- Sections
- Parashat Hashavua
The Less Understandable Request
It is hard to understand the way Moshe and Aharon presented their demands of Paroh, demands which resulted in the freeing of Bnei Yisrael from bondage and their exodus from Egypt. Hashem told them to tell Paroh that they want to travel for three days into the desert and bring sacrifices to Hashem (Shemot 5:3). Was there a need for Hashem to hide the fact that they were to be leaving permanently and not just bringing sacrifices and returning? Certainly Hashem was capable of getting Paroh to agree to anything. In fact, he even had to harden Paroh’s heart so that he would not agree earlier.
Egypt. Hashem told them to tell Paroh that they want to travel for three days into the desert and bring sacrifices to Hashem (Shemot 5:3). Was there a need for Hashem to hide the fact that they were to be leaving permanently and not just bringing sacrifices and returning? Certainly Hashem was capable of getting Paroh to agree to anything. In fact, he even had to harden Paroh’s heart so that he would not agree earlier.
Perhaps the idea was not to use this approach as a way to get Paroh to agree but to teach a lesson. It was important that Bnei Yisrael should be liberated not just as an ethnic group of slaves being freed but that they were being freed as the Nation of Hashem. They also needed to know that Hashem is the one who runs His world. The idea was to break the Egyptian conception of how things are supposed to work. The Egyptian standard of success and their confidence in their civilization had to be broken. Their deities had to be slaughtered as sacrifices to the true G-d. They had to recognize that Hashem’s demands of them were just and that they were prepared to agree to His will. Even Paroh would have to acquiesce to the dictates of the King of kings.
Had Bnei Yisrael just asked for freedom from slavery, it is possible that Paroh would more easily have found the humanitarian appeal to have logic and merit. Maybe he would have found the moral basis to be gracious. Then there would not have been a theological element to the struggle between Bnei Yisrael and Egypt. It was specifically the theological basis of the conflict that needed to be the driving force in the emergence of the Nation of Israel. The world had to see that Paroh had given in to Hashem in this struggle.
Perhaps the above explains what Moshe meant when he said, amidst a bad start to his mission of freeing the nation: "From the time I came to speak in Your name, the situation for this nation has deteriorated" (Shemot 5:23). Moshe felt that the things he said, invoking Hashem, made things worse. Perhaps asking for freedom on humanitarian grounds would have been better. Paroh cannot accept, "Send My nation and they will serve Me," as this is a contradiction to what he presumed one would view as liberty.
Hashem answered Moshe: "With a strong hand, he will send them" (ibid. 6:1). It is not up to Paroh’s desires; he will be forced. Thus, the less the process of liberation makes sense, the more desirable it is.
Perhaps the idea was not to use this approach as a way to get Paroh to agree but to teach a lesson. It was important that Bnei Yisrael should be liberated not just as an ethnic group of slaves being freed but that they were being freed as the Nation of Hashem. They also needed to know that Hashem is the one who runs His world. The idea was to break the Egyptian conception of how things are supposed to work. The Egyptian standard of success and their confidence in their civilization had to be broken. Their deities had to be slaughtered as sacrifices to the true G-d. They had to recognize that Hashem’s demands of them were just and that they were prepared to agree to His will. Even Paroh would have to acquiesce to the dictates of the King of kings.
Had Bnei Yisrael just asked for freedom from slavery, it is possible that Paroh would more easily have found the humanitarian appeal to have logic and merit. Maybe he would have found the moral basis to be gracious. Then there would not have been a theological element to the struggle between Bnei Yisrael and Egypt. It was specifically the theological basis of the conflict that needed to be the driving force in the emergence of the Nation of Israel. The world had to see that Paroh had given in to Hashem in this struggle.
Perhaps the above explains what Moshe meant when he said, amidst a bad start to his mission of freeing the nation: "From the time I came to speak in Your name, the situation for this nation has deteriorated" (Shemot 5:23). Moshe felt that the things he said, invoking Hashem, made things worse. Perhaps asking for freedom on humanitarian grounds would have been better. Paroh cannot accept, "Send My nation and they will serve Me," as this is a contradiction to what he presumed one would view as liberty.
Hashem answered Moshe: "With a strong hand, he will send them" (ibid. 6:1). It is not up to Paroh’s desires; he will be forced. Thus, the less the process of liberation makes sense, the more desirable it is.

More on Helping the Weak in Beit Din?
Rabbi Yossef Carmel | Shvat 29 5782

Leaders Change but History Still Repeats Itself
Rabbi Yossef Carmel | Sivan 5768

The Historical Root of Lashon Hara
From Siach Shaul, p. 326-328 (1944)
Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli zt"l | Nissan 5 5782

Which Tablet Was Broken After Cheit Ha’egel?
Rabbi Yossef Carmel | Adar II 19 5782

Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli zt"l
Rosh Yeshiva of "Mercaz Harav", Rosh Kollel of "Eretz Hemda" and a member of Beit Din Hagadol in Yerushalaim.

Listening for Listening’s Sake
Av 22 5777

Don’t Hide the Internal Problem
Elul 8 5776

What’s in a Name? A Lot but Not Enough
5773

Caring about Justice for All
Shvat 14 5776

The Religious View of the Secular State of Israel
Rabbi Ari Shvat | 5769

Practices of the Tochacha
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | Elul 16 5776

seudat hodaya
Rabbi Daniel Mann | 5772
In the Beginning
Parashat Bereshit
Rabbi Zalman Baruch Melamed | 5763

How the Torah & MItzvot Protect Us
Rabbi Ari Shvat | Iyar 21 5782
The Promise Of The Land
Rabbi Yaakov Asher Sinclair | Iyar 17 5782
