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!