AND THE LORD SPOKE. Scripture employs a short form,¹ for Moses stands in place of Israel.² is the same as saying, the Lord spoke unto Israel; i.e., the contents of this chapter pertained to Israel. However, Yefet says that Moses was commanded to verbally sanctify all first-born.³ The aforementioned is the reverse of then the priest shall defile him (Lev. 13:8);⁴. Both Moses and the priests perform their actions verbally. What I.E. means by the term “reverse” is that one makes someone unclean while the other makes one holy. the priest, being holy, defiles an individual by declaration.⁵

footnotes: ¹ Scripture should have followed up our verse with: speak unto the children of Israel and say unto them as in Num. 6:1,2. As things stand, it is nowhere stated in our chapter that Moses told or was commanded to relate the contents of verse 1 to the Israelites. ² Hence And the Lord spoke unto Moses ³ According to Yefet this command was only for Moses. Moses personally was to declare all first-born holy. ⁴ Translated literally. J.P.S. renders, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean ⁵ And not in any other way. The verse can be taken to mean that the priest shall place an unclean object upon the subject in order to make him unclean, hence I.E.’s comment.

OPENETH. Peter (openeth) means the opening of. Peter is similar to peture (open) in and open flowers (I Kings 6:18). Its meaning is, the son who first opens the womb.⁶ literally means the opening of the womb, hence I.E.’s comment. The word rechem (womb) is irregular, as according to the rules of Hebrew grammar the letter preceding a guttural is vocalized with a pattach.⁷ in penultimately accented nouns. Compare, nachal (river), lahav (flame), and na’ar (youth) (Weiser). Hence our word should have been vocalized racham rather than rechem. Cf. Jud. 5:30.

footnotes: ⁶ Peter kol rechem ⁷ Rather than a segol

AND MOSES SAID. Remember this day was said by Moses on the fifteenth day.⁸) of the 15th day (yom) he said remember. Filwarg correctly points out that the second yom is a scribal error and should be deleted. It means the same as And this day shall be unto you for a memorial (Ex. 12:14).

footnotes: ⁸ Of Nisan, the day that they actually left Egypt. The Hebrew literally reads: on the day (ba-yom

[OUT OF THE HOUSE OF BONDAGE.] This indicates that the Egyptians forced them to work as if they were their slaves.⁹, 1:5, “From the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule…Clearly there are some who are by nature free, others are by nature slaves, and for the latter their condition of servitude is both advantageous and just.” Elsewhere Scripture reads, out of the iron furnace (Deut. 4:20), for the Egyptians overpowered them.¹⁰ However, the Lord brought them out by strength of hand from the mighty.

footnotes: ⁹ Hence Scripture speaks of the place/house of bondage. However, the Israelites were not true slaves. They were a separate nation. They lived in their own houses, not in the homes of their masters; they had a family life and a culture. I.E. apparently comments thus so that people would not think of the ancient Israelites in the same way that they thought of contemporary slaves, i.e., as mean people. Cf. Aristotle’s Politics ¹⁰ And forced them to work as if they were the slaves, of the Egyptians.

THIS DAY. Moses first mentions, there shall be no leavened bread eaten, its meaning being, do in future generations what you did on the day that you left Egypt.¹¹ As you left Egypt at the time when the first ears (aviv) are found,¹² (This day ye go forth in the month Abib). I.E. interprets this verse to mean: This day ye go forth in the month of fresh ears. so shall you do yearly in the future in the Land of Israel when the first ears come. The first ears refers to the first ears of barley. The word aviv (Abib) means the first that ripens.¹³ Aviv comes from the same root as av (father), which means first to the one whom one begets, or sage¹⁴. Cf. Jud. 17:10, Dwell with me, and be unto me a father (av) and a priest; and Pirke Avot (Ethics of the Fathers/Sages). to the student whom one teaches.¹⁵ means first in wisdom. Furthermore, it is written, for the barley was in the ear (aviv) (Ex. 9:31).¹⁶ refers to ears of barley. Even of the first-fruits (bikkure) of wheat harvest (Ex. 34:22),¹⁷, not avivim, for aviv refers to the first barley ears, which ripen about two months before the wheat does. which is written with regard to the festival of weeks,¹⁸ is proof of the above.¹⁹ means first.

footnotes: ¹¹ Eat no leaven on that day. ¹² Verse 4 reads, ha-yom attem yotze’im be-chodesh ha-aviv ¹³ The barley ripens first. ¹⁴ A sage is called an av ¹⁵ In this case av ¹⁶ Which shows that aviv ¹⁷ The Torah refers to the first ears of the wheat harvest as bikkurim ¹⁸ Which falls seven weeks after Passover. ¹⁹ That aviv

AND IT SHALL BE. Scripture does not list all of the seven Canaanite nations because they have already been mentioned elsewhere.²⁰

footnotes: ²⁰ They are listed in Gen. 15:19-21 and there is no need to repeat all of them here.

THE SEVEN DAYS. This is the service.²¹

footnotes: ²¹ Spoken of in verse 5.

UNLEAVENED BREAD. Now the stranger that is within the gate was exhorted by God to observe the Sabbath,²² as it is only on the condition that he do no work before the Lord on the Sabbath that he may dwell within the gates. Similarly on the Day of Atonement, for it is so written.²³ (Lev. 23:32). The same applies to Passover, as a stranger is not permitted to eat leaven even on his own property. This is the meaning of in all thy borders.

footnotes: ²² Ex. 20:10. ²³ The Day of Atonement is called a sabbath of solemn rest

IT IS BECAUSE OF THAT. Rabbi Merinus says that ba’avur zeh (it is because of that) should have been written, zeh ba’avur; i.e., this is because of what the Lord did for me.²⁴) the Lord did for me when I came forth out of Egypt. Rabbi Merinus could find no sense in this. Prima facie, “because of this” refers to the eating of matzah. What meaning is there in: because of the eating of the matzah, the Lord did for me when I came forth out of Egypt? He thus interprets our verse to mean: It is because of that (zeh ba’avur) which the Lord did for me when I came out of Egypt that I eat matzah and abstain from leaven. He cited what in his opinion are many other such instances.²⁵, chap. 28. However, I do not think that he was right in even one instance. For how can we invert the words of the living God? The meaning of the verse is just the opposite of what he understands it to be, because we do not eat unleavened bread “because of this.”²⁶ is not to be interpreted as a reason for the eating of the matzah and abstaining from leaven. Its meaning rather is: it is because of this, i.e., it is because of this service, namely, the eating of unleavened bread and the abstention from leavened bread, which are the first of the precepts that God commanded us, that the Lord did signs for us and brought us out of Egypt.²⁷ Its meaning thus is: God took us out of Egypt only to serve Him, as it is written, when thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain (Ex. 20:12). It is furthermore stated, I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God:²⁸ I am the Lord your God (Num. 15:41).

footnotes: ²⁴ Our verse literally reads: And thou shalt tell thy son in that day saying, because of this (ba’avur zeh ²⁵ Where the word order has to be inverted. See Sefer Ha-Rikmah ²⁶ In other words, ba’avur zeh ²⁷ Our verse is to be understood thus: And thou shalt tell thy son in that day saying: It is because we should observe this (and other) precept(s) the Lord did signs for me when I went out of Egypt. So too Rashi. ²⁸ That is, so that you will serve me.

AND IT SHALL BE A SIGN UNTO THEE. There are those who oppose our holy patriarchs²⁹ refers to the phylacteries placed upon the hand and head. and say³⁰. This is obviously a scribal error. The correct reading is, she-ameru. that for a sign…and for a memorial is to be understood in the manner of For they shall be a chaplet of grace unto thy head, And chains about thy head (Prov. 1:9).³¹ They also say that And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand (Deut. 5:8) is like Bind them continually upon thy heart, Tie them upon thy neck (Prov. 6:21)³² and also that And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house (Deut. 6:9) is like Write them upon the table of thy heart (Prov. 3:3). They furthermore say that it shall be for a sign…and for a memorial means for with a strong hand hath the Lord brought thee out of Egypt shall drop from your lips.³³ However, this is incorrect, for at the beginning of the book of Proverbs it is stated, The Proverbs of Solomon. Thus whatever Solomon henceforth mentions is by way of parable. However, it is not, heaven forbid, written in the Torah that it is metaphoric. Hence it is to be taken only at face value. We thus will not interpret it except literally. It does not contradict reason if explained according to its plain meaning, like Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart (Deut. 10:16), which has to be interpreted according to the requirements of reason.³⁴

footnotes: ²⁹ Who interpret our verse literally and say that for a sign unto thee upon thy hand, and for a memorial between thy eyes ³⁰ Those who oppose the rabbis. I.E. reads, she-amar ³¹ Which is not to be taken literally, for it refers to the teachings of one’s father and mother (Prov. 1:8). Similarly with our verse (see note 20). It is worthy of note that this interpretation is found in Rashbam, who notes that from a literal point of view our verse is to be taken metaphorically: that is, a person should recall the Exodus as if it were written upon his hand and adorned his head as a jewel. ³² Which is not to be taken literally. ³³ Its knowledge shall be second nature, so that you can recall it and speak of it at the drop of a hat. ³⁴ See I.E.’s third approach to Biblical interpretation, Vol. 1, pp. 10 and 11.

[UPON THY HAND.] Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the term yad (hand) in most of Scripture refers to the left hand,³⁵ as in Yea, My hand (yadi) hath laid the foundation of the earth, And My right hand hath spread out the heavens (Is. 48:13); and Her hand (yadah) she put to the tent-pin, And her right hand to the workmen’s hammer (Jud. 5:26). However, the teachings of tradition are firmly established and do not require any support.³⁶ usually refers to the left hand.

footnotes: ³⁵ According to the rabbis the hand phylactery is placed on the left hand. ³⁶ I.E. disagrees that yad

FROM YEAR TO YEAR. Mi-yamim yamimah (from year to year) is similar to yamim tiheyeh ge’ullato (for a full year shall he have the right of redemption (Lev. 25:29). The meaning of mi-yamim yamimah is, from year to year. The year begins when the Bet Din announces its commencement.³⁷

footnotes: ³⁷ As explained by I.E. in his comments on Ex. 12:2.

AND IT SHALL BE. Moses mentions only the Canaanite, because he was the father of them all.³⁸

footnotes: ³⁸ Gen. 10:15-18. Hence the term Canaanite includes all the inhabitants of Canaan. Also see I.E. on Gen. 15:20

[AS HE SWORE UNTO THEE.] Its meaning is similar to for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give this land (Gen. 26:3).³⁹ means as He swore unto your fathers to give this land to you their seed (Krinsky), as we do not find God taking this oath to the generation enslaved in Egypt.

footnotes: ³⁹ As He swore unto thee and to thy fathers

THAT THOU SHALT SET APART. Thou shalt set it apart unto the Lord so that it does not get mixed up with another. Now these two precepts⁴⁰ were commanded on the fifteenth day.

footnotes: ⁴⁰ The sanctification of the first-born (v. 2) and the eating of unleavened bread (v. 3 and 6).

COMING OF. Sheger⁴¹. (coming of) follows the paradigm of eretz (land of) whose vocalization does not change in the construct. However, a number of irregular cases⁴² whose vowels change to sheva, pattach in the construct. are found. They are: shegar (the increase of)⁴³, as in our verse. in the increase of thy kine (Deut. 7:13), chadar (chamber of)⁴⁴. in and in the chamber of thy bed (Ex. 7:28), havel (vanity of)⁴⁵. in Vanity of vanities (Eccles. 1:1), hamatekha (thy venom)⁴⁶. in That puttest thy venom thereto (Hab. 2:15), and delatekha (thy doors)⁴⁷. in and shut the doors (Is. 26:20). I have not found any additional instances.

footnotes: ⁴¹ Vocalized segol, segol ⁴² Nouns vocalized segol, segol ⁴³ Rather than sheger ⁴⁴ The absolute form of which is cheder ⁴⁵ The absolute form of which is hevel ⁴⁶ The absolute form of which is chemet ⁴⁷ The absolute form of which is delet

AND EVERY FIRSTLING OF AN ASS. Which is unclean, thou shalt redeem with a lamb.

THOU SHALT BREAK ITS NECK. Some say that va-arafto (thou shalt break its neck) means thou shalt write the word holy on its neck.⁴⁸ means a neck. Hence va-arafto literally means: and you shall neck it. Hence the possibility of this interpretation. However, I say that anyone who says this is himself a stiff-necked ass. For behold it is written, He will break down (ya’arof) their altars (Hos. 10:2),⁴⁹ means to break. and ve-arefu sham et ha-eglah ba-nachal (and shall break the heifer’s neck there in the valley) (Deut. 21:4), in which the meaning of ve-arefu is, as explained by the transmitters of the law, to cut off the neck.⁵⁰ All firstlings that are not brought up on the altar or are not redeemed are required to be killed, as all the first-born of Egypt both man and beast perished. God did not save them⁵¹ from the decree which he had issued on the first-born of the Egyptians except that they should be prepared for His service. The Israelites had no unclean animals except for asses. Therefore no other⁵² first-born⁵³ is to be redeemed.

footnotes: ⁴⁸ The word oref ⁴⁹ We thus see that the verb derived from oref ⁵⁰ Apparently no one disputes the rabbinic interpretation. Otherwise I.E. would be guilty of circular reasoning. ⁵¹ The first-born of Israel, both man and beast. ⁵² Unclean. ⁵³ Animal.

AND IT SHALL BE. Rabbi Judah Ha-Levi of blessed memory says that the word machar (in time to come)⁵⁴ is missing an alef, its meaning being that which comes after today.⁵⁵ is short for me’acher (after). Rabbi Judah Ha-Levi interprets this way because “And it shall come to pass when thy son asketh thee tomorrow (machar),” etc., makes no sense in our context, whereas And it shall come to pass when thy son asketh thee in time to come (machar) does. Also see Rashi, “There are instances when machar means after some time.”

footnotes: ⁵⁴ Literally, tomorrow. ⁵⁵ In other words machar

AND IT CAME TO PASS. Moses begins by saying, By strength of hand the Lord brought us out from Egypt (v. 14) and backtracks and explains that what the strength of hand refers to is the plague of the first-born. It was because of this plague, and not because of the first plagues, that Israel went out of Egypt. The poet similarly says, To Him that smote Egypt in their first-born, For His mercy endureth for ever (Ps. 136:10).⁵⁶ (Ps. 136:11). None of the other plagues are recalled in Ps. 136. Only this plague is mentioned, because it was the one that caused Pharaoh to permit Israel to leave Egypt. Moses wrote elliptically. When Moses said, that the Lord slew all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both the first-born of man, and the first-born of beasts, it was known⁵⁷ that God saved our first-born and the first-born of our cattle. It is to the latter,⁵⁸ not to the slaying of the first-born, that therefore I sacrifice to the Lord all that openeth the womb is connected.

footnotes: ⁵⁶ Which is followed by And brought out Israel from among them ⁵⁷ At that time. ⁵⁸ Although it is not stated in the text.

ALL THAT OPENETH THE WOMB, BEING MALES. From a kind fit to be sacrificed to the Lord.⁵⁹

footnotes: ⁵⁹ In other words, “all” is not to be taken literally because it does not include unclean animals.

AND IT SHALL BE FOR A SIGN. Scripture mentions, And it shall be for a sign upon thy hand with regard to two commandments.⁶⁰ That which the sages of blessed memory transmitted, namely, that the chapters⁶¹ are to be written,⁶² is true.

footnotes: ⁶⁰ The eating of unleavened bread (v. 9) and the sanctification of the first-born (v. 16). ⁶¹ Ex. 13:1-10 and Ex. 13:11-16, which contain these commandments. ⁶² In the phylacteries.

AND FOR FRONTLETS. Totafot (frontlets) means a memorial.⁶³ (memorial) in place of totafot (frontlets). Others say⁶⁴ that the tet of totafot⁶⁵. is doubled,⁶⁶. Menachem believed that Hebrew words come from a two-letter root its meaning being to speak. They say that it comes from the same root as ve-hettef (and preach) in and preach toward the south (Ezek. 21:2). However, in my opinion this is far-fetched.⁶⁷ comes from the root nun, tet, peh whereas totafot comes from the root tet, tet, peh (Krinsky).

footnotes: ⁶³ Our verse is similar to verse 9, which has zikaron ⁶⁴ Menachem ben Saruk (c. 910-970 C.E.). See Rashi. ⁶⁵ Which is spelled with two tafs ⁶⁶ From the root tet, peh ⁶⁷ Because ve-hettef

Can a fool who rebels against his maker succeed? When at peace his liver an arrow shall split. Note and take heed, O recusant; All that the portion Be-Shallach records concerning Pharaoh.

AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN PHARAOH HAD LET THE PEOPLE GO. The vav in ve-lo nacham (led them not) is like an unaspirated fa in the Arabic tongue.⁶⁸ prefixed to a word does not always mean and. Hence ve-lo nacham does not mean: and led them not, but may mean: that God led them not, or something similar. It is known that the distance between Egypt and Jerusalem by way of the land of the Philistines is not very great. It is about a ten-day journey by straight road. If this was not so, how did the tribes⁶⁹ come as far as Egypt upon their asses?⁷⁰ If the distance was very great how much would have been necessary for them and their asses to eat?⁷¹ Furthermore, upon returning they brought back food for their households.⁷²

footnotes: ⁶⁸ In other words, a vav ⁶⁹ Jacob’s sons. ⁷⁰ To buy food. See Gen. 42-44. ⁷¹ In other words, if the distance between Egypt and Canaan had been very great they would not have been able to carry enough food with them for the journey. ⁷² If the distance was very great they would have had to carry a vast amount of food for the journey plus an additional amount for their households.

ALTHOUGH THAT WAS NEAR. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that ki karov hu means although that was near.⁷³, which usually means “for” or “because,” has the meaning of “although” here. Rabbi Moses interprets thus, for prima facie, the word, “because” is out of place here, as God should have led them by the way of the Philistines because it was close. In my opinion, ki am keshe oref hu (for it is a stiff-necked people) (Ex. 34:9); refa’ah nafshi ki chatati lakh (Heal my soul; for I have sinned against Thee) (Ps. 41:5); and ki rekhev barzel lo (though they have chariots of iron) (Josh. 17:18) are similar.⁷⁴ in these verses is to be translated as although. Hence Ex. 34:9 is to be translated, although it is a stiff-necked people; and Ps. 41:5, Heal my soul; although I have sinned against Thee. However, I see no need for this interpretation,⁷⁵ here as although. for its meaning is: the reason God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines was that it was close.⁷⁶ is to be rendered, because it was close. God thus led them via a distant way so that they would not witness any war and say, Let us make a captain, and let us return to Egypt (Num. 14:4).

footnotes: ⁷³ In other words, the word ki ⁷⁴ The word ki ⁷⁵ For interpreting ki ⁷⁶ In other words, ki karov hu

[LEST PERADVENTURE.] We know for certain that the Lord knows the future.⁷⁷ implies that God was uncertain about the future. This contradicts the concept that the Lord is omniscient, hence I.E.’s comments. God knew that the people would repent if He led them by the way of the land of the Philistines. Scripture reads, Lest peradventure the people repent because the Torah employed human terminology so that those who study⁷⁸ will understand.⁷⁹

footnotes: ⁷⁷ Lest peradventure ⁷⁸ The Torah. ⁷⁹ What the Torah is trying to convey. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26.

LED THE PEOPLE ABOUT. Va-yassev (led about)⁸⁰ beneath the yod, a tzere beneath the samekh, and a dagesh in the samekh. is a verb⁸¹. that comes from a double root. Its stem is samekh, bet, bet. Va-yassev also has an alternative vocalization.⁸², with a kamatz beneath the yod and a segol beneath the samekh. For a double root in the hifil imperfect may be vocalized pattach tzere, as in yassev, or kamatz segol, as in yasekh, yagel, yasev. Compare, va-yasekh (shut up) in Or who shut up (Job 38:8)⁸³. and va-yagel (and rolled) in and rolled the stone (Gen. 29:10).⁸⁴. Pay no heed to those who say that the root of va- yassev is nun, samekh, bet.

footnotes: ⁸⁰ Vocalized with a pattach ⁸¹ In the hifil ⁸² It may be vocalized va-yasev ⁸³ Vocalized kamatz, segol ⁸⁴ Vocalized kamatz, segol

[THE WILDERNESS.] The word ha-midbar (the wilderness) is to be read as if written twice.⁸⁵. Now a definite article cannot be prefixed to a word in the construct. Hence I. E. argues that ha-midbar yam suf is short for ha-midbar, midbar yam suf. See Vol. 1, Foreword, p. XV, and I.E. on Gen. 2:9. The clause is to be understood as if written, by the way of the wilderness, wilderness of the Red Sea. Similarly, ha-aron ha-bebrit (the ark of the covenant) (Josh. 3:14) is to be understood as if written, the ark, ark of the covenant,⁸⁶ and, ve-etz ha-da’at tov va-ra (the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) (Gen. 2:9) as if written, and the tree of the knowledge, knowledge of good and evil.⁸⁷ Likewise the terms ha-sefer ha-miknah (the deed of the purchase)⁸⁸, is short for ha-sefer, sefer ha-miknah (the deed, deed of the purchase). (Jer. 32:12) and ha-yayin ha-chemah (the wine of fury) (Jer. 25:15).⁸⁹ is short for ha-yayin, yen ha-chemah (the wine, wine of fury). There are many other similar instances.

footnotes: ⁸⁵ The Hebrew reads, ha-midbar yam suf ⁸⁶ See Vol. 1, p. 54, note 36. ⁸⁷ See Vol. 1, p. 54. ⁸⁸ The phraseha-sefer ha-miknah ⁸⁹ Ha-yayin ha-chemah

RED SEA. Suf (Red) is the name of a place. Others say that suf comes from the same root as sof (the end)⁹⁰ (Red Sea) is a variant of yam sof and means the Sea of the End, that is, the sea which lies at the end of the world. in The end of the matter (Eccles. 12:13). It is so called because it lies at the end of the world. The reference is to the Atlantic, which I have already mentioned.⁹¹ However, this is a major blunder, because the yam suf (Red Sea) lies in the east, opposite Egypt.⁹² The Spanish Sea⁹³ is larger than it.⁹⁴

footnotes: ⁹⁰ In other words, yam suf ⁹¹ Ex. 10:19. Literally, as I have already mentioned. ⁹² Whereas the Atlantic does not. ⁹³ The Mediterranean. ⁹⁴ The Red Sea. How much more so the Atlantic, which is greater than the Mediterranean. Hence the Red Sea cannot be identified with the Atlantic.

ARMED. Some say that chamushim (armed) means full of wealth, possessing all that they need. Now Scripture states, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual (Ex. 12:39).⁹⁵ Furthermore, what reason is there to mention this now?⁹⁶ The only meaning of chamushim is, girded with weapons for war. Compare, chalutzim ta’avoru (ye shall pass over armed) (Deut. 3:18), the meaning of which is: ye shall pass over with girded loins.⁹⁷ means loins. Therefore, chalutzim ta’avoru literally means: ye shall pass over with loins, i.e., with loins girded with weapons. The fact that Scripture in one place reads, ve-attem ta’averu chamushim (but ye shall pass over before your brethren armed) (Josh. 1:14) and in another place refers to the Israelites as chalutzim (Deut. 3:18) is true witness to the aforementioned.⁹⁸ means armed. What reason was there for them to carry food before their brethren?⁹⁹ means stocked with food then Josh. 1:14 tells us that the tribes of Dan and Reuben and half the tribe of Manasseh passed over the Jordan before the rest of Israel, carrying food. Now what conceivable reason was there for this? Food carriers or baggage follow behind troops. They do not precede them. The reason Scripture at this point notes that the children of Israel went up armed is that it is previously stated, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt (v. 17).¹⁰⁰ For¹⁰¹ the Israelites went out with a high hand (Ex. 14:8), with weapons of war and not like fleeing slaves.

footnotes: ⁹⁵ Which shows that they did not have everything they needed. ⁹⁶ That they had provisions. It adds nothing to the account here. Its proper place is in Ex. 12:39. ⁹⁷ The word chalatz ⁹⁸ That chamushim ⁹⁹ If chamushim ¹⁰⁰ Hence we might assume that they were unarmed. ¹⁰¹ Contrary to what verse 17 might imply.

AND MOSES TOOK THE BONES OF JOSEPH. Scripture mentions above that the children of Israel who were alive in that generation went up out of the land of Egypt. Scripture now notes that the children of Israel also brought up with them the most honored one of them, the one through whom they came down to Egypt. The latter had made them swear before his death that they would tell their children, and their children would instruct their children about this.¹⁰² Now Moses busied himself with fulfilling the oath so that no guilt would fall upon Israel. For we see that the princes of Israel swore an oath to the Gibeonites.¹⁰³ Now they only took this oath on condition that the Gibeonites came from a distant place as they claimed.¹⁰⁴ After it was found that the Gibeonites came from close by¹⁰⁵ it was fitting that they not keep their oath so that they and all Israel not violate the injunction, thou shalt save alive nothing (Deut. 20:16). However, they kept their oath out of regard for God’s glory so that they not desecrate it.¹⁰⁶ Many years later God punished the children of Israel¹⁰⁷ because Saul permitted the Gibeonites who were in Nob, the city of the priests, to be put to death.¹⁰⁸

footnotes: ¹⁰² To bring his bones up with them. ¹⁰³ That they would not harm them. See Josh. 9. ¹⁰⁴ See Josh. 9:9. ¹⁰⁵ That is, from the land of Canaan. ¹⁰⁶ As they swore upon God’s name. ¹⁰⁷ See II Sam. 21:1. ¹⁰⁸ See Rashi and Kimchi on II Sam. 21:1.

[THE BONES OF JOSEPH.] Scripture mentions the bones of¹⁰⁹ for all of the flesh and skin breeds worms and putrefies, and after a few years only the bones remain.¹¹⁰

footnotes: ¹⁰⁹ Rather than the body of. ¹¹⁰ I.E. was apparently unaware of the process of mummification.

AND THEY TOOK THEIR JOURNEY…ETHAM. Etham is, as I will explain,¹¹¹ the wilderness of Shur.

footnotes: ¹¹¹ See Ex. 15:22.

AND THE LORD WENT BEFORE THEM BY DAY. We know that the Lord inhabiteth eternity and His name is Holy (Is. 57:15), and that He is enthroned of old. Selah (Ps. 55:20).¹¹² Scripture speaks in the language of men. It reads so because God’s power went with Israel, as in That caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses (Is. 63:12).

footnotes: ¹¹² In other words, God is incorporeal, for if He had a body He could not be eternal. This being the case, why does Scripture read, And the Lord went?

[IN A PILLAR OF CLOUD.] Scripture reads, in a pillar of cloud because it was not shaped like other clouds but was in the form of a pillar stretching from the sky upon the earth. A pillar is called an ammud¹¹³. in Hebrew because the base (ma’amad)¹¹⁴. of the house is on it.¹¹⁵) of the house depends on it. See the word ammud in Kimchi’s Sefer Ha-Shorashim. Be that as it may, I.E.’s point is that the passive form ammud (it was stood up), rather than the active omed (stands) is used for a pillar because the house is stood up, i.e., stands/exists (ammud) because of it.

footnotes: ¹¹³ From the root ayin, mem, dalet ¹¹⁴ From the root ayin, mem, dalet ¹¹⁵ An alternative translation is: because the existence (ma’amad

[THAT THEY MIGHT GO BY DAY AND BY NIGHT.] Scripture reads, that they might go by day and by night because the camp was large and they could only journey a short distance.¹¹⁶ They therefore journeyed part of the day¹¹⁷ and also part of the night.¹¹⁸ These two pillars were, as I shall explain,¹¹⁹ before the Israelites until they came to the sea.

footnotes: ¹¹⁶ At a time. ¹¹⁷ That is, a little by day (Cohen). ¹¹⁸ That is, a little by night. ¹¹⁹ Ex. 15:22

DEPARTED NOT. Yamish (departed) is a transitive verb.¹²⁰ (the pillar of cloud departed not) means: God did not cause the pillar of cloud to depart. For God mentioned above¹²¹ did not cause the pillars to depart from before the people.

footnotes: ¹²⁰ Meaning he caused to depart, the reference being to the Lord mentioned in verse 21. Thus lo yamish ammud he-anan ¹²¹ In verse 21.

[BY DAY.] The word yomam (by day) is not found employed in Scripture except for the time when the sun shines upon the earth. The word yom (day) found in the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings refers also to nighttime, for it is written, on the day (yom) that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt (Num. 8:17). Now the slaying of the first-born took place at night.¹²² It is also written, this day (ha-yom) is a day (yom) of good tidings (II Kings 7:9). Now it was then night, for we read there, if we tarry till the morning light (Ibid.). Scripture also reads, The day (yom) I cry in the night before Thee (Ps. 88:2).¹²³

footnotes: ¹²² Ex. 12:29. ¹²³ Translated literally.