AND THE LORD SAID…STRETCH FORTH THY HAND. Towards the four corners of heaven¹ and the frogs will arise from the canals, from the rivers, and from the pools. However, they will not arise from all gatherings of water.²

footnotes: ¹ The passage is to be interpreted, stretch forth thy rod with thy hand towards heaven so that a plague will descend upon the rivers, canals, and pools. I.E. interprets thus because he believed it unlikely that the Lord would ask Aaron to put forth his hand over every river, canal, and pool in the land of Egypt (Krinsky). ² Unlike the plague of blood, which struck all gatherings of water (Ex. 7:19), the plague of frogs was limited to rivers, pools, and canals.

AND AARON STRETCHED OUT HIS HAND. Behold, Aaron merely stretched forth his hand but did not strike the water as he did the first time.³ He merely indicated that the frogs could arise from the moment that he stretched out his hand.

footnotes: ³ At the plague of blood. See Ex. 7:15.

AND THE MAGICIANS DID IN LIKE MANNER. In the little water.⁴ Pharaoh therefore saw that there was a difference between what Aaron did and what his magicians were able to do. He called Moses because he saw that his magicians could add to the plague⁵ but were unable to mitigate it.

footnotes: ⁴ Which they brought. The magicians could only bring forth frogs from the pans of water which they brought before Pharaoh, whereas Aaron caused frogs to swarm in all of the canals, pools, and rivers. ⁵ They could bring forth additional frogs from the water they brought but could not do anything to remove the frogs from the rivers, streams, and canals.

THEN PHARAOH CALLED. Pharaoh employed the plural form for entreat (hatiru) out of respect for Moses and Aaron.⁶ This plague was worse than the first one, for we read, He sent among them…frogs, which destroyed them (Ps. 78:45).⁷ (Ps. 78:44). It does not say that the plague of blood destroyed them.

footnotes: ⁶ Pharaoh knew that it was Moses who would pray to God to have the frogs removed. He used the plural and thereby included Aaron in his plea, out of deference to Aaron. ⁷ Psalms does not say the same with regard to the plague of blood. It states, And turned their rivers into blood, So that they could not drink their streams

AND MOSES SAID UNTO PHARAOH: HAVE THOU THIS GLORY OVER ME. I will glorify you by entreating the Lord that He take away the plague on a day that you yourself shall designate.

[AND REMAIN IN THE RIVER ONLY.] The reason for mentioning the river is that this is where the frogs started from. Once Scripture notes the river there is no need to mention the canals and pools.⁸ is mentioned merely as an example of the aforementioned.

footnotes: ⁸ The point of our verse is that the frogs remained in their natural habitat. The river

AND HE SAID: AGAINST TOMORROW. Rabbi Samuel ben Hofni⁹ says that people usually pray that a plague be removed from them immediately.¹⁰ Pharaoh, however, thought that the plague of frogs resulted from an unpropitious conjunction of heavenly bodies which Moses knew about.¹¹ He thought that the time for the removal of the frogs had now come.¹² Therefore Pharaoh tested Moses by asking him to extend the plague and said, Against tomorrow.

footnotes: ⁹ See chapter 4, note 135. ¹⁰ I.E. was troubled by Pharaoh requesting that the plague be removed on the next day, hence this comment. ¹¹ And exploited for his benefit. Pharaoh did not believe that Moses had brought the plague. He thought that it was a natural occurrence. ¹² On the day that he spoke to Moses.

AND THE FROGS SHALL DEPART. Ve-saru (shall depart) is ultimately accented, contrary to the rules of grammar.¹³ We find the same irregularity in the word samu (they put) in that they should put me into the dungeon (Gen. 40:15).

footnotes: ¹³ According to the rules of Hebrew grammar it should have been penultimately accented.

AND MOSES AND AARON WENT OUT. Moses cried unto the Lord because he trusted that the Lord would not put him to shame. Out of his own accord and without the permission of God, he had told Pharaoh, Be it according to thy word.

AND THE LORD DID ACCORDING TO THE WORD OF MOSES. Which he had spoken of his own accord.

AND THEY GATHERED. Va-yitzberu (and they gathered) is similar in meaning to the word va-yitzbor (laid up) in And Joseph laid up corn (Gen. 41:49).

HEAPS. Chomarim chomarim (heaps) is similar in meaning to chamor chamoratayim (heaps upon heaps) (Jud. 15:16).

BUT WHEN PHARAOH SAW THAT THERE WAS RESPITE. The word harevachah (respite) is similar in meaning to ve-ravach (relief) in so Saul found relief (Jud. 16:23).

HE HARDENED HIS HEART. Scripture employs an infinitive (hakhbed) in place of a perfect.¹⁴ (he hardened) rather than hakhbed (to harden), as the former is a perfect and the latter an infinitive. I.E. points out that Scripture occasionally uses an infinitive with the meaning of a perfect. As to the question of free will, see I.E. on Ex. 7:3.

footnotes: ¹⁴ In view of the fact that our verse deals with the past, Scripture should read hikhbid

AND THE LORD SAID. Note that the first three plagues and signs which Aaron brought about pertained to the lowest elements,¹⁵ as I have explained previously, since two were related to water and one to the dust of the earth. However, the plagues brought about by Moses with his rod related to a higher element. This was so because Moses was on a higher plane than Aaron. Thus the hail and the locusts were brought by the wind, and the darkness was in the air.¹⁶ Moses also brought about the plague of boils.¹⁷ However, three plagues came about without the use of the rod, namely, the swarms of beasts, murrain, and the death of the first-born.¹⁸ One plague, that of the boils, was brought about by Moses with Aaron’s minor participation and without the use of the rod.

footnotes: ¹⁵ For the four elements, see Vol. 1, p. 74, note 53. ¹⁶ Air (wind) was believed to be a higher element. ¹⁷ It was Moses who threw the soot of the furnace heavenward and caused boils to break out upon man and beast. See Ex. 9:10. This plague entailed the element of air. ¹⁸ These three plagues did not entail any interaction with any of the elements. Thus Aaron brought three plagues via the rod, i.e., blood, frogs, and gnats. Moses similarly brought three plagues via the use of the rod, i.e., hail, locusts, and darkness. One plague was brought jointly by Moses and Aaron without the use of the rod, i.e., the plague of boils. Three other plagues came about without any action by Moses and Aaron, i.e., the swarms of beasts, (J.P.S. renders swarms of flies), murrain, and the death of the first-born.

[THAT IT MAY BECOME GNATS THROUGHOUT ALL THE LAND OF EGYPT.] This is similar in meaning to And it shall become small dust over all the land of Egypt (Ex. 9:9).¹⁹ prefixed to kinnim does not mean to, but for, i.e.; le-kinnim does not mean to gnats but for gnats, that is, so that gnats will result. Similarly, le-afar does not mean to dust but for dust, i.e., so that dust will result. I.E. comments thus because the lamed usually has the meaning of to. The dust which Aaron struck gave birth, as it were, to gnats which went up over all the land of Egypt.²⁰

footnotes: ¹⁹ The lamed ²⁰ Our verse does not teach that the dust literally turned into gnats. It only seemed so.

AND THEY DID SO. And they did refers to Moses and Aaron. Moses is included because he told Aaron to smite the dust with the rod. Our verse is similar to and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thy hand (Ex. 17:5).

AND THERE WERE GNATS. Kinnam (gnats) is a generic name.²¹ presents a problem. The Hebrew word for gnat is kinnah; for gnats, kinnim. Hence our verse should have read kinnim or kinnah if a collective noun were employed. The mem of kinnam is either superfluous or in place of a heh.²² (a variant of kinnah), the mem in kinnam being superfluous. He then suggests that the word for gnat is kinnah, with a mem substituted for a heh. In any case, it is not a root letter. The mem sometimes serves as the sign of the feminine plural, as in the word tzefardi’im (frogs). This term is a feminine, for when referring to the singular Scripture reads, va-ta’al ha-tzefarde’a (and the frog came up) (Ex. 8:2).²³ (came up) is a feminine verb. Thus tzefarde’a (frog), the noun which it governs, must also be feminine. Hence tzefardi’im (frogs) is a feminine plural. I.E. makes note of this because a mem suffixed to a noun usually indicates that a word is a masculine plural. The term kinnim is proof of the aforementioned.²⁴ of kinnam is not a root letter, for the plural of kinnah. is kinnim, not kinnamim According to this interpretation the word ha-kinnam is irregular because of its superfluous mem.²⁵. It is similar to the word rekam (empty) and chinnam (gratuitous).²⁶ However, Yefet says that the mem of kinnam is a pronominal suffix relating to the Egyptians.²⁷ (gnats) means their gnats, for kinnam is a combination of the noun ken (gnat) and the pronoun she-lahem (their). He claims that the singular of kinnim (gnats) is kan, in the same way that the singular of pittim (morsels) is pat (morsel). He also says that the word ha-kinnam is similar to the word ha-oholi (my tent) (Josh. 7:21).²⁸) prefixed to it. Thus prima facie, ha-kinnam cannot mean their gnats. Hence Yefet points out that we occasionally do find the definite article prefixed to a noun combined with a pronoun, as in the word ha-oholi. Do not be amazed that Scripture records that after one spot was struck, all the dust of the earth became gnats throughout all the land of Egypt.²⁹ Its meaning is that the plague then started.³⁰ did not turn to gnats the moment Aaron struck the earth. The same is true regarding the plagues of the water³¹ (Ex. 7:20). and the boils.³²

footnotes: ²¹ The word kinnam ²² I.E. suggests that our verse employs a collective noun and that the word for gnat is ken ²³ Va-ta’al ²⁴ That the mem ²⁵ For the usual word for gnat is kinnah ²⁶ See Vol. 1, p. 306. ²⁷ In other words, kinnam ²⁸ Words that result from the combination of a noun and a pronoun do not usually have the definite article (ha ²⁹ I.E. assumes that this would strain some people’s credulity. ³⁰ In other words, all the dust of the earth ³¹ All the rivers, streams, pools, and ponds of Egypt did not turn into blood the moment Aaron smote the waters that were in the river ³² The boils did not break out upon all men and beasts the moment Moses threw the soot heavenward.

AND THE MAGICIANS DID SO. They struck the dust of the earth.

TO BRING FORTH GNATS. To cause the earth to bring forth gnats as Aaron did. However, they could not do so.

[AND THERE WERE GNATS UPON MAN, AND UPON BEAST.] Scripture notes this a second time because the plague was also upon the magicians.

THEN THE MAGICIANS SAID. When the magicians saw that unlike the changing of the rod into a serpent and the plague of blood and frogs where they were able to duplicate Aaron’s actions they were now unable to imitate what Aaron had done, they said to Pharaoh that this plague did not come to liberate Israel but was a disaster sent by God in keeping with the arrangements of the stars dealing with Egypt’s fortune. I have previously explained that Pharaoh did not deny the existence of a Creator.³³ He only denied the existence of the God which Moses revealed to him. Our verse is explained by, it is not His hand that smote us; it was a chance that happened to us (I Sam. 6:9) from heaven. Hence Pharaoh’s heart was hardened. Our interpretation is supported by the fact that the magicians said, This is the finger of God, and not, this is the finger of the Lord, meaning the God of Israel, as Pharaoh did when he exclaimed, Entreat the Lord, with regard to the plague of frogs and then similarly used this term for God in the latter plagues.³⁴) rather than Elohim (God) for the Deity. Adonai is the Lord’s proper name. Elohim is a generic name and in the Bible often refers to idols. Furthermore, Moses told Pharaoh that the Nile would be stricken before it was actually plagued, and he likewise informed him that the land would be inundated by frogs before they appeared. However, Moses did not inform Pharaoh that a plague of gnats was about to strike.³⁵

footnotes: ³³ See I.E. on Ex. 5:2. ³⁴ When Pharaoh finally acknowledged that the plagues were sent by the God of Israel, he used the term Lord (Adonai ³⁵ Hence the magicians could argue that the gnats were not sent by the Lord.

AND THE LORD SAID. It is the custom of kings to go out to the river in the morning, for it is good for the eyes to see water.

I WILL SEND. The word mashli’ach (I will send) is in the hifil. It is irregular.³⁶ in the pi’el.

footnotes: ³⁶ The usual term for I will send, as used in our verse, is meshale’ach

[SWARMS OF FLIES.] The word arov (swarms of flies) refers to a mixture of evil beasts such as lions, wolves, bears, and leopards.³⁷, translated by J.P.S. as swarms of flies, comes from the root ayin, resh, bet, meaning to mingle. According to I.E. it means a mixture of wild animals.

footnotes: ³⁷ The word arov

[AND ALSO THE GROUND.] Uninhabited places.

AND I WILL SET APART. Some say that the word ve-hifleti (and I will set apart) is missing an alef.³⁸. There is no alef in ve-hifleti, hence I.E.’s comment. However, I believe that it comes from a root ending in a heh.³⁹ Hence there is no alef in ve-hifleti. The meaning of ve-hifleti is, and I will set apart. It is logical to assume that Pharaoh now started to lighten Israel’s burden. When he saw that the Lord put a division between Israel and Egypt he feared to harm them. He now saw the need to send them to offer sacrifices to the Lord, lest he fall upon us with pestilence (Ex. 5:3).⁴⁰ was first uttered by the Israelites. However, it also referred to Pharaoh. See I.E.’s comment on Ex. 5:3. Don’t you see that he now gave them permission to sacrifice to the Lord in the land of Egypt?⁴¹

footnotes: ³⁸ It comes from the root peh, lamed, alef ³⁹ Its root is peh, lamed, heh. ⁴⁰ Lest he fall upon us with pestilence ⁴¹ Which shows that Pharaoh now started to make concessions.

[THAT I AM THE LORD IN THE MIDST OF THE EARTH.] This is a metaphor. It is the manner of kings to establish their residences in the middle of their kingdoms so as to be equidistant to their borders. The Lord similarly placed the heart, which is “king” over man’s body, in the center of the human corporeal frame. Man’s spirit too is located in the center of the body, as it is written, And (the Lord) formed the spirit of man in the midst of him (Zech. 12:1).⁴² There are many proofs from nature that this is so. Scripture states, Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God hath shined forth (Ps. 50:2) because Zion is in the center of the inhabited world and God’s presence is seen in the inhabited world.⁴³

footnotes: ⁴² I.E. believed that man’s soul is located in the heart, which is in the center of the body. He held that Zech. 12:1 supports this contention. ⁴³ See I.E. on Gen. 1:1.

AND I WILL PUT A DIVISION. The meaning of pedut is a division. The word pidyon (redemption) is always similar in meaning.⁴⁴ and pidyon come from the root peh, dalet, heh.

footnotes: ⁴⁴ To be redeemed means to be separated from ones enemies. Both pedut

AND THE LORD DID SO. On the morrow, as Moses had spoken.⁴⁵

footnotes: ⁴⁵ I.E. assumes that the swarms came the day after Moses had warned Pharaoh of their coming. They did not come immediately because God wanted to give Pharaoh a chance to repent (Krinsky).

[AND THERE CAME GRIEVOUS SWARMS.] By themselves.⁴⁶ of beasts (or flies). The Pentateuch tells us that a grievous swarm came. Hence I.E. notes that the grievous swarm came of itself; i.e., it was worse than what Moses threatened (Krinsky). That is, they were more numerous and/or more harmful. This plague was worse than any of the previous plagues.

footnotes: ⁴⁶ Moses threatened a swarm

AND PHARAOH CALLED. It was now clear to Pharaoh that the plagues came because the children of Israel did not offer sacrifices unto the Lord.

[IN THE LAND.] In his kingdom and not in any other place.

AND MOSES SAID. Rabbi Joshua says that the clause the abomination of the Egyptians was written to disparage idol worship. What Moses actually said to Pharaoh was, “the god of the Egyptians.” Rabbi Joshua further states that the god of Egypt was shaped like a lamb because the Egyptians believed that the constellation of the lamb ruled over their land. It is because of this that the Egyptians did not eat meat. However, if the reason for the Egyptians not eating meat was their worship of the lamb why did they also abstain from ox and goat meat? I believe that the ancient Egyptians in the time of Moses had the same belief currently held by the people of India, who make up more than half of the world. All of them are descendants of Ham.⁴⁷ They do not eat meat until this very day. These people also do not drink milk or blood or eat fish or eggs. In other words, they do not eat anything coming from a living creature. Furthermore, they abhor any person who eats any of the aforementioned. They consider shepherding to be an especially disgusting type of work. It is similarly written, for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians (Gen. 47:34). They also do not allow any meat-eating person in their country. If any of them goes to a foreign country he will flee from any place where flesh is eaten. They will not eat anything which a meat-eater has handled. They consider his very garments unclean. It is thus written, because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews (Gen. 43:32). Behold, Potiphar placed everything with the exception of the food which he ate under the care of Joseph, who was then living in his house. Potiphar would not permit him to touch his food because Joseph was a Hebrew. There is no reason to ask, “If this is so, then why did the Egyptians keep cattle?”⁴⁸ We find the same to be the case in contemporary India. Horses, asses, and camels were used to carry burdens and for riding. Cattle served to pull the plow and sheep were kept for their wool. I will yet speak on this when I discuss the Passover observed in Egypt.⁴⁹ Yefet says that an interrogative heh is missing in the phrase ve-lo yiskelunu,⁵⁰ (will they not stone us) literally means: and they will not stone us. For the clause to mean “(and) will they not stone us” it should read: ve-ha-lo yiskelunu; i e., an interrogative heh should be placed before the word lo. for its meaning is, will they not stone us.⁵¹ However, I believe that the word hen (lo) in hen nizbach (lo, we sacrifice)⁵² before the word hen (lo). J.P.S. translates: lo, if we sacrifice. has the same meaning as the interrogative heh. The meaning of our verse thus is: if we sacrifice (hen nizbach) the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, will they not stone us? The word hen in hen hayetah ka-zot (if there hath been such a thing) (Jer. 2:10) is identical.⁵³ is in place of the interrogative heh, for the meaning of hen hayetah is: if there had been, not lo, there had been. The word hen can mean lo, behold, or if.

footnotes: ⁴⁷ As are the Egyptians. ⁴⁸ The Pentateuch tells us that the Egyptians kept cattle. See Ex. 9:3 and many other verses in this chapter which relate the same. ⁴⁹ Ex. 12:7. ⁵⁰ Ve-lo yiskelunu ⁵¹ The context implies that it is to be so translated. ⁵² Hence there is no need to place an interrogative heh ⁵³ There too hen

WE WILL GO THREE DAYS’ JOURNEY INTO THE WILDERNESS. We must remove ourselves from the Egyptians.

[AS HE SHALL COMMAND US.] Regarding the type and number of animals to be selected as sacrificial victims.

AND PHARAOH SAID. The phrase entreat for me should have been placed at the beginning of the verse,⁵⁴ as the verse means entreat for me that this plague will be removed and I will let you go to sacrifice in the wilderness as you asked. However, this is on the condition that you go no further than three days’ journey into the desert.

footnotes: ⁵⁴ Rather than at the end of the verse.

AND MOSES SAID…ONLY LET NOT PHARAOH DEAL DECEITFULLY. The word hetel (deal deceitfully) is irregular. A dagesh should have been placed in the tav, for its heh is a root letter. It should have been vocalized like the word dabber (speak) in behold, I cannot speak (Jer. 1:6).⁵⁵ is a pi’el. Hence it should follow the paradigm of dabber, which is a pi’el and should be vocalized hattel. Since the word is not so vocalized it is irregular. We find the same irregularity in hatel tehatellu vo (mock, will ye mock him) (Job 13:9).⁵⁶? Cf. Krinsky. The correct vocalization of this word is found in the clause va-yehattel ba-hem eliyahu (that Elijah mocked them) (I Kings 18:27).⁵⁷ form va-yehattel. Compare, va-yedabber. Moses said, only let not Pharaoh deal deceitfully any more, because he had promised to let the people go during the plague of the frogs and then didn’t.

footnotes: ⁵⁵ The word hetel ⁵⁶ I.E. has abridged the clause. Job 13:9 reads: Or as one mocketh a man, will ye mock Him ⁵⁷ The word is there vocalized in the usual pi’el

AND MOSES WENT OUT. There are words in Hebrew that have the same meaning in the kal and hifil. These words come in two forms with one meaning. Examples are: va-yetar (and entreated) in and entreated the Lord and ve-hatarti (and I will entreat) in and I will entreat the Lord (v. 25).⁵⁸ is a kal; ve-hatarti is a hifil. Similarly moreh (shoot) and yarah (shot) in which I shoot and he shot an arrow (I Sam. 20:36).⁵⁹ is a hifil. Yarah is a kal. However, such words are rare.

footnotes: ⁵⁸ The same root in a variant conjugation usually has a different though related meaning, hence I.E.’s comment. Va-yetar ⁵⁹ Moreh

AND THE LORD DID. The word va-yasar (and he removed) is grammatically irregular. Roots having a vav as their middle letter⁶⁰ is samekh, vav, resh. are vocalized with a kamatz beneath their first stem letter, i.e., va-yashav (and he returned)⁶¹ is shin, vav, bet. and va-yakam (and he got up).⁶² is kof, vav, mem. However, in cases where the last letter of the root cannot receive a dagesh, i.e., if it is a chet, ayin, or resh, then the first root letter is vocalized with a pattach,⁶³. as in va-yanach (and rested)⁶⁴. in and rested on the seventh day (Ex. 20:11); va-yana (was moved)⁶⁵. in and his heart was moved (Is. 7:2); va-yasar (and he turned) in And he turned in unto her (Jud. 4:18). All of the aforementioned applies to words in the kal, because in the hifil roots having a vav as their middle letter are vocalized with a segol beneath their first stem letters in cases where their roots do not end in the letters mentioned above.⁶⁶, or resh. An example of the aforementioned is va-yashev (and he brought back) in And he brought back all the goods (Gen. 14:16). Now and he removed is written va-yasar rather than va-yaser.⁶⁷. It is so written because its final root letter is a resh. Thus the hifil and the kal of this root are spelled in the same way, hence the grammatical irregularity of this root. It is like va-yasar (and he took off) in And he took off their chariot wheels (Ex. 14:25). However, it appears that va-yasar is a kal and that va-yasar he-arov (and He removed the swarms of flies) means: and the swarms of flies departed.⁶⁸ to be a hifil its meaning is, and he removed. If we interpret it as a kal its meaning is, and he (it) departed.

footnotes: ⁶⁰ The root of va-yasar ⁶¹ The root of va-yashav ⁶² The root of va-yakam ⁶³ Rather than a kamatz ⁶⁴ From the root nun, vav, chet ⁶⁵ Its root is nun, vav, ayin ⁶⁶ A chet, ayin ⁶⁷ Even though it is a hifil ⁶⁸ If we take va-yasar

AND PHARAOH HARDENED HIS HEART. He hardened his heart as he did at the plague of the frogs wherein it is written: he hardened his heart (v. 11).