After Moshe teaches the halachot of Mishpatim to the people (enabling them to better understand what acceptance of the complete Torah implies), Hashem begins a new conversation with Moshe.
"Behold, I send an angel before you to protect you on the way…." (23: 20).
In the gemara, Raba seems to wonder why the Torah restates the point with the changed language. However, Rashi explains that the verse implies that the nation would sin by making the Golden calf and that the Divine Presence would then say to them, 'I will not go up among you…' (33: 3).
The verse that Rashi refers to says, "…I will send an angel before you" and then continues "…for I will not go up among you" (33: 2-3).
According to Rashi, the sin of the golden calf caused a real change in the relationship between God and His people. At first, leadership of the people was directly from Hashem. The people perceived this leadership in the pillar of fire and the cloud.
It was not that Hashem gave general directions which were carried out by Moshe: the actual map reading was done in heaven! After the sin of the golden calf this changed. The particular directions came from Moshe and only the general direction from Heaven. This explains the addition of the angel in leading the way for the people to follow.
It also explains why the language used in the parasha of beshalach differs from the that used after the sin of the golden calf in ki tisa.
However, our verse remains a mystery. Why did the Torah change its position in the parasha of mishpatim and state: "I send and angel before you …" (23: 20). The sin of the golden calf has not yet happened.
Rashi is not usually fazed by problems of chronology. He is content to say that the Torah is not committed to chronological reporting: it is the message content, the ideas, that need to concern us. However, in this case, Rashi does not use that particular avenue of escape. Instead, Rashi claims that the verse was placed after the teaching the laws intentionally in order to make the people aware of a particular change of plan. Originally, they were to be lead directly by Hashem; now, they are being informed that there will be a change. Because they will sin in the future they will be lead by the angel and not directly by Hashem.
The laws that the people had studied were part of the Torah received through direct communication from Heaven. This is actually the continuation of the idea that the people would be lead from Egypt directly by Hashem. In both matters the notion of direct communication is of paramount importance. After teaching of the laws, Hashem makes it clear to Moshe that Divine revelation throughout history, in the manner of the revelation on Sinai, is not part of our agreement.
True, when the people left Egypt, there was a plan that the ongoing relationship with Hashem would be unusually close. That was the situation reflected in the revelation at Sinai. However, after the sin of the golden calf that relationship was no longer possible (certainly not as a given). Therefore it was important for Hashem to clarify that the people should not expect that the covenant included the kind of relationship that was experienced at Sinai.
Rashi is careful to emphasize that the information in our verse is chronologically in order and could not be presented in any other place in the Torah.
Gut shabbos, Chaim Brovender
After Moshe completes his rendition of the great poem that describes the salvation of the people at the Red Sea, the Torah teaches that it was Miriam's turn to express herself.
"Miriam the prophetess, Aharon's sister, took the tambourine in her hand and all the women went forth with her taking tambourines and doing various dances…" (15: 20).
"Miriam called to them: "Sing to Hashem…" (15: 21). She repeats the refrain that Moshe has said along with the people. Moshe was the dominant brother, and he was the one who lead the prayers which Miriam imitates and it is reasonable that she should be called "Moshe's sister" in this context.
It is important to note that Rashbam (who followed Rashi's interpretive system) states that this is not really a problem. Miriam is called the sister of Aharon because Aharon was the oldest. Siblings are referred to while mentioning the oldest child.
Rashi is interested in something more-- the meaning of the words is not enough. Though Rashi could have interpreted as the Rashbam, he prefers to show that the sequence of words in the verse has a special meaning.
According to Rashi, we are taught the answer to the question: "where did she prophesize?" The answer to the question is that she prophesied while she was only Aharon's sister, before Moshe was born. She said then: "my mother is to give birth to a son who will save the people of Yisrael…" [Sotah 12b].
This has to be understood as follows. Miriam was not a prophetess because she engaged in prophecy at the time of the splitting of the sea and sang a song that Moshe had originated. She was a prophetess previously. As a result, she was now able to engage in the prophetic act of leading the women in singing the great poem.
Ramban points out at the end of Parashat Bo that one of the reasons that the plagues were announced by Moshe and discussed again and again by Moshe with Pharaoh, was in order to prove again and again that the event called yeziat mizraim, the exodus from Egypt, was determined through prophecy. This prophecy in turn makes it reasonable for the world to understand that the Torah is a possible reality.
Torah was given through prophecy, and the exodus from Egypt is a proof that such prophecy (torah) is possible.
Rashi points out that the song that Moshe sang was prophecy and had specific prophetic content. In his comment to another verse: "Then Moshe…will sing", Rashi explains the apparent future tense of the verb as follows: "this word yashir (he will sing) contains an allusion to the resurrection of the dead…" (15:1). This is clearly a statement that the content of the "song" was prophetic. Moshe was composing a "song" worthy of the Torah. (Rashi himself is not perfectly clear about this commentary. See his issue there.) The fact that the resurrection of the dead is only mentioned as a remez is very much the way of the Torah. Moshe's version of the song of the sea was a prophecy and contained specific information necessary for the forging of the Jewish people.
For Miriam the presentation in the Torah is different. "Miriam called out to them, "sing to Hashem for he is exalted…" (15: 21). Rashi explains that "Moshe led the men in song… and Miriam did the same for the women".
There is no obvious indication that Miriam led the women as a prophetess or that her "song" contained special prophetic information. If Rashbam is right then the song that Miriam sang was on a lower prophetic level than the song of Moshe. If that's true, perhaps the words "sister of Aharon" are meant to remind us of her familial connections. However, according to Rashi we are reminded that she was also a prophetess, and that her song is being sung within that context.
Though the event of the splitting of the sea enabled everyone to achieve a significant level of awareness of G-d, only Moshe and according to Rashi, Miriam, who had prophesized previously, were entitled to lead the people in song.
Gut Shabbos, Chaim Brovender Let us learn a posuk with Rashi.
Missed a parasha? Visit the parasha archives...
Return to Yeshivat Hamivtar - Orot Lev
