{"versions": [{"status": "locked", "priority": 4.0, "license": "CC-BY-NC", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": true, "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "", "purchaseInformationURL": "", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "en", "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001102376/NLI", "versionTitle": "Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004", "actualLanguage": "en", "languageFamilyName": "english", "isSource": false, "isPrimary": false, "direction": "ltr", "text": [["AND THE LORD SPOKE. It is truly not proper for an intelligent person to scrutinize God’s actions and ask, why did the Lord act thus?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, truthfully speaking one can not always fathom God’s will.</i> For all of God’s actions are done wisely. Man’s wisdom is as nothing before God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cf. Ps. 39:6.</i> I mention this because you will read in this Torah portion that God<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Acting like the general of an army.</i> guilefully commanded the Israelites to turn back<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, verses 2 and 3.</i> so that Pharaoh would go out and pursue them, and drown in the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, verse 4.</i> God’s thoughts are very deep.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence we cannot understand why the Lord chose to destroy Pharaoh and his hosts in this way when he could have killed them with a plague or the like.</i>"], ["PI-HAHIROTH. <i>Pi-hahiroth</i> is elsewhere called <i>Pene-hahiroth</i> (Num. 33:8). It is so called<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By these two names.</i> because the mouth (<i>peh</i>) is on the face (<i>panim</i>).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence <i>pi</i> (mouth of) and <i>pene</i> (face of) interchange.</i> It is the name of a place.", "BEFORE BAAL-ZEPHON. Some say that the Egyptian magicians made bronze images which drew power from the stars, and that Baal-zephon was a statue that no slave fleeing Egypt was able to pass by.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They held that Baal-zephon was an image on the border of Egypt which supernaturally prevented fleeing slaves from crossing it.</i> It is because of this that Scripture reads, <i>that the people were fled</i> (v. 5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Once the Israelites passed Baal-zephon the Egyptians realized that the statue was ineffective against Israel and that the Israelites had fled.</i> However, in my opinion because Moses said to Pharaoh, <i>We will go three days’ journey into the wilderness</i> (Ex. 8:23), it appeared to Pharaoh from these words that Moses knew the road that they would take to the place where they intended to sacrifice. Thus when Pharaoh heard that the Israelites started to go by way of the wilderness,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the place where they were going to offer sacrifices.</i> and when they had traveled some distance<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Into the desert away from Egypt.</i> backtracked to go in another way, Pharaoh surmised that everything that Moses had told him was said in guile, that he did not intend to sacrifice but to flee. For one who flees becomes confused on the way and does not know which road to take.", "OVER AGAINST IT. The word <i>nikhcho</i> (over against it) is vocalized with a <i>chirik</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than a <i>kamatz katan</i>. The word <i>nikhcho</i> consists of the word <i>nokhach</i> (against) plus the pronominal suffix. In such cases the <i>cholam</i> changes to a <i>kamatz katan</i>. Thus we would expect <i>nokhcho</i> rather than <i>nikhcho</i>, hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is similar to the word <i>niflo</i> (was fallen)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which should have been vocalized <i>noflo</i>, for <i>niflo</i> consists of the word <i>nofel</i> plus the pronominal suffix.</i> in <i>after that he was fallen</i> (II Sam. 1:10). There are many other such instances.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In which the <i>chirik</i> comes in place of a <i>kamatz katan</i> where a word vocalized with a <i>cholam</i> is combined with a pronominal suffix.</i>"], ["AND PHARAOH WILL SAY OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. This is similar to <i>say of me</i> (Gen. 20:13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>imri li</i> (say of me); literally, say to me. I.E.’s point is that there are instances in which the <i>lamed</i> is to be interpreted to mean of, concerning, about. Thus <i>li-vene yisrael</i> does not mean to the children of Israel but of the children of Israel.</i>", "ENTANGLED. <i>Nevukhim</i> (entangled) is vocalized with a <i>shuruk</i> in place of a <i>cholam</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The singular form of <i>nevukhim</i> is <i>navokh</i>. Thus we would expect to see <i>nevokhim</i> rather than <i>nevukhim</i>. Compare, <i>nakhon, nekhonim, navon, nevonim</i>.</i> It is similar to the word <i>ta’avuri</i> (pass)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In which a <i>shuruk</i> comes in place of a <i>sheva</i>. The usual form of the <i>kal</i> feminine imperfect is <i>ta’avri</i>.</i> in <i>neither pass from hence</i> (Ruth 2:8), for <i>nevukhim</i> is a <i>nifal</i> as the word <i>nekhonim</i> (ready) (Ex. 19:11) is.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence it should have followed that paradigm and been similarly vocalized. See note 17.</i> Now <i>navokhu</i> (perplexed) (Joel 1:18) and also <i>navokhah</i> (perplexed) in <i>but the city of Shushan was perplexed</i> (Est. 3:15) are like <i>nakhonah</i> (established)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are all <i>nifals</i> and follow the same paradigm. Similarly <i>nevukhim</i> despite its irregular vocalization.</i> in <i>And the kingdom was established</i> (I Kings 2:46). Its meaning is, they are like a person who cannot find anyone to advise him and does not know what to do.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>nevukhim</i> means perplexed.</i> The <i>nun</i> in <i>nivkhe</i> (depths of) in <i>the depths of the sea</i> (Job 38:16)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated according to I.E.</i> is a root letter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Whereas the <i>nun</i> of <i>nevukhim</i> is not a root letter but the nun of the <i>nifal</i> form. The root of <i>nevukhim</i> is <i>bet, vav, kaf</i> and the root of <i>nivkhe</i> is <i>nun, bet, kaf</i>.</i> The meaning of <i>nivkhe yam</i> (the springs of the sea) is the depths of the sea. <i>Nivkhe</i> has no place here.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contra Rashi and Rashbam, who connect <i>nevukhim</i> and <i>nivkhe</i>. Rashi comments, “<i>Nevukhim</i> means enclosed and sunk deep, as in <i>nivkhe yam</i>.”</i>", "THE WILDERNESS HATH SHUT THEM IN. The ways of the wilderness are closed to them, and like fugitives they do not know where to go."], ["AND I WILL HARDEN PHARAOH’S HEART. As if he forgot the plagues<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, <i>And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart</i> means: I will harden his heart so that he will act as if he forgot the plagues.</i> with which the Egyptians were smitten because of Israel.", "AND I WILL GET ME HONOR UPON PHARAOH. My glory shall be manifest in the world when I drown Pharaoh and his army.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>be-faroh</i> (upon Pharaoh) is to be interpreted, via Pharaoh.</i>", "AND THE EGYPTIANS SHALL KNOW. The remnants<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who remained in Egypt and did not pursue Israel.</i> and those who drowned prior to their death <i>shall know that I am the Lord</i>.", "AND THEY DID SO. Scripture’s short way of saying that they turned backwards.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>and they did so</i> is short for: and they turned backwards and encamped before <i>pi-hahiroth</i>. According to Krinsky, <i>and they did so</i> is short for: and Moses told Israel to turn backwards, etc.</i>"], ["AND IT WAS TOLD THE KING OF EGYPT. That they are not going for any purpose but to flee."], ["AND HE MADE READY HIS CHARIOT. By command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contra Rashi, who explains that Pharaoh himself made ready his chariot.</i> It is like <i>So Solomon built the house</i> (I Kings 14:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which means Solomon commanded that the house be built.</i>"], ["AND HE TOOK SIX HUNDRED CHOSEN CHARIOTS. The chosen chariots of all the chariots that he had.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The best of his chariots.</i>", "AND CAPTAINS. Note that the king is like the number one. Therefore the one who is next to him in rank is called the <i>mishneh</i> (the second), which is derived from the same root as <i>shenayim</i> (two). The third in rank is called the <i>shelishi</i>. <sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 41:43. Thus <i>shalishim</i> (captains) are third in rank.</i>"], ["WITH A HIGH HAND. They had all the weapons of war and so did not go out like fugitives."], ["AND THE EGYPTIANS PURSUED AFTER THEM. This is in keeping with linguistical style.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Scripture to repeat itself in this manner. The previous verse reads, <i>and he pursued after the children of Israel</i>.</i> It is similar to <i>and the people saw</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which follows <i>And all the people saw</i>.</i> <i>and they trembled and stood far off</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Ex. 20:15), the meaning of which is, when they saw this,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In others words, <i>va-yar</i> (and they saw) is to be rendered: and when they saw. Otherwise Scripture would be literally repeating itself.</i> they trembled and stood far off. The meaning of <i>and the Egyptians pursued after them</i> thus is: when the Egyptians pursued them,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>va-yirdefu</i> (and they pursued) is to be rendered: and when they pursued. Thus Scripture does not literally repeat itself.</i> they overtook them as they were encamping by the sea.", "[ALL THE HORSES.] Scripture notes this<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew text reads, <i>kol sus</i> (all the horses); literally, every horse, hence I.E.’s comment.</i> to inform us that they did not come upon them scattered.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The horsemen did not approach Israel in scattered groups but as a united force (Cohen).</i>", "AND HIS HORSEMEN. <i>Parashav</i> means his horsemen.", "AND HIS ARMY. <i>Chelo</i> (his army) means his foot soldiers."], ["AND WHEN PHARAOH DREW NEAR. When Pharaoh caused his camp to draw near.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>u-faroh hikriv</i> (and Pharaoh drew near) means: and when Pharaoh caused to draw near, i.e., when Pharaoh caused his army to draw near.</i> The verb <i>hikriv</i> (drew near) is always transitive in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence it means to cause to draw near rather than drew near.</i>"], ["AND THEY SAID. We find that the holy tongue employs two words with one meaning back to back when one would suffice. Now the phrase <i>ha-mibbeli en kevarim</i> (because there were no graves)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, because there are no graves, for <i>bli</i> and <i>en</i> mean the same thing.</i> is similar to <i>ha-rak akh be-mosheh</i> (only with Moses?) (Num. 12:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, only only with Moses? For <i>rak</i> and <i>akh</i> mean the same thing.</i>", "TO BRING US FORTH. <i>Le-hotzi’anu</i> (to bring us forth) is vocalized with a long <i>kamatz</i> in place of a <i><span class=\"underline\">tzere</span></i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, a short <i>kamatz</i>. According to the rules of Hebrew grammar the word should be <i>le-hotzi’eni</i>. Compare, <i>hotzi’eni</i> (Ps. 25:17); <i>ve-hotzie’ni</i> (I Kings 22:34).</i> It is similar to <i>ro’ani</i> (seeth me)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Wherein a long <i>kamatz</i> has been substituted for a <i>tzere</i>. The word should have read, <i>ro’eni</i>. Compare, <i>ro’enu</i> (Is. 29:15).</i> in <i>Thou hast said</i>:<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is how Scripture reads. I.E. has: And I say. He probably quoted from memory and erred.</i> <i>None seeth me</i> (Is. 47:10)."], ["IS THIS NOT THE WORD. This is not stated.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the Exodus narrative. Nowhere is it stated that the Israelites told Moses, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians, etc.</i> However, we know that this was the case, for how could they say to his face something that was not true? This remark was included in <i>but they hearkened not unto Moses</i> (Ex. 6:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is worthy of note that <i>Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians</i>, etc., follows <i>but they hearkened not to Moses</i>, etc., in the Samaritan Pentateuch.</i>"], ["STAND STILL, AND SEE THE SALVATION OF THE LORD. For you will not wage war but you shall see the salvation which the Lord will work for you this day. One may ask: How is it that a large camp comprising six hundred thousand armed men were afraid of those who pursued them? Why did they not stand and fight for their own and their children’s lives? The answer is: The Egyptians were masters over Israel. The generation that left Egypt were trained from their youth to bear the yoke of the Egyptians. They were of humble spirit. How then could they now wage war against their masters? The Israelites were lazy and not learned in war. Can you not see that were it not for the prayers of Moses, the Amalekites, who came<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To attack Israel. See Ex. 17:8-13.</i> with a small number of men, would have defeated Israel. God alone, <i>Who doeth great things</i> (Job 5:9); <i>And by Him actions are weighed</i> (I Sam. 2:3), so arranged events that all Israelite males<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Under the age of 20. See Num. 14:31.</i> who left Egypt died out,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 14:22.</i> for they had no spirit to fight the Canaanites; and a new generation with a noble spirit, who had never tasted exile, arose after the generation of the wilderness.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The generation that left Egypt and died in the wilderness.</i> I have noted the aforementioned in the account of Moses recorded in the Torah portion <i>Ve-Eleh Shemot</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 2:3.</i>"], ["THE LORD WILL FIGHT FOR YOU. <i>Lakhem</i> means for you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, to you, hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Similarly, whenever the word war (<i>milchamah</i>) is followed by a <i>lamed</i> it indicates aid. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen therefore explains <i>li</i> (me) in <i>For there are many that fight</i> (lochamim) <i>me</i> (li) <i>on high</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated according to I.E.</i> (Ps. 56:3) to mean for me.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For a <i>lamed</i> follows the word war (<i>lochamim</i>.) According to Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen, Ps. 56:3 should be translated: For there are many that fight on high for me.</i> The meaning of <i>on high</i> is, a war on high, as is the case with all that sit.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is unclear what I.E. means. Filwarg suggests emending <i>ha-yoshevim</i> (that sit) to <i>ha-chashuvim</i> (that are important), the idea being that important people have others who fight for them. The verse thus states: For there are many that fight for me on high as is the case with all important people. However, in I.E.’s short commentary the reading is <i>ha-moshekhim</i>, which is a technical term for words that are to be read as if written twice. In this case our verse is to be read as follows: For there are many that fight for me, that fight for me on high, the reference being to angels who fight on his behalf. See I.E. on Ps. 56:3. In this case the last line of I.E. should be interpreted as: The meaning of on high is a war on high, as our verse belongs to those verses in which there is a word that is to be read as if written twice.</i>", "AND YE SHALL HOLD YOUR PEACE. In contrast to <i>and the children of Israel cried out</i> (v. 10)."], ["WHEREFORE CRIEST THOU UNTO ME. Some say that Moses was crying out unto the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Mekhilta and Rashi on this verse: “This teaches us that Moses was standing and praying.”</i> However, this is incorrect, for God had already told Moses, <i>and I will get Me honor upon Pharaoh</i> (v. 4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus Moses knew that God would destroy Pharaoh and his army and would not cry unto the Lord.</i> On the contrary, this was told to Moses who stood in Israel’s stead<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The words were directed to the children of Israel, not to Moses.</i> because the children of Israel cried out to the Lord.", "THAT THEY GO FORWARD. Little by little until they reach the edge of the sea."], ["AND LIFT THOU UP. God told Moses to lift up his rod and divide the sea before the children of Israel went forward. The Lord did not tell Moses to strike the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which shows that Moses was some distance from it.</i> He told him to stretch out his hand toward the sea<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which he could do from a distance. According to I.E. <i>al ha-yam</i> (over the sea) is to be rendered, toward the sea.</i> in the manner<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, <i>al</i> means toward.</i> of <i>And Moses stretched forth his rod toward heaven</i> <sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>al ha-shamyim</i> which literally means over the heaven.</i> (Ex. 9:23). We know that the rod did not divide the sea but that from the moment that Moses stretched his hand toward the sea God caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind and the waters then<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Reading <i>az</i> rather than <i>oh</i> (<i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38).</i> split. For it is so written.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 21.</i>"], ["AND I. We know that the Red Sea is not situated between Egypt and the Land of Israel. There was no reason for them to enter the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. apparently assumes that <i>yam suf</i> is the Red Sea. However, the Red Sea is not located between Canaan and Egypt. There was thus no reason to cross the Red Sea, hence I.E.’s comment.</i> However, God commanded them to do so, so that the Egyptians would enter behind them and drown. The children of Israel, as I will explain,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verses 22 and 29 and Ex. 15:22.</i> entered the sea from the wilderness of Etham and exited the sea to the wilderness of Etham."], ["AND THE EGYPTIANS SHALL KNOW. Those that remained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Egypt shall know that I am the Lord, for those who pursued Israel all perished (v. 28). See I.E. on verse 4.</i>", "WHEN I HAVE GOTTEN ME HONOR UPON PHARAOH. Who will drown along with his chariots and horsemen."], ["AND THE ANGEL OF GOD. This took place before <i>speak unto the children of Israel, that they should go forward</i> (v. 15).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The incident described in verses 19 and 20 must have taken place before Israel was commanded to go forward, since the pillar of cloud came between the two camps and prevented the Egyptians from harming the Israelites <i>all the night</i> (v. 20).</i> It’s meaning thus is, and the angel of God had already removed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>va-yissa</i> (removed) is a pluperfect, meaning had removed.</i> I have already showed you many such instances.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where Scripture employs a pluperfect.</i> Now because these three verses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 19, 20, 21.</i> are connected to each other and each one has seventy-two letters we find in them, as stated in the books,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Post-talmudic works such as <i>Lekach Tov</i> on Ex. 14; Responsa of R. Hai Gaon. Also see <i>Ozer Ha-Geonim, Hagigah</i>, p. 23. The Talmud speaks of the 72-letter name of God. See <i>Sukkah</i> 45a. Those who see the 72-letter name of God in these verses do so in one of the following two ways. They arrange the three verses on top of each other and arrive at God’s name by reading down, i.e., <i>vav, vav, vav; yod, yod, yod; samekh, bet, tet</i>, etc. Or they invert verse 20 and arrange the three verses as above and read down, i.e., <i>vav, heh, vav; yod, lamed, yod; samekh, alef, tet</i>, and so on. The reason they invert the middle verse is that it states, <i>and the one did not come near the other all the night</i>; i.e., one is not to combine the letters of this verse in their normal fashion but they are to be read backwards as the word <i>ha-laylah</i> (the night) is. For <i>ha-laylah</i> reads the same whether from left to right or right to left (Krinsky).</i> the sign of the secret of God’s explicit name. However, in my opinion it is so written<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These three verses. In other words, verses 19-21 consist of 72 letters each, not because a combination of their letters spells out a secret name of God, but rather they allude to God (<i>YHVH</i>) whose might delivered Israel.</i> because, as I will explain in the Torah portion <i>Ki Tissa</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. insists that when the Talmud speaks of the 72-letter name of God it refers to the tetragrammaton (<i>YHVH</i>),which when calculated as follows, <i>Y</i> (10) <i>YH</i> (15) <i>YHV</i> (21) <i>YHVH</i> (26), comes to 72. Cf. I.E.’s <i>Sefer Ha-Shem</i> 5.</i> the numerical value of God’s glorious name comes to seventy-two. The <i>Book of Raziel</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An early cabalistic work which is supposed to have been given to Adam by the angel Raziel (Hebrew, mystery of God). It contains mystical teachings, letter mysticism, descriptions of heaven, as well as formulas for amulets.</i> states that one who wants to query the heavenly powers in a dream should read the verse, <i>Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year</i>, etc. (Ezek. 1:1), for it contains seventy-two letters.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the <i>Sefer Raziel</i>, and apparently also in I.E’s version of Scripture, the words <i>ha-golah</i> and <i>marot</i> in Ezek. 1:1 were spelled without a <i>vav</i>. Otherwise the number of letters in Ezek 1:1 comes to 74 as they do in our editions of the Prophets. Cf. <i>Minchat Shai</i> on Ezek. 1:1.</i>", "THE ANGEL OF GOD. The reference is to the great prince<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The angel Michael. Cf. Dan. 21:1, <i>And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince who standeth for the children of Israel</i>.</i> who goes in the cloud, concerning whom it is written, <i>And the Lord went before them by day</i> (Ex. 13:21). When this angel, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them, the pillar of cloud moved with him. Let the one who identifies the angel of God with the cloud show us where we find the pillar of cloud called the angel of God. Furthermore, if the angel and the pillar are one and the same, why is <i>and the pillar of cloud removed from before them</i> repeated? If he should answer that Scripture repeats the same idea in different words,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As it often does.</i> then we respond that it is not the manner of Scripture to repeat itself except in prophecy<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is given in poetic form.</i> or reproof.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Prophet’s words of reproof.</i> Moreover, it is unfit to repeat oneself when reporting how something happened.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When prose is employed. In other words, Scripture repeats the same idea in different words in poetry but not in prose.</i>"], ["AND IT CAME. And the angel came.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>va-yovo</i>, which may mean: and it came, or, and he came, hence I.E.’s comment.</i>", "AND THERE WAS THE CLOUD AND THE DARKNESS HERE. Between the camps.", "AND IT LIT UP THE NIGHT.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this, and he lit up the night, the reference being to the angel who lit up the night via the pillar of fire (Krinsky).</i> As was the manner on all the nights, so that Israel could cross the sea. They crossed it at night. Rabbi Merinus says that the meaning of <i>va-ya’er</i> (he lit up) is, he darkened. <i>And the night shall be light about me</i> (Ps. 139: 11)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. So too Rashi on Ps. 139:11.</i> is similar. Furthermore, we find, <i>On the light of the fourteenth day</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Pesachim</i> 2a. The meaning of which is, on the night of the fourteenth day, i.e., the night preceding the fourteenth day. We thus see that the word light can refer to night or darkness.</i> in rabbinic literature. However, the one who interprets thus turns darkness into light and light into darkness, for it is impossible in any language for a word to mean both a thing and its opposite unless it is euphemistically used, as in <i>Naboth did bless God and the king</i> (I Kings 21:13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. Its meaning is, as J.P.S. translates, <i>Naboth did curse God and the king</i>.</i> The word light in <i>shall be light about me</i> refers to the light itself, as I have explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cf. I.E. on Ps. 139:11.</i> Similarly, the sages said<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Pesachim</i> 3a.</i> that <i>On the light of the fourteenth</i> is a refined language,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They did not want to mention darkness.</i> which is similar to a euphemism. Furthermore, what reason was there for Scripture to say, <i>and he darkened the night</i>? It is dark every night. The only meaning of <i>va-ya’er et ha-laylah</i> is that he<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The angel via the pillar of fire (Krinsky).</i> lit up the night<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>va-ya’er et ha-laylah</i> means: and he lit up the night.</i> as he did from the day that Israel went out of Egypt, for the pillar of fire was seen every night. Now if Israel had no light how did they cross the sea?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Another argument against Rabbi Merinus’ interpretation.</i> For behold, by the time Pharaoh came into the sea and the Lord looked forth upon him in the morning watch, most of the Israelites had already crossed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus most of the Israelites crossed during the night. However, if they had no light how could they have crossed?</i>"], ["AND MOSES STRETCHED OUT HIS HAND…ALL THE NIGHT. Even while Israel was crossing, the wind did not cease."], ["AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WENT INTO THE MIDST OF THE SEA. Do not think that because Scripture reads, <i>in the midst</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">96</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>be-tokh</i> in (the middle), hence I.E.’s comment.</i> <i>of the sea</i> that the Israelites reached the middle of the Red Sea. On the contrary, even if they entered the sea for even half of a Persian mile one may say that they came in the midst of the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">97</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>tokh</i> is not to be taken literally.</i> It is like <i>And the mixed multitude that was in the midst of them</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">98</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Num. 11:4), for the mixed multitude was not in the middle of the camp. The meaning of <i>the midst of the sea</i> is, the place where there was water at the beginning of the night.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">99</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not literally in the midst of the sea.</i>", "AND THE WATERS WERE A WALL UNTO THEM. The waters froze.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">100</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The waters on either side of the Israelites froze and formed two solid walls (Krinsky, Cohen).</i> It is also written, <i>The floods stood upright as a heap</i> (Ex. 15:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">101</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse continues, <i>The deeps were congealed in the heart of the sea</i>.</i> After most of Israel crossed, the waters which formed a wall for them melted. This is the meaning of <i>that the waters may come back upon the Egyptians</i> (v. 26). These waters<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">102</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which formed from the melting walls.</i> separated between the Egyptians and the dry land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">103</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the Israelites were on.</i> It therefore states, <i>and the Egyptians fled against it</i> (v. 27), as the Egyptians thought that they would go out onto dry land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">104</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The dry land that the Israelites were on.</i> But the walls of water melted and separated them and dry land. There is no doubt that those who pursued Israel saw the light by which Israel crossed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">105</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they saw the Israelites on dry land and wanted to follow them.</i>"], [], ["AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MORNING WATCH. The <i>alef</i> of <i>ashmoret</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">106</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>shin, mem, resh</i>.</i> (watch) is a superfluous letter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">107</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is not a root letter, nor is it a prefix. It has no translatable meaning.</i>", "THAT THE LORD LOOKED FORTH. The reference is to the angel of the Lord mentioned earlier.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">108</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 19.</i> The same is the case with Gideon,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">109</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Concerning whom we read, <i>And the angel of the Lord came</i> (Jud. 6:11), <i>And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him</i> (<i>Ibid.</i>). This angel is subsequently referred to as the Lord in verses 14, 15, 23, 27; i.e., <i>and the Lord turned, And the Lord said</i>, etc. Similarly, the angel mentioned in verse 19 of this chapter is subsequently called the Lord.</i> where the messenger is called by the name of the sender. Since the sender commands his agent to commit an act, it is as if the sender himself had executed it.", "THROUGH THE PILLAR OF FIRE AND OF CLOUD. Between these two pillars.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">110</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contra Rashi, who interprets the <i>bet</i> of <i>be-ammud</i> (through the pillar) to mean with; i.e., God threw the Egyptians into confusion through the use of the two pillars. I.E. interprets the <i>bet</i> of <i>be-ammud</i> as meaning in the pillars, i.e., between the pillar of cloud, which was behind the camp of Israel, and the pillar of fire, which was in front of Israel (Filwarg).</i>", "AND DISCOMFITED. Possibly because of this the poet says, <i>The voice of Thy thunder was in the whirlwind</i> (Ps. 77:19).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">111</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For <i>va-yaham</i> (discomfited) refers to a discomfit brought about by lightning and thunder. Ps. 77:19 speaks of the splitting of the Red Sea (Weiser).</i> Similarly <i>And He shot forth lightnings, and discomfited them</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">112</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>va-yehummem</i>. This is the reading in Ps. 18:15. However, I.E. has <i>va-yahom</i>. He probably quoted from memory. The parallel verse in II Sam. 22:15 has <i>va-yahom</i> as the <i>kre</i>. Be that as it may, this verse shows that the root <i>heh, mem, mem</i> refers to discomfit brought about by thunder and lightning (Weiser).</i> (Ps. 18:15). Elsewhere it is written, <i>And He sent…Lightning, and discomfited them</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">113</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>va-yahom</i>.</i> (II Sam. 22:15)."], ["AND HE TOOK OFF. <i>Va-yasar</i> (and He took off) is a <i>hifil</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">114</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>samekh, vav, resh</i>.</i> It should have been vocalized <i>va-yaser</i> with a <i>segol</i> beneath the <i>samekh</i>. I have already noted its grammatical explanation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">115</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 8:27.</i>", "[AND HE TOOK OFF THEIR CHARIOT WHEELS.]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">116</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and he removed the wheel of his chariots, hence the various interpretations.</i> Some say its meaning is that they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">117</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, “he” refers to each one of the chariot drivers.</i> untied the knot of the wheel<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">118</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the chariots.</i> from the horses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">119</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They untied the knot by which the horses were tied to the chariots and tried to escape by riding on the horses.</i> so that, being lighter,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">120</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not having to pull the chariots, the horses had a lighter load, i.e., only the rider.</i> they could flee more easily. However, the above-mentioned divine discomfit fell upon them and their horses, and they could only drive them with great difficulty.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">121</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cohen paraphrases I.E. in this way: “To hasten their flight, the Egyptians unharnessed the chariots; but the general confusion also affected the horses.”</i> Others say that <i>va-yasar</i> comes from the root of <i>sorer</i> (rebellious) (Deut. 21:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">122</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>samekh, resh, resh</i>, meaning to rebel. Thus <i>va-yasar</i> (and he took off) means: and he rebelled.</i> He who went before them wanted to turn the chariot around.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">123</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Filwarg believes that the reference is to the leading chariot. He wanted to turn his chariot around and flee. In this case, “and he rebelled” means: and he turned the wheels of his chariot around. That is, instead of going forward as his orders said, the lead charioteer tried to turn his chariot around and flee. Rashbam interprets similarly.</i>", "FOR THE LORD FIGHTETH FOR THEM AGAINST THE EGYPTIANS. <i>Lahem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">124</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its literal meaning is, to them.</i> means for them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">125</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the word to fight is followed by a <i>lamed</i> it means on behalf (see Weiser).</i> It now becomes clear that God’s word, <i>and the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord</i> (v. 4), which He spoke earlier meant: <i>and the Egyptians shall know</i> before their deaths."], ["THAT THE WATERS MAY COME BACK. The waters which served as walls for them should return to their previous state."], ["WHEN THE MORNING APPEARED. <i>Lifnot boker</i> (when the morning appeared) means toward morning.", "TO ITS STRENGTH. <i>Le-etano</i> means to its strength. It is a noun,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">126</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, <i>etan</i> is a noun. Cf. I.E. on Ps. 74:15. <i>Le-etano</i> is the noun <i>etan</i> plus the prepositional <i>lamed</i> and the pronominal suffix.</i> like <i>etan</i> in <i>mighty rivers</i> (Ps. 74:15).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">127</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated according to I.E.</i>", "FLED AGAINST IT. I have already explained<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">128</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 22.</i> that the Egyptians in fleeing thought that they were returning to dry land when in actuality they were going toward the sea. May the bones of Chivi<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">129</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Chivi Al-Balkhi, a Persian Bible exegete born in Balkh (now in Afghanistan) who lived in the latter part of the 9th century. He wrote a book containing two hundred queries on the Bible. Surviving quotations show Chivi to have been a free-thinking man “who sought to explain biblical miracles naturally…His views aroused intellectual ferment among Oriental Jewry and Saadiah Gaon published a refutation” (Roth, p. 916).</i> the dog<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">130</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A play on Ha-Balkhi. By inverting the letters of Ha-Balkhi from Balakh, we get <i>ha-kalbi</i> (the dog).</i> be crushed. Chivi said that Moses knew the time of low tide, when the level of the sea goes down, and the time of high tide, when the sea comes in and its level rises, and so brought his people across the sea when the tide was normally low. However, Pharaoh did not know the manner of the sea and therefore drowned. This interpretation is sheer madness, as the sea is not normally dry in any place when its level goes down. However, all was dry.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">131</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to verse 29 Israel crossed on dry land.</i> Neither do walls of water remain on the right or the left.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">132</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the sea retreats at low tide.</i> Furthermore, the end of low tide and the beginning of high tide do not become clear until some hours have passed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">133</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It takes some hours before the effects of high and low tide are perceptible. Thus it would take quite a while for the waters to have enveloped the Egyptians. However, it appears from Scripture that the waters overwhelmed the Egyptians in a short period of time.</i> Moreover, the Israelites had not yet finished crossing before Pharaoh and his army drowned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">134</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If it was low tide why did Pharaoh and his army drown?</i>", "AND THE LORD OVERTHREW. <i>Va-yena’er</i> (overthrew) is a <i>pi’el. Na’arti</i> (I shook) in <i>Also I shook out my lap</i> (Neh. 5:13) is similar to it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">135</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It comes from the same root. Thus <i>va-yena’er</i> means to shake, or cast out something from one’s lap, hand or vessel.</i> <i>Va-yena’er</i> is to be understood in the manner of <i>hath He thrown into the sea</i> (Ex. 15: 1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">136</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And the Lord overthrew</i> is to be interpreted: and the Lord threw them into the sea (Weiser).</i>"], ["AND THE WATERS RETURNED. The waters that were walls returned.", "SO MUCH AS ONE OF THEM. Even one of them did not escape.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">137</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ad echead</i> (literally, until one) means so much as one.</i> Similarly <i>ad echad</i> in <i>and, behold, there was not so much as one</i> (ad echad) <i>of the cattle of the Israelites dead</i> (Ex. 9:7). Indeed, the poet says, <i>There was not one of them</i> (echad me-hem) <i>left</i> (Ps. 106: 11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">138</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that <i>ad echead</i> means so much as one.</i>"], ["BUT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. The reason this is noted a second time<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">139</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After already noting it in verse 22.</i> is that there remained some Israelites who were still crossing the sea while Pharaoh was drowning. This was a miracle within a miracle, for in the place where the Israelites were crossing the sea there was a strong east wind drying<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">140</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The sea.</i> and where Pharaoh and his host were, God brought another wind to melt the waters that were frozen and formed walls. There were thus two winds in two places in the sea close to one another.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">141</sup><i class=\"footnote\">At the same time.</i> True proof that this interpretation is correct is offered by the statement in the Song of Moses, <i>And with the blast of Thy nostrils the waters were piled up</i> (Ex. 15:8), which speaks of the wind that blew for Israel; and the statement, <i>Thou didst blow with Thy wind, the sea covered them</i> (Ex. 15:10), which speaks of the wind that caused the Egyptians to drown. It is because of this that the end of the song reads, <i>and the Lord brought back the waters of the sea upon them; but the children of Israel walked on dry land in the midst of the sea</i> (Ex. 15:19). Do not ask, how could all of Israel cross in one night? Did not the six hundred thousand men on foot<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">142</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who left Egypt. See Ex. 12:37. They were married and had children. Additionally, a mixed multitude went up with them.</i> make up only a quarter of the camp?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">143</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the Israelites. The reading in <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 is: For the six hundred thousand men on foot did not make up even a quarter of the camp.</i> Perhaps they passed over some other way.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">144</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Pharaoh only pursued the 600,000 armed men. The rest continued along on an overland road and eventually joined up with the group that crossed over (Filwarg). See the rest of I.E.’s comments.</i> Or perhaps the sea split into twelve parts, as the sages of blessed memory say.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">145</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cf. <i>Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer</i> 42; <i>Tanchuma, Be-Shallach</i> 10; <i>Mekhilta, Be-Shallach</i> 4.</i> Now the Israelites did not cross the width of the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">146</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E.’s comments on verse 22.</i> On the contrary, they moved along its length and came out in the wilderness of Shur from wherein, as I will explain, they entered the sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">147</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 15:22.</i>"], ["THUS THE LORD SAVED. Now the Israelites were saved from the hand of the Egyptians. Until now the fear of Pharaoh was upon them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">148</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Israelites dreaded Pharaoh until they saw the Egyptian corpses.</i> Scripture tells us that the Egyptians drowned in the sea. The sea did not cast their bodies out upon the dry land,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">149</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contra Rashi and <i>Mekhilta</i> on this verse, and <i>Pesachim</i> 118b.</i> for it is clearly written, <i>The earth swallowed them</i> (Ex. 15:12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">150</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the sea bed swallowed them (Krinsky).</i> The meaning of <i>and Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the sea-shore</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">151</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which implies that the sea cast them out.</i> therefore is: when the Egyptians drowned, the Israelites, who were on the shore, saw their dead bodies.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">152</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before they sank.</i>"], ["FEARED. When Israel saw this great blow they feared God, as in <i>And David was afraid of the Lord that day</i> when Uzzah who put forth his hand to the ark of God died (II Sam. 6:9).", "AND THEY BELIEVED IN THE LORD. They believed that the Lord is truth<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">153</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Unchanging and Ultimate Being. Cf. <i>Mishneh Torah, Mada</i> 1:3,4: “The Truth of His being is incomparable to the truth of any other individual being…He alone is the Truth, and no other being possesses a truth similar to His Truth.”</i> and that Moses is His servant and will do only that which the Lord commands him to do."]]}], "available_versions": [{"status": "locked", "priority": 4.0, "license": "CC-BY-NC", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": true, "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "", "purchaseInformationURL": "", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "en", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001102376/NLI", "versionTitle": "Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004", "actualLanguage": "en", "languageFamilyName": "english", "isSource": false, "isPrimary": false, "direction": "ltr"}, {"status": "locked", "priority": 4.0, "license": "Public Domain", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": true, "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "", "purchaseInformationURL": "", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "he", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH990020973480205171/NLI", "versionTitle": "Piotrkow, 1907-1911", "actualLanguage": "he", "languageFamilyName": "hebrew", "isSource": true, "isPrimary": true, "direction": "rtl"}, {"status": "locked", "priority": 1.0, "license": "Public Domain", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": "", "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "ובלכתך בדרך", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "", "purchaseInformationURL": "", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "he", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "versionSource": "http://mobile.tora.ws/", "versionTitle": "On Your Way", "actualLanguage": "he", "languageFamilyName": "hebrew", "isSource": true, "isPrimary": true, "direction": "rtl"}, {"status": "", "priority": "", "license": "CC0", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": "", "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "תרגום קהילת ספריא", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "", "purchaseInformationURL": "", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "en", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org", "versionTitle": "Sefaria Community Translation", "actualLanguage": "en", "languageFamilyName": "english", "isSource": false, "isPrimary": false, "direction": "ltr"}, {"status": "locked", "priority": "", "license": "CC-BY", "versionNotes": "", "formatAsPoetry": "", "digitizedBySefaria": "", "method": "", "heversionSource": "", "versionUrl": "", "versionTitleInHebrew": "", "versionNotesInHebrew": "", "shortVersionTitle": "Metsudah Publications, 2009", "shortVersionTitleInHebrew": "", "extendedNotes": "", "extendedNotesHebrew": "", "purchaseInformationImage": "https://storage.googleapis.com/sefaria-physical-editions/8a2e58f60e6137c496147ad75d44a48b.png", "purchaseInformationURL": "https://www.israelbookshoppublications.com/store/pc/Sifsei-Chachamim-Chumash-Vol-1-p482.htm", "hasManuallyWrappedRefs": "", "language": "en", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "versionSource": "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH002691623", "versionTitle": "Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009", "actualLanguage": "en", "languageFamilyName": "english", "isSource": false, "isPrimary": false, "direction": "ltr"}], "ref": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 14", "heRef": "אבן עזרא על שמות י״ד", "sections": ["14"], "toSections": ["14"], "sectionRef": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 14", "heSectionRef": "אבן עזרא על שמות י״ד", "firstAvailableSectionRef": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 14:1", "isSpanning": false, "next": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 15:1", "prev": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 13:22", "title": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus 14", "book": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "heTitle": "אבן עזרא על שמות", "primary_category": "Commentary", "type": "Commentary", "indexTitle": "Ibn Ezra on Exodus", "categories": ["Tanakh", "Rishonim on Tanakh", "Ibn Ezra", "Torah"], "heIndexTitle": "אבן עזרא על שמות", "isComplex": false, "isDependant": true, "order": [15], "collectiveTitle": "Ibn Ezra", "heCollectiveTitle": "אבן עזרא", "alts": [], "lengths": [40, 941, 1651], "length": 40, "textDepth": 3, "sectionNames": ["Chapter", "Verse", "Comment"], "addressTypes": ["Perek", "Pasuk", "Integer"], "titleVariants": ["Ibn Ezra on Exod.", "Ibn Ezra on Ex.", "Ibn Ezra on Exo", "Ibn Ezra on Shmot", "Ibn Ezra on Shemot", "Ibn Ezra on Ex", "Ibn Ezra on Exo.", "Ibn Ezra on Exod", "Ibn Ezra on Shemoth", "Ibn Ezra on Exodus; Perush HaArokh", "Ibn Ezra on Exodus"], "heTitleVariants": ["אבן עזרא על שמות; פירוש הארוך", "אבן עזרא על שמות"], "index_offsets_by_depth": {}, "warnings": []}