A.
Our parasha details the opening of the campaign to free the bënei Yisra’él from Egyptian bondage by forcing the Egyptians to acknowledge the existence and sovereignty of Ha-Shem over the world and the natural forces governing it. Both goals were to be accomplished through the administration of ten makkoth, “blows” (commonly termed “plagues” in English).
The first of these was Makkath Dam: כה אמר ד' בזאת תדע כי אני ד' הנה אנכי מכה במטה אשר בידי על המים אשר ביאר ונהפכו לדם: והדגה אשר ביאר תמות ובאש היאר ונלאו מצרים לשתות מים מן היאר: (Moshe declares: “Thus has Ha-Shem said, 'By this will you know that I am Ha-Shem: Behold, I am striking with the staff in my hand the waters in the Nile, and they will turn to blood [dam]. And the fish in the Nile will die, and the Nile will stink, and the Egyptians will loathe drinking water from the Nile”; VII, 17-18). The miracle came about as predicted and panic was sown amongst the Egyptians, but its import with the king was negated when the chartumei Mitzrayim, his “brain-trust,” proved able to duplicate it through their techniques. ויחזק לב פרעה ולא שמע אליהם (“And Pharaoh’s heart was strengthened and he did not listen to [Moshe and Aharon]”; ibid., 22).
Next was Makkath Tzëfardéa‘: הנה אנכי נגף את כל גבולך בצפרדעים ושרץ היאר צפרדעים ועלו ובאו בביתך ובחדר משכבך ועל מטתך ובבית עבדיך ובתנוריך ובמשארותיך: (“Behold, I am plaguing your entire border with frogs [tzëfardë‘im], and the Nile will swarm [with] frogs, and they will ascend and come into your house, and into your bedroom, and upon your bed, and into your servants’ house, and into your ovens and kneading troughs”; ibid., 28). Again, the miracle came to pass, and again ויעשו כן החרטמים בלטיהם וגו' וירא פרעה כי היתה הרוחה והכבד את לבו ולא שמע אליהם וגו' (“And the chartumim did the same.... And Pharaoh saw that there was relief, and he hardened his heart, and did not listen to [Moshe and Aharon]....”; VIII, 3, 11).
The third makka was Kinnim: ויאמר ד' אל משה אמר אל אהרן נטה את מטך והך את עפר הארץ והי' לכנים בכל ארץ מצרים: (“And Ha-Shem said to Moshe, 'Say to Aharon, Stretch out your staff and strike the dust of the earth, and it will become lice [kinnim] throughout the land of Egypt”; ibid., 12). This time, when the chartumim tried to reproduce the phenomenon, they failed, and told Pharaoh אצבע אלקים היא (“It is the finger of G-d”). From this point on, the chartumim evidently gave up trying to replicate the blows (at least, we hear no more of their efforts), yet nonetheless ויחזק לב פרעה ולא שמע אליהם וגו' (“And Pharaoh’s heart was strengthened and he did not listen to them....”; ibid., 15).
Why not? Why did this and the subsequent blows rained down on the hapless Egyptians fail to convince Pharaoh, now that he knew that this, at least, was no conjurer’s trick?
B.
The Talmud records Rav Pappa’s opinion as to why the chartumim were able to reproduce frogs but not lice: אפילו כנמלא נמי לא מצי לברוא אלא האי מכניף לי' והאי לא מכניף לי' (“Even an insect like an ant they could not create, but rather they could collect [frogs] and could not collect [lice]”; סנהדרין ס"ז:). The Torah Tëmima comments: ר"ל כשצריך לבריות גדולות הוא מאסף ומביא מן ההפקר ובריות גדולות נוחים לקבצם ונאספים יחד אליו אבל ברי' קטנה אינה נאספת שאין בה כח לבוא ממקום רחוק (“I.e., when [a practitioner] needs larger creatures, he collects them and brings them from [those not otherwise involved], and larger creatures are easily gathered and collected together; but a small creature cannot be gathered, because it has no strength to come from a distant place”).
In other words, the chartumim did not create frogs at all, but in some fashion brought them from regions not involved in the miracle to some spot in order to claim that they had reproduced the miracle. The lice, however, were created from dust בכל ארץ מצרים, throughout the land of Egypt. So tiny an insect as the louse has no real range, and hence lice from other regions of Africa simply could not travel to Egypt for this purpose.
The chartumim, apparently, honestly recognized that this was a miraculous feat; in Rashi’s words: מכה זו אינה ע"י כשפים מאת המקום היא (“This blow is not due to tricks, it is from G-d”). Pharaoh, however, chose not to hear Eloqim, “G-d”, in their words and as they intended, but elohim, the “forces”, presumably of nature (cf., e.g., the way G-d Himself uses elohim in speaking to Moshe in VII, 1), and strengthened his heart yet again.
We can discern a similar pattern of deliberate, and increasingly desperate, self-deception on the king’s part in the rest of the makkoth as well. The next one, ‘Arov, which brought a mixed group of venomous and predatory animals into the Egyptians’ fields and houses, he was doubtless able to dismiss as the same sort of “trick” worked with the frogs, also “rather larger” creatures than the tiny lice. Again, Pharaoh failed to be impressed.
But then we come to the fifth makka, Dever: הנה יד ד' הוי' במקנך אשר בשדה בסוסים בחמרים בגמלים בבקר ובצאן דבר כבד מאד (“Behold, the hand of Ha-Shem is actively upon your livestock, upon your horses, your donkeys, your camels, your cattle, and your ovicaprids, a very heavy pestilence”; IX, 3). But this was clearly no ordinary, “natural” pestilence. Every single Egyptian beast dropped dead in the fields, וממקנה בני ישראל לא מת אחד: וישלח פרעה והנה לא מת ממקנה ישראל עד אחד ויכבד לב פרעה ולא שלח את העם: (“And of the livestock of the bënei Yisra’él not one died. And Pharaoh sent [to know what was going on] and behold, of the livestock of Yisra’él up to one did not die; and Pharaoh’s heart was hardened and he did not release the people”; ibid., 6-7).
What could have been the king’s excuse this time?
C.
The following is based upon an explanation which I have heard in the name of the Vilner Ga’on (the Gra), though I’ve not been able to find in any of the collections of his comments.
In order to appreciate the Gra’s reasoning, a number of things have to be noted in advance. First, we can understand the phrase ‘ad echad, ”up to one,” in line with the Talmudic principle עד ולא עד בכלל (“’up to’, and not inclusive”; hence, ‘ad echad can mean that only one animal died ברכות כ"ו:, רש"י שם ד"ה עד ועד בכלל. אבל עיי' מפרשים אחרים שפירשו אחרת כגון ההעמק דבר ושבעים פנים לתורה ). Next, we must note the following halacha, that עובד כוכבי' ועבד הבא על בת ישראל הולד כשר (“Should an idolator or [non-Jewish] servant impregnate a daughter of Israel, the child is kosher”, that is, the child’s ethnic identity follows that of his mother (יבמות כ"ג. וקידושין ס"ז:, וע"ע רמב"ם הל' איסוררי ביאה פ"א ה"ג ושו"ע אה"ע סימן ד' סע' י"ט). Finally, we note the tragic story in Leviticus XXIV, 10-16, of the mëqallél who cursed G-d, described as a בן איש מצרי, the “son of an Egyptian man” (and an Israelite mother, Shëlomith bath Divri).
The Gra notes the subtle differences between the two verses: The first concerns the livestock of the bënei Yisra’él, whilst the second mentions only Yisra’él; the first states that “not one” of the animals of the bënei Yisra’él had died, whilst the second states that “up to one” of the animals of Yisra’él had died.
Ramban, in his comments to the passage from Leviticus, quotes rabbeinu ha-Tzorfathim, “our French rabbis,” as noting that the principle of ethnic identity came into effect only with Mattan Torah; before that time, ethnic identity in Israel was the same as amongst all the other bënei Noach, through the father. Now, our “son of an Egyptian” father was surely alive during the makkoth, and doubtless was already living with his mother, rather than his father. Says the Gra, this person owned an animal; since he was held to be an Egyptian under the Noachide laws, his animal perished in the plague. However, since he was living amongst the bënei Yisra’él, it appeared to Pharaoh, when he sent to discover the status of Israel’s livestock, that one of the Israelites’ animals had died.
In short, the first verse reflects objective reality, that none of the animals of the bënei Yisra’él had perished. The second reflects Pharaoh’s perception, that only one, ‘ad echad, of Israel’s animals had died. The Egyptians had suffered a mass catastrophe, but the perceived death of a single animal of Israel’s was enough to negate Moshe’s words, and provide Pharaoh with another excuse to “harden his heart.”
D.
This shows us how far willful self-deception can go. The sinner who wishes to deny reality, who wishes to believe that לית דין ולית דיין, there is neither judgment nor Judge, is able in this ‘alma dë-shiqra, this world of prevarication, to fool himself right up to the point of ultimate self-destruction.
The nature if idolatry is, ultimately, egotism; when one creates his own gods and then bows down to them, he is, in fact, worshipping himself, the ultimate “creator.” Had Pharaoh possessed even a modicum of humility, had he been willing to admit, as his chartumim had done, that the blows falling on this nation were neither natural nor subject to human control, he could have spared Egypt the worst. The consequences of his stubborn refusal are now history and common knowledge.
And, as the philosopher George Santayana famously said, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
No comments:
Post a Comment