PARSHAS BO
Kli Yakar (Sh’mos Perek 7/Posuk 17) cites a fascinating and analytical
Abarbanel in which the latter discusses the unique phrase that appears for the first
time in this verse.
As a prelude to the first of the plagues, Moshe is commanded by Hashem to make
the following declaration to Par’o. “Ko o’mar Hashem b’zos tei’da’ ki a’ni
Hashem hi’nei o’no’chi ma’keh ba’ma’teh a’sher b’yo’di ‘al ha’ma’yim a’sher
ba’y’or v’neh’f’chu l’dom.” Thus said Hashem, with this you [Par’o] shall know
that I am Hashem-behold I am smiting with the staff that is in my [Moshe] hand
on the water in the river and it [the water] will turn to blood.
This declaration that states that Par’o will know that there is Hashem appears
three times in the course of meting out the punishment of the plagues.
The first time is in our verse in Parshas Voeiro.
The second time for this type of statement is later in Parshas Voeiro prior to the
plague of ‘O’rov. There we read, “V’hif’lei’si va’yom ha’hu es Eretz Goshen
a’sher ‘ami o’meid ‘o’lei’ho l’vil’ti he’os shom ‘o’rov l’ma’an tei’da’ ki ani
Hashem b’kerev ho’o’retz” (Perek 8/Posuk 18). And I [Hashem] will separate on
that day [when I will visit this plague upon the nations] the Land of Goshen that
My People dwell upon it so that there should not be there the plague of ‘O’rov in
order that you [Par’o] shall know I Hashem am in the midst of the Land.”
The final occasion is later in Parshas Voeiro (Perek 9/Posuk 14). There we read,
prior to the onset of the plague of Borod-hail, “Ki ba’pa’am ha’zos a’ni
sho’lei’ach es ko ma’gei’fo’sai el li’b’cho u’va’a’vo’de’cho u’v’a’me’cho b’a’vur
tei’da’ ki ein ko’mo’ni bo’o’retz.” Because this time I [Hashem] am sending all of
my plagues to your heart, Par’o and in [the hearts of] our slaves and your people
or order that you will know that there is no on like Me on the earth.
Three times during the course of the Ten Plagues Hashem states their purpose as
letting Par’o know that He Yisborach is Hashem, overseeing all of history, ho’yoh,
ho’veh v’yi’h’yeh.
Abarnanel explains to us why these phrases appear specifically at the point that
they are written. Of course, if such a phrase predicated every plague then we
would need no special explanation. It is the differential use of these phrases that
particularly call out attention to them. Furthermore, as Abarnanel notes, though
the phrases are most similar, they are not identical. We are quite aware that
“almost” is not an explanation and the apparently slight differences are significant
in and of themselves.
First he explains that these phrases introduces each of group of three plagues.
The phrases come before the first, the fourth and the seventh of the makkos.
Secondly, he explains that the different makkos, especially as they were organized
according to the acrostic siman in the Haggadah Shel Pesach, convey separate and
distinct messages.
The first group of makkos comes to prove the existence of HaKodosh Boruch Hu.
Par’o disparagingly said, “mi Hashem”? (Perek 5/Posuk 2), denying His
existence Yisborach. The goal of the initial set of plagues was to clearly establish
that Hashem exists.
For this reason, the original phrase is worded “b’zos tei’da’ ki a’ni Hashem”.
With these plagues my existence will be clearly demonstrated.
The second set of plagues came to demonstrate that the Hashem Who does truly
exist, provides hashgacha p’ratis over this world. His Divine Providence means
that He Yisborach is totally and completely aware of all events that involve all of
mankind. The need for these plagues was to establish this fact in an indisputable
manner. That is why the knowledge that will become apparent to Par’o from
these plagues is “ki A’ni Hashem b’ke’rev ho’o’retz”. I am Hashem in the midst
of the land. Hashem is not disconnected. The relationship with Him is not
limited. He Yisborach is in the very midst of all that occurs.
The third aspect that the plagues were to affirm was that Hashem has complete
and utter mastery over nature. Nature does not exist independently of HaKodosh
Boruch Hu. Nature is a creation of G-d no less than all of the creatures, beings
and creations that we know.
For this reason, the third piece of knowledge that the last group of plagues was to
impart was that “ki ein ko’mo’ni b’chol ho’o’retz”. There is none like Me in the
entire land. The land is not independent. I Hashem control it and give the land
and that which grows and the heavens and that which comes from the heavens
their existence.
Thus, three times HaKodosh Boruch Hu presented Par’o with indisputable
knowledge, establishing His existence, His Providence and His Mastery.
All of this would be fine except for one problem. It did not seem to work. It did
not at all seem that Par’o learned anything from the plagues. The succession of
plagues came precisely because Par’o learned nothing or that which he claimed to
learn was acquired under duress and he had no qualms about dismissing that
learning when the stress was removed.
How can we understand that which appear to be definitive statements. Par’o will
know! Did he know? It doesn’t necessarily seem like it.
Chizkuni add a word to the first instance of “l’ma’an tei’da”. He writes
“tas’chil”, meaning that the first group of plagues was only a beginning. Success
should not be expected up front. That answer, too, seems to be lacking since
success did not show up at the end either.
Targum Yonoson ben Uziel writes an explanation that seems helpful. He
explains the first refusal of Par’o to be swayed by a plague, in which we are told
“…va’ye’che’zak lev Par’o v’lo sho’ma’ a’lei’hem…”(Perek 7/Posuk 22). The
literal translation of the verse is that “Par’o’s heart hardened and he did not listen
to them [Moshe and Aharon].
Targum Yonoson adds, “…v’is’kef yitz’ro d’Far’o v’lo ka’bel min’hon…” The
yetzer ho’ra’ of Par’o became strong and he did not believe them. That is,
intellectually Par’o was aware that the events in which he participated were
cataclysmic and earth shaking. His evilness was so strong, however, that it
overcame the intellectual awareness that he realized with complete clarity.
This would explain why in the latter plagues it was Hashem who had to harden
the heart of Par’o. Even he would have to admit to the truth that hit him with
such power, except that Hashem prevented him from acknowledging the truth
that was undeniable.
There is another way, perhaps, to answer this question. However, a second
question will be posed first to set the environment for the new answer.
In the beginning of our Parshas Bo we have a verse in which Hashem tells Moshe
“bo el Par’o” (Perek 10/Posuk 1). Moshe is to come to Par’o but the message he
is to bring is not stated in the verse. Furthermore, a new purpose is given to the
plagues. “U’l’ma’an t’sa’per b’oz’nei vi’n’cho u’ven bi’n’cho eis a’sher his’a’lal’ti
b’Mitzrayim (Posuk 3). You will go to Par’o in order that you will tell your
children and grandchildren how I Hashem toyed with Egypt.
All of the commentators attempt to explain this strange sequence of verses as
well as the new reason that is given for the plagues. Until now we saw the
plagues as a vehicle to cause us to know G-d.
Now we are told they have changed their purpose. Their goal is to be a
significant source of influence on all generations.
In fact, it does seem to be problematic to understand why Hashem would be
interested in teaching Par’o anything. It was by his command that first the
Jewish boys would be killed and then shortly thereafter he commanded the
execution of all babies, even from his own people.
It with all of this in mind, we can suggest that there is another explanation
regarding the intent of the “l’ma’an tei’da” verses as above.
In fact, the proofs to Par’o were conclusive. Any unbiased, sane person would be
convinced beyond a doubt regarding the existence of G-d and the powers He
demonstrates through His Providence and His mastery.
The message to B’nei Yisroel for all generations is to look at Par’o. Observe him
carefully. Monitor his promises and his actions. G-d’s message is that you, B’nei
Yisroel can express wonder at the deep evil of Par’o as he remained steadfast in
his inappropriate leadership.
To us it may seem a given that Hashem’s existence is beyond question. But, as we
learn from Par’o, it is not simple at all. We are not only telling of our insights
into G-d’s rule over the world when we recount the Exodus and its inherent
miraculous nature, we are having a deeper appreciation of the fact that we
acknowledge such and that is denied by that very world over which G-d rules.
Par’o is presented to us as this proverbial straw man. He was real and he
attempted to do that which he wished. This knowledge and insight is presented
to us clearly so that we may always remember the difference between us and
Par’o and all of his successors. We have this knowledge to help us better realize
our tafkid, seeking to maximize its accomplishments within a framework of selfdefinition. By knowing who we are, we can take this multi-generational Divine
message and maximize its lessons as we anticipate the revealed Hand of G-d and
seek to have it comfort us in these times of travail.
Shabbat Shalom
Chodesh Tov
Rabbi Pollock