It did not take long for Pharaoh to beg Moshe to implore Hashem to put a halt to the swarms of frogs that were literally infesting his entire country. Moshe prayed to Hashem and the frogs all died. Chazal tell us that the frogs who had entered the ovens miraculously did not die, either in the oven or afterwards! We may question the remarkable reward received by the frogs. After all, if they were commanded by Hashem to enter the ovens, where else should they have gone? A similar question may be asked regarding Chazal’s statement in the Talmud Pesachim…
Back to Home -> Vaeira ->
The various Names of Hashem each represents a different way in which He reveals Himself. Moshe was privy to the revelation of “Hashem,” the highest manifestation of revelation. Yet, he questioned His ways. The Avos, Patriarchs, maintained the ultimate level of emunah. Even though Hashem revealed Himself to them only with His other Name, K’el Shaddai, they never questioned His ways, regardless of their perplexity. Rashi cites Chazal in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 111a, who “quote” Hashem saying, “Woe to those that are gone and not found. Many times I revealed Myself to the Patriarchs using (only) the Name of K’el…
Moshe gave Pharaoh no options; he gave Pharaoh no room for discussion or compromise in meeting his demand. The Jews must leave Egypt — unequivocally! There must be a complete liberation. Why? Would it not have been sufficient to halt the labor and insist that the Jews be reinstated as common citizens? The Otzar Chaim offers a simple, but profound, response. He recounts a comment made by the Chasam Sofer, z.l., during the emancipation in Austria. The prejudicial laws were lifted, enabling Jews to hold positions of importance and granting them access to society in general. Everyone was excited about…
Similar to the two previous plagues of blood and frogs, it is Aharon who brought about the plague of lice. Aharon had this responsibility because Moshe was not permitted to strike the water or the dust. The water had protected him when he was an infant, and the dust concealed the Egyptian who Moshe had killed. It would have shown ingratitude for Moshe to strike either the water or the ground. Imagine, Moshe and Aharon were involved in the most sublime endeavor of their lives — taking Klal Yisrael out of Egypt. The overriding concern, however, was not to “offend”…
Why did Hashem tell Moshe to ask Pharaoh for a three-day “pass” to serve Hashem in the desert? Did any obstacle preclude Hashem’s “ability” to have Pharaoh permit Bnei Yisrael to leave indefinitely? Moshe should have simply told Pharaoh, “Our time of servitude is up; we are prepared to leave this country forever.” Regardless of the demand, Pharaoh dissented. Only when he was “encouraged” by the effects of the plagues did he relent and “allow” us to leave Egypt. Another question that confronts us is Pharaoh’s obstinate refusal to permit Bnei Yisrael from taking this short three day retreat. The…
Horav Yecheskel Abramski z.l., used to say that without the special “glasses” of the Torah, an individual can not really attain an appreciation of the wonders of Hashem. In the light of the Torah one is better able to acknowledge His Divine guidance of this world in general, and the activities of each individual specifically. Indeed, even the overt miracles which Hashem “performs” make a limited impression upon those who lack the proper Torah hashkafah, outlook/perspective. Horav Abramski applied this theory to the interpretation of the pesukim concerning the geulah, redemption from Egypt, in the following manner: “And I will…
Eretz Yisrael has been given to Am Yisrael as an inheritance. The concept of inheritance implies several lessons regarding our obligation to and relationship with Eretz Yisrael. A yerushah, inheritance, does not mandate a kinyan, a specific act of acquisition. The yerushah becomes the possession of the inheritor, even if his attention is diverted from it at the time. Wherever the inheritor may be, the inheritance becomes his possession. Likewise, notes Horav Mordechai Ilan z.l., is Eretz Yisrael’s relationship with us. Even when we are in galus, exile, it is kept guarded, waiting for our return. Eretz Yisrael is our…
Rashi explains that this is one of the ten instances of kal v’chomer, a fortiori argument, in the Torah. The commentators ask the obvious question. Does the Torah not give a reason for Bnei Yisrael’s reluctance to listen to Moshe? The Torah clearly states, “And they did not listen to Moshe because of impatience of spirit and cruel bondage (6:9).” This is not a kal v’chomer, since the reason that Bnei Yisrael did not listen to Moshe evidently does not apply to Pharaoh. Therefore, Pharaoh might even have been impressed with Moshe’s words, so that he would have submitted to…
The clear objective of Moshe’s mission was that Bnei Yisrael leave Egypt unconditionally. Why, then, did Moshe misrepresent his real purpose by merely asking for a three day respite from their servitude so that they could serve Hashem? The Ra’Mah asserts that the strategy was deliberate. If Moshe were to ask Pharaoh to fully release the Jews from slavery, his request would have absolutely been denied. The mission, however, was a pretense to punish Pharaoh for not listening to Hashem. If Pharaoh were to have been confronted with a demand that was perhaps “excessive,” like releasing an entire nation of…
We do not find Pharaoh making any such concession after any of the other plagues. Was makas barad, the plague of hail, so “enlightening” that Pharaoh was inspired to condemn himself and his nation, while simultaneously offering plaudits to Hashem? Horav Aharon Rotter, Shlita, offers a very pragmatic response. Rashi explains that the physical composition of the hail was unique in that two chemically opposed substances mixed together. Indeed, the hail was viewed as a neis b’soch neis, miracle within a miracle. Fire and hail, which is essentially water, made “peace” with each other to do the will of Hashem….