משה רבינו

(13) But he said, “Please, O Lord, make someone else Your agent.”

(1) ביד תשלח signifies by the hand of him whom Thou art accustomed to send; viz., Aaron (Exodus Rabbah 3:16). Another explanation is: by the hand of some other person whom Thou wilt be pleased to send — for in the end “I” shall not bring them into the land of Palestine nor shall “I” become their deliverer in the future — and You have many messengers! (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 40)

(13) And he said, I pray for mercy before the Lord. Send now Thy sending by the hand of Phinehas, by whom it is to be sent at the end of the days.

(20) So Moses took his wife and sons, mounted them on an ass, and went back to the land of Egypt; and Moses took the rod of God with him.

(1) על החמור UPON “THE” ASS — the ass designated for this purpose: this was the ass which Abraham had saddled for the purpose of travelling to bind Isaac on Mount Moriah, and this, too, is the ass upon which King Messiah will once show himself in public, as it is said, (Zechariah 9:9) “[Behold, thy king cometh unto thee, …] lowly and riding upon an ass” (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 31). (2) וישב ארצה מצרים ויקח משה את מטה AND HE RETURNED TO THE LAND OF EGYPT: AND MOSES TOOK THE STAFF [OF GOD] — “Earlier and later” are not strictly observed in the Scriptures (i. e. incidents are not necessarily related in the exact order in which they occur. Here it should state: He took the staff etc. and returned to Egypt; cf. v. 17).

(1) Then the LORD said to Moses, “You shall soon see what I will do to Pharaoh: he shall let them go because of a greater might; indeed, because of a greater might he shall drive them from his land.” (2) God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the LORD. (3) I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but I did not make Myself known to them by My name יהוה. (4) I also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners. (5) I have now heard the moaning of the Israelites because the Egyptians are holding them in bondage, and I have remembered My covenant. (6) Say, therefore, to the Israelite people: I am the LORD. I will free you from the labors of the Egyptians and deliver you from their bondage. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and through extraordinary chastisements. (7) And I will take you to be My people, and I will be your God. And you shall know that I, the LORD, am your God who freed you from the labors of the Egyptians. (8) I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will give it to you for a possession, I the LORD.” (9) But when Moses told this to the Israelites, they would not listen to Moses, their spirits crushed by cruel bondage. (10) The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, (11) “Go and tell Pharaoh king of Egypt to let the Israelites depart from his land.” (12) But Moses appealed to the LORD, saying, “The Israelites would not listen to me; how then should Pharaoh heed me, a man of impeded speech!” (13) So the LORD spoke to both Moses and Aaron in regard to the Israelites and Pharaoh king of Egypt, instructing them to deliver the Israelites from the land of Egypt. (14) The following are the heads of their respective clans. The sons of Reuben, Israel’s first-born: Enoch and Pallu, Hezron and Carmi; those are the families of Reuben. (15) The sons of Simeon: Jemuel, Jamin, Ohad, Jachin, Zohar, and Saul the son of a Canaanite woman; those are the families of Simeon. (16) These are the names of Levi’s sons by their lineage: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari; and the span of Levi’s life was 137 years. (17) The sons of Gershon: Libni and Shimei, by their families. (18) The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel; and the span of Kohath’s life was 133 years. (19) The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi. These are the families of the Levites by their lineage. (20) Amram took to wife his father’s sister Jochebed, and she bore him Aaron and Moses; and the span of Amram’s life was 137 years. (21) The sons of Izhar: Korah, Nepheg, and Zichri. (22) The sons of Uzziel: Mishael, Elzaphan, and Sithri. (23) Aaron took to wife Elisheba, daughter of Amminadab and sister of Nahshon, and she bore him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. (24) The sons of Korah: Assir, Elkanah, and Abiasaph. Those are the families of the Korahites. (25) And Aaron’s son Eleazar took to wife one of Putiel’s daughters, and she bore him Phinehas. Those are the heads of the fathers’ houses of the Levites by their families. (26) It is the same Aaron and Moses to whom the LORD said, “Bring forth the Israelites from the land of Egypt, troop by troop.” (27) It was they who spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt to free the Israelites from the Egyptians; these are the same Moses and Aaron. (28) For when the LORD spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt (29) and the LORD said to Moses, “I am the LORD; speak to Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I will tell you,” (30) Moses appealed to the LORD, saying, “See, I am of impeded speech; how then should Pharaoh heed me!”

(25) Let me, I pray, cross over and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan, that good hill country, and the Lebanon.”

(1) אעברה נא LET ME PASS OVER, I PRAY THEE — The term נא is a term of request (it does not here signify "now").

(2) ההר הטוב הזה THAT GOODLY MOUNTAIN, i.e. Jerusalem (that was situated on hills) (Sifrei Bamidbar 134:5).

(3) והלבנן AND LEBANON — this is a term for the Temple (Siphre).

has its weaving on its inside, in that the straps woven to hold the bedding are tied in holes inside the bed posts, while a bed has its weaving on its outside, in that its straps are tied around the posts. The Gemara raises an objection from the mishna (Kelim 16:1): From when are wooden vessels considered complete and susceptible to impurity? In the case of a bed or a crib, this happens once they are rubbed with fish skin, which smoothens the wood. The Gemara asks: And if a bed is woven on its back side, as Rabbi Yoḥanan claimed, why do I need rubbing with fish skin? Doesn’t the weaving cover the smooth part of the bed? Rather, instead of Rabbi Yoḥanan’s explanation, say that the weaving of both this and that, a dargash and a bed, is on its inside, and the difference between them is that on a bed, the straps go in and out of holes on the posts, whereas on a dargash, they go in and out of loops. Rabbi Ya’akov says that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel that a mourner is not required to overturn a dargash, but only to untie the straps around its posts to let it fall on its own. In connection with this matter Rabbi Ya’akov bar Ami says: In the case of a bed whose posts [naklitim] on which the canopy is spread extend, meaning that they are very long, so that the bed will remain high off the ground even if it is overturned, the mourner stands it up in the time of mourning and that is sufficient. MISHNA: And the king brings out people for conscription in an optional war, i.e., a war that is not mandated by the Torah and is not a war of defense, on the basis of a court of seventy-one, and breaches fences of anyone in his way to create a pathway for himself for his various needs, and no one can protest his power. The pathway of the king has no measure, neither lengthwise nor widthwise, and one cannot protest that this pathway is wider than necessary. And all the people take spoils in war and give them to him, and he takes the first portion of the spoils. GEMARA: We already learn this on another occasion in the mishna (2a): And the king may bring out the nation to an optional war only on the basis of a court of seventy-one judges. Why did the mishna need to repeat it here? The Gemara explains: Since in the mishna here the tanna taught all matters pertaining to the king, he also taught the halakha of bringing out the nation to an optional war, although this halakha was taught at the beginning of the tractate in the context of the halakhot of the court of seventy-one judges. With regard to the king’s rights, the Sages engaged in a dispute: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: Concerning all the actions that are stated in the biblical passage about the king (see I Samuel 8:11–17), it is permitted for a king to perform them. Rav says: This biblical passage was stated only in order to threaten the Jewish people, so that they would accept the king’s sovereignty with reverence, as it is stated: “You shall set a king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:15), meaning, it is necessary that his fear should be upon you. But the king is not actually permitted to perform the actions stated there. The Gemara comments that this dispute is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says: Concerning all the actions that are stated in the biblical passage about the king, it is permitted for a king to perform them. Rabbi Yehuda says: This biblical passage was stated only in order to threaten the Jewish people, as it is stated: “You shall set a king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:15), meaning, it is necessary that his fear should be upon you. The baraita continues: And so would Rabbi Yehuda say: Three mitzvot were commanded to the Jewish people upon their entrance into Eretz Yisrael, which apply only in Eretz Yisrael: They were commanded to establish a king for themselves (see Deuteronomy 17:14–15), and to cut off the seed of Amalek in war (see Deuteronomy 25:17–19), and to build the Chosen House, i.e., the Temple, in Jerusalem (see Deuteronomy 12:10–12). The baraita continues: Rabbi Nehorai says: This biblical passage about appointing a king was stated only in response to the Jewish people’s complaint, as it is stated: “When you come unto the land that the Lord your God gives you, and shall possess it, and shall dwell therein, and shall say: I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me” (Deuteronomy 17:14). The verse indicates that appointing a king is not a mitzva and that when Samuel spoke to them, he intended to frighten them so that they might regret their complaint and retract their request for a king. It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: The elders of Samuel’s generation asked appropriately, as it is stated: “Give us a king to judge us” (I Samuel 8:6), since they wanted a steady leader in place of Samuel. But the ignoramuses among them ruined it, as it is stated: “But the people refused to heed the voice of Samuel; and they said: No, but there shall be a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us, and emerge before us, and fight our battles” (I Samuel 8:19–20). It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says: Three mitzvot were commanded to the Jewish people upon their entrance into Eretz Yisrael: To establish a king for themselves, and to cut off the seed of Amalek in war, and to build for themselves the Chosen House in Jerusalem. But I do not know which one they are obligated to do first. When the verse states: “The hand upon the throne [kes] of the Lord: The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16), you must say that this means they are obligated to establish a king for themselves first, before waging war with Amalek, and the verse is interpreted as follows: “Throne of the Lord” is nothing other than a symbolic name for a king, as it is stated: “Then Solomon sat on the throne [kisei] of the Lord as king” (I Chronicles 29:23), indicating that a king sits on “the throne of the Lord.” The baraita continues: And still I do not know whether building them the Chosen House is first, or cutting off the seed of Amalek is first, i.e., after the appointing of the king. When the verse states: “And He will give you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety; then it shall come to pass that the place that the Lord your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, there shall you bring all that I command you” (Deuteronomy 12:10–11), you must say that the Jewish people were to cut off the seed of Amalek first. The baraita continues: And so the verse states concerning David: “And it came to pass, when King David dwelled in his house and the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies” (II Samuel 7:1). And it is written immediately afterward: “That the king said to Nathan the prophet: See now, I dwell in a house of cedar but the Ark of God dwells within curtains” (II Samuel 7:2), and King David then began seeking a site to build the Temple. § The Gemara cites another tradition about Solomon’s kingdom. Reish Lakish says: Initially, Solomon ruled even over the supernal worlds, as it is stated: “Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord” (I Chronicles 29:23), indicating that his kingdom was like the Lord’s kingdom, reigning over all worlds. But ultimately, after he married foreign wives, he ruled over only the lower worlds, as it is stated: “For he had dominion over all the region on this side of the river, from Tiphsah even to Gaza” (I Kings 5:4). Rav and Shmuel disagreed with regard to the meaning of this verse: One says that Tiphsah is a name of a place at the end of the world, at one end of Solomon’s kingdom, and Gaza is at the other end of the world. And one says that Tiphsah and Gaza sat next to each other, and the verse serves to teach that just as he ruled over Tiphsah and over Gaza, so he ruled over the whole world. Reish Lakish continues: And ultimately, Solomon declined further still in that he ruled only over Israel, as it is stated: “I, Koheleth, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem” (Ecclesiastes 1:12). And ultimately, he ruled over only Jerusalem, as it is stated: “The words of Koheleth, the son of David, king in Jerusalem” (Ecclesiastes 1:1). And ultimately, he ruled over only his bed, as it is stated: “Behold, it is the bed of Solomon; threescore mighty men are about it, of the mighty men of Israel” (Song of Songs 3:7). And ultimately, he declined so much that he ruled over only his staff, as it is stated: “And this was my portion from all of my labor” (Ecclesiastes 2:10). Rav and Shmuel disagreed with regard to the meaning of this latter verse as well. One says that the term “this” is a reference to his staff, and one says that it is a reference to his cloak. The Gemara asks: Did he return to reign over the whole world, or did he ultimately not return? Rav and Shmuel disagreed about this: One says that he returned, and one says that he did not return. The one who says that he did not return reasons that Solomon was first a king and then an ordinary person [hedyot] and did not return to his reign; and the one who says that he returned reasons that Solomon was first a king and then an ordinary person and ultimately returned to be a king. § The mishna teaches that the king breaches fences of anyone in his way to create a pathway for himself. The Sages taught in a baraita: Treasures of kings taken as spoils in war belong to the king, and as for the rest of the spoils that are taken in a war, half is for the king and half is for the people. Abaye said to Rav Dimi, and some say that he said this to Rav Aḥa: Granted, treasures of kings belong to the king. This is the typical manner of kings, as it is fitting that the king should use the treasures of the kings he conquers; but with regard to the rest of the spoils that are taken in a war, where half is for the king and half is for the people, from where do we derive this halakha? He answered Abaye: The source is as it is written:

(15) I will show him wondrous deeds As in the days when You sallied forth from the land of Egypt.