Sedra 3, Bo
Exodus 10:1 – 13:16
10:1 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH BO EL PAR'OH KI ANI HICHBADETI ET LIBO VE ET LEV AVADAV LEMA'AN SHITI OTOTAI ELEH BE KIRBO
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה בֹּא אֶל פַּרְעֹה כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי אֶת לִבּוֹ וְאֶת לֵב עֲבָדָיו לְמַעַן שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה בְּקִרְבּוֹ
KJ (King James translation): And the LORD said unto
Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his
servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:
BN(BibleNet translation): Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Go in to Pharaoh; for I have hardened his heart, and the hearts of his servants, that I might show these my signs in their midst...
SHITI: I am only slightly perplexed by the verb here. It is not the common verb for "to show", and it is even what "show" really means - the verb LASET derives from it, and means "to put" or "to place". I suspect that the Egytptian original was not this verb at all, but a reference to the god Set, who in Yehudit is Shet, the third child of Adam and Chavah (Eve); Set's role is the wicked uncle, the killer of Osher (Osiris), the vegetation god, usually in the form of a boar who hides among the barley and the rye and the wheat - all of which happen to be the last item created, see Exodus 9:31) - and gores Osher to death with his tusk; as this tale is central to the spring rebirth of Osher, it comes as no surprise to find a hint of it, apparently concealed among the uncommonalities of verbs.
10:2 U LEMA'AN TESAPER BE AZNEY VINCHA U VEN BINCHA ET ASHER HIT'ALALTI BE MITSRAYIM VE ET OTOTAI ASHER SAMTI VAM VIYDA'TEM KI ANI YHVH
וּלְמַעַן תְּסַפֵּר בְּאָזְנֵי בִנְךָ וּבֶן בִּנְךָ אֵת אֲשֶׁר הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי בְּמִצְרַיִם וְאֶת אֹתֹתַי אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בָם וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה
KJ: And that thou mayest
tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought
in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that
I am the LORD.
Serious future planning. The same could of course be argued for the Holocaust.
Yet again we have text with commentary built-in; the Redactor making his point. We need to look again at the word OT; see Genesis 1, and understand that these are not signs in the sense "look at the power of the miracles I can perform which prove I am mightier than any other god", though that is the traditional interpretation. Each of the events denotes a god, and is cosmological: these are "seasons" and "festivals"; the sign is merely the indication of the event.
10:3 VA YAVO MOSHEH VE AHARON EL PAR'OH VA YOMRU ELAV KOH AMAR YHVH ELOHEY HA IVRIM AD MATAI ME'ANTA LE'ANOT MI PANAI SHALACH AMI VE YA'AVADUNI
וַיָּבֹא מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן אֶל פַּרְעֹה וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי הָעִבְרִים עַד מָתַי מֵאַנְתָּ לֵעָנֹת מִפָּנָי שַׁלַּח עַמִּי וְיַעַבְדֻנִי
KJ: And Moses and Aaron
came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the
Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people
go, that they may serve me.
Mosheh and Aharon appear to be extemporising here; previously they were scripted. Having said which, the words come across as liturgical, so perhaps what is missing is the scripting rather than the script.
LE'ANOT: Similarly with this, which really means "to answer", which one does to a call from or to the deity by saying "Amen". Or more vocally even, by singing an entire hymn, as will be the case at Exodus 15:21, or Psalm 147:7, and many other occasions. Gesenius describes the root as being "applied to anyone who pronounces anything solemnly and with a loud voice", which could include soldiers in battle (Exodus 32:18), or jackals howling in the desert (Isaiah 13:22).
But the puns are everywhere, and there is a second root ANAH, spelled exactly the same, and it describes the state in which Pharaoh finds himself, the very reason why he "refuses" to "answer" YHVH positively. In Psalm 116:10 for example. In Zechariah 10:2, which also has the word AVEN, meaning "sin" - though that is spelled with an Aleph, not an Ayin. "Afflicted", "troubled", "oppressed" even - or as a verb, when Sarai treats Hagar harshly, in Genesis 16:2.
But the puns are everywhere, and there is a second root ANAH, spelled exactly the same, and it describes the state in which Pharaoh finds himself, the very reason why he "refuses" to "answer" YHVH positively. In Psalm 116:10 for example. In Zechariah 10:2, which also has the word AVEN, meaning "sin" - though that is spelled with an Aleph, not an Ayin. "Afflicted", "troubled", "oppressed" even - or as a verb, when Sarai treats Hagar harshly, in Genesis 16:2.
10:4 KI IM MA'EN ATAH LESHAL'E'ACH ET AMI HINENI MEVIY MACHAR ARBEH BIG'VULECHA...
כִּי אִם מָאֵן אַתָּה לְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת עַמִּי הִנְנִי מֵבִיא מָחָר אַרְבֶּה בִּגְבֻלֶךָ
KJ: Else, if thou refuse
to let my people go, behold, to morrow will I bring the locusts into thy coast:
MACHAR: As noted in the last chapter, the plagues are a daily phenomenon; "and it was evening, and then morning", just as in the Genesis version of Creation.
ARBEH: There is much dispute amongst scholars as to whether this is the desert locust (Schistocerca gregaria) or the migratory locust (Schistocerca migratoria); though the former ought to be the more likely, the latter, by definition, could fly into the desert at springtime on its long journey home to Queensland. Locusts by any Latin name are associated with the harvest, because what they do is destroy it, feasting on it at a remarkable pace, and stripping it bare. So, yet again, the wondrous "miracle" of fertility and creation, celebrated in the name of Osher; but also the devastations of Nature, feared in the refusal to sing the praises of Osher by his deadly rival Set, who also protects the crops in his underworld role, providing the means by which biodegraded matter can compost future growth - see my note at verse 1 for this essential duality that lies at the core of these "plagues".
Archaeologists have found innumerable locust-amulets during their excavations in Egypt, suggesting it was worn as a charm to ward off the creature; a locust-headed god named Senehem is usually depicted. This amulet parallels the "eye of Hor" which is still findable around the Mediterranean to this day. When the plague hits, (verse 15), the locusts will be described as so thick that the "eye of the earth" was darkened (and verse 5 predicts it). One of the epithets of the sun-god Ra was "the eye of Ra", a variation of the eye of Hor. So was this the day of Senehem, or of Ra/Hor; a minor or the major god? Logic says the major god would get the last day...worth taking a look here for a detailed contrast of the Egyptian and Habiru versions of the plagues.
Archaeologists have found innumerable locust-amulets during their excavations in Egypt, suggesting it was worn as a charm to ward off the creature; a locust-headed god named Senehem is usually depicted. This amulet parallels the "eye of Hor" which is still findable around the Mediterranean to this day. When the plague hits, (verse 15), the locusts will be described as so thick that the "eye of the earth" was darkened (and verse 5 predicts it). One of the epithets of the sun-god Ra was "the eye of Ra", a variation of the eye of Hor. So was this the day of Senehem, or of Ra/Hor; a minor or the major god? Logic says the major god would get the last day...worth taking a look here for a detailed contrast of the Egyptian and Habiru versions of the plagues.
10:5 VE CHISAH ET EYN HA ARETS VE LO YUCHAL LIR'OT ET HA ARETS VE ACHAL ET YETER HA PELETAH HA NISH'ERET LACHEM MIN HA BARAD VE ACHAL ET KOL HA ETS HA TSOM'E'ACH LACHEM MIN HA SADEH
וְכִסָּה אֶת עֵין הָאָרֶץ וְלֹא יוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְאָכַל אֶת יֶתֶר הַפְּלֵטָה הַנִּשְׁאֶרֶת לָכֶם מִן הַבָּרָד וְאָכַל אֶת כָּל הָעֵץ הַצֹּמֵחַ לָכֶם מִן הַשָּׂדֶה
KJ: And they shall cover
the face of the earth, that one cannot be able to see the earth: and they shall
eat the residue of that which is escaped, which remaineth unto you from the
hail, and shall eat every tree which groweth for you out of the field:
EYN: Most translations give "face", but EYN is "an eye". However, as above, to the Egyptians the sun was the "eye of Ra" or Hor, the same sun-god that will later give the Beney Yisra-El the Yevarechecha (Numbers 6:24-26).
YETER HA PLEYTAH: Everything that is left after the hail.
ETS: Again the intention appears to be plants, though the word means "trees".
And again the duality. That gorgeous sun drawing you to the beaches of Cannes or Malibu, can also give you skin cancer. Those mountains full of snow enticing you to ski, could avalanche straight down on you and ruin your holiday for life. Such is the "Nature" of the gods, equally miracles and plagues. Adonai natan, va adonai lakach, yehi shem adonai mevorach (Job 1:21).
10:6 U MALU VATEYCHA U VATEY CHOL AVADEYCHA U VATEY CHOL MITSRAYIM ASHER LO RA'U AVOTEYCHA VA AVOT AVOTEYCHA MI YOM HEYOTAM AL HA ADAMAH AD HA YOM HA ZEH VA YIPHEN VA YETS'E ME IM PAR'OH
וּמָלְאוּ בָתֶּיךָ וּבָתֵּי כָל עֲבָדֶיךָ וּבָתֵּי כָל מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר לֹא רָאוּ אֲבֹתֶיךָ וַאֲבוֹת אֲבֹתֶיךָ מִיּוֹם הֱיוֹתָם עַל הָאֲדָמָה עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וַיִּפֶן וַיֵּצֵא מֵעִם פַּרְעֹה
KJ: And they shall fill
thy houses, and the houses of all thy servants, and the houses of all the
Egyptians; which neither thy fathers, nor thy fathers' fathers have seen, since
the day that they were upon the earth unto this day. And he turned himself, and
went out from Pharaoh.
These constant references to the servants are fascinating, distinguishing four groups in Egyptian society: Pharaoh, servants, Ivrim and regular Egyptians. These servants are distinguished from the Ivri slaves, yet they have their own houses; like black servants in apartheid South Africa, who were allowed to go home to their shanty towns each night. Or civil servants, the Egyptian middle-class, distinguished from the hoi poloi of regular Egyptians. Or worshippers, distinguished from those Egyptians who followed other gods; this societal structure would work if we are in the epoch of Hyksos conquest; but it would also identify the Habiru with either the servants or the Pharaoh. And yet the word that is used to describe all these people, whatever their class or caste or role in society, is AVADIM (AVADECHA in this verse, which is AVADIM + the second person possessive as a suffix = "your servants"), exactly the same word that is used for the Ivrim, but understood there to mean "slaves". So, yet again, the text itself disputes whether or not the Beney Yisra-El were in fact slaves in Egypt.
The tone of the departure on this occasion is almost foot-stamping; if this isn't liturgy, how come Pharaoh hasn't put an end to such insubordination! Donald Trump would have "tweeted" him! This is not, however, the same as the question that Pharaoh's servants ask in the next verse; their motive is rather different.
The tone of the departure on this occasion is almost foot-stamping; if this isn't liturgy, how come Pharaoh hasn't put an end to such insubordination! Donald Trump would have "tweeted" him! This is not, however, the same as the question that Pharaoh's servants ask in the next verse; their motive is rather different.
10:7 VA YOMRU AVDEY PHAR'OH ELAV AD MATAI YIHEYEH ZEH LANU LE MOKESH SHALACH ET HA ANASHIM VA YA'AVDU ET YHVH ELOHEYCHEM HA TEREM TEDA KI AVDAH MITSRAYIM
וַיֹּאמְרוּ עַבְדֵי פַרְעֹה אֵלָיו עַד מָתַי יִהְיֶה זֶה לָנוּ לְמוֹקֵשׁ שַׁלַּח אֶת הָאֲנָשִׁים וְיַעַבְדוּ אֶת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיהֶם הֲטֶרֶם תֵּדַע כִּי אָבְדָה מִצְרָיִם
KJ: And Pharaoh's servants
said unto him, How long shall this man be a snare unto us? let the men go, that
they may serve the LORD their God: knowest thou not yet that Egypt is
destroyed?
AD MATAI: The servants use the same language as YHVH; again suggesting that this is liturgical. The phrase was Yesha-Yahu's "signature tune" - cf Isaiah 6:11
MOKESH: The first sign of dissent among his own people, if this is historical; the next phase of the ritual if this is liturgy. The word is indeed used for a trap or a snare for catching animals (Amos 3:5 for example, and Job 40:24), but really it means "troublemaking", the bringing of bad things - cf Exodus 23:33, Deuteronomy 7:16, Joshua 23:13,
KI AVDAH MITSRAYIM: Reading history backwards as an act of the deity, we can ask ourselves: what historical record is there of a terrible destruction in Egypt, that could be attributed in this manner; and the obvious one that comes to mind at this time is the rebellion of Ahmose (Ach-Mousa)against the "shepherd-kings" of Hyksos, their overthrow in a bloody civil war, the re-establishment of the former Egyptian pantheon, and then what was now Pharaoh Ahmose's leading of his people across the Sinai into Kena'an, which he likewise conquered.
Note again the homophonic puns - it is the AVADIM with an Ayin who are telling him that his land is IBUD with an Aleph.
10:8 VA YUSHAV ET MOSHEH VE ET AHARON EL PAR'OH VA YOMER AL'EHEM LECHU IVDU ET YHVH ELOHEYCHEM MI VA MI HA HOLCHIM
וַיּוּשַׁב אֶת מֹשֶׁה וְאֶת אַהֲרֹן אֶל פַּרְעֹה וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם לְכוּ עִבְדוּ אֶת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם מִי וָמִי הַהֹלְכִים
KJ: And Moses and Aaron
were brought again unto Pharaoh: and he said unto them, Go, serve the LORD your
God: but who are they that
shall go?
Stage by slow stage of bringing in the harvest.
If this is truly an account of history, and the history is the one retold in the Haggadah, of Beney Yisra-Eli Mosheh leading his people out of Egyptian slavery, then it is a meaningless question, because obviously everyone who can walk is going, and those who have to be, will be carried. But Pharaoh believes this is only a 3-day Hajj to the holy mountain, and not everyone is going to be able, or even be in a condition of purity to be permitted, to make such a pilgrimage. So he is asking: who exactly will be going? Just men? Women and children as well? Old and young? Sick and healthy? And he might be asking to know if his work-force will be depleted, and he might be asking to know if the pilgrimage is in fact a ruse.
If this is truly an account of history, and the history is the one retold in the Haggadah, of Beney Yisra-Eli Mosheh leading his people out of Egyptian slavery, then it is a meaningless question, because obviously everyone who can walk is going, and those who have to be, will be carried. But Pharaoh believes this is only a 3-day Hajj to the holy mountain, and not everyone is going to be able, or even be in a condition of purity to be permitted, to make such a pilgrimage. So he is asking: who exactly will be going? Just men? Women and children as well? Old and young? Sick and healthy? And he might be asking to know if his work-force will be depleted, and he might be asking to know if the pilgrimage is in fact a ruse.
10:9 VA YOMER MOSHEH BI NE'AREYNU U VI ZEKENEYNU NELECH BE VANEYNU U VI VENOTENU BE TSO'NENU U VI VEKARENU NELECH KI CHAG YHVH LANU
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה בִּנְעָרֵינוּ וּבִזְקֵנֵינוּ נֵלֵךְ בְּבָנֵינוּ וּבִבְנוֹתֵנוּ בְּצֹאנֵנוּ וּבִבְקָרֵנוּ נֵלֵךְ כִּי חַג-יְהוָה לָנוּ
KJ: And Moses said, We
will go with our young and with our old, with our sons and with our daughters,
with our flocks and with our herds will we go; for we must hold a
feast unto the LORD.
If the commentary on this story is correct, then we can say that we have been waiting for this. "This is a feast of YHVH." So now we are absolutely clear. The Passover is not a feast that commemorates the Exodus from Egypt, nor is the unleavened bread a consequence of their fleeing by night. The intention, from the outset, was to go and worship YHVH: as we have heard repeatedly. And what is that worship if not "a feast to YHVH"? And what feast? The Spring New Year, which was already the Passover long, long before this. With one rider to this observation: that it was not of course YHVH, except in translation. We have seen who it was: the traditional Egyptian theocracy, which presumably this foreign conqueror of a Pharaoh has replaced with his own religion, and which Mosheh wishes to reinstate.
Once again we have a list of nouns in which some have a Yud but others do not - is there a grammmatical reason for this, or were the Masoretes just sloppy?
10:10 VA YOMER AL'EHEM YEHI CHEN YHVH IMACHEM KA ASHER ASHALACH ET'CHEM VE ET TAPCHEM RE'U KI RA'AH NEGED PENEYCHEM
וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם יְהִי כֵן יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם כַּאֲשֶׁר אֲשַׁלַּח אֶתְכֶם וְאֶת טַפְּכֶם רְאוּ כִּי רָעָה נֶגֶד פְּנֵיכֶם
KJ: And he said unto them,
Let the LORD be so with you, as I will let you go, and your little ones: look to it; for evil is before you.
There are innumerable variant translations of this very difficult verse, some giving the two-facedness to Mosheh, others to Pharaoh, as in TheBibleNet's offering, which I believe is justified specifically by the opening phrase of the next verse. Sefaria's offering takes the other side - click here; and also uses the next verse as a justifier! Then click here for the Bible Hub site, and follow its list from NIV (which is very much akin with Sefaria on this) to WEB. GNT offers yet a third variant - Pharaoh actually refusing, now or ever.
10:11 LO CHEN LECHU NA HA GEVARIM VE IVDU ET YHVH KI OTAH ATEM MEVAKSHIM VA YEGARESH OTAM ME ET PENEY PHAR'OH
לֹא כֵן לְכוּ נָא הַגְּבָרִים וְעִבְדוּ אֶת יְהוָה כִּי אֹתָהּ אַתֶּם מְבַקְשִׁים וַיְגָרֶשׁ אֹתָם מֵאֵת פְּנֵי פַרְעֹה
KJ: Not so: go now ye that are men,
and serve the LORD; for that ye did desire. And they were driven out from
Pharaoh's presence.
Many versions the phrase offer "now that you are men", which is meaningless. Pharaoh is saying that "the men can go", inferring that the women and children cannot, and that there is no reason to take all the sheep and cattle (verse 24 will confirm this). The "evil" he refers to is his own suspicion that they are leaving with all they possess, precisely because they have no intention of returning. Much evidence before this to suggest that his suspicions are well placed. But also much evidence that this is the Ach-Mousa rebellion being amalgamated with the Pesach liturgy, for the creation of Yisra-Eli pseudo-history.
IVDU: Our perennial problem now at its most crucial. IVDU as worship or IVDU as slavery? The slaves are going off to become worshippers, or are the worshippers...
IVDU: Our perennial problem now at its most crucial. IVDU as worship or IVDU as slavery? The slaves are going off to become worshippers, or are the worshippers...
YEGARSHU: YEGARSHU? YEGARSHU? The word is trying desperately hard to engage my synapses. We are coming to the end of the Creation story. The Paradisal garden is in full bloom, despite the ravages of the serpent-deity who rules the undersoil. Humans are ready to approach the centre of the shrine, and worship there. Genesis 3:24, the sending out of Humankind to till the soil, to steward the Earth, to bring the fertility to the harvest-point of cultivation. "So he drove out the man (VA YIGARESH); and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden the Keruvim, and a swastika (ET LAHAT HA CHAREV ), a fire-wheel which rotated and rotated, guarding the way to the Tree of Life...." - see my notes on the connections between ET LAHAT HA CHAREV and Mount Chorev (Horeb) at Exodus 3, but also my extensive notes on the subject at Genesis 3:24.
samech break
10:12 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH NETEH YADCHA AL ERETS MITSRAYIM BA ARBEH VA YA'AL AL ERETS MITSRAYIM VA YOCHAL ET KOL ESEV HA ARETS ET KOL ASHER HISH'IR HA BARAD
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה נְטֵה יָדְךָ עַל אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בָּאַרְבֶּה וְיַעַל עַל אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם וְיֹאכַל אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב הָאָרֶץ אֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר הִשְׁאִיר הַבָּרָד
KJ: And the LORD said unto
Moses, Stretch out thine hand over the land of Egypt for the locusts, that they
may come up upon the land of Egypt, and eat every herb of the land, even all that
the hail hath left.
It is odd that YHVH god sends the locusts only after Pharaoh has relented. Or is it because Pharaoh has not really relented, by allowing the men but refusing the rest? If this, then again the reading here is confirmed.
YA'AL: Asin making aliyah to the land of Yisra-El, or having an aliyah for the reading of the Law in synagogue. Same root. Pure coincidence on this occasion.
ESEV: Confirming the interpretation of ETS as all herbs and plants and not just trees.
10:13 VA YET MOSHEH ET MAT'EHU AL ERETS MITSRAYIM VE YHVH NIHAG RU'ACH KADIM BA ARETS KOL HA YOM HA HU VE CHOL HA LAILAH HA BOKER HAYAH VE RU'ACH HA KADIM NASA ET HA ARBEH
וַיֵּט מֹשֶׁה אֶת מַטֵּהוּ עַל אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם וַיהוָה נִהַג רוּחַ קָדִים בָּאָרֶץ כָּל הַיּוֹם הַהוּא וְכָל הַלָּיְלָה הַבֹּקֶר הָיָה וְרוּחַ הַקָּדִים נָשָׂא אֶת הָאַרְבֶּה
KJ: And Moses stretched
forth his rod over the land of Egypt, and the LORD brought an east wind upon
the land all that day, and all that night; and when it
was morning, the east wind brought the locusts.
Why the east wind? This would mean the locusts came out of the Sinai desert, which is not known as a habitation of locusts - far too sandy; they need scrub desert; unless they came from the Aravah and the Negev, and crossed the Sinai (hopefully their locust-Pharaoh gave them permission and it didn't take forty years!). Migratory locusts, on the other hand, would have come from the south at this time of year, heading for the warmth of the northern hemisphere when the southern plunges into its winter (another of the great dualities of the gods, though probably the ancients didn't have the travel-experience to know that). Liturgical locusts, connected with the god of Chorev, are perfectly capable of coming from any direction; and Chorev was due east.
And note that once again it is Mosheh and not Aharon who is performing the magic tricks, despite the clear statement by YHVH that this would be Aharaon's role. Two texts, self-evidently. And possibly the source of the confusion later on in the Yehudit world, as to what precisely were the roles of the Kohanim and the Leviyim.
And note that once again it is Mosheh and not Aharon who is performing the magic tricks, despite the clear statement by YHVH that this would be Aharaon's role. Two texts, self-evidently. And possibly the source of the confusion later on in the Yehudit world, as to what precisely were the roles of the Kohanim and the Leviyim.
10:14 VA YA'AL HA ARBEH AL KOL ERETS MITSRAYIM VA YANACH BE CHOL GEVUL MITSRAYIM KAVED ME'OD LEPHANAV LO HAYAH CHEN ARBEH KAMOHU; VE ACHARAV LO YIHEYEH KEN
וַיַּעַל הָאַרְבֶּה עַל כָּל אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם וַיָּנַח בְּכֹל גְּבוּל מִצְרָיִם כָּבֵד מְאֹד לְפָנָיו לֹא הָיָה כֵן אַרְבֶּה כָּמֹהוּ וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא יִהְיֶה כֵּן
KJ: And the locusts went
up over all the land of Egypt, and rested in all the coasts of Egypt: very
grievous were they; before
them there were no such locusts as they, neither after them shall be such.
Odd that the locusts and the connected verbs here are in the singular: HA ARBEH, YA'AL and YANACH.
10:15 VA YECHAS ET EYN KOL HA ARETS VE TECH'SHACH HA ARETS VA YOCHAL ET KOL ESEV HA ARETS VE ET KOL PERI HA ETS ASHER HOTIR HA BARAD VE LO NOTAR KOL YEREK BA ETS U VE ESEV HA SADEH BE CHOL ERETS MITSRAYIM
וַיְכַס אֶת עֵין כָּל הָאָרֶץ וַתֶּחְשַׁךְ הָאָרֶץ וַיֹּאכַל אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב הָאָרֶץ וְאֵת כָּל פְּרִי הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר הוֹתִיר הַבָּרָד וְלֹא נוֹתַר כָּל יֶרֶק בָּעֵץ וּבְעֵשֶׂב הַשָּׂדֶה בְּכָל אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם
KJ: For they covered the
face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened; and they did eat every
herb of the land, and all the fruit of the trees which the hail had left: and
there remained not any green thing in the trees, or in the herbs of the field,
through all the land of Egypt.
EYN: As noted above, EYN means "eye" not face, and symbolises the senior deity, Ra, or, at a different period of Egyptian history, his son Hor, who succeeded him. So ET EYN KOL HA ARETS is at once the "face" of the whole Earth but also the "eye" of the entire sky, Ra's ultimate realm.
Every "plague" that we have witnessed until now brought fertility in some form, despite the Yehudit text telling us they were "plagues"; not so this time. As we approach the New Year itself, at the end of the preparatory period, total uncreation is established, everything previously fertilised is being stripped, leaving a form of darkness, but not yet total darkness (that will come in verse 21). What he now have, or very nearly for there is one more yet to come, are the conditions that existed immediately before Creation; as though we are being prepared not just for annual fertility, but for the Big Bang itself: the annual recreation now serving as a metaphor for the original Creation, and vice versa. There is a wonderful logic to this process, religiously speaking.
And what form will that Big Bang take, that will lead to so much fire by night, so many pillars of cloud by day, and such an intensity of darkness at the moment that it happens? Read on.
But also remember, connecting this back again to Genesis 1, that, in Genesis 1:2, "the Earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of Elohim moved upon the face of the waters" (though see my notes there for a rather different rendering)And what form will that Big Bang take, that will lead to so much fire by night, so many pillars of cloud by day, and such an intensity of darkness at the moment that it happens? Read on.
10:16 VA YEMAHER PAR'OH LIKRO LE MOSHEH U LE AHARON VA YOMER CHATA'TI LA YHVH ELOHEYCHEM VE LACHEM
וַיְמַהֵר פַּרְעֹה לִקְרֹא לְמֹשֶׁה וּלְאַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמֶר חָטָאתִי לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְלָכֶם
KJ: Then Pharaoh called
for Moses and Aaron in haste; and he said, I have sinned against the LORD your
God, and against you.
Which takes us back to the unresolved dispute at verse 10, and still does not resolve it, because this can still be read either as Pharaoh the enemy, or as Pharaoh the royal participant in a scripted liturgy, and therefore having to play the enemy.
But either way, if Creation is to take place (the incipit of the Messianic era is simply the re-Creation of the world, as after the No'achic flood, as at every sunrise, as at every spring equinox), all sins must be repented and redeemed, so this too is logical. This is still CHET however, the lowest form of sin (see next verse). Are the words PESHA AND AVON, or perhaps MECHILAH AND KAPARA, going to occur in the next verses? They should do.
10:17 VE ATAH SA NA CHATA'TI ACH HA PA'AM VE HA'TIYRU LA YHVH ELOHEYCHEM VA YESAR ME ALAI RAK ET HA MAVET HA ZEH
וְעַתָּה שָׂא נָא חַטָּאתִי אַךְ הַפַּעַם וְהַעְתִּירוּ לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְיָסֵר מֵעָלַי רַק אֶת הַמָּוֶת הַזֶּה
KJ: Now therefore forgive,
I pray thee, my sin only this once, and intreat the LORD your God, that he may
take away from me this death only.
ACH HA PA'AM...RAK ET HA MAVET HA ZEH: Translated literally this verse makes no sense at all. ACH = "therefore" belongs at the beginning, where KJ has put it. But they have then retranslated it, incorrectly, as "only", alongside "this once"; or have they moved the RAK, which does mean "only", from the latter part, where it clearly does not belong? My translation assumes (restores?) a different order of words.
Pharaoh is offering final repentance, as we anticipated, but what death does he mean, since the locusts are not killing people directly, and only indirectly through possible future famine following their devastation? What we have is not MAVET - "death", but the Egyptian MA'AT, which is an extraordinarily similar word, but with a completely different meaning; as we have seen before, MA'AT was the ancient Egyptian concept of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice, roughly equivalent to the later Beney Yisra-Eli concept of SHALOM. Ma'at was also personified as a goddess regulating the stars, seasons, and the actions of both mortals and the deities, who set the order of the universe out of chaos at the moment of creation. And is that not exactly what we have just been describing? Today is MA'AT's day, and MECHILA and KAPARA may not be mentioned by name, but they are implicit here. What Pharaoh is requesting is not death, nor redemption from death, but to be allowed to witness the fullness of MA'AT in her kingdom, and that can only be achieved when the Passover is celebrated at the mountain of the pantheon. Each phase has led us closer to this point; now we are almost there.
Pharaoh is offering final repentance, as we anticipated, but what death does he mean, since the locusts are not killing people directly, and only indirectly through possible future famine following their devastation? What we have is not MAVET - "death", but the Egyptian MA'AT, which is an extraordinarily similar word, but with a completely different meaning; as we have seen before, MA'AT was the ancient Egyptian concept of truth, balance, order, law, morality, and justice, roughly equivalent to the later Beney Yisra-Eli concept of SHALOM. Ma'at was also personified as a goddess regulating the stars, seasons, and the actions of both mortals and the deities, who set the order of the universe out of chaos at the moment of creation. And is that not exactly what we have just been describing? Today is MA'AT's day, and MECHILA and KAPARA may not be mentioned by name, but they are implicit here. What Pharaoh is requesting is not death, nor redemption from death, but to be allowed to witness the fullness of MA'AT in her kingdom, and that can only be achieved when the Passover is celebrated at the mountain of the pantheon. Each phase has led us closer to this point; now we are almost there.
YHVH ELOHEYCHEM: YHVH "your gods", polytheistically plural.
10:18 VA YETS'E ME IM PAR'OH VA YE'TAR EL YHVH
וַיֵּצֵא מֵעִם פַּרְעֹה וַיֶּעְתַּר אֶל יְהוָה
KJ: And he went out from
Pharaoh, and intreated the LORD.
10:19 VA YA'HAPHOCH YHVH RU'ACH YAM CHAZAK ME'OD VA YISA ET HA ARBEH VA YITKA'EHU YAMAH SUPH LO NISH'AR ARBEH ECHAD BE CHOL GEVUL MITSRAYIM
וַיַּהֲפֹךְ יְהוָה רוּחַ יָם חָזָק מְאֹד וַיִּשָּׂא אֶת הָאַרְבֶּה וַיִּתְקָעֵהוּ יָמָּה סּוּף לֹא נִשְׁאַר אַרְבֶּה אֶחָד בְּכֹל גְּבוּל מִצְרָיִם
KJ: And the LORD turned a
mighty strong west wind, which took away the locusts, and cast them into the
Red sea; there remained not one locust in all the coasts of Egypt.
RU'ACH YAM: Literally "sea-wind", leading to one of the finest mistranslations in the entire Tanach. Of course, in Kena'an, a RU'ACH YAM would be a west wind, because the sea is in the west and YAM means sea; but in Egypt there is one sea in the north, the Mediterranean, and another in the south-west, the Red Sea, so it could be either. And as to which - if you regard Yam Suph as the Red Sea, then it must have been a wind out of the Mediterranean; if you regard Yam Suph as the the marshlands of Goshen in the Nile Delta, it must have been a wind out of the Red Sea. My preference is in the translation, and will be defended repeatedly as we move on through the book.
However, whichever translation we prefer, a northern wind could not have driven the locusts into the Red Sea, any more than a wind off the Red Sea could have driven them into the Mediterranean, because that would have taken them across at least a hundred and eighty miles of desert, and sea-winds blow out well before they have crossed such an empty distance;
This, of course, assumes that the text is meant to be read as geography - in which case it is very bad geography; on the other hand, as with so much of this tale, it could be intended symbolically, an element of liturgy, in which case literal accuracy is irrelevant.
This, of course, assumes that the text is meant to be read as geography - in which case it is very bad geography; on the other hand, as with so much of this tale, it could be intended symbolically, an element of liturgy, in which case literal accuracy is irrelevant.
10:20 VA YECHAZEK YHVH ET LEV PHAR'OH VE LO SHILACH ET BENEY YISRA-EL.
וַיְחַזֵּק יְהוָה אֶת לֵב פַּרְעֹה וְלֹא שִׁלַּח אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
KJ: But the LORD hardened
Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go.
This has been stated many times before, but, if we are to regard the god in this tale as YHVH, rather than the translator using the Beney Yisrae-El name of god when the originally text would have named the various Egyptian deities instead, then we are entitled to try to fathom the motives of YHVH in all this. If his objective is to get the people out of Egypt, and he has the power of almighty divinity, then hardening Pharaoh's heart to make him refuse to let them go is not an effective strategy; in which case, making the exodus difficult must be seen as one of the intrinsics and not an incidental extrinsic. We could simply take god out of the whole equation and see this as a human story, but that is not what is written. This is theocentric history; the goal is to show how amazing YHVH is. But this is also a description of YHVH's belief in struggle as a necessity of human growth, much as we saw when Ya'akov wrestled at Penu-El. I made a similar comment at Exodus 9:2.
10:21 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH NETEH YADCHA AL HA SHAMAYIM VI YEHI CHOSHECH AL ERETS MITSRAYIM VA YAMESH CHOSHECH
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה נְטֵה יָדְךָ עַל הַשָּׁמַיִם וִיהִי חֹשֶׁךְ עַל אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם וְיָמֵשׁ חֹשֶׁךְ
KJ: And the LORD said unto
Moses, Stretch out thine hand toward heaven, that there may be darkness over
the land of Egypt, even darkness which may
be felt.
The final precondition for the establishment of Creation: "VE CHOSHECH AL PENEY TEHOM - and there was darkness upon the face of the void" (Genesis 1:2). There was a strong wind, there too, RU'ACH ELOHIM, MERACHEPHET AL PENEY HA MAYIM, hovering, like a hen on an egg she has just laid but which has not yet hatched, over the waters.
VA YAMESH: But how do you "feel" darkness?
10:22 VA YET MOSHEH ET YADO AL HA SHAMAYIM VA YEHI CHOSHECH APHELAH BE CHOL ERETS MITSRAYIM SHELOSHET YAMIM
וַיֵּט מֹשֶׁה אֶת יָדוֹ עַל הַשָּׁמָיִם וַיְהִי חֹשֶׁךְ אֲפֵלָה בְּכָל אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים
KJ: And Moses stretched
forth his hand toward heaven; and there was a thick darkness in all the land of
Egypt three days:
One of the key verses that enable us to deconstruct the source mythology. All the plagues are connected with gods, and it seems clear now that the liturgy is connected with the Book of the Dead and the rites of Osher and Horus. The preparatory month is coming to an end - all months are lunar in the ancient world - and the rebirth of the moon, Rosh Chodesh in the Yehudit, is now imminent. When the moon wanes, a three day-period of darkness leads to the waxing of the new moon; in the myths, this is the 3-day period when the god descends into the underworld, harrows Hell, and is reborn (yes, Jesus too).
Every other "plague" lasted one day (and it would be worth counting the totality of days to see exactly how long this whole procedure lasted: 30 days, one lunar month, functioning exactly as Elul does to Tishrey, is the anticipation of this commentator); this "plague" lasts three days. Whenever we hear of three days of darkness in mythology, we know that we are in the realm of the moon. The New Moon at the start of the month is the virgin moon, the Cinderella moon, the Sleeping Beauty Brunhilde or Brynhildr, the nymphets Lolita, Snow White and Cordelia. The full moon is the Madonna. The waxing moon is the wicked stepmother, Hecate, the aged crone. And then three days of darkness, which the Beloved Son spends in the Underworld before he ascends as the Risen Lord; the three days between the old and the new moon when it is not visible in the sky. So we know that the end of Selichot is coming, that the new month, which on this occasion is also the new year, will shortly start, and that the liberation of Yisra-El will accompany it. Liturgy not history.
Which allows us to date the plague of darkness (itself an extension of the darkness of the locusts) to the last three days of the month. The day after will be Rosh Chodesh, the New Moon, the rising of the Risen Lord. Easter Monday, in Christian terms.
Sometimes Mosheh stretches out his hand, sometimes his sceptre; presumably he always holds the sceptre, but the text just sometimes fails to mention it.
10:23 LO RA'U ISH ET ACHIV VE LO KAMU ISH MI TACHTAV SHELOSHET YAMIM U LE CHOL BENEY YISRA-EL HAYAH OR BE MOSHAVTAM
לֹא רָאוּ אִישׁ אֶת אָחִיו וְלֹא קָמוּ אִישׁ מִתַּחְתָּיו שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים וּלְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיָה אוֹר בְּמוֹשְׁבֹתָם
KJ: They saw not one
another, neither rose any from his place for three days: but all the children
of Israel had light in their dwellings.
BN: A man could not see his fellow, and for three days no one got up frm his resting-place. But all the Beney Yisra-El had light in their dwellings.
VE LO KAMU MI TACHTAV: TACHAT means "under", or refers to the "bottom" of something, so that "resting-place" is a very well-meaning translation! TACHTAV could also be read as three days of prostration in prayer, with the light metaphorical, coming from the divine. I strongly suspect something like the latter.
10:24 VA YIKRA PHAR'OH EL MOSHEH VA YOMER LECHU IVDU ET YHVH RAK TSONCHEM U VEKARCHEM YUTSAG GAM TAPCHEM YELECH IMACHEM
וַיִּקְרָא פַרְעֹה אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר לְכוּ עִבְדוּ אֶת יְהוָה רַק צֹאנְכֶם וּבְקַרְכֶם יֻצָּג גַּם טַפְּכֶם יֵלֵךְ עִמָּכֶם
KJ: And Pharaoh called
unto Moses, and said, Go ye, serve the LORD; only let your flocks and your
herds be stayed: let your little ones also go with you.
Confirming the correction of GEVARIM in verse 11: it did mean "only the men may go". And likewise the fact that Pharaoh suspected Mosheh's real intentions.
The incremental increases parallel the argument between Av-Raham and YHVH at Sedom (Genesis 18:16-33), [which is also the tale of a volcanic eruption, and in its aftermath, as per my notes through Genesis 19, a re-Creation tale].
10:25 VA YOMER MOSHEH GAM ATAH TITEN BE YADENU ZEVACHIM VE OLOT, VE ASIYNU LA YHVH ELOHEYNU
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה גַּם אַתָּה תִּתֵּן בְּיָדֵנוּ זְבָחִים וְעֹלֹת וְעָשִׂינוּ לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ
KJ: And Moses said, Thou
must give us also sacrifices and burnt offerings, that we may sacrifice unto
the LORD our God.
Again confirming that the journey to the desert was to perform a feast, and specifically the Passover. Again confirming that Pharaoh's role in all this is complicitous, not oppositional.
10:26 VE GAM MIKNENU YELECH IMANU LO TISHA'ER PARSAH KI MIMENU NIKACH LA'AVOD ET YHVH ELOHEYNU VA ANACHNU LO NEDA MA NA'AVOD ET YHVH AD BO'ENU SHAMAH
וְגַם מִקְנֵנוּ יֵלֵךְ עִמָּנוּ לֹא תִשָּׁאֵר פַּרְסָה כִּי מִמֶּנּוּ נִקַּח לַעֲבֹד אֶת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ וַאֲנַחְנוּ לֹא נֵדַע מַה נַּעֲבֹד אֶת יְהוָה עַד בֹּאֵנוּ שָׁמָּה
KJ: Our cattle also shall
go with us; there shall not an hoof be left behind; for thereof must we take to
serve the LORD our God; and we know not with what we must serve the LORD, until
we come thither.
This is disingenuous, but necessary for the editor who is trying to merge two very different stories. For the total exit from Egypt, they want all the cattle. But Mosheh knows perfectly well which cattle will be sacrificed, because this is the celebration of the spring, and the sacrifice of the first born is what YHVH requires, the customary sacrifice since sacrifices began millennia before.
PARSAH: Very important that PARSAH! Cloven hooves and uncloven hooves will become central to Kashrut after Sinai.
It also adds a complication noted many times before. Slaves do not usually possess cattle; so the issue of the fleshpots is raised again. The Redactor appears to be editorialising, to explain how they managed to have cattle for sacrifice, just as he will have the Egyptian ladies dole out their jewellery later; both perfectly reasonable if they were not slaves but merely, say serfs, in the Czarist Russian sense, or vassals, in the sense of Magna Carta in feudal England, and those who were not able to join the pilgrimage for whatever reason saying, take this piece of gold for me, or take this piece of silver for me, in the way that Diaspora Jews today will invite pilgrims to Yeru-Shala'im to put a note in a crack in the Wailing Wall on their behalf. This only matters if there is an insistence upon AVADIM as slaves, and not as either bondmen or worshippers.
Having said which, AVODAH in this verse is unquestionably "worship" and not "slavery".
10:27 VA YECHAZEK YHVH ET LEV PAR'OH VE LO AVAH LE SHALCHAM
וַיְחַזֵּק יְהוָה אֶת-לֵב פַּרְעֹה וְלֹא אָבָה לְשַׁלְּחָם
KJ: But the LORD hardened
Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go.
BN: But YHVH hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go.
Of course not. For Jesus to go down into the Underworld, in order to be able to rise again, he first has to be crucified, as Osher has to be gored in the thigh by the boar Set. So the slaying of the first-born, which parallels inside Egypt the sacrifices at the holy mountain, is also a necessary final act.
10:28 VA YOMER LO PHAR'OH LECH ME ALAY HISHAMER LECHA AL TOSEPH RE'OT PANAI KI BE YOM RE'OT'CHA PANAI TAMUT
וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ פַרְעֹה לֵךְ מֵעָלָי הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ אַל תֹּסֶף רְאוֹת פָּנַי כִּי בְּיוֹם רְאֹתְךָ פָנַי תָּמוּת
KJ: And Pharaoh said unto
him, Get thee from me, take heed to thyself, see my face no more; for in that day thou
seest my face thou shalt die.
The personal relationship between Mosheh and Pharaoh merits an essay. This is not the Pharaoh of his childhood, the one whose daughter brought him up and who pronounced a death sentence against him for the murder of the overseer; it was stated that he died and a new one took his place. Who was the new Pharaoh? One likely possibility is that it was his son, which would make Mosheh his step or half-brother.
Liturgically, of course, what Pharaoh says in not a threat at all, but a statement of fact; his reign as sacred-king ends when the year ends and the darkness lifts upon the Exodus, drowned in the waters of Creation as they close together from either side of the miraculously-created firmament in the Sea of Reeds; in that dawn a new king, Ach-Mousa, will reign, and Hor (the god of the Golden Calf), will succeed Ra, whose "eye" and "face" will also be obliterated. For the new king to see the old king again, he too must have died and made the journey that only kings can make, to the invisible regions of the skies.
But this is later Egypt, not earlier Egypt. Just as Yitschak at the Akeda was spared, and a ram sacrificed in his place, so, in the middle period of Egypt, the Pharaoh too was spared, allowed to remain on his throne for another, and then another year, and the firstborn of Egypt sacrificed in his stead, quite probably symbolically, as in the Jewish world - the act of circumcision, the rite of Pidyon ha Ben; though there is much evidence, across the human world, universally, that the May-King May-Queen rituals, which were the final act in the fertility rites of the spring, did indeed include the physical sacrifice of large numbers of firstborn, usually after they had reached puberty or the fertility rites would have been barren.
And of course, we have to point out, this sacrifice of the firstborn is precisely what was taking place, as it did every year, when Mosheh was himself on the list of should-have-beens in Exodus 1:15 ff, just as it is the Herodian version in Matthew 2.
KI BE YOM RE'OT'CHA PANAI TAMUT: Pharaoh in his role as surrogate for the deity. Exodus 33:20 is the place to go for this line.
Liturgically, of course, what Pharaoh says in not a threat at all, but a statement of fact; his reign as sacred-king ends when the year ends and the darkness lifts upon the Exodus, drowned in the waters of Creation as they close together from either side of the miraculously-created firmament in the Sea of Reeds; in that dawn a new king, Ach-Mousa, will reign, and Hor (the god of the Golden Calf), will succeed Ra, whose "eye" and "face" will also be obliterated. For the new king to see the old king again, he too must have died and made the journey that only kings can make, to the invisible regions of the skies.
But this is later Egypt, not earlier Egypt. Just as Yitschak at the Akeda was spared, and a ram sacrificed in his place, so, in the middle period of Egypt, the Pharaoh too was spared, allowed to remain on his throne for another, and then another year, and the firstborn of Egypt sacrificed in his stead, quite probably symbolically, as in the Jewish world - the act of circumcision, the rite of Pidyon ha Ben; though there is much evidence, across the human world, universally, that the May-King May-Queen rituals, which were the final act in the fertility rites of the spring, did indeed include the physical sacrifice of large numbers of firstborn, usually after they had reached puberty or the fertility rites would have been barren.
And of course, we have to point out, this sacrifice of the firstborn is precisely what was taking place, as it did every year, when Mosheh was himself on the list of should-have-beens in Exodus 1:15 ff, just as it is the Herodian version in Matthew 2.
KI BE YOM RE'OT'CHA PANAI TAMUT: Pharaoh in his role as surrogate for the deity. Exodus 33:20 is the place to go for this line.
10:29 VA YOMER MOSHEH KEN DIBARTA LO OSIPH OD RE'OT PANEYCHA
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה כֵּן דִּבַּרְתָּ לֹא אֹסִף עוֹד רְאוֹת פָּנֶיךָ
KJ: And Moses said, Thou
hast spoken well, I will see thy face again no more.
BN: And Mosheh said: "You have spoken well; I will never see your face again."
BN: And Mosheh said: "You have spoken well; I will never see your face again."
LO OSEPH OD RE'OT PANEYCHA: Which of course is true of a terminal moon as much as it is of a Pharaoh from whim you have just made clear you are departing with no intention of coming back.
Go back and check how many times the word YOSEPH is used in this tale, and always entirely incongruously. The allusion cannot be ignored.
pey break
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment