God’s attribute of strict justice and the word used for ‘spoke,’ VaYiDaBear, indicates a harsh tone. So we have God manifesting Himself in exacting judgment and speaking firmly with Moshe.

Isn’t it odd, then, that the first thing God says in such a serious tone is: I am Adonoy – since the name of Adonoy denotes mercy, the opposite of strict justice! What do we make of this?

It appears to me that, while God had to clarify to Moshe at this point His merciful attitude towards the Jewish people (despite evidence to the contrary), He also saw the need to subtly rebuke Moshe for his approach to God. A message we can take away from this perplexing juxtaposition of God’s names is that no matter the justice of any appeal we make to God, His approach in responding to us may well reflect the tone, the intensity, and the sincerity of our own prayer. Our prayers may still be answered but the answer may well be sweeter, and more pleasant, if we appeal to God with faith and deference.