THEN SANG MOSES. It is Hebrew style to employ an imperfect preceded by the word az (then) in place of a perfect.¹ (then sang Moses) literally means: then Moses will sing. I.E. points out that an imperfect preceded by the word az occasionally has the meaning of a perfect. Similarly, in the next three verses cited by I.E. verbs that are in the imperfect are to be translated as perfects, for the imperfects are preceded by the word az. Compare, Az yivneh shelomoh (then did Solomon build) (I Kings 11:7);² is an imperfect that means will build. Thus az yivneh shelomoh literally means: then will Solomon build. az yedabber yehoshu’a (then spoke Joshua) (Josh. 10:12);³ is an imperfect that means will speak. Therefore az yedabber yehoshu’a literally means: then will Joshua speak. az yavdil mosheh (then Moses separated) (Deut. 4:41).⁴ is an imperfect that means will separate. Thus az yavdil mosheh means: then Moses will separate. The same is true in Arabic. Moses composed the song by himself. He then taught it to all of Israel, each one of whom then sang and said, I will sing unto the Lord.⁵ (and spoke), which literally means: and they spoke. Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song may be interpreted to mean that Moses and Israel simultaneously broke into song. However, this interpretation is untenable, as it is impossible for a whole nation to know the contents of a song without first being taught its words. Hence I.E.’s comment. And Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people (Deut. 27:1) is similar. The commandment was first spoken only by Moses. The elders of Israel then repeated it to everyone.⁶

footnotes: ¹ Az yashir mosheh ² Yivneh ³ Yedabber ⁴ Yavdil ⁵ Hence the song is in the singular even though the verb which introduces it reads, va-yomeru ⁶ For Moses and the elders did not simultaneously command the people.

AND SPOKE, SAYING.⁷ (saying). Lemor is used when a statement is directed to someone. However, what follows is a hymn, hence I.E.’s comment. Cf. Filwarg. Each one of the Israelites was to say the following, or the following was to be said in every generation.

footnotes: ⁷ In Hebrew, lemor

FOR HE IS HIGHLY EXALTED. He demonstrated His exaltation by casting both the mighty rider and his exalted and powerful steed into the sea as one casts an arrow. The meaning of ramah (thrown) in ramah va-yam (hath He thrown into the sea) is similar to the word rome (throws) in armed with that which a bow throws (Ps. 78:9).⁸

footnotes: ⁸ Translated according to I.E.

THE LORD IS MY STRENGTH AND SONG. Rabbi Solomon⁹ of blessed memory says that there is a difference between ozzi (my strength), which is vocalized with a furtive kamatz, and uzzi, which is vocalized with a kubbutz. He therefore says that the yod in ozzi (my strength) in the Lord is my strength and song is superfluous.¹⁰ of ozzi is not a first person pronominal suffix. The word ozzi has the same meaning as the word oz. It means strength. Cf. Rashi’s comment on this verse. However, Rabbi Solomon does not offer another such instance.¹¹ (enthroned) and shokheni (dwelt), the yods of both of which are superfluous. Cf. Filwarg. If this is what I.E. meant then he must have quoted Rashi from memory and erred. However, it is possible that what I.E. means is that Rashi offered no other instance of two words ending in a yod coming from the same root, one word vocalized with a kubbutz, the other with a kamatz, with the yod of one superfluous and the yod of the other a first person pronominal suffix. Rabbi Solomon goes on to say that ve-zimrat (and song) is in the construct with Yah (the Lord). He interprets our verse as if it read: The strength and vengeance¹² (and song) is to be rendered, and vengeance. Rashi connects ve-zimrat to zamar, which means to prune or cut. God, as it were, pruned Israel’s enemies. of the Lord became my salvation.¹³ (and he is become), which usually opens a new clause. Hence Rashi points out that va-yehi at times has the meaning of hayah, which continues a thought rather than starting a new clause. Rabbi Solomon thought that our verse is similar to va-yehi ba-yom ha-shelishi va-yissa avraham et enav (on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes) (Gen. 22:4).¹⁴ (lifted up), which is grammatically similar to va-yehi, does not begin a new clause but rather continues a thought. However, one who knows Arabic knows the difference between the two verses.¹⁵ or va-yissa can be used with the meaning of hayah or nasa and when it cannot, for Hebrew and Arabic are sister languages. It is neither correct Hebrew nor Arabic form to say ozzi ve-zimrat Yah va-yehi li li-shu’ah.¹⁶ cannot mean: became my salvation, but rather, And He is become my salvation. There is no difference between ozzi vocalized with a furtive kamatz and the same word vocalized with a kubbutz.¹⁷ and uzzi mean the same. For while Scripture reads, chukki (mine allotted)¹⁸ in Feed me with mine allotted bread (Prov. 30:8) it elsewhere reads, chokkha¹⁹ ve-chok ba-nekha (thy due, and thy son’s due) (Lev. 10:13). Now we find the word ve-ozzekha (in Thy strength) (v. 13) vocalized with a furtive kamatz, later on in this song and similarly in O Lord, in Thy strength (be-ozzekha) the king re-joiceth (Ps. 21:2).²⁰ is the word oz plus the second person pronominal suffix. Similarly, ozzi is the word oz plus the first person pronominal suffix. This contra Rashi, who maintains that the yod of ozzi is superfluous. The yod of ozzi is thus a first person suffix. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the meaning of ve-zimrat Yah is, the Lord is my song,²¹ (and song) is short for ve-zimrati (and my song). for the resh of ve-zimrat (and song) is vocalized with a kamatz.²² cannot be in the construct with Yah, for if ve-zimrat were in the construct with Yah it would be vocalized with a pattach rather than with a kamatz. Similarly,²³ the meaning of shenat in I will not give sleep (shenat) to mine eyes (Ps. 132:4) is, my sleep,²⁴ is short for shenati (my sleep). as shenat is vocalized with a kamatz.²⁵ If shenat were vocalized with a pattach it would be in the construct. Likewise, the meaning of nachalat, which is vocalized with a kamatz²⁶ in Yea, I have a goodly heritage (nachalat) (Ps. 16:6) is my heritage.²⁷ is short for nachalati (my heritage). Similarly,²⁸ the meaning of menat, which is vocalized with a kamatz²⁹ in, O Lord, the portion (menat) of mine inheritance and of my cup (Ps. 16:5), is my portion.³⁰ is short for menati (my portion). However, what will Rabbi Moses do with the word menat (portion) in the king’s portion (II Chron. 31:3) in which menat is vocalized with a kamatz and is in the construct. It is the same case with the word yam (sea) in the salt sea (Num. 34:3) and in the sea (yam) of Chinnereth (Num. 34:11). Should one respond that the latter are irregular, we would tell him to place ozzi ve-zimrat Yah among them.³¹ is occasionally in the construct it is possible to interpret ve-zimrat as being in the construct with Yah. Hence there is no need for the novel interpretation that ve-zimrat is short for ve-zimrati. I believe that the word ozzi (my strength) is, as is the style of the Hebrew language, to be read as if written twice.³² Our clause is to be read as if written, ozzi, ve-zimrat ozzi³³ is in the construct with ozzi, which is carried over from the first part of the verse. Yah (The Lord is my strength and the song of my strength).³⁴ The reason behind this verse is that Moses earlier mentioned, The horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea (v. 4). Moses now states that this was not through his own majesty and strength. On the contrary, he confesses, my strength and the glory of my strength³⁵ to mean: the glory of my strength. is Yah alone who is the Lord. Yah is, as I have explained,³⁶ one of the three proper names of God. All three³⁷ come from one root.³⁸ Since the word eheyeh³⁹ is frequently employed in speech it was necessary to substitute a vav for a yod in God’s glorious name.⁴⁰ the form YHVH was used for God’s name rather than YHYH, which means he will be, and is frequently employed in speech. Filwarg suggests emending our textto read: since the word yihyeh is frequently employed in speech it was necessary for a vav to be substituted for a yod in God’s glorious name. The word Yah⁴¹ What I.E. means by Yah are the letters yod heh. is likewise known.⁴² is short for yehi (let there be) (Filwarg). Filwarg suggests emending to: The word yehi is likewise frequently employed. Its yod was vocalized with a pattach because of the guttural⁴³ and the silent yod⁴⁴ is short for YHVH, its shortened form should be YHY (yehi), as YHVH is really YHYH (which stands for yehiyeh), the vav being substituted for a heh. Hence I.E.’s comment. For I.E.’s explanation of the divine name see I.E. on Ex. 3:15. was dropped⁴⁵ was not substituted for it as in the full name of God (Filwarg). because it has another secret numerical meaning.⁴⁶ are spelled out and then computed they come to 26. The latter is the same as the numerical equivalent of the letters making up the divine name YHVH. Yah is spelled yod heh. Yod heh spelled out = 26. That is, yod spelled out comes to 20: yod (10), vav (6), dalet (4). Heh, which is spelled heh (5), alef (1), comes to 6. The full name of God, Y (10) H (5) V (6) H (5), comes to 26. Thus Yah = YHVH. We find Yah combined with God’s glorious name in ki ozzi ve-zimrat Yah YHVH (for God the Lord is my strength and song) (Is. 12:2). I have already explained that the name YHVH is at times a proper name and at times an adjective.⁴⁷

footnotes: ⁹ Rashi. ¹⁰ According to Rashi the yod ¹¹ Actually Rashi does. He offers ha-yoshevi ¹² According to Rashi ve-zimrat ¹³ Rashi reads our verse as one clause. The problem with this reading is that the second part of the sentence starts with va-yehi ¹⁴ Wherein va-yissa ¹⁵ Knows when an inverted imperfect such as va-yehi ¹⁶ That is, to connect part a and b of the line and read it as one clause. Hence va-yehi li li-shu’ah ¹⁷ In other words, contra Rashi, ozzi ¹⁸ With a kubbutz. ¹⁹ Vocalized with a furtive kamatz. ²⁰ Ozzekha ²¹ In other words, ve-zimrat ²² Hence ve-zimrat ²³ According to Rabbi Moses. ²⁴ For shenat ²⁵ Rather than with a pattach. ²⁶ Rather than with a pattach. ²⁷ For nachalat ²⁸ According to Rabbi Moses. ²⁹ Rather than with a pattach. ³⁰ For menat ³¹ Once it is established that a word ending in kamatz tav ³² I.E. makes this point throughout his commentary. ³³ Ve-zimrat ³⁴ Literally, my strength, and the song of my strength is the Lord. ³⁵ I.E. interprets the song of my strength ³⁶ Cf. I.E. on Ex. 3:15. ³⁷ YHVH, EHEYEH, YAH. ³⁸ Heh, yod, heh. ³⁹ Which means I will be, and is also one of the names of God. See Ex. 3:14. ⁴⁰ The point is, since God’s name comes from the root heh, yod, heh, ⁴¹ Short for YHVH. ⁴² It is known that Yah ⁴³ Because it precedes a heh. ⁴⁴ Since Yah ⁴⁵ And a vav ⁴⁶ If the letters of the name Yah ⁴⁷ See I.E. on Ex. 3:15.

THIS IS MY GOD. My power.⁴⁸ (God) means power. Hence Eli (my God) means my power. See I.E. on Ex. 3:15.

footnotes: ⁴⁸ El

AND I WILL GLORIFY HIM. I will place Him in a building.⁴⁹ (and I will glorify Him) to naveh (habitation), hence his translation. See Onkelos and Rashi.

footnotes: ⁴⁹ I will erect for Him a temple. I.E. connects ve-anvehu

[THIS.] The word zeh (this) is to be read as if written twice. The last clause of our verse is to be read as if written: And this is my father’s God, the reference being to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.⁵⁰

footnotes: ⁵⁰ In other words, “my father” refers to the patriarchs.

AND I WILL EXALT HIM. For I will recount His might.

THE LORD IS A MAN OF WAR. The Lord supports those who love Him and cleave unto Him and He is a man of war to their enemies.

[MAN.] The word ish (man) means a being.⁵¹ as a being obviously eliminates an anthropomorphism. Scripture thus states in reference to the stars, ish lo nedar (not one faileth) (Is. 40:26); and in reference to the living creatures, ish el ever panav yelekhu (they went every one straight forward) (Ezek. 1:9); and in reference to the angels, ve-ha-ish gavriel (the man Gabriel) (Dan. 9:21). The meaning of ish milchamah (a man of war) thus is, a being who wages war. It is similar to the term ish emunim (a faithful man) (Prov. 20:6), the meaning of which is, a being⁵² imbued with faith.

footnotes: ⁵¹ Or an entity. I.E. makes a similar point in his comments on Gen 15:10. Translating ish ⁵² Cf. Krinsky and Weiser.

THE LORD IS HIS NAME. His name will now be known. Compare, That calleth for the waters of the sea, And poureth them out upon the face of the earth; The Lord is His name (Amos 5:8). He alone can do such a thing.⁵³

footnotes: ⁵³ After God does a wondrous thing people speak of it and His name thus becomes known.

PHARAOH’S CHARIOTS. God, as it were, cast Pharaoh’s heavy chariots and their hosts as if they were a light arrow.

[AND HIS CHOSEN CAPTAINS.] Moses made mention of his chosen captains “who were over all them”⁵⁴ because he had previously spoken of Pharaoh’s hosts.

footnotes: ⁵⁴ See Ex. 14:7.

[THE RED SEA.] Yefet⁵⁵ says that suf in yam suf (the Red Sea) has the same meaning as the word suf (flags) in The reeds and flags shall wither (Is. 19:6) and the word suf in and laid it in the flags (Ex. 2:3). For reeds and rushes grow around the yam suf,⁵⁶ is the Sea of Flags or the Sea of Reeds. and not around other seas.⁵⁷ However, Rabbi Joshua says that suf is the name of a city.⁵⁸ is the Sea of Suf. It is like yam kinneret (the sea of Chinnereth) (Josh. 13:27).⁵⁹ 6a) because the city of Tiberias is situated on it shores.

footnotes: ⁵⁵ See notes on I.E. Ex. 3:3. ⁵⁶ Hence the meaning of yam suf ⁵⁷ This is Yefet’s assumption. ⁵⁸ Hence the meaning of yam suf ⁵⁹ Chinnereth was the name of a city. See Jud. 19:35. The area around the city was called the land of Chinnereth (I Kings 15:20). The sea adjacent to this area was called the Sea of Chinnereth. Similarly, the Talmud refers to it as the Sea of Tiberias (Megillah

THE DEEPS. The deeps of the earth.⁶⁰ Compare, The earth swallowed them (v. 11).

footnotes: ⁶⁰ The bottom of the ocean floor.

[COVER THEM.] A shuruk has been substituted for a cholam in yekhasyumu (cover them).⁶¹ Compare, timla’emo, torishemo (v. 9). Compare, ta’avuri (pass) in neither pass from hence (Ruth 2:8).⁶² has been substituted for a cholam, for the word should have read ta’avori.

footnotes: ⁶¹ According to the rules of grammar the word should have read yekhasyumo. ⁶² Wherein a shuruk

THE DEPTHS. Metzolot (the depths) means the deep waters. Similarly va-tashlikheni metuzlah, (for thou did cast me into the deep waters) (Jonah 2:4).⁶³

footnotes: ⁶³ Translated according to I.E.

GLORIOUS. The yod of nedari (glorious) is superfluous.⁶⁴ as it does i n verse 11. It is like the yod of akhzari (cruel).⁶⁵ is found in Is. 13:9; Jer. 6:23; Prov. 11:17; and elsewhere in Scripture. Scripture uses the term akhzar in Deut. 32:33; Job 30:21; 41:2; and Lam. 4:3.

footnotes: ⁶⁴ It has no meaning. Scripture could have employed nedar ⁶⁵ Which is superfluous. The word akhzari

[THY RIGHT HAND.] The repetition of the phrase Thy right hand, O Lord indicates the same as the repetition of For, lo, Thine enemies, O Lord (Ps. 92:10)⁶⁶ and The floods have lifted up (Ps. 93:3).⁶⁷ It indicates time and time again. Its meaning is: your right hand dashes the enemy in pieces times without number.

footnotes: ⁶⁶ The line repeats itself in Ps. 92:10. ⁶⁷ The line repeats itself in Ps. 93:3.

[GLORIOUS IN POWER.] Glorious in power refers to God.⁶⁸ However, there are those who say that it refers to the Lord’s right hand.⁶⁹

footnotes: ⁶⁸ The verse should be interpreted, Thy right hand, O Lord who art glorious in power. ⁶⁹ They claim that the verse should be interpreted, Thy right hand, O Lord, which is glorious.

AND IN THE GREATNESS OF THY EXCELLENCE. Which is superior to all who exalt themselves. You are able to shatter (overthrow) those that rise up against You. You need no iron weapons to shatter them. All You have to do is send forth Your wrath and it consumeth them as stubble, for God’s wrath is as hot as fire.

AND WITH THE BLAST OF THY NOSTRILS. You rebuke the waters and they congeal. Compare, By the breath of God they perish (Job 4:9).

THE WATERS WERE PILED UP. The word ne’ermu (were piled up) is similar to the word aremat (a heap of) in a heap of wheat (Cant. 7:3).

THE FLOODS STOOD UPRIGHT AS A HEAP. The waters, whose nature is to flow and descend, turned into a heap (ned), as in And rose up in one heap (ned) (Josh. 4:16).⁷⁰ The meaning of ned (heap) is a wall.

footnotes: ⁷⁰ The reference is to the waters of the Jordan that split so that Israel could enter Canaan.

THE DEEPS WERE CONGEALED. Kafe’u means were congealed. Compare, ve-kippa’on (frost) (Zech. 14:6).⁷¹

footnotes: ⁷¹ Translated according to I.E.

IN THE HEART OF THE SEA. The heart lies in the middle of the body from the point of view of the body’s width.⁷² thus means in the midst of the sea.

footnotes: ⁷² In the heart of the sea

THE ENEMY SAID. The reference is to Pharaoh.

[SHALL BE SATISFIED UPON THEM.] The word timla’emo (shall be satisfied upon them) is difficult.⁷³ in timla’emo means them. Hence our verse literally reads, My soul will fill them (or satisfy them). However, this was not Pharaoh’s intention. Pharaoh’s intention was to be full of their wealth. Hence our text should have read: My soul will be full of them; i.e., I will be full of their wealth. Rabbi Merinus explains that timla’emo nafshi (my lust shall be satisfied upon them) means: my person⁷⁴ (my lust) may also be translated as, my person or my soul. shall be full of them;⁷⁵ means them we can interpret it to mean from them or of them. We can thus interpret timla’emo to mean full of them rather than will fill them. i.e., I will take all of their wealth. The term timla’emo is to be understood like the term yetza’uni (gone forth of me)⁷⁶ means me. Thus yetza’uni literally means: gone forth me. However, this is not the meaning of the word in the context of the verse. Its meaning is, gone forth of me. We thus see that Scripture sometimes employs a direct object suffix with the meaning of an indirect object. The same is true of timla’emo. in My children are gone forth of me (Jer. 10:20). Its meaning⁷⁷ is connected to I will divide the spoil.⁷⁸ Others say that timla’emo is used in the same sense as the word me’lo’o (presume)⁷⁹ doesn’t only mean to fill. It also means to presume. In our verse it is used in the latter sense. in that durst presume in his heart (Esth. 7:5).⁸⁰ means: will carry out my intentions. Hence timla’emo nafshi means: I will carry out my intentions upon them or, according to J.P.S., my lust shall be satisfied upon them.

footnotes: ⁷³ Here. For the suffix mo ⁷⁴ Nafshi ⁷⁵ In other words, even though the suffix mo ⁷⁶ The suffix ni ⁷⁷ Timla’emo nafshi. ⁷⁸ In other words, I will be full of them means: I will be full of their spoils. ⁷⁹ The root mem, lamed, alef ⁸⁰ Thus timla’emo

[MY HAND SHALL DESTROY THEM.] After doing the latter⁸¹ I shall destroy them.

footnotes: ⁸¹ Satisfying his lust upon them.

MY HAND SHALL DESTROY THEM. Torishemo means shall destroy them.⁸² is yod, resh, shin. This root also has the meaning of to inherit, hence I.E.’s comment. Similarly the word torishu (you will destroy) in But if you will not destroy (Num. 34:55).⁸³

footnotes: ⁸² The root of torishemo ⁸³ Translated according to I.E.

THOU DIDST BLOW WITH THY WIND. Nashafta (Thou didst blow) comes from the same root as neshef (night). The meaning of nashafta ve-ruchakha (Thou didst blow with Thy wind) is: You brought a wind at night that drowned them.⁸⁴ literally means: you “nighted” with a wind.

footnotes: ⁸⁴ Thus nashafta ve-ruchakha

THEY SANK. Tzalelu (they sank) comes from the same root as metzolot (depths). Compare, My lips quivered (tzalelu) at the voice (Hab. 3:16).⁸⁵ is the verbal form of metzolot (depths) then its meaning is, they sank. This being the case, what connection is there between tzalelu in our verse and tzalelu in Hab. 3:16, which means quivered? Krinsky suggests reading metzilot (bells, cymbals) (Zech. 14:20) rather than metzolot (depths). Indeed, I.E. connects tzalelu in Hab. 3:16 to metziltayim (cymbals). According to Krinsky we should read, “Tzalelu (they sank) comes from the same root as metzilot (bells, cymbals).” In other words, tzalelu means they tingled, and the meaning of our verse is, they tingled like lead in the mighty waters; i.e., they cried and shrieked as they drowned as if they were lead cymbals. The point is, they did not die quietly.

footnotes: ⁸⁵ This comment presents a problem. If tzalelu

IN THE MIGHTY WATERS. This is connected to they sank. Our verse is to be read as if written: they sank⁸⁶ as lead in the mighty waters.

footnotes: ⁸⁶ If we accept Krinsky’s emendation then we should render, they tingled.

AS LEAD. Oferet (lead) comes from the same root as afar (dust).⁸⁷ If one puts any of the six kinds of metal⁸⁸ in the ground each will lose one of its familiar elements in a given number of years.⁸⁹ However, lead will always maintain itself.

footnotes: ⁸⁷ Its root being ayin, peh, resh. ⁸⁸ For the six other metals see I.E. on Ex. 3:15 and the notes thereto. ⁸⁹ They decompose in the ground.

WHO IS LIKE UNTO THEE, O LORD, AMONG THE MIGHTY. Elim (the mighty) refers to the holy angels in the celestial heights. The sons of the mighty (bene elim)⁹⁰ refers to the stars. I will explain this further in the Torah portion Ki Tissa.

footnotes: ⁹⁰ Spoken of elsewhere in Scripture. See Ps. 29:1.

GLORIOUS IN HOLINESS. The reference is to the Throne of Glory.

[FEARFUL IN PRAISES, DOING WONDERS.] For all who want to acclaim God are afraid to praise His name because who can recite all of His praises. However, they are obligated to praise Him because He alone does wonders.

THOU STRETCHEDST OUT THY RIGHT HAND. Your wonders⁹¹ were manifest when You stretched forth Your hand from the highest realm of the celestial heights where Your name is exalted, and the ground which is beneath all earthly creatures swallowed up the enemy of Israel. Your right hand, which is above the heaven of heavens, reached, as it were, in a moment to the bottom of the sea.⁹²

footnotes: ⁹¹ Spoken of in the previous verse. Literally, what is the wonder? ⁹² I.E.’s description of the fate of the Egyptians.

[THY RIGHT HAND.] Its meaning is, Thy strength.

THOU IN THY LOVE HAST LED. Moses used the perfect nachita (led) in place of the imperfect,⁹³ as: Thou in thy love will lead. as is the style in prophecy.⁹⁴

footnotes: ⁹³ The verse speaks of God bringing Israel to His holy habitation. It thus deals with the future. I.E. interprets Thou in thy love hast led ⁹⁴ For the prophet speaks of the future as if it already has come to pass. See I.E. on Gen. 48:22.

[IN THY LOVE.] The reference is to the pillars of cloud and fire, for God led them.⁹⁵ On the other hand, it might allude to the fact that God led them up till now.⁹⁶

footnotes: ⁹⁵ God, out of love for His people, caused the pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire to lead Israel. ⁹⁶ This refers to I.E.’s opening comment that Scripture uses a perfect in place of an imperfect. I.E. now suggests that the Pentateuch uses a perfect because it speaks of the past; i.e., up to this point God lovingly led Israel i n their march to His holy habitation.

THOU HAST LED. Nehalta (thou hast led) is similar to etnahalah (I will journey) in I will lead on⁹⁷ gently (Gen. 33:14).⁹⁸ means to lead.

footnotes: ⁹⁷ J.P.S. renders journey. ⁹⁸ In other words, the root nun, heh, lamed

IN THY STRENGTH. Not by their strength.

TO THY HOLY HABITATION. The reference is to Mount Sinai where God’s Glory dwelt. It is similarly written, and brought you unto Myself (Ex. 19:4).

THE PEOPLES HAVE HEARD. The reference is to the peoples round about them and also to the peoples whom they would pass by.⁹⁹

footnotes: ⁹⁹ On their journey to the promised land.

PANGS HAVE TAKEN HOLD ON THE INHABITANTS OF PHILISTIA. The inhabitants of the land of Philistia.¹⁰⁰ (Philistia) is the name of a nation, hence I.E.’s comment that here it refers to their country (Krinsky). The word inhabitants indicates this.¹⁰¹

footnotes: ¹⁰⁰ In other words, Philistia is short for the land of Philistia. Peleshet ¹⁰¹ It indicates that Scripture speaks of a country.

THE MIGHTY MEN. Ele (mighty men) spelled with a yod¹⁰² means sheep,¹⁰³ (the mighty men of Moab) literally means the rams of Moab. for the sheep have leaders.¹⁰⁴

footnotes: ¹⁰² As it is in our verse. ¹⁰³ Or rams. Thus ele mo’av ¹⁰⁴ The rams lead the sheep.

[THEN WERE THE CHIEFS OF EDOM AFFRIGHTED…THE MIGHTY MEN OF MOAB, TREMBLING TAKETH HOLD UPON THEM.] The Philistines, the Edomites, and the Moabites did not wage war with the Israelites in the wilderness.¹⁰⁵

footnotes: ¹⁰⁵ See I.E.’s comment on verse 14.

ALL THE INHABITANTS OF CANAAN ARE MELTED AWAY. Because of the reports which they received, as in And as soon as we heard it, our hearts did melt (Josh. 2:11). The inhabitants of Canaan is also¹⁰⁶ See I.E.’s comments on verse 14 and the notes thereto. to be interpreted as the inhabitants of the land of Canaan.¹⁰⁷

footnotes: ¹⁰⁶ Like the inhabitants of Philistia. ¹⁰⁷ For Canaan is short for the land of Canaan.

TERROR AND DREAD FALLETH UPON THEM. This refers to Edom and Moab even though Canaan is mentioned above.¹⁰⁸ He spoke unto them in a pillar of cloud (Ps. 99:79) is, as I have explained, similar.¹⁰⁹ refers only to Moses and Aaron even though Samuel is also mentioned in the verse. See I.E. on Gen. 20:17 and Ex. 7:7. Likewise, and shed the blood of war in peace (I Kings 2:5) only refers to Abner.¹¹⁰ So too, and God healed Abimelech, and his wife, and his maid-servants; and they bore children refers to Abimelech’s wife and handmaids.¹¹¹ All of this¹¹² because Scripture reads, Till thy people pass over, O Lord.¹¹³ For Israel passed them¹¹⁴ before they came to the land of Canaan. Moses repeated Till Thy people pass because they circled Mount Seir for many days.¹¹⁵

footnotes: ¹⁰⁸ Canaan is the last mentioned in verse 15. ¹⁰⁹ For He spoke unto them ¹¹⁰ Not to Amasa, although both are mentioned in the verse. ¹¹¹ Not to Abimelech. See I.E. on Gen. 20:17. ¹¹² I.E. had to take the trouble to say all of this, i.e., that the verse does not refer to the Canaanites even though they are the last nation mentioned in the previous verse, and then he had to offer other similar instances. ¹¹³ Which implies that the verse speaks of the march to and not the conquest of Canaan. ¹¹⁴ Edom and Moab. ¹¹⁵ Deut. 2:1.

[THOU HAST GOTTEN.] Its meaning is: they were slaves in Egypt and Thou hast gotten them to be Your servants.

THOU BRINGEST THEM IN, AND PLANTEST THEM IN THE MOUNTAIN OF THINE INHERITANCE. A prayer that Israel remain long in the land and not be exiled from it.¹¹⁶ (plantest them). Our verse is like in the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it (Ezek. 17:23).

footnotes: ¹¹⁶ As a tree takes root in the ground and remains there permanently, hence the use of the term titta’emo

IN THE MOUNTAIN. The goodly hill country and Lebanon (Deut. 3:25)¹¹⁷ thus refers to the land of Canaan, which is mountainous. is similar. Or it alludes to Mount Moriah.¹¹⁸ It is therefore followed by The place, O Lord, which Thou hast made for Thee to dwell in.

footnotes: ¹¹⁷ Literally, the goodly mountain and Lebanon. In the mountain ¹¹⁸ The mountain in Jerusalem upon which the Holy Temple was built.

[WHICH THOU HAST MADE.] Its meaning is: which Thou hast prepared as a place for a sanctuary for Thyself.¹¹⁹ The place mentioned lies opposite the glorious celestial place,¹²⁰ Ex. 10, “The Sanctuary below is directly opposite the Throne above.” Also see Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 4:5 and Rashi. for the places on earth vary in accordance with the star that is over them.¹²¹ Those who are versed in the science that deals with the constellations will understand this.¹²²

footnotes: ¹¹⁹ The verse literally reads, a place for a dwelling Thou hast made. I.E. thus explains that the word order has to be rearranged. He then interprets the rearranged word order. ¹²⁰ See Mekhilta ¹²¹ I.E.’s interpretation of the rabbinic text quoted in the previous note. According to I.E. the greater the star, the more important the place under it (Krinsky). ¹²² The greater the star over a place, the greater the importance of the place (Weiser). I.E. believed that the Temple was under the influence of the sphere wherein all the stars are embedded. Hence its site was the most important place on earth (Krinsky).

[THE SANCTUARY.] The word mikkedash (sanctuary)¹²³ in the kof. has the same meaning as mikdash (sanctuary).¹²⁴ in the kof but has one in the dalet. Mikdash is the form for sanctuary used throughout Scripture. The form mikkedash is found only here. The word mittoharo (his brightness) in Thou hast made his brightness to cease (Ps. 89:45) is similar, as the dagesh in the tet is superfluous, like the dagesh in the kof of mikkedash.¹²⁵ in mittoharo, like the mem of mikkedash, is a form mem and not a prepositional mem. Hence the dagesh following it, like the dagesh which follows the mem in mikdash, is superfluous. If the mem of mittoharo or mikkedash was a preposition then the dagesh following it would not be superfluous, for it would be in place of a nun. For the prepositional mem is in place of the word min (from). The dalet¹²⁶ does not receive a dagesh¹²⁷ as does the dalet of mikdash. because the kof¹²⁸ is vocalized with a mobile sheva.¹²⁹ A dagesh kal follows a sheva nach (quiescent sheva). It does not follow a mobile sheva (sheva na). Hence mikdash, which is vocalized with a quiescent sheva, has a dagesh in its dalet whereas mikkedash, which is vocalized with a mobile sheva, does not. With the exception of the form shetayim we do not find it to be the way of Scripture to place a dagesh in a word which follows a mobile sheva. I have already noted its grammatical uniqueness.¹³⁰ in the Sefer Ha-Tzachot, I.E. notes that shetayim is the only word in Hebrew in which a sheva na is followed by a word with a dagesh.

footnotes: ¹²³ In our verse, which has a dagesh ¹²⁴ Which does not have a dagesh ¹²⁵ The mem ¹²⁶ In mikkedash. ¹²⁷ A dagesh kal, ¹²⁸ Of mikkedash. ¹²⁹ Because of its dagesh. ¹³⁰ In his commentary on the letter nun,

WHICH THY HANDS HAVE ESTABLISHED. Its meaning is similar to thou hast made,¹³¹ is the same as The place, O Lord, which Thou hast made for Thee to dwell in. for Scripture repeats itself.

footnotes: ¹³¹ The meaning of The sanctuary, O Lord, which Thy hands have established

THE LORD SHALL REIGN. God’s Kingship will be seen when the Holy Temple¹³² which will be dedicated to His name shall be built.

footnotes: ¹³² Mentioned in the previous verse.

[FOR EVER AND EVER.] Le-olam va-ed (for ever and ever)¹³³ is an abridgment. The full form is le-olam ve-ad¹³⁴ is a variant of ve-ad. olam (for ever and until ever). Do not be amazed that the word ed¹³⁵ is not in the construct,¹³⁶ for we find, shokhen ad¹³⁷ a variant of ed, is not in the construct.ve-kadosh shemo (That inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy) (Is. 57:15). It is the custom of Hebrew to vocalize a vav with a pattach¹³⁸ I.E. occasionally refers to the kamatz as a pattach (Krinsky). when the syllable which follows it is accented.¹³⁹ rather than ve-ed. Compare, va-ez (or goat) in of ox, or sheep, or goat (Lev. 7:23). It is for this reason that va-ed is vocalized with a pattach.¹⁴⁰ Now Scripture reads, va-okhal¹⁴¹ mi-kol (I have eaten of all) (Gen. 27:33). However, at the end of a verse it reads, ha-nachash hishi’ani va-okhel¹⁴² In other words, the pattach changes to a tzere at the end of a sentence. Similarly, the word ad is vocalized ed at the end of a sentence. (the serpent beguiled me, and I did eat) (Gen. 3:13). Hence the statement, le-olam va-ed.¹⁴³

footnotes: ¹³³ Literally, forever and until. ¹³⁴ Va-ed ¹³⁵ In le-olam va-ed. ¹³⁶ With another word. For the word is a preposition and it seems strange to end a phrase with it. ¹³⁷ Here too ad, ¹³⁸ That is, a kamatz. ¹³⁹ Hence the word reads va-ed ¹⁴⁰ That is, a kamatz. ¹⁴¹ Vocalized with a pattach. ¹⁴² Vocalized with a tzere. ¹⁴³ Rather than le-olam va-ad.

FOR THE HORSES OF PHARAOH. This verse is, in my opinion, part of the song.¹⁴⁴ Its purpose is to recall the wonder within the wonder,¹⁴⁵ which I have noted.¹⁴⁶

footnotes: ¹⁴⁴ Even though it is in prose. It was for the latter reason that Nahmanides does not interpret it as part of the song. See Nahmanides and Shadal on this verse. ¹⁴⁵ Namely, that Israel was crossing the Red Sea at the same time that the Egyptians were drowning. ¹⁴⁶ See I.E. on Ex. 14:29.

[UPON THEM.] Upon them refers to the horses of Pharaoh…his chariots and his horsemen. It also includes Pharaoh.¹⁴⁷ For Scripture clearly states, The enemy (Pharaoh) said (v. 9) and then goes on to say, The earth swallowed them¹⁴⁸ (v. 12). Furthermore, it is explicitly written, But (God) overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea (Ps. 136:15).

footnotes: ¹⁴⁷ Contrary to the Midrashic opinion that Pharaoh survived. ¹⁴⁸ Scripture thus clearly states that Pharaoh drowned.

AND MOSES LED. I believe that the pillar of cloud, and likewise the pillar of fire, that went before the people when they left Egypt was to ensure that Israel was able to go by day and by night (Ex. 13:21). After Pharaoh and his hosts drowned, Israel was no longer frightened and did not travel at night.¹⁴⁹ Indeed, we do not find it recorded in the Torah portion Be-Halotekha¹⁵⁰ that Israel journeyed at night. Behold, Moses now led the people according to God’s command.¹⁵¹ There are only six journeys from the Red Sea until Mount Sinai¹⁵² lasting less than forty days.¹⁵³ The air¹⁵⁴ is then good. It is neither humid nor cold. He who does not have a tent can live outdoors¹⁵⁵ without harm. When Israel came to the wilderness of Sinai they all erected booths,¹⁵⁶ as they camped there for about year. Moses informed them that they would tarry there until they constructed the Tabernacle. It was for this reason that, as I will explain,¹⁵⁷ Israel brought out acacia wood from Egypt. The festival of booths was established in commemoration of the booths that Israel made there, for Scripture states, that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Egypt (Lev. 23:43). How can one maintain that Israel dwelt in clouds?¹⁵⁸ 34:4. I.E. disagrees. For the booths do not resemble clouds.¹⁵⁹ I will yet explain why the festival of Sukkot is observed in the seventh month.¹⁶⁰ When the Tabernacle was erected God descended upon it in a pillar of cloud, as it is clearly written, and there was fire therein by night (Ex. 40:38). When the cloud journeyed the children of Israel went onward (Ex. 40:36). It is because of this that Scripture reads, and thou goest before them, in a pillar of cloud by day (Num. 14:14). There were thus two interchanging pillars¹⁶¹ over the Tabernacle. If the statement to the effect that there were seven interchanging pillars over the Tabernacle¹⁶² 1. is based on tradition, then we will rely on tradition and set aside our own opinions.

footnotes: ¹⁴⁹ Hence they no longer needed the pillars. ¹⁵⁰ In which we find a description of Israel’s journey. See Num. 8:15-22. ¹⁵¹ In other words, Moses rather than the pillars now guided Israel. It is I.E.’s opinion that the pillars led Israel from the time they left Egypt till they came to the Red Sea, and that from the Red Sea to Sinai Moses led Israel. When the Tabernacle was erected the pillars of cloud and fire descended upon it, and the pillar of cloud once again led Israel. See I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 13:21. ¹⁵² Listed in Num. 33:14,15. ¹⁵³ Israel journeyed from the Red Sea on the 21st of Nisan until the first of Sivan when they came to the desert of Sinai. ¹⁵⁴ At that time of year in the wilderness. ¹⁵⁵ At this time of year. ¹⁵⁶ As I.E. goes on to explain, they were informed by Moses that they would spend the fall and winter at Sinai. ¹⁵⁷ See I.E. on Ex. 25:5. ¹⁵⁸ According to Rabbi Ishmael the booths spoken of in Lev. 23:43 refer to the “clouds of glory.” Cf. Sukkah ¹⁵⁹ For an explanation of Rabbi Ishmael’s opinion see Nahmanides on Lev. 24:43. ¹⁶⁰ See I.E. on Lev. 23:43. ¹⁶¹ A pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. ¹⁶² Mekhilta, Be-Shallach

INTO THE WILDERNESS OF SHUR. This is the very wilderness of Etham.¹⁶³ (Israel) passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness; and they went three days’ journey in the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in Marah. See I.E.’s comments on verse 23. Perhaps there were two cities in the wilderness that were so called.¹⁶⁴ Or the wilderness had two names.¹⁶⁵ And they went three days in the wilderness, the reference being to the wilderness of Shur, is proof of this.¹⁶⁶ (of Shur) is parallel to and they went three days’ journey in the wilderness of Etham (Num. 33:8). Therefore to indicate this¹⁶⁷ the bet of ba-midbar (in the wilderness), which precedes and found no water, was vocalized for emphasis with a pattach.¹⁶⁸ 38.

footnotes: ¹⁶³ See I.E. on Ex. 13:20. I.E. insists that the wilderness of Shur is to be identified with the wilderness of Etham because he wants to harmonize verses 22 and 23 with Num. 33:8. For the latter states, and ¹⁶⁴ One named Shur and the other Etham. The wilderness was named after these cities. At times it is called after one, at other times after the other. ¹⁶⁵ Shur and Etham. ¹⁶⁶ That the desert had two names, Shur and Etham. For, the line and they went three days in the wilderness ¹⁶⁷ That the desert spoken of is Shur. ¹⁶⁸ Which indicates the subject, i.e., the wilderness mentioned earlier in the verse, namely, the wilderness of Shur. Cf. Vat. Ebr.

AND WHEN THEY CAME TO MARAH. It is elsewhere written, And they journeyed from the Red Sea (Num. 33:11). The latter is similar to And Moses led Israel onward from the Red Sea,¹⁶⁹ (and they went out into the wilderness of Shur and came to Marah) (v. 22). We similarly find, and they went three days’ journey in the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in Marah (Num. 33:8).¹⁷⁰

footnotes: ¹⁶⁹ In other words, Num. 33:11 and Ex. 15:22 refer to the same event. ¹⁷⁰ Thus the wilderness of Shur is to be identified with the wilderness of Etham.

THEREFORE THE NAME OF IT WAS CALLED MARAH.¹⁷¹ Someone called it Marah.¹⁷² Who was born unto Levi in Egypt (Num. 26:29)¹⁷³ is similar.

footnotes: ¹⁷¹ Literally, Therefore he called the name of it Marah. The question is who? Hence I.E.’s comment. ¹⁷² The verse is abridged. ¹⁷³ Literally: whom she bore unto Levi. Here too the subject is missing and the verse should be interpreted as whom someone bore unto Levi.

AND THE PEOPLE MURMURED. Va-yillonu (murmured) is a nifal. It is similar to ve-yikkonu (shall be established)¹⁷⁴ and is similarly vocalized. in And thy thoughts shall be established (Prov. 16:3), which comes from the same root as nakhonu (prepared) (Prov. 19:29).¹⁷⁵ Similarly, the root of va-yillonu is lamed, vav, nun. It comes from a double root¹⁷⁶ However, the vav is usually dropped in the conjugation. Hence it appears to have only two letters (Weiser, Krinsky). or from a root in which the middle letter is missing.¹⁷⁷ If it came from a root which begins with a nun¹⁷⁸ I.E. makes this point because there is a dagesh in the lamed. Now one might argue that the dagesh in the lamed is not the dagesh of the nifal conjugation but rather a dagesh that compensates for a missing nun, as in va-yippelu from the root nun, peh, lamed. it would have followed the paradigm of va-yiggashu (came near) (Gen. 45:4).¹⁷⁹ However, it is not. Hence it has to be taken as an ayin vav in the nifal.

footnotes: ¹⁷⁴ Which is a nifal ¹⁷⁵ The root of which is kaf, vav, nun. ¹⁷⁶ A two-letter root. That is, its root is lamed, vav, nun. ¹⁷⁷ That is, its root may be described as a double root or as a root in which the middle letter is dropped. ¹⁷⁸ Nun, lamed, nun. ¹⁷⁹ That is, it would have been conjugated as a root whose first letter is a nun.

AND HE CRIED UNTO THE LORD; AND THE LORD SHOWED HIM A TREE. We do not know what type of tree this was.¹⁸⁰ 1; Yalkut Shimoni on Ex. 15:25. What happened can only be described as a miracle. If the waters were stationary¹⁸¹ then we would say that they were medicinally sweetened.¹⁸² What the sages said is correct.¹⁸³ on Ex. 15:25.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁰ Contrary to the rabbis in the Midrash who identify the tree as a willow, olive, pomegranate, or date tree. See Mekhilta, Be-Shallach ¹⁸¹ If we knew for a fact that Scripture deals with water gathered in a pool or the like. ¹⁸² However, it is equally possible that our text deals with running water. In the latter case we can’t maintain that the waters were medicinally sweetened because what was healed moved on and new bitter water replaced it. ¹⁸³ That it was a miracle. See Yalkut Shimoni

THERE HE MADE FOR THEM. God¹⁸⁴ might be taken to refer to Moses, hence I.E.’s comment. for Israel.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁴ He

A STATUTE AND AN ORDINANCE. To discipline them and to instruct them.

[AND THERE HE PROVED THEM.] This is to be understood in the manner of for the Lord your God putteth you to proof, to know whether ye do love the Lord your God with all you heart and with all your soul (Deut. 13:4). Scripture similarly states, *And He afflicted thee,*¹⁸⁵ and suffered thee to hunger (Deut. 8:3); and that He might prove thee, to do thee good at thy latter end (Deut. 8:16),¹⁸⁶ that is, to do good to those who did not murmur against Moses.¹⁸⁷

footnotes: ¹⁸⁵ This refers to the lack of water which the Israelites suffered. ¹⁸⁶ Which is preceded by that He might afflict thee. ¹⁸⁷ To those who showed their love for God by not murmuring against Moses.

AND HE SAID: IF THOU WILT DILIGENTLY HEARKEN. I have already noted that when the word shema (hearken) is followed by a lamed¹⁸⁸ (to the voice of) follows shamo’a tishma (diligently hearken). or a bet it does not mean to hear the words being spoken but rather to understand the subject which is being verbalized. Shema in our verse thus means to understand what the Lord commands us to do.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁸ As in our verse where the word le-kol

AND WILT DO THAT WHICH IS RIGHT IN HIS EYES. This refers to the positive commandments.

AND WILT GIVE EAR TO HIS COMMANDMENTS. To understand what the negative commandments consist of.

AND KEEP ALL HIS STATUTES. Not to violate them. Compare, And ye shall not walk in the statutes¹⁸⁹ of the nation (Lev. 20:23). It is God’s statute not to imitate the practices of the nations.¹⁹⁰ is: and you will not imitate the practices of the nations.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁹ J.P.S. renders customs. ¹⁹⁰ In other words, the meaning of and keep all his statutes

[NONE OF THE DISEASES.] Its meaning is, the diseases you should remember. For you saw with your own eyes the diseases, the strokes, and the plagues which I put upon the Egyptians because they rebelled against Me. Now if you will hearken to My statutes you will be saved from these plagues, for I will not do to you what I did to them. Additionally, you have no need of a physician for I am the Lord that healeth thee from all disease which I have decreed to be upon the earth. I will heal you as I healed the bitter waters which no physician has the ability to heal. Behold, what happened at Marah was the opposite of what occurred when the first plague struck, for the waters of the Nile were sweet but the Egyptians could not drink from them.¹⁹¹ However, here¹⁹² the bitter waters turned sweet. You should therefore love the Lord and keep yourself from rebelling against Him, for He will do good for you.

footnotes: ¹⁹¹ After the first plague struck. ¹⁹² At Marah.

AND THEY CAME TO ELIM. Saadiah Gaon says there were seventy species of palm trees there.¹⁹³ Others added, for each and every tribe.¹⁹⁴ Others said, for each and every person.¹⁹⁵ However, there is no need for these interpretations, for the springs of water, of which there were twelve, and the seventy palm trees did not come into being now because of Israel.¹⁹⁶ Additionally, this was not the time for the ripening of palms.¹⁹⁷ I believe that Israel tarried in Marah for only one day¹⁹⁸ and that they stayed in Elim for about twenty days.¹⁹⁹ Scripture therefore says, and they encamped there by the waters.²⁰⁰ The next verse therefore informs us that Israel journeyed from Elim on the fifteenth day of the second month.²⁰¹ Now Israel camped in the following four places²⁰² in fifteen days:²⁰³ the wilderness of Sinai,²⁰⁴ Dophkah, Alush, and Rephidim, for they came to the desert of Sinai at the beginning of the third month.²⁰⁵ Scripture mentions the palm trees to let us know that contrary to the waters of Marah the waters here were sweet, for palm trees cannot flourish in a land of bitter waters.²⁰⁶

footnotes: ¹⁹³ Seventy palm trees would not suffice for a such a large population. Hence Saadiah Gaon says that there were 70 species of palm trees there, each species consisting of numerous trees. ¹⁹⁴ There were 70 types of palm trees for every tribe. ¹⁹⁵ There were 70 palm trees per person. ¹⁹⁶ There is thus no reason to assume that Israel found a forest of palm trees in the wilderness vast enough to feed a large nation. ¹⁹⁷ In other words, there are no dates on the palm trees in the month of Iyyar. Thus Scripture does not imply that Israel ate from the palm trees. Hence there is no reason to exaggerate their number. ¹⁹⁸ I.E. offers no proof for this. He may base his opinion on the fact that Scripture does not note here that Israel camped in Marah. (However, Scripture does so in Num. 33:8). It rather mentions Marah as a place that Israel passed by on the way to Elim. ¹⁹⁹ Israel journeyed from Elim on the 15th of Iyyar (16:1). There are 24 days from the 21st of Nisan, when Israel crossed the Red Sea, to the 15th of Iyyar. Israel journeyed for three days without water (v. 22) and spent one day at Marah. Hence they spent about 20 days at Elim. ²⁰⁰ To emphasize that their main camp at this time was at Elim. ²⁰¹ That is, where they spent the longest period of time from the crossing of the Red Sea up to this point. ²⁰² Listed in Num. 8:12-16. ²⁰³ There are 15 days from the 15th of Iyyar until the first of Sivan, when Israel came to Sinai. ²⁰⁴ This should be emended to read Sin, Israel’s first stop on the way to Sinai. If it is not emended then I.E. lists Israel final destination first. ²⁰⁵ See I.E. on Ex. 19:1. ²⁰⁶ I.e., contrary to the opinion of the commentaries quoted earlier, Scripture does not mention the palm trees to inform us that Israel ate of them.