|
And the name of
the other was Eliezer, for ‘the G-d of my father came to my aid, and He
saved me from the sword of Pharaoh'” (18:4)
The Torah recounts
that Moshe had two sons. He named the oldest Gershom because Moshe was a
“ger” – “stranger” in a strange land, reflecting his exile in the land of
Midyan after fleeing from Mitzrayim[1]. His second son he named Eliezer
to commemorate his miraculous salvation from the executioner’s sword in
Mitzrayim[2]. Both of Moshe’s sons were born prior to his return to
Mitzrayim. Why does the Torah wait until Bnei Yisroel leave Mitzrayim to
reveal the name of Moshe’s second son? Furthermore, Moshe’s salvation
from the executioner’s sword occurred prior to his exile in Midyan. Why
did he give the name “Gershom” before the name “Eliezer”?
When a person is
miraculously saved his immediate reaction must be that Hashem spared him
for a higher purpose. Until that purpose is discovered the full extent of
the miracle cannot be realized. Moshe understood that his salvation must
be viewed as part of Hashem’s master plan, but upon the birth of his
first son he was still not aware of the specifics of this plan.
Consequently, Moshe’s named his child Gershom reflecting his sense of
detachment from his people .
At the site of the
burning bush Hashem revealed to Moshe that he was saved from Pharaoh so
that he may lead the Jewish people out of exile. At this juncture his
second son was born whom Moshe named Eliezer, for the full purpose of the
miracle had been revealed to him. The Torah waits until Bnei Yisroel are
standing at Har Sinai to receive Hashem’s commandments to relate the name
of Moshe’s second son, for it is at this point that the full impact of
Moshe’s deliverance is felt. The message that the Torah is imparting is
that if Hashem reveals Himself to an individual through a miracle it can
only be because this individual will be instrumental in bringing about a
greater revelation and the sanctification of Hashem’s name.
1.18:3
2.Rashi 18:4
This Is Personal
And Yisro…heard
everything that Hashem did to Moshe and to Bnei Yisroel…” (18:1)
Rashi cites the
Midrash on this verse which states that upon hearing of the splitting of
the Red Sea and the war waged against Amalek, Yisro is moved to join the
Jewish people[1]. Eight verses after this verse, when Moshe repeats the
miracles which Hashem performed on behalf of Bnei Yisroel, Rashi again
comments that he related to Yisro the splitting of the Red Sea and Bnei
Yisroel’s miraculous victory over Amalek. Rashi adds that this was done
to bring Yisro closer to Torah[2]. What is Moshe adding in his description
of these two miracles that would impact upon Yisro in a stronger manner
than previously?
After hearing
Moshe’s account of these miracles, the Torah says “vayichad Yisro”. Rashi
offers the following two explanations for this expression: “and Yisro was
happy (for the miracles performed on behalf of Bnei Yisroel)”, from the
Aramaic word “chadi” – “happiness” and “Yisro felt discomfort”, from the
word “chad” – “sharp” for his flesh felt as if it were covered with
lacerations. Based upon the second interpretation, our Rabbis formulated
the rule that a person is prohibited to speak deprecatingly about a
gentile in the presence of a convert[3]. Why do the Rabbis use the
expression “al tevazeh” – “do not deprecate”; how did Moshe speak
deprecatingly about Mitzrayim? Furthermore, if it is the downfall of
Mitzrayim which causes Yisro distress, should not only deprecating
comments be prohibited, but all comments describing the ill-fortune of
gentiles be prohibited as well?
A just king who
sentences his subject for committing a crime will mete out a punishment
commensurate to the crime involved. However, if the crime is perpetuated
against his own son, the king will inflict a much harsher punishment upon
the criminal in return for having caused his child anguish. Initially,
Yisro is motivated to join Bnei Yisroel by the punitive measures taken
against Mitzrayim for the crimes they perpetrated. When Moshe recounts
the miracles which were punishments to Amalek and Mitzrayim, the verse
states “al odos Bnei Yisroel” – “on account of Bnei Yisroel”[4]. Whereas
Yisro originally understood that Mitzrayim’s punishment was quid-pro-quo
for their wicked behavior, Moshe is adding that the punishment was meted
out with additional wrath, for their crimes were committed against
Hashem’s children, Bnei Yisroel. It is this added element which causes
Yisro distress, for Moshe is, in effect, declaring that Hashem’s
relationship with Bnei Yisroel is so unique that He will destroy any
nation that mistreats Bnei Yisroel. This fact is deprecating to the
nations of the world, and therefore, the rule forbidding us to speak
deprecatingly of a gentile in the presence of a convert is formulated
from this incident.
The manner in which
Hashem relates to Bnei Yisroel or to the nations of the world can be
ascertained by the manner in which He is described. “Elokim” is used when
Hashem’s judgement is being invoked, indicating punitive action, while
the ineffable name “yud-kay-vov-kay” reflects Hashem’s attribute of love
or mercy. When the verse states that Yisro is motivated to join Bnei
Yisroel because of what Hashem did to Bnei Yisroel’s enemies the name
“Elokim” is used, for it is Yisro’s understanding that this was a purely
punitive action[5]. When Moshe recounts the miracles to Yisro, Hashem’s
ineffable name is used, for Moshe is explaining that the impetus for the
punishment is not the crimes perpetuated by Mitzrayim and Amalek, rather
Hashem’s love for Bnei Yisroel, against whom the crimes had been
perpetrated[6].
1.18:1
2.18:8
3.18:9
4.18:8
5.18:1
6.18:8
|
Comments
Post a Comment