Yitro (Part 3) - Exodus 18:1-20:23

A Punny Story

First, a few background details.

In Genesis 25:2, Abraham has several children with Keturah, and two of them he names with the root word "Dan", or "judge" - Medan and Midian. Midian will establish his own legacy, and his land will be called Midian. One could call it a "Judging land".

Generations later, Yitro (Jethro), a leader, a priest, a man who has much, lives in Midian. "Cohain" doesn't just mean a descendant from Aaron, but is a priest, and also a teacher or leader of religious significance. (The sons of King David were called "Cohanim" (2Samuel 8:18).

After the Exodus, Yitro comes to Moses and brings the wife and sons of Moses to him. Moses and the Hebrews are "by the mountain of Elohim" when they meet.

Yitro sees Moses judging the people, and tells him that he is doing to much, and needs to delegate, and explains how the judging should be done.

Yitro (יתרו) is derived from the word "Yoteir" (יותר) with the same root and letters, and means "more", and "much".

And so, the teacher from "Judging-Land" tutored Moses in how to judge the many, because what he was doing was too much for him.

There's enough play on words here to cause one to wonder if the names drove the story, or the story drove the names.

And as we will see, the man who gave his daughter to Moses when he first arrived wasn't called Yitro!

Out of Order

There is a Jewish apologetic tradition that the Torah is not written in order. Sometimes a chapter belongs elsewhere, and sometimes just a verse or two. Of course, the simple reason is that the later editors who stitched this together were not interested in a linear timeline.

And sometimes this view is held because later authors, whose stories were added to it, would include differences that needed to be retroactively incorporated into the earlier stories to connect them, and it would make the timeline messy. 

It is for that reason that chapter 18, the story of Yitro coming to Moses and teaching him how to judge by having more judges, is held to have happened two years later. 

Why two years? 

I'll explain that in the next segment ("The Other Jethro")

But it is important to know that this makes more problems than it solves.

One of the problems that some commentators have with this is that, "You mean Moses' wife and kids missed the Revelation at Sinai?!" Or "Why are they back at Sinai 2 years later?" And the best one, "How is it that 2 years later, Moses' father in-law is leaving for Midian, but he is doing it here too?"

And so on.

The Other Jethro

In Exodus, we are introduced to Jethro who is called the "Chotain" (חותן\חתן) of Moses. This is translated as "father in-law and, in Biblical Hebrew, that is all that it means. In Modern Hebrew Chatan (חתן) with the same letters can mean bridegroom. A brother in-law is also not Biblical idea, but the modern word "gis" (גיס) is used.

In a later book, Numbers 10:20, we are introduced to Moses talking to his Midianite father in-law two years later, who is ready to depart.

His name, however, is Hobab (חבב\חובב) the son of Reuel!

Hobab means "cherished one", and Moses is trying to convince this man, whom he cherishes, to remain with him. רעואל is "A friend/colleague of El/God". 

A cherished adviser, and father in-law from Midian.

More play on words for the characters.

So the typical Jewish apologetic is to say that Yitro had several names, and since the Torah is not in order, the Chapter 18 of Exodus is during the same time as Chapter 10 of Numbers, while the chapter 19 of Exodus is not two years later,

The Radak indicated that Reuel was also Jethro's father, so Hobab was the brother in-law.

Where does the Torah say that Reuel was the father of Yitro?

It's doesn't! But I will explain that in more detail in the next segment ("The Other Reuel").

But first, I can't ignore the Christian apologetics on this one!

For example, the Christian commentator Albert Barnes wrote that "Chotain" means any relation by marriage! John Gill and Matthew Henry wrote that Hobab was the son of Jethro (who was not mentioned up until now, nor were there any sons of Jethro).

And so you have this mess because the Numbers author(s) wrote a different view than the author(s) of this week's parashah. 

But it gets even better.

The Other Reuel

In Chapter 2 of Exodus, Moses saves two young ladies and they go running to their father. It says in 2:16 that this man only had daughters, and that he had 7 of them.

And in verse 7:18 we are told that his name was Reuel!

In chapter 3 of Exodus, Reuel disappears and Yitro is now the father in-law.

These are different stories from different authors who had a tradition of different names.

(If you want to see the worst case of name mangling, read Chronicles!)

So, apologists, to make this work want Jethro to be the son of Reuel who only had daughters and in a later book, Hobab the son of Reuel to be the brother of Jethro, and to have the word for "father in-law" to mean "any relation by marriage", or maybe Hobab wasn't the brother of Jethro, but his son and...

...it would all be so much easier if the people would just admit that these are contradictory stories written by different people, and the editor(s) who stitched them together had no interest in creating a consistent story-line, because the Torah was not written to be a history book, but a document of nationalism for a people coming out of exile.

But they won't, and they never will.

Here's a meme to summarize this all:

Yitro (Part 2) - Exodus 18:1-20:23

The Problem with Deuteronomy

The book of Deuteronomy begins with "These are the words that Moses spoke to all of Israel on the other side of the Jordan..." 

Ibn Ezra, one of the most biting and honest commentators, wrote that there is a secret to be discovered in these words.

Here's the secret:

If Moses was (past tense) on the other side of the river that he never crossed over, then the author(s) of this text were living in the land of Israel at some time in the future.

The Sages had a problem with this book, while ignoring the problems that the other books had as well. Their biggest problem is that Deuteronomy changes a lot of the narrative of the earlier books while having it appear that Moses is reminiscing about what transpired. Things are so wrong that they are almost different stories altogether.

One statement from the Sages was that "While the other four books were dictated by God, this book was written by Moses, Himself, and approved by God."

This was not an apologetic as much as a hint that something wasn't quite the same with this book.

The Establishment of a Legal System

In this week's parashah, we have Jethro, a Midianite, schooling his son in-law about how to set up a workable system of instruction and judgments. Exodus 18:17 begins with Jethro noticing that Moses is doing all of this himself, and that it's not really working. So the next several verses, Jethro instructs him. And in verse 18:24, it says that "Moses heard the voice of his father in-law, and did everything that he had said." He followed Jethro's recommendations.

It begins with Jethero warning Moses that "...it is a burden that you will not be able to do alone." (18:18)

That was the version from the Exodus author(s).

But when the book of Deuteronomy, written by different, and later, author(s), begins, we read something different. After an introduction of where he was while speaking, Moses begins (1:9) by saying, "And I spoke to y'all, at that time, to say, "I will not be able to, alone, bear y'all." and ends with (1:14) "And y'all answered me, "The thing that you have spoke of is good for us to do."

According to the Book of Exodus: no, Moses didn't, and no, the people didn't.

(Note: I use "y'all" as a second-person-plural form of "you" so that the plurality is evident.)

Not only is Jethro not mentioned, once he goes home near the end of this week's parashah, his name is not mentioned again, not even in the later books. It's as though the Deuteronomist(s) was not aware that he existed.

But wait, there's more!

Apparently, the author(s) of the book of Numbers also was not aware of the Jethro story, because in their version, it is YHVH who tells Moses to delegate his authority by establishing the same thing!

In Numbers 11:11, Moses complains to God that he cannot do it alone, and that the people are a burden to him (something we read of in Deuteronomy 11:9 and Exodus 18:18). And so God tells him to start delegating, and explains the whole setup, in Numbers 11:16. God's idea was that 70 people could handle the work, unlike Jethro's idea that the work would be spread about more, making the job even easier.

The Deuteronomist(s) doesn't detail the "Moses plan", but I think that it's safe to assume that it was based on what was in place during the time of its writing.

Conclusion

As I have stated elsewhere, many of the stories in the Torah have duplicates, some have triplicates, of the same story, just told from different authors and stitched together by later editors in order to present a quasi-unified nationalistic narrative.

Yitro - Exodus 18:1-20:23

Jethro (or Yitro) is an interesting character with a lot of midrashim, legends, surrounding him.This weeks story begins with Jethro meeting his son in-law, Moses, and bringing Moses' wife and two sons with him after he heard what happened in Egypt (the destruction of the armies and so forth).

There are some interesting points to this meeting that many ignore.

The first is, how had Jethro heard of these events, especially since he lived many days ride away. Of course, maybe Moses sent one of the people with him ahead to tell Jethro, someone who never left Egypt , nor knew the lay of the land, nor even heard of Midian. And even if he did, it would still have taken several days.

So maybe the Hebrews and Moses were sitting around the mountain, waiting for YHVH to tell them to go up the mountain and worship him, which was what he had told Moses he wanted in Exodus 3:12.

And this is one of the reasons why there is a tradition that the giving of the Law of Moses took place earlier, and that this verse belongs much later because "There is no earlier or later [order] in the Torah".

Perhaps this chapter DOES belong later, and if so, it's not for the reason that the Rabbis are saying.

So let's talk for a moment about Moses' wife, Tzippora, who finally arrives with her father and children.

When we last saw her mentioned, she was in a pub with her husband and YHVH was going to kill him because one of her sons wasn't circumcised. (There are legends surrounding which one and why). So she took a piece of sharp flint and quickly snipped off the tip of the kid's foreskin.

As I I have noted in the past, many parts of the Torah are points of view from different authors that are stitched together, sometimes in odd sequences. When Moses meets YHVH and is given his orders, there are three versions:

Only in chapter 3, the first version is Zipporah mentioned as being with Moses. The other two don't mention her at all. And so, 15 chapters later, she is briefly mentioned again as part of a plot device for having Jethro meet Moses. But other than that, she serves no real purpose in moving the plot forward.

Even Miriam is only mentioned in passing as she is walking through the parting waters and leading the ladies into song.

But that's it for her too.

Unlike the "Prince of Egypt", these ladies played no major roles in the story.

To those Jewish women who want to put out a "cup of Miriam" on Passover night - go ahead - minor characters need all the help that they can get!

As I said, Jethro met Moses.

But where?

In the first version (chapter 3) of "Hi, I'm YHVH", God tells Moses that he wants the Jews to come to Him on His mountain, the very mountain that Moses met Him - "Mount Elohim" or "Elohim's Mountain", AKA "God's Mountain", depending on your translation of הר אלהים.

This mountain was right where Moses was being a shepherd for his Father in-law in Midian. So it couldn't have been more than a few hours away at most. It was likely in Midian or part of a nearby territory, which the Torah calls "Horeb". Also, in chapter 17, the people are whining about water, and God tells Moses to hit the rock at Horeb, and water would come out

So let's put it all together, shall we:

• Moses meets YHVH on "Elohim's Mountain" in Horeb while shepherding for his father in law in Midian.
• YHVH tells Moses that He wants the people to come to that mountain to pray to him (ironically, the people are forbidden from coming close to the mountain under penalty of death).
• After leaving Egypt, the people are in Horeb.
• And Jethro brings Moses his wife and sons who are at "Elohim's Mountain".

The issue is that nobody is really sure where Horeb is, and based on the ideological bent, it moves around. But if you take the story at it's face value, it must be in or around Midian.

Yet many consider that a problem, and so put it elsewhere.

Here is one example. The red circle shows the narrow passageway where the Jews might have left Egypt. It was likely a marsh ("Reed Sea"). The red square is Midian. The red triangle is where a lot of people put "Horeb" ("Mt. Sinai"). 

Here is the most likely scenario, that most people don't seem to like:

Moses and his motley crew traveled to Midian. Moses sent someone ahead to ask for Jethro and to tell what happened and to bring his wife and sons while he maintained order amidst this new nation.

Those who don't like that prefer that Moses had no intention of getting his wife and sons, who lived with an idolatrous priest, and was planning to head due north and skip Midian altogether when YHVH spoke to Jethro in a dream, and Jethro met Moses as Elohim's Mountain.

Either scenarios are not without their problems, so most people don't give them too much thought.

Finally, let me leave you with one of the most important things that Jethro tells Moses (other then how to delegate, of which there are 3 versions of THAT story!):

Beshalach (Part 2) - Exodus 13:17-17:16

YHVH's Motivation

In this weeks parashah. YHVH drowns a lot of Egyptians. In the previous week, he killed all of the "first-born" (bechorim) males, be they Egyptian or Hebrew, if they didn't spread lamb's blood on their doorposts. The other "plagues" that he sent were either annoyances or could have had the potential to be life threatening.

In short, over these past two portions, YHVH went from annoying to deadly to mass-executioner. 

So what was His motivation?

When Moses happens upon the "Mountain of Elohim" and meets YHVH for the first time, YHVH chooses Moses (and Aaron) to be His messengers. He also chose them to lie on His behalf (which I wrote about in this blog).

Let's go through this for a moment.

3:7 - YHVH tells Moses that he has been hearing and seeing what has been going on with the Hebrews (for the past 210 years!) and decided that NOW was the time (instead of waiting the full 400 years that He told Abraham) to take them out.

3:18 - YHVH tells Moses to lie to Pharaoh, to tell him that he just wants to take the Hebrews on a 3-day holiday to worship YHVH. He continues by saying that it won't happen and He is going to start doing things to the Egyptians.

3:22 - YHVH admits that the Hebrew women will be looting Egypt, "borrowing" gold and silver and nice clothing, while there was no intent to return to Egypt, nor to return the items "borrowed".

At several points, YHVH "strengthens" and "hardens" the heart of Pharaoh and his servants. Whatever that means. It seems to mean that YHVH was manipulating events in order to put on a show.

And that was YHVH''s motivation.

Throughout the text, He tells how people are going to talk about this for generations, how HE will be at the foremost of their thoughts, and how everyone will know that He is YHVH.

And then the pinnacle of the story - the Jews are led out of Egypt and are told to gather at a specific spot and wait!

The people are getting anxious, and YHVH initiates another "strengthening the hearts" so that Pharaoh and his army will go after the Jews. As the army gets closer, the Jews are nervous, and YHVH puts up a supernatural barrier with an angel to stop the army from approaching further as they stand by the God of "safe passage", Baal-Zephon.

Verse 14:17, YHVH admits that he was going to strengthen the hearts so that He will be glorified through the humiliation of Pharaoh and the destruction of his entire army, through the destruction of all of his chariots and horsemen. "Egypt will know that I am YHVH, when I am glorified through Pharaoh, his chariots, and his horsemen."

So, rather than letting the people leave, and then have the waters cover their path, forcing the Egyptians to turn back and give up, YHVH chose to leave the way open, so that the waters could cover them all, so that none of them remained, so that His name would be glorified.

"I have done these things because I am YHVH", "I have done these things so that they will know that I am YHVH", "I will do these things so that My name will be glorified through their deaths".

And after all of this, there is a long passage of a "Song of the Sea", where Moses leads the children of Israel into a song that praises YHVH again and again and again incessantly. And when he has finished, Miriam leads them into a song to glorify YHVH as well.

So it was all about being glorified, and being praised, and being feared, and being worshiped.

And as soon as He gets the praise and glory that He was desperate to get, the Hebrews begin to whine "What are we going to drink? This water sucks! Where's the food? Why'd we come here anyhow?"

YHVH learned that being glorified isn't all that He thought that it was going to be!

Beshalach - Exodus 13:17-17:16

Baal-Tzaphon vs YHVH-Elohim

In my post, "Who Are The Elohim?", I wrote about the number of different uses of the name "Elohim", as well as its development. I recommend reading that post as well to get a better understanding on how the names and attributes of the Hebrew God evolved, and how that has impacted Rabbinical Judaism to the present day.

The names YHVH and Elohim

Here's a short summary:

The Jews did not meet God and had a sudden unified view of what God was. This view evolved over time. And whether is was a schism in ideology or geography, several different views developed over different periods. One, at its extreme level, was that God was to be feared and obeyed. Asking God for favors was not even a consideration. As a servant, you acted without expectation of a reward. The other, at its extreme level, was that God cared about His special people, and that He would reward His faithful servants. He was the salvation and the provider. There were, of course, gradations between these two views.

The use of different names for this God expressed their differing views. And this is why you have the Rabbinical tradition that "Elohim is the name of strict justice and YHVH is the name of loving-kindness". Of course, that is too simplistic of an approach, since sometimes Elohim will do do acts of loving kindness, and YHVH could be nit-picky and kill for the slightest grievances. The truth is, that that the people of those period did not have a monolithic view of God, and when they told their stories, those differences would be expressed.

Of course, some of these stories were shared with those of the opposing view, and if they liked them, they made them their own, using a name for God that they could relate to, and giving Him attributes that was consistent with their views.

And at some point, in later generation, these two opposing views no longer were opposing. The bleeding over of legends and songs resulting in a homogeneous view of God, and they brought their tales together, stitched them into a written word, and the result is that we have dramatic examples of the same stories being repeated, but with changes to God names and attributes and a few details, in the same book. This accounts for some of the repeat tales in the Torah, as well as in Psalms. Psalm 14 and 53 are the two most dramatic examples, where it's the same short story with the same message, but only the name of God and the expectations of the people were changed.

At some point, YHVH and Elohim were no longer distinct, but became YHVH-Elohim.

But before I write about this hyphenating of names, I want to speak briefly about the name YHVH.

In modern Jewish Orthodox circles, the name יהוה (which I write as YHVH) is never spoken. Instead, a name is spoken in place of it out of respect. Originally, "Adoni" ("My Lord" or "Lord") was the word used, and in prayer, this is the name the the Jew utters. But due to the impulse to take things to extreme, even that name is now too holy to say, except in prayer, so "HaShem" (literally, "the name") is said in place when speaking to another person about YHVH.

Leaving people's nutty obsession aside, it is this use of "LORD" which is important, because in the Septuagint (LXX), that is exactly what they did with the name YHVH - they replaced it with "LORD" for the written text, and the Jews replaced YHVH with "Adoni" in prayer and speech, but kept "YHVH" in the text as-is...usually. The ultra-religion replace some of the Biblical use of "YHVH" with "יי" (YY) as an abbreviation for extra sanctity, and some go one step further and change "YY" for "Y'" (the letter yud with an apostrophe.)

I bring all of this up to show you how nutty the religious are when it comes to these names.

And this is relevant, because of what happens in the Book of Isaiah.

Hyphenating Names

In my post, "Isaiah - A Book that Changed God", I talk about how Elohim is barely mentioned, and is completely eliminated as the story goes on. In fact, YHVH-Elohim is never mentioned. And how the Elohim of others are systematically removed as well. And near the end, YHVH becomes known as "Adon YHVH" - LORD YHVH. And what you may not be aware of is that when an Orthodox Jew publicly reads this passage, he pronounces it as "Adoni-Elohim".

In other words, YHVH is treated as the second half of the hyphenated name in the same way as Elohim always was.

And this finally brings us to the point I wanted to make: hyphenated names.

There was a time when I read "YHVH-Elohim" as "YHVH of the Elohim", which is grammatically correct in Hebrew if you have two distinct nouns. In Hebrew, noun1 plus noun2 results in a translation of "noun1 of/belonging-to noun2".

However, is became clear to me that these were not to disconnected nouns, but were a connected single noun.

Yes, there is God names a YHVH and another group used Elohim, and later there's a view that unified these two, but there is one thing to keep in mind - the way that YHVH-Elohim was viewed was not exactly the same as YHVH or Elohim was viewed. Yes, it's the same God ideologically, but the attributes and the legends about it are different.

There are other hyphenated names as well, such as El-Shaddai and, as we will be reading, Baal-Tzaphon.

The prominent idea about these hyphenating of names is that the first name is the title, and the second name is the unique name. So "Adon YHVH" would make "Adon" (LORD) the title, and "YHVH" the personal name of God. And so too with Baal-Tzaphon, where "Baal" (which means "LORD") is the title, ans "Tzaphon" is the unique name. However, you don't refer to a God by His unique name, but by the complete hyphenated name.

Of course that brings us back to "YHVH-Elohim".

There was a time when the name "Baal" and "YHVH" were interchangeable. For example, King Saul named his son IshBaal, or "A man of the LORD" rather than, say, "IshYah" ("Yah" [יה] is the normal abbreviation for YHVH in names given to people).

Hadad is also often used as a form of "Baal" and is not only the name of a God, but is sometimes used as another name for "LORD" which appears in the Tanach as well, such as "Ben-Hadad, the King or Aram" or "Son-of-the-LORD".

In other words, "Baal-" and "YHVH-" were equivalent. And the Book of Isaiah was a text that eliminated that connection altogether, although prophesied that one day, people would refer to God as LORD-YHVH, giving YHVH back His honorific title.

In the same way, the God Baal, and Baal-Tzaphon, and Baal-Peor, and all of the other LORDS, may have some association to the original Canaanite "Baal" in aspect or legend, but these are names given to describe the views of the people who saw this LORD, with the private name being the unique identifier of how he was seen.

Of course, the Tanach is a propaganda text for a pro-YHVH narrative, and so any other God with "LORD" as an honorific will not be treated with the same respect. In fact, it is suspected that some of the unknown "Baal" God-names in the Tanach are polemic in nature, such as "Baal-Zebub" ("zebub" is a shit eating, bothersome, insect - a fly), and some say that it might be an insult to Baal-Tzaphon, although that too may also be an insult, since "tzaphon" is sometimes used to express a dark, scary, and gloomy place.

Baal-Tzaphon

So end this by finally talking about Baal-Tzaphon.

It should be noted that when the Torah uses the name "Tzaphon" in this week's parashah, it spells it defectively, meaning, missing a letter (Tz-Ph-N instead of TZ-Ph-O-N). Perhaps this is also meant as an insult, or perhaps not.

Rashi, always the apologist, says this about Baal-Tzaphon in 14:2:

"He along remained of all of the gods of Egypt to as to mislead them, so that [the Egyptians] should say, [that] their God is enduring. Regarding this, [the Bok of] Job explained, "He leads the goyim astray, and He destroys them." (Job 12:23).

Rashi has to come up with an explanation because YHVH said:

So how come there was a God left? Well, YHVH left one God so that the Egyptians would be misled and He could destroy them further.

What a God!

This begs the question: Was Baal-Tzephon as place or a God? Because if it was a God and the Hebrews needed to wait in front of Him, well, that causes some problems, at least to the modern mind.

It is debated if the Baal-Tzaphon God in the Torah is the same Baal-Tzaphon mention in other ancient texts is hard to determine, since it was not an Egyptian deity (Rashi did not know about the ancient texts that would be excavated centuries after he lived), but was worshiped far to the west, in Carthage, and would have been popular long after the Exodus story took place, which is a problem for some.

Now, Ba'al Tzaphon was a God for seafarers, and 14:2 tells the Hebrews to "...wait before Baal-Tzaphon, and camp opposite Him/it by the sea."

So perhaps this is the same Baal-Tzaphon, but written about by a much later author.

It is interesting to note that while Rashi is willing to call Baal-Tzaphon a God, he did not do the same for Ashteroth-Keranim in Genesis 14:5, when the Rephaim were fighting with Her.

So the question should come up, "Why did YHVH tell the Hebrews to wait at that particular spot?"

Ba'al-Tzaphon was the God who would protect people as they crossed the sea. And YHVH waited for all of the Egyptians to show up and then part that very "sea" ("yom suf"was likely a marsh) and be the Protector of His people!

Except, wouldn't the Egyptians think that this  was the doing of Ba'al Tzaphon?

Ah, that is where YHVH's plan: "He leads the goyim astray, and He destroys them."

Why did He do it? "So they will know I am YHVH" (14:4).

Or better, "So that will know that I am LORD, not LORD-Tzaphon!"

It was a power struggle of Divine intent.

YHVH knew that the Egyptians would think that it was safe, after all, there was Ba'al-Tzaphon! They went after the Hebrews and, "woosh"!, all of the waters pour over them and drown them all, showing that Ba'al-Tzaphon was an impotent God.

YHVH: 1, Baal: 0

Bo ((Part 3) - Exodus 10:1-13:16

Hello Darkness My Old Friend

The 9th plague is mentioned in this weeks parashah as "darkness".

Here's a bit of an overview of that term (lifted from my Hebrew grammar blog):

Grammar

Word: חשך or חושך
Representation: ChoShCh
Transliteration: Kho-shekh (the "kh" is gutteral)
Noun: "darkness" or "a tangible darkness"
Strong Concordance: H2822

---

Exposition

This word appears more than 100 times in the Tanach. Sometimes it is prefixed with "ה" ("the") and sometimes not, which appears to be more of a stylistic choice than a modifier of the meaning.

In the first place that is appears (Genesis 1:2) it is presents as almost a form of a blanket draped over the waters. And in Genesis 1:4, this physical darkness was mixed with light, and Elohim needed to make a separation between the light and darkness to be used for other things.

The attributes of "darkness" are quite physical:

It can be felt (Ex. 10:21)
It is thick (Ex. 10:22, Ex. 20:18, Deut. 4:11, Deut 5.19, etc.)
As a barrier (Joshua 4:7)
It is deep (Job 24:17)

The use of this Hebrew word has cause a lot of interpretation of Scripture. According to the Ramban, the darkness of Genesis was a black fire, distinguishing it from other darknesses, and that the darkness of Genesis was the darkness that was brought into Egypt that could be felt.

There are Hebrew terms for "dark" (not "darkness"), and those are never physical like חושך.

So sometimes I will use "tangible-darkness" when the context is clear that it has a form.

"EVEN DARKNESS WHICH MAY BE FELT (Exodus 10:21). How thick was this darkness? Our Sages conjectured that it was as thick as a denar, for when it says EVEN DARKNESS WHICH MAY BE FELT, it means a darkness which had substance." - Midrash Rabbah Exodus 14:1

---

While it is interesting that other books will use "darkness" in a similar way, let's keep our attention on just three of the book, specifically from the Torah where "darkness" can be found". Specifically, I am speaking of Genesis, Exodus, and Deuteronomy (the authors of Leviticus and Numbers stories never used "darkness"). This reduces our pool to only 15 occurrences, as we see: (actually, 14. See below).

 The Genesis 1 grouping is the tactile darkness that was resting upon the vast waters, one that can be separated from the light, and which competes with the light above every day, shifting dominance back and forth by God, which creates the day and night (the sun is but a sign for day, and according to the Genesis narrative, is not the source of day, God is, by moving aside the darkness.

The Genesis 15 account is Abraham having a dream, and the darkness pressing upon him as God describes how his descendants will be going into slavery in Egypt, and how he will bring them out. It's the darkness of that experience, the tactile darkness, that will oppress many in the Exodus story.

The Exodus 10 (this week) is the "darkness which can be felt".

Exodus 14 tells us how a pillar of cloud and a blanked of darkness were barriers to the Egyptians, who could not pursue the Hebrews.

Exodus 20 doesn't use the word "Khoshekh" (or Choshech), but uses the word for a cloud, which the translator in this software that I used translated to "a thick darkness". So ignore that one. I left it in to show that not every "darkness" in your translation is really חושך. This translation is based on the Deuteronomy rewrite of what happened, which does used חושך in the narrative, so the translator reconciled the two.

Now, Deuteronomy is a much later book than the others, by many generations. There are portions that smack of quasi-monotheism, moreso than the other four book that are clearly henotheistic. The authors of Deuteronomy often retell stories, and change them. The best example is to compare the story of the spies in the Book of Numbers to the version mentioned in Deuteronomy.

In chapters 4 and 5, the narrator is using a lot of excessive description about the meeting of the Hebrews with God who resided atop of His mountain. There was a thick blanket of darkness separating God from the people, with a sound and light show to go along with His impressive presence.

Finally, Chapter 28 is Moses warning the people of God's wrath against them is the don't remain His servants, and uses the imagery of the darkness in Egypt.

Conclusion

"Darkness" in the Torah is an expression of the supernatural that can oppress, halt, and at times, protect humans. That should not be surprising, given that the Torah is a book of supernaturalism. And yet, there will be many who will ignore the supernatural elements (well, except the God parts) and claim that it is all a flowery part of speech, and that the ancient sages were fundamentalists, literalists who did not grasp the Bible like the enlightened modern fan of the Text.

I am going with intent here. The apparent intent is that חושך is not what we call "darkness" today, but was viewed as something supernatural that could affect humans. The Ruach, often translated as "spirit" is another supernatural element that is used to affect humans, and yet, for some reason, having a "spirit" of God causing a peaceful town to kill its friendly neighbors seems more acceptable than "darkness" pushing someone on their back, unable to get up or move.

And THAT is the plague of darkness.

Bo (Part 2) - 10:1-13:16

Divine Deceptions

There is one thing that is often ignored in the story of Moses, and that is the lies that he repeated to the Children of Israel on YHVH's behalf. 

Remember, YHVH told Moses his plan to take the Jews out of Egypt and relocate them in another land "flowing with milk and honey". (3:18). And later, Moses and Aaron tell the Children of Israel (Aaron did the talking), as their first act as prophets, that this was God's plan. (4:30).

And yet, rather than, as the Charlton Heston version of the story depicted, be honest with Pharaoh and say "Let my people go!", Moses (through Aaron) said:

5:1 - "Send out My people so that they may celebrate Me in the wilderness", followed by a declaration that they would only need three days off to worship their God who lived, as we learned in 3:1, on a mountain outside of Egypt. He then further lies and adlibs with, "If we don't go, YHVH will kill us with sword and pestilence." 

At that point, Pharaoh might have chuckled as the bizarre claim and sent them off packing. And Pharaoh knew it was all a lie, and says, "let them not engage in words of lies" (5:9).

in 7:16 - "Send My people out into the wilderness that they may serve me." And again in 7:26, 8:16, 9:1, 9:13, and so on.

At no point is Moses told to tell Pharaoh the truth, and at no point does Aaron tell the truth to the Pharaoh.

When Pharaoh is fed up and willing to send them, Moses almost lets the cat out of the bag when Pharaoh asks him (10:8), "Which ones will go [worship YHVH]?" and the response is "Everyone! Young, old, adult, child, and all of our cattle and flocks. Pharaoh's response in 10:10-11 indicates that he knows that this 3-day festival is a ruse and tells Moses to take the men and go worship, since that is what he asked for! He called Moses' bluff. And, of course, there's another plague in response.

After being fed up again, Pharaoh is willing (10:24) to even let the children go, but still wants the cattle and flocks to remain to ensure that they will return. But Moses won't have that. "Not a hoof will be left here!" (10:26).

Righteous Theft?

In verse 11:2, we have YHVH telling Moses to tell the people, who will be leaving Egypt (as far as the Egyptians were concerned, it was for a 3-day holiday), to borrow silver and gold vessels from the locals. The next verse tells us that the people were impressed with what YHVH had done, and were also impressed with Moses, and did so.

Now let's go back for a moment to verse 3:22 - "But every woman will ask/borrow from [Egyptian] neighbor, and of her that dwells in her house, vessels of silver and gold...and you will exploit/despoil Egypt."

While שאל can mean "borrow" as well as "ask", is it clear that this asking is for the intent of taking from others and not returning them, to benefit from another's loss.

So YHVH's intent was clear, and in the later text when they "borrow" the items, the intent is to keep them. And this "requesting" was a ruse, since the intent was to take all of the wealth of the Egyptians and leave Egypt, just as YHVH had promised Moses, and earlier, Abraham (Genesis 15:14).

While this is just a myth, some people take these types of stories seriously, or, at least, more seriously than others. 

Here is a fun article about a prominent legal scholar, several years ago, had prepared a lawsuit "against Jews around the world over gold allegedly stolen in biblical times during the Jewish exodus from Egypt".

Conclusion

The idea of a God telling His prophet to lie, or to have him tell others to lie, seems a bit contradictory to the modern view of how we hold our Gods, but in ancient days, lying and taking what you wanted was part of the theology of the Gods of the times.

The idea of a Divine Deception, while contrary to modern theists, is quite compatible with ancient beliefs, which is expressed in this week's parashah.

Bo - Exodus 10:1-13:16

The Trouble With Gods

The common issue that atheists and theists have with Gods is that we all live in the 21st century with sophisticated views of the supernatural, and the views of the -10th century we quit simple.

For most modern theists, God exists outside of time and space, is omnipotent, omniscient, omni-benevolent, and has a plan for the entire Universe, the entire Earth, and for all peoples.

However, when the God in the -10th century stories is none of those things, both atheists and theists agree "THAT isn't a real God!".

For the theist, that God gets reworked and the text gets reinterpreted to being Him up to date. For the Atheist, that God gets dismissed as but a badly written character in a myth.

Let's take one example: God being a Jerk.

In ancient times, they had no problems with this sort of behavior. Let's take this poem from the Ugaritic text that was written about the time when Abraham supposedly existed. In it, Anat, who is a goddess of hunting and warring, wants permission from her father, El, to kill a human, the son of El's favorite servant, Danel, because he has a better bow and arrow set than she does. The young man, Aqhat, refused to give them to the Goddess, so she wants to kill him and take them. The irony, is that at the end of the story, after she kills him, the objects of her desire are broken.

Here is Anat interacting with her Dad:

Such are the ways of the Gods, at least, in the "good old days" when they used to walk the Earth.

YHVH is sometimes a Jerk

In this weeks parashah the first two sentences tell us a lot about YHVH's character. Most translations don't do it justice.

First, let me show you the Rabbinically approved Aramaic Targum of those two verses. The Targumist was very uncomfortable with the Hebrew text, and so I will highlight the area that got changed:

(1) "And YHVH said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants so that I shall place these, My signs, among them. (2) and so that you may recount before your son and your son's son the miracles that I performed in Egypt and My signs which I placed among them, so that you will know that I am YHVH,"

The best, and yet still ideologically tweaked translation that I have found is in Artscroll's Saperstein Edition of the text. I will highlight where they went off track, but italicize where they kept to the Hebrew:

(1) "And YHVH said to Moses, "Come to Pharaoh, for I have made his heart and the heart of his servants stubborn so that I shall place these signs of Mine in his midst; (2) and so that you may relate in the ears of your son, and your son's son, that I have amused Myself with Egypt and My signs that I placed among them - that you may know that I am HaShem". ("HaShem" is used by religious books that don't like to write a word for God).

You can see a couple of issues right off. One is that the Targum has God performing miracles, while the other has God amusing Himself with the whole thing.

There are several translation points that need to be addressed. The first one is not that important.

Come/Go: In Biblical Hebrew, you will usually go to a place, and come to a person. There are lots of interpretations that make a lot out of why "come" is used instead of "go", but that's all there is to it.

Recount/Relate: The Hebrew word לספר means "to tell a story". This is the verse commanding Moses that all of this should be told from generation to generation as a form of oral storytelling. A Storyteller is called a maggid, and this word shares the same root as used in haggadah, which is what Jews use on Passover to read from and tell the story of Exodus, from father to son to grandson. To use "recount" and "relate" loses that story-telling action that the Hebrew word indicates, to create an oral tradition of passing on these tales to the next generation.

Hardening Heart. Of course, we are not talking about the physical heart here. "Heart" was what you thought with (they had no concept of what the brain was for). The word translated as "harden" is in the causative form, and it means to make something heavier, a burden, to become worsened, an aggravation. While "stubborn" doesn't seem bad, it falls apart in context. Because right after that, Moses gives his ultimatum, the servants of Pharaoh whose hearts were "hardened" were begging Pharaoh to let the Hebrews go (10:7), and Pharaoh, whose heart was "hardened", agreed (10:10-11).  The fact that YHVH and Moses ignored Pharaoh is irrelevant. So I will go with the simple meaning of "heavier", as in "unhappy thoughts", or "regretful thoughts" etc., which goes counter to the typical translation.

So That. The Hebrew word למען means, "for the sake of" as in "the reason that I am doing this". The English translation into "so that" is a bit low key for this and doesn't really show "I am doing all of this stuff to Egypt so that I can place My signs, and so that you will tell stories about Me." YHVH's intent was not for the Hebrews to be set free (which is a secondary benefit), but so that stories can be told through the generations about YHVH. ("I make the greatest plagues!")

Signs. Saadiah renders "signs" as "plagues" in his interpretation, and I tend to agree.

Amused Myself. The word להתעלל can best be summed up by the image of a big brother, laughing while he has his younger brother beneath him, refusing to let him up, even though the younger one is begging him to stop, and having fun at the other's expense. It is a bullying, but not out of hatred, but out of enjoyment and a lack of empathy for the other. It can also refer to verbally bullying at another expense in the same way, or "mocking".

This was the type of amusement that YHVH was involved in "I amused myself bullying Egypt as her expense and with my plagues that I put among them!"

So here is my translation:

(1) "And YHVH said to Moses, "Come to Pharaoh, for I have made heavy, his heart/thoughts and the heart/thoughts of his servants in order to place these signs/plagues of Mine in [Pharaoh's] midst [to be all around him]; (2) and for-the-sake of, [so that you may] tell-the-story in the ears of your son, and your son's son [telling them] that I amused Myself, bullying Egypt at her expense and [with] My signs/plagues that I put among them so that you may know, because I am YHVH".

It's really a great image of YHVH, having fun, bullying another country, causing them pain and suffering with His plagues. And when, in a few verses, Pharaoh asks Moses to stop and gives in to his demands, YHVH continues anyhow. (Granted, Pharaoh slips in an insult in the midst of telling them to go, but still, he was willing).

Summary

The beginning of this week's parashah is YHVH telling Moses that he's been having fun with his plaguing of Egypt, and that he intends to continue so that the Hebrews will have stories to tell for generations. He has caused a heaviness in the thoughts of the people of Egypt who beg this to stop, and when Pharaoh says, "OK", God just isn't quite done yet.

It's a fun bit of pantomime from an ancient author.

Va'eira (Part 4) - Exodus 6:2-9:35

The Plagues

This week, the first 7 of the 10 plagues are listed. I thought that it would be fun to list them, and any quirks that are typically missed.

It should be noted that most of the plagues don't say how long they lasted, and the few that give some hint about it give a rather short time. Most don't need God to stop them. They just sort of end.

So put aside all of the movie and Haggadah versions that you might have seen and read and just look at the oddities that are the plagues of Egypt.

Water into blood (דָם): Verses 7:14–24

The Rashi on 7:15 is quite funny. It tweaks "he goes out [to] the water" to "the water goes out of him", in order to have God tell Moses "do this magic trick while Pharaoh is taking a piss in the Nile".

But verse 19 should be paid close attention to. It is YHVH giving Moses specific instructions to give to Aaron: "take the staff and stretch out your hand" and yet, as Moses always does, he improvises, and instead he has Aaron hit the water with his staff! 

In the Book of Numbers, when God tells Moses that He and his brother have sinned and cannot enter the Promised Land, the assumption is that it was because God told Moses to talk to the rock, and instead he hit the rock. Nowhere does that text tell us the reason, and those who suggest that it is because of not following God's orders exactly, haven't paid attention to all of the other orders.

The final part of the curse, verse 25, tells us that the plague of killing all the fish (yet the frogs and the wild animals survive) and making the water undrinkable lasted only a week. Rashi, always the apologist, in order to stretch it out says that while the plague lasted a week, Moses was giving warnings for 3 weeks. 

It lasted a week. And Pharaoh didn't have to give in (his own magicians showed how easy of a trick it was to do), and Moses didn't have to ask God to stop. It was just one of those "one week only" plagues.

Frogs (צְּפַרְדֵּעַ): Verses 7:25–8:15

Again, YHVH gives Moses a new command, telling him to tell Pharaoh to let the Hebrews go worship him. Please note that it is not a request to have them leave forever, but to go and have a group worship service for a few days. That's a bit deceptive for a God, who also refused to tell Pharaoh Himself.

And, again, God gives a specific command, "put out your hand with the staff", but instead, Aaron simply stretched out his hand, with no staff mentioned.

And yes, the verse starts out with "frog" in the singular (8:2), which is the source of many legends.

Even though his magicians showed him how to do that magic trick, Pharaoh was fed up with all of the frogs and told Moses to entreat YHVH to get rid of the damn frogs.

Moses then says a weird phrase, "Boast about me!" (8:5). He wants Pharaoh to give a specific time to prove that there are none like YHVH, who is the Elohim of the Hebrews. Pharaoh agrees, and all the frogs die and rot everywhere, and the rest remain in the river.

It should be noted that up to this point, it does not say that YHVH hardened Pharaoh's heart, but that he hardened his own heart (an expression of stubbornness). Yes, YHVH said that he would do it, and in verse, 7:13, before the plagues, He did it so that Pharaoh wouldn't listen to Moses (which makes the act of sending Moses rather fruitless). And sometimes He is involved, and sometimes He is not. 

Lice (כִּנִּים): Verses 8:16–19

This is actually head lice. God: "Stretch out your staff". Aaron: Stretches out his hand and his staff.

It says that in verse 13, "all of the dust of the land [of Egypt] became head lice". It should be noted that the Jewish sages learned from this that head lice can spontaneously generate, and that they do not come from eggs.

These must have been special head lice because they also infested the stabled animals (a behemah is typically a domesticated farm animal). The magicians couldn't copy that trick and proclaimed that it was "the finger of Elohim"! This is typically translated as "finger of God", but as polytheistic magicians, they most likely were speaking of their God or Gods.

And this was another one of those plagues with no specific time indicated that just stopped on its own. Pharaoh wasn't impressed.

Wild Animals (ערוב): Verses 8:20-32

We typically translate arov as "wild animals", but it really means a swarm, a mixture of critters. Some interpret this to mean things like scorpions and spiders and the like. Some Christian commentators have them as flying things, like flies. But for some reason, the Passover Haggadah will typically illustrate this with lions and tigers attacking the Egyptians.

So "Wild Animals" is based on tradition, not on the grammar. And they stayed out of the Land of Goshen, where the Children of Israel lived.

Verse 8:18 is fascinating, "I YHVH am in the midst of the land [of Egypt]". This anthropomorphism bothered both the Targumist and Saadiah HaGoan change "in the midst" to "rule/ruler in the midst" as if to say, "I live in the heavens, but My authority is even here". But the simple reading is that YHVH is dwelling in Egypt.

The interaction between Moses and Pharaoh at the end, where Pharaoh says, "Go worship your God in the land [of Egypt]", and Moses refuses, and gives a bizarre reason, saying that if they slaughter an offering to YHVH, the citizens of the land will stone the Hebrews.

What, neither the Pharaoh or YHVH cannot keep them safe?

Diseased livestock (דֶּבֶר): Verses 9:1–7

Here was have the warning that a plague will wipe out all of their livestock. It also mentioned camels, which weren't a domesticated animal 3,500 years ago in Egypt. That wouldn't take place for another 500 years.

So Moses says, "This will happen tomorrow", and all of the animals died. It seems to indicate that all of this took place in one day.

When Pharaoh saw that the Hebrews animals weren't affected, he decided that he wasn't going to do them any favors.

Boils (שְׁחִין): Verses 9:8–12

With this plague, the Pharaoh isn't even given a warning. And Moses and Aaron were told to put soot into their cupped hands and that the two of them were to toss it to shamayim before Pharaoh. Verse 10 tells us that only Moses did it.

The Targumist has a problem with tossing this stuff to shamayim (another word for the firmament, also called "heavens"), so he changes to to "towards the sky".

The Ramban wrote that this dust that fit into the hands of Moses caused the boils seems bizarre, since his hands weren't that big to affect all of Egypt!

Also, this plague just stopped. Pharaoh wasn't spoken to by Moses

Hail (בָּרָד): Verses 9:13–35

God: "Stretch out your hand to shamayim". Moses: stretches out his staff. The Targumist doesn't like the image of the staff stretching to shamayim, so he changed it to "toward shamayim".

The description of the hail is one of supernaturalism: it was fire and ice combined, and the center of each giant ball of hail was flashing fire.

So apparently God can do anything.

Verse 28 "Entreat YHVH, it has been much, this qolot of Elohim".

The word "qol" (קול), means a voice or a sound. Here, it is in the plural, as in the "sounds or voices of Elohim". This is often rendered as "Godly thunder", but a better translation would be the "noisy outbursts of Elohim". It should be noted that "thunder" (ra'am, רעם), is used everywhere else in the Tanach except here, where the translations would have you believe that we are talking about "thunder".

Conclusion

Some of the plagues happened without talking to Pharaoh. Sometimes YHVH hardened Pharaoh's heart, and sometimes Pharaoh did it himself. The time that each plague took is mostly unknown, and how long this entire process took is also unknown. Even some words that are generally interpreted one way, don't really have that meaning at all.

In short, the Passover story can pretty much be whatever you want it to be!

Va'eira (Part 3) - Exodus 6:2-9:35

Commanding God

As I noted in the previous post, there are three different versions of the same, "Moses, I have a job for you" story. In the first 2, an 80-year old Moses has to climb up and down a mountain and walk to Egypt and back, and then back up the mountain and down again.

In the third version of the story, Moses and YHVH are in Egypt together when he  gets his orders.

That view made things a lot simpler!

It is odd, though, that a territorial local God would intrude on the territory of other Gods, but, then, He will show that He is more powerful than they are, and they better not mess with Him or His people!

In each instance that YHVH gives Moses a command, he does it. Interestingly enough, Moses didn't usually tell Aaron to do it exactly as YHVH told him. Check out verses 7:19-20 for a very ironic improvisation - God tells Moses and Aaron to hold the staff aloft over the waters, and he would change it to blood, but they hit the water instead, and it's fine. And God never complains! At least, not in the Book of Exodus!

This parshah has several plagues in it. And every time Moses wants YHVH to stop, he commands him to do so.

The Aramaic Targum has a problem with such things, and replaces these terms with "pray". Ironically, "to pray" (להתפלל) is only used 7 times in the Torah, and each time it is used, it's to beg God to stop killing. But the Targumist is really concerned with YHVH being treated like one's pet Pit-bull, or a genie.

And in verses 8:4, 8:5, 8:26 and 9:28, "עתר" (atar) is used which means "petition", "entreat", "urge", and "request. It is too anthropomorphic for the Targumist who changes it to "pray".

But the one that I want to call your attention to is this one that is very commanding:

In verse 8:8 "צעק" (Tz'ak) is used which means to "shout", "reprimand", "complain", and "cry out". It is used to describe Moses commanding YHVH to stop the plague of frogs:

"Moses and Aaron went out from Pharaoh's presence, Moses shouted to YHVH about the plague of frogs that He/he had inflicted upon Pharaoh. YHVH did according to the word of Moses, and the frogs died..."

The term "כדבר" (k'dvar), or "according to the word of..." is always obeying a command. As in Exodus 12:35 - "The children of Israel did according to the word of Moses..."

It's an expression of Moses as the commander.

And in this verse, he shouted his command to YHVH to stop, and YHVH did according to the word of Moses.

It's a odd tidbit, don't you think?

Va'eira (Part 2) - Exodus 6:2-9:35

Fragmentation

As I have pointed out in the past, the chapter numbering and locations of those chapter breaks are not ancient, and they have ideological motivations in some cases where a logical break doesn't seem to make any sense. Also, in some instances, the Christian version of these texts will have a different location for the chapter break. This is more apparent in Psalms, where it occurs a lot, than in the Torah, although it does occur.

Also, I have mentioned that many chapters are not a single story, but may contain multiple stories that at stitched together and, when read in sequence, causes one t jump backward and forward in time, and often, not having a particular place where one can move the text due to different writing styles and story interpretations.

Chapter 6 (and 7) is a perfect example of this "stitched fragmentation" problem.

Verses 6:2-6:12 is one story which breaks down to Moses, having returned from Egypt, and is back on Elohim's mountain, is talking to YHVH. He has been walking up this mountain twice, and have walked back and forth between Midian, and YHVH's first words are, "Go back and tell the Hebrews that I am going to save them", which is something that Moses already did in 4:30, but YHVH and this Moses appear to be unaware of that event.

So Moses walks back to Israel, apparently alone, and gives the Hebrews the message, but they won't listen, so Moses walks back to Midian, and back up the mountain, and God says, "OK, now go back there and tell the Pharaoh to let them go!" Which is something that He told Moses to do back in verse 4:21, which, again, is something that this version is unaware of.

Moses then tells God, "Wait a second! Why should Pharaoh listen to me if nobody else will?!"

The story stops at verse 6:12 and doesn't give an answer.

If the chapter 4 story appears to be very similar to the chapter 6 version, that's because they are the same story!

Just as you have 2 versions of Abraham telling his wife to lie to the Pharaoh "tell him that you are  my sister" (and arguably a third version, but with Isaac's name being used in place of Abraham's), so too do you have two versions of Moses being sent on his mission.

The difference is that in this version, his wife and kid aren't involved and are never mentioned again, until chapter 18, then Jethro is bringing them along to give to Moses at Mt. Sinai, who apparently had no intent on taking them along.

So the little side-story of God meeting Moses at the local in and almost starting a bar fight was but another fragment, stitched to the end of the first version of the "Moses gets a command" narrative. But is not included in the second version.

And just as the beginning of chapter 4 start with the Moses complaining that the Hebrews won't believe him, and he doesn't talk well, so too do we have the chapter-6 version with a similar beginning. We have Aaron being given the job of being the spokesman in both versions. (In neither version does Tzipporah say a word in Egypt as she did in "The Prince of Egypt" cartoon!)

So I am suggesting that both of these versions are really the same story, from different authors and periods, with small variations in the telling.

The Genealogy Fragment

Starting with 6:13, we get a short fragment giving us some genealogy. This fragment is very important because, with it, we can determine that the Exodus author was unaware of the Genesis author's view that the Hebrews would be in Egypt for 400 years. This specific genealogy, with time frames, reduces that to only about 210 years.

Meanwhile...

And the last three verses of chapter 6 are but repeats, just before the genealogy break.

And it is how that verse begins, as an introduction into chapter 7 (obviously, the logical separation of chapter 7 should really begin at 6:28) that tells us that these three verses are not just repeats, but yet another version of the "Go to Egypt and do my bidding" story.

Why?

Because in this version, not only is YHVH and Moses unaware that they have done all of this stuff before, but in verse 6:28, we read that they are both in Egypt having this conversation, not on top of any mountain!

So there are actually three versions of this "go do my bidding" story, and three times Moses says that he can't do the job, and three times YHVH assigns the speaking job to Aaron.

It's something well worth thinking about! 

Va'eira - Exodus 6:2-9:35

There is a lot of meat in the second verse of this week's parashah.

וָאֵרָא, אֶל-אַבְרָהָם אֶל-יִצְחָק וְאֶל-יַעֲקֹב--בְּאֵל שַׁדָּי; וּשְׁמִי יְהוָה, לֹא נוֹדַעְתִּי לָהֶם.

Here is a translation (mine):

"And I [YHVH] appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as/with El Shaddai. And/but My name, YHVH, I did not make known to them." 

So let's break down the important components.

Appeared

The idea of an infinite God appearing to anyone was so problematic that the Aramaic Targum changes "I appeared" to, "I revealed Myself".

Remember, this is Moses, interacting with God, who encountered Him on "Elohim's Mountain", turned his face away so as not to look at YHVH, then left to do His bidding, and when Pharaoh sent him away, Moses went back to the mountain to talk to YHVH.

Yes, "appeared" is the simple reading, and the most suitable.

as/with El Shaddai

It is interesting that "El Shaddai" is typically rendered as "God Almighty" in most translations. If you read the Biblical texts, you will see that whenever this name is used, it refers to a fertility/protecting God. In fact, today, Jews still have the name "Shaddai" on their doorposts (usually written on the outer side of the mezuzzah scroll) and that item has often been referred to as a protecting symbol for the home.

Here is a list of the 10 times that "El Shaddai" appears in the Torah. The only exception to this reference are spoken by the Sorcerer Bilaam, who will be uttering a blessing to protect the Jews on El Shaddai's behalf.

Now, it can be argued that El Shaddai is another name for God. In fact, some translations render this verse as "...but my name EL Shaddai, I did not make known to them". But nowhere does this verse call "El Shaddai a "name".

Then you have that pesky prefix of the letter bet (ב) which is often treated as the letter kof (כ) by many.

What's the difference?

The letter bet refers to the location-relationship between to objects, such as "in, with, for, by, because of, at", which the letter kof as a prefix refers to a "not quite exactly the same"-relationship between two objects, such as "approximately, like, as, when (Biblically).

In this verse, it is being treated by most translations as though it is using a kof ("as") rather than the actual letter bet ("with").

The reason is that "I appeared...with El Shaddai..." causes some ideological problems.

I did not make known to them

The Exodus author is apparently unaware of some of the verses that the Genesis authors had used. Here's a meme to express that:

Also, Genesis 27:20 has Esau acknowledge to his father, Isaac, "Because your God, YHVH, sent me with good speed.". Genesis 28:13 has YHVH telling Jacob that he is YHVH, the God of Abraham and Isaac. 

Yes, this name was made known to them.

Conclusion

This verse has an anthropomorphic Deity who has appeared to others in the past, has spoken with them, and has called them by name, a Deity that exists with "other Gods" within a henotheistic (monaltry) mindset, who had appeared with El Shaddai (or perhaps as El Shaddai if you prefer, which doesn't make it much better), contradicting earlier texts composed by other authors.

It makes for an interesting discussion, don't you think? ;)

Shemot (Part 5) - Exodus 1:1-6:1

YHVH at the Pub (Part 2)

In the Hebrew text, notice the use of several impersonal pronouns in Exodus 4:24:

"And IT came to pass, on the way to the pub, that YHVH met HIM and HE sought to kill HIM."

That's 4 impersonal pronouns. Because of that, you can mix and match whatever combination that you want.

Of course, there are traditionalists. Rashi chose the simple explanation to be read as:

"And it came to pass, on the way to the pub, that YHVH met [Moses] and He sought to kill [Moses for being lax about circumcision]."

But there are other combinations as well. as we read in the Talmud (Nedarim 31b-32a).

 (I snipped the above translation from the this odd web site rather than translate this lengthy text on my own. Yes, I was lazy!)

The first paragraph is an apologetic to explain why Moses didn't circumcise his son. The simple explanation is that Moses, for all intents and purposes, saw himself as an Egyptian and had no real connection to the commandment of Abraham. There is a legend that Moses was born circumcised to get around the pesky problem as to why God had no problem with Moses' status.

In later periods, supernaturalism concerning demons and angels seeped into the Rabbinical mindset, and so Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel of the early 2nd century, interpreted "he" to be an adversarial Satan.

Not to be outdone, Rabbi Yehudah ben Bizna had not Satan, but a pair of attacking angels going after Eliezer.

Look at the end of verse 4:25:

כִּי חֲתַן-דָּמִים אַתָּה לִי

Tzipporah says why she did what she did (cutting off the foreskin): "because a chatan of blood (plural) you are to me".

Because "blood" is plural, it can be also read of "ones of blood", so they interpretation is that there were two angels seeking blood - to do harm. While a chatan can be a bridegroom or a son in-law, it can also refer to one who is the focus of a mitzvah, such as one selected to be honored as chatan Berashit when the Torah reading cycle begins, or, in this case, the child who is being circumcised.

So "you" in "you are to me" is speaking of Eliezer, and not Moses, according to this text. Which certainly seems sensible.

The reference to "Af" and "Chemah" (or Hemah) are from Psalm 37:8 "cease from Af (anger) and forsake Chamah (wrath)..." as personifications of undesirable traits. Also Isaiah 27:4 YHVH: "I have no Chamah..."

So as we can see, supernaturalism from the Rabbis only adds to the supernaturalism of the Torah itself! But it is a fun way to read it.

Conclulsion

The reasons why Moses didn't circumcise his son are apparent, unless you held that he was already well versed in all of the mitzvot of the Torah before it was even given. Who was going to get killed is not 100% clear, but either reading is suitable. The idea that YHVH was going to kill His messenger, Moses before he could fulfill his duties seems less likely than YHVH wanting to kill the son (he will be killing the sons of Aaron for some unknown reason in a later chapter).

But either reading is fine.

As for the avenging angels coming to kill one of them with or without their armies, that's a fantasy covering a fantasy!

Shemot (Part 4) - Exodus 1:1-6:1

This particular sentence is so full of so many things, that's it's impossible for me to let it slide without commenting on it.

Remember, previously, Moses met YHVH in a pub (actually an establishment for resting and getting refreshments, but the colloquial term "pub" works just fine), and YHVH was going to kill him until Moses' wife snipped off the tip of her son's foreskin, making it bleed, which seemed to satisfy YHVH.

And prior to that, Moses came upon the "mountain of Elohim", where he saw an angel of YHVH, and YHVH himself appeared (although Moses turned his face away so as not to gaze at YHVH.

And here, the author is having Moses (Aaron is doing the speaking for him, hence the use of "we" and "us") tell Pharaoh that the Elohim of the Hebrews just happened to encounter Moses! And that's true. Had Moses not gone to that mountain, YHVH might not have ever had that private meeting with him.

And the image of YHVH yielding a sword and attacking Moses and Aaron for not bringing the Hebrews to offer sacrifices to Him is a wonderful image. It is reminiscent of Apollo shooting arrows of disease at the soldiers of Agamemnon for not doing what His priest begged him to do.

YHVH is being present to the Pharaoh, who had never heard of him before, as a short-tempered bully who would come into Egypt and having a fit if the Pharaoh didn't obey.

And the Pharaoh basically told them to "piss off", calling the bluff that was all part of YHVH's plan.

One could call it His "Divine Plan" - to destroy and kill rather than simply do what a God should have been capable of doing: "Poof! The Hebrews are in Israel!"

But then, where's the fun in that?!