Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh. The word now is a proper response to Moses regarding what he said, Why have You done evil to this people? For Moses did not complain about Pharaoh not immediately sending the Israelites when he came to him, as the Holy One, blessed be He, had already told him twice that the king of Egypt would not allow them to go. Rather, he complained about how He made things worse for this people than before, because at the very least if his mission did not immediately help them, it should not have harmed them. Yet our eyes see that his mission did harm them. Moses said, “Perhaps I was the cause of this because You sent to him a man with a heavy mouth and tongue like me. Therefore, Pharaoh’s anger was intensified because he said, ‘See, the Jews are mocking me,’ and if so, why did You send me?” Moses perhaps understood this from Pharaoh’s words, Why, Moses and Aaron, do you disturb the people, as he should have said, “Moses and Aaron, why do you disturb?” Rather, this is what he meant: “If some other suitable and eloquent person had been sent on this mission to disturb the people from their work, I would have been silent. But why Moses and Aaron, who are not fit for this mission, and they disturb the people from their work?” This angered him even more — that this mission was carried out by an unworthy messenger rather than someone appropriate for the task.

And the Holy One, blessed be He, answered him, “Now you will see, etc.” For it is known that this is the natural order — that every day, just before the dawn rises, the darkness becomes even more intense than the night’s darkness, and afterward the light of dawn breaks through and rises. Similarly, most sick people, just before their death, strengthen and sit up in bed and ask for food, and afterward death overpowers them. And likewise in the winter days, just before the sun rises, the cold intensifies, and finally it is overcome by the sun. This is natural, for any natural thing that senses something opposing it coming to nullify its existence will strengthen itself against its opponent and refuse to yield before it, exerting in its nature all the power it can muster, until finally it is defeated because the opposite force has overpowered it. This is true in all the examples we mentioned. Similarly, the fact that Pharaoh has now worsened his treatment of Israel more than before is conclusive proof that his end is near and that the time of redemption is close, which will nullify all of Pharaoh’s actions. Therefore, he wants to strengthen his efforts. This is what is meant by Now you will see — with the word now, He answered Moses’ question of Why have You brought harm…? Because now the time has arrived when Pharaoh will be compelled to send them away and expel them, therefore he wishes to rise up against them with a strong hand. And this is proof that My salvation is close to come, and My righteousness to be revealed.

One can also interpret the word “now you will see,” to indicate that the end of the 400 years that they were supposed to be in Egypt had not yet arrived, for they were only enslaved for 210 years. Therefore, [God] increased their suffering and servitude so that the smaller amount [of time] would count as a larger calculation, because in these few days it was as if they had been enslaved for many years, and through this the end time would be brought closer to them, so that now, immediately, you will see what I will do to Pharaoh. This is a correct inference.

And God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the Lord.” The phrase to him is completely redundant because Moses’s name was already mentioned. It seems to me that this follows the way our Sages explained (see Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, Ibn Ezra, Sforno on Exodus 2:10) that Moses was called “Moshe” and not “Mashui” [one who was drawn out] because “Moshe” is in the present tense, and the spirit of God spoke through Pharaoh’s daughter to call him “Moshe,” meaning “one who draws out,” because he would be the one to draw Israel out from exile, from the treacherous waters. If Moses had examined his name, he would have truly known that Israel would be redeemed through him, and he would not have complained saying, Why have You sent me? Why have You brought harm (Exodus 5:22–23). However, on the other hand, there is room to judge Moses favorably because he examined his own nature and saw himself as “heavy of mouth and tongue,” therefore he thought he was not worthy of this mission. For this reason it says, And God spoke — harsh speech, “Elohim” representing the attribute of judgment, to Moses — suggesting that he deserved judgment for not examining his name “Moshe” and understanding from it that he would be the one to draw Israel out from exile. From this perspective, he should not have said Why have You brought harm. But because of his essence, God was filled with compassion for him, and said — gentle speech, to him — because of his essential nature, since he was “heavy of mouth and tongue,” therefore his heart was emboldened to say Why have You sent me? And because of to him, it was said to him I am the Lord, which indicates mercy, for His name and His essence contradicted each other. Therefore He said, I am the Lord, full of mercy, to judge you favorably.

“And I appeared to Abraham, etc.” It began with the language of seeing and concluded with the language of knowing, for it should have said, “And I appeared to Abraham, etc.” and “by My name the Lord I did not appear to them,” or it should have said, “And I made Myself known to Abraham, etc.” and “My name the Lord was not known to them.” What seems most likely to me is that the language of seeing indicates a clearer understanding of something than the language of knowing. For you can have knowledge of something that is recognizable and known through a logical deduction, which can be subject to error, or through hearing, which can be subject to falsehood. But something that a person sees with his own eyes is better than all of these, for nothing seen can be subject to error or falsehood. You should know that the name Shaddai indicates that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to His world “enough” [dai], and that He would say “enough” to their troubles, as Rashi explained on the verse And may El Shaddai grant you mercy (Genesis 43:14). And it is known that the Patriarchs lived most, if not all, of their lives in pain. For Abraham was thrown into a furnace, wandered as a nomad, and had his wife taken. And likewise with Isaac; moreover his wells were blocked, and he was a stranger in the land. And Jacob’s [suffering] was even more obvious than all of them. The Holy One, blessed be He, said “enough” to all their troubles, and this is what they saw with their own eyes — all the hardship that passed over them, and how God saved them through the name Shaddai, saying “enough” to their troubles. But the name Lord, which indicates complete mercy without any mixture of bad things — not only did they not see this with their own eyes, but even through knowledge by way of proof, it was not known to them that I am the Lord who does good to all.

And if so, it mentioned seeing and knowledge in the way of “not only this but also that,” because for the bad things, not only did they know them, but they even saw them with their own eyes. And for the complete mercies, not only did they not yet see them, but I was not even known to them in demonstrable knowledge. Indeed, I said to the forefathers I am the Lord, full of mercy, but I have not yet fulfilled this promise to them. This is the first sign of the redemption and of the transformation. The second sign is And I have also established My covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan — but I have not yet given it to them. The third sign is And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians are making to work with harder labor than was decreed, because I was angry a little, but they helped for evil. These three are joined to the depth of the three promises that are mentioned afterwards in three consecutive verses, because in them is explicitly mentioned Therefore say to the children of Israel: I am the Lord, etc. And He mentioned great judgments to be done upon their enslavers, and the coming to the land, as is clear to anyone who examines these verses.

A second way [of explaining] the continuation of these verses is, that “Elohim” only means Judge, and it is not yet explained in what judgment the Holy One, blessed be He, judged. Therefore, it seems to me that this judgment refers to the preceding verse where it says, Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh. Our Sages of blessed memory explained (Sanhedrin 111), “but not what will be done to the kings of the seven nations.” The word “kings” seems redundant because it could have simply said “not what will be done to the seven nations.” (And in Shemot Rabbah 5:23) it concludes “and you will not see what I will do in the war against the 31 kings.” This is difficult: why do we need this count? Do we not already know that Israel fought against 31 kings? And there’s another difficulty: why does it say Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh — why do I need the word now? Although I explained the meaning of “now” at the end of Parshat Shemot, nevertheless there are additional divine interpretations to explain it in another way, namely: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, I am the Lord who was, is, and will be. For all flesh and blood cannot be certain to fulfill their promises, since the spirit leaves him and he is gone and cannot fulfill his promise. Therefore, he must fulfill it immediately. And if not, then justifiably those who were promised complain about why the pronouncement of his word was not done quickly, for if not now, when? But I exist eternally, equally throughout all times, therefore the forefathers did not complain but waited and anticipated when the word of God would come, and they were confident that it would ultimately be fulfilled. But you complained that My words were not fulfilled immediately, therefore all the more so you would complain about the wars against the 31 kings, because those wars would necessarily be prolonged, as it is written Joshua waged war with all those kings for a long time (Joshua 11:18). For Israel could not inherit all the land quickly lest the beasts of the field multiply against them, but rather [the seven nations] would be driven out gradually. And because it is your way to complain when a promise is not fulfilled quickly, therefore I am penalizing you that justifiably you will not see the prolonged war against the 31 kings, except for the war against Pharaoh who is a single king, and you can see now — meaning immediately — what I will do to Pharaoh. Only that you will see. And the main exclusion comes from the word now meaning you will only see what is done immediately, but not something that will not be done now but only after many days, such as the war against 31 kings — that you will not see. And this is what is meant by and My name, the Lord which indicates that I exist eternally and My promise will ultimately be fulfilled, but they did not yet know this, and they waited to see [the fulfillment of] My words as mentioned.

The third approach is, that the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to publicize in the world that He created His world ex nihilo [something from nothing]. Since miracles demonstrating creation were not yet widespread in the world, the Holy One, blessed be He, needed to perform all these miracles so that people would retroactively believe that God created His world ex nihilo, as it is written, By this you shall know that I am the Lord, and similarly Jethro said, Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods (Exodus 18:11). Many commentators have discussed how the miracles in Egypt were demonstrations of the world’s creation. Therefore, He said, I appeared to the forefathers as El Shaddai, because this name indicates that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to His world “enough” [dai], and it is evidence of creation, but not of creation ex nihilo. This is the meaning of but by My name YHVH I did not make known to them, because this name of YHVH [Havayah] indicates that the Holy One, blessed be He, brings everything into existence [mehaveh et hakol], and all existences come from Him, blessed be He. This confirms the concept of creation ex nihilo, saying that no existence has being except through Him, blessed be He. This is the answer to Moses who complained and said, Why have You brought harm, etc. Even though God had already told him, the king of Egypt will not let you go, Moses still wanted to know the reason for Pharaoh’s extreme stubbornness. And if it was in order to perform all the miracles, this itself raises the question: what need is there for all these miracles? Until the Holy One, blessed be He, told him the reason for the matter: For I am YHVH who brings everything into existence, and this fact had not yet been publicized in the world. For to the forefathers I appeared only with the name Shaddai, which indicates that I said to My world “enough,” but a miracle demonstrating creation ex nihilo had not yet been publicized. This is the meaning of but by My name YHVH I did not make Myself known to them. Therefore, I need to harden Pharaoh’s heart in order to perform miracles that demonstrate creation ex nihilo.

And if you ask, what is different about this day, and what is the need for this knowledge now more than at other times? About this it said, And I also established My covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan. If I do not publicize now that all the earth is Mine, then the nations will say, “You are robbers,” because with a strong hand you are conquering the lands of the seven nations, and God did not rebuke them (1 Samuel 3:13). This would lead them to denial and heresy, saying there is no judge and no justice, as explained above in Genesis (1:1) regarding the words of Rabbi Isaac. And if you ask, didn’t I also promise the forefathers to give them the land without making a public announcement about this innovation? About this it said, And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, etc. This means that the forefathers did not need miracles because they were faithful believers anyway, and for all the nations there was no need for this knowledge yet. But now that I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel and the time has come for their entry into the land, therefore I need to publicize now through miracles that I am the Lord who brings everything into existence and all the earth is Mine, and it is in My power to give the land to whomever I wish. This is what it means when it says, And I will give it to you as an inheritance, I am the Lord. Because I am the Lord who brings everything into existence, and I made the earth and all that is upon it, therefore it is in My power to give it to you as an inheritance.

The fourth approach is, based on what our Sages of blessed memory said (Sanhedrin 90b): “From where in the Torah do we learn about the resurrection of the dead? As it is said, And I have also established My covenant with them to give to them the land of Canaan. It does not say ‘to you’ but rather to them, from here we learn about the resurrection of the dead from the Torah.” Rashi explains that from here we learn that they [the Patriarchs] are destined to live again and inherit the land. But his explanation is difficult due to several questions. For what does the resurrection of the dead have to do with this conversation that the Holy One, blessed be He, had with Moses when he complained? Furthermore, we do not find in the Torah, Prophets, or Writings that during the Messianic era the Patriarchs will live again and dwell in the land of Israel, for what benefit would they have in exchanging an eternal world for a transient one? And all the more so at the time of resurrection, for then the world will be destroyed, so how will the Patriarchs dwell on the land? Additionally, there is a difficulty with the Midrash that Rashi quotes (on verse 9): “Alas for those who are lost and not to be found” etc. “I have much to lament over the death of the Patriarchs. I said to Abraham, Arise, walk through the land in its length and breadth, for I will give it to you, yet when he sought a place to bury Sarah, he could not find one until he purchased it with money. Similarly with Isaac, they disputed over the wells, and likewise with Jacob, who had to purchase a field,” etc., “and yet he did not question Me.” This is difficult no matter how you look at it: if the promise of the land was specifically to their descendants and not to the Patriarchs themselves, then why would the Patriarchs question or protest? After all, God never promised the Patriarchs that they would have a portion in the land. And if He did promise it also to the Patriarchs, then where is His promise?

And what seems closest to me is to say that it addresses different aspects, because the Patriarchs were not given a portion in the land for the purpose of using this world, but only a burial place, as the dead of the Land of Israel will be the first to be resurrected. And in every place where it says for to you and to your seed I will give all these lands, the giving is not equal to both, for how could individuals inherit such a large land? Rather, [the land was given] to their descendants in this world, and to them [the Patriarchs] for the purpose of the resurrection of the dead in the World to Come, so that they would have a portion and burial in the land to be saved from the suffering of “rolling through tunnels” [a reference to the belief that those buried outside Israel would need to roll underground to reach Israel for resurrection]. And therefore, when Abraham sought a place to bury Sarah and did not find one, Abraham had reason to doubt this fundamental promise to the Patriarchs which was that they would have a burial place, and he did not find one. Nevertheless, this promise was later fulfilled when he found [a place] to purchase with money. But before he found a place to buy, he had reason to doubt yet did not doubt. Similarly, when they disputed Isaac about the wells, he also had reason to doubt lest they would not give him even a burial place in the land, since they were so particular not to give him even a small portion in the land. And the same with Jacob.

The concept of resurrection of the dead is connected to the renewal of the world, for one who believes in the renewal [of the world] will also believe in resurrection through a fortiori reasoning [kal vachomer], as it states in the Gemara (Sanhedrin 91a): “If something that did not exist comes into existence, then certainly something that already existed can come back into existence.” This is what is meant by And God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the Lord” — the One who brings everything into being, who was, is, and will be in the future. All of this serves as evidence for resurrection. Therefore, I needed to perform all the miracles with Pharaoh and all his servants so that they would also believe in resurrection. For until now, My name the Lord, which indicates renewal, was not known to them. Nevertheless, I established My covenant with them to give to them the land of Canaan — to them meaning that they would be buried in the land so that they could be assured of arising in the future without the suffering of rolling through underground tunnels [to reach the Holy Land at resurrection]. This explanation works well both according to the third approach, that the entire passage is stated factually and not as an accusation against Moses for complaining, as well as according to Rashi’s approach, who explained “Alas for those who are lost [and are not found]…”

And it further appears to me, that He mentioned the name of Shaddai to the forefathers in the promise of the land, to hint to them that the purpose of the land is in both this world and the world to come. For the letters “yud-shin” [י“ש] from the name ”Shaddai“ [שדי] hint at the reward of the world to come, as it is said To bequeath substance [יש - ‘yesh’] to those who love me (Proverbs 8:21). And the letter ”dalet“ [ד] from ”Shaddai“ hints at the reward of this world which extends to the four [ד’ - dalet represents the number 4] directions of the world, as it is written And you shall spread out to the west and to the east, etc. (Genesis 28:14). And regarding this it was said to Moses And You shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen (Exodus 33:23). The Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses the knot of the tefillin, because the letter ”dalet“ from ”Shaddai“ is in the knot of the tefillin at the back, through which the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him all the reward of this world hinted at by the four directions, as it is said to Moses, Ascend to the top of the summit and lift Your eyes westward and northward, etc. (Deuteronomy 3:27). But My face — meaning the letters ”yud-shin“ which are in the tefillin in the front, alluding to the reward of the world to come, namely the ”shin“ in the head tefillin and the ”yud“ in the hand tefillin — shall not be seen. He told him that the reward of the world to come cannot be seen, as it is written No eye has seen God besides You (Isaiah 64:3). Therefore, He mentioned here the name of Shaddai to say that they [the forefathers] did not question why they did not find a burial place in the land, which is meant for the purpose of resurrection, even though they were also promised resurrection with the name of Shaddai.

I will bring you out, I will save you, I will redeem you, and I will take you. These correspond to the four things that happened to them, as it is said (Genesis 15:13), Your offspring shall be strangers — this refers to their status as foreigners; in a land not their own — this refers to the distance from the Divine Presence, for one who dwells outside the Land of Israel is like one who has no God, etc. (Ketubot 110b). And the text places the distance from the Divine Presence next to their status as foreigners because one depends on the other — the distance from the Divine Presence stems from their being foreigners outside the Land of Israel, in a place distant from the Divine Presence. And they shall serve them — this is something additional to being foreigners, for a typical foreigner is at least not a slave. And they shall afflict them — this is something additional to slavery, for a typical slave is not afflicted without reason. In the redemption, the Holy One, blessed be He, saw fit to save them gradually, bit by bit. First, He saved them from the most dangerous thing, which was affliction, and about this it is said, I will bring you out from under the burdens of Egypt, for burdens refers to affliction, as it is written, to afflict them with their burdens. And afterward, He saved them from slavery as well, and about this it is said, I will save you from their labor. And afterward, He saved them from the lightest of all, which was their status as foreigners, and about this it is said, I will redeem you, etc., for a typical foreigner has no redeemer, as it is written (Numbers 5:8), If the man has no redeemer, which our Sages interpreted (Bava Kamma 109a) as referring to a foreigner, etc.

And since from the [status of] foreignness comes the removal of the Divine Presence, for this reason it was necessary to connect to [the concept of] foreignness the statement in a land not their own which indicates the removal of the Divine Presence. In contrast to this, here it says that with the nullification of [their status of] foreignness, they will merit to cleave to the Divine Presence. And regarding this it says, I will take you to Me for a people, and I will be to you as God — an actual taking [signifying marriage in Biblical Hebrew], like a man [takes] a maiden. And since one who dwells outside the Land of Israel is as if he has no God, therefore it says here, and I will be to you as God. And through this cleaving, you shall know that I am the One who brings you out from under the burdens of Egypt, the greatest of evils. And afterwards, He explained this taking by saying, And I will bring you to the land, etc. Therefore, they instituted four cups [of wine] on Passover corresponding to the salvation from these four evils. And above, in Parshat Vayeshev (40:11), regarding the cup mentioned concerning the chief butler, you will find a very correct reason for the four cups of Passover, see there.

And behold, in these four expressions of redemption, which mention the name of God four times in the verse Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: The God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you — why do we need both the general statement and the specific details? This is to tell us that from the foreignness they were saved in the merit of Abraham who left his land, his birthplace, and his father’s house to go to a foreign land. And in the merit of Isaac’s service, who was bound upon the altar for the service of God, they were saved from the labor of Egypt. And in the merit of Jacob who endured afflictions all his days, they were saved from the affliction of Egypt. However, regarding the divine attachment, all the forefathers were equal in it; therefore, He grouped them together and said God of your fathers for in the merit of all of them, they would merit the attachment of the Divine Presence. And some say that I will deliver you from their labor [avodah, which can also mean worship] means from the zodiac sign of Aries which the Egyptians worshipped, meaning from their deities, which is their worship, and that is correct.

“And Moses spoke thus to the children of Israel, etc.” There are several questions in this narrative because shortness of breath is the same as hard labor, so why separate them? Furthermore, what is written afterwards, Come, speak to Pharaoh, implies that this was meant to fix the refusal and resistance of Israel, and this matter requires explanation. And everyone asks, isn’t there a rebuttal to this kal vachomer [a fortiori argument] [in 6:12]? For what applies to Israel who had shortness of breath [does not apply to Pharaoh]. And what did the Holy One, Blessed be He, answer to this kal vachomer, and how was it fixed by what was said, And He commanded them concerning the children of Israel, etc.

And what appears to me in this matter, is that in the entire narrative from “And I appeared to Abraham” until “And I will give it to you as an inheritance,” there is no mention at all of Pharaoh sending them from his land. This could be understood as if God wanted them to leave on their own without the king’s permission, as implied by the language “I will take you out” and “I will take you.” Even though God had already said to Pharaoh, “Let My people go so they may serve Me,” perhaps after Pharaoh’s refusal, God wanted them to leave against Pharaoh’s will. Moses erred in this matter because he should have added of his own understanding and spoken to Israel also this time that Pharaoh would send them forth, for they would compel him until he said, “I am willing,” since the Blessed One is not a man that He should change His mind. But Moses did not add anything; rather, he told them God’s words exactly as they were, as it says, And Moses spoke thus to the children of Israel. The word “thus” indicates that the words were exactly as stated and they did not listen to Moses — they did not accept his words. They should have responded to his words, “How can we leave without the king’s permission?” just as it is said, How can I go? If Saul hears, he will kill me (First Samuel 16:2). But because of their shortness of spirit, their breathing was short like a panicked person, therefore they couldn’t verbalize their response to him. Furthermore, they feared the hard labor, lest it become even heavier upon them as it had become after Moses’ first mission. When God saw Israel’s intention and the reason for their refusal and rejection, He wanted to correct their error, so God spoke to Moses: Go, speak to Pharaoh, etc. For even from the beginning, it never arose in His blessed mind that they would go without permission, except that both Moses and Israel misunderstood His first words.

And indeed he erred in these words of his as well, because he thought that since the mission was dependent on Pharaoh, it implied that only the consent of the sender was needed, but not the consent of Israel, since with a strong hand he will drive them out against their will. Therefore, he said, Behold, the children of Israel have not heeded me. Not as a logical deduction [kal vachomer], but rather he was saying, “In my opinion, they don’t want to listen to leave Egypt at all.” For our Sages found that during the plague of darkness, there were many wicked Israelites who did not want to leave, as Rashi explained in Parashat Bo (10:2). And although the verse tells us the truth that they did not listen because of shortness of spirit, Moses nevertheless thought they did not listen because they had no desire to leave at all. Therefore, Moses said, without a logical deduction: since the children of Israel did not listen to me and have no desire to leave, how then will Pharaoh listen to me to drive them out? For Pharaoh will use their refusal and reluctance as an excuse. And when God saw Moses’s mistake and the mistake of Israel, He wanted to correct both at once, as it says, And He commanded them concerning the children of Israel and concerning Pharaoh king of Egypt. So that there would be both the consent of the sender and the consent of the sent, for one cannot be without the other. He would speak to the children of Israel to persuade them to leave, speaking to their hearts good words of comfort, and to Pharaoh to persuade him to send them. And those among Israel who did not want to leave died during the three days of darkness. And as for why Moses again said, How then will Pharaoh listen to me, seeing that I am of uncircumcised lips? It was because when God told him, “Go, speak to Pharaoh,” Moses thought that perhaps God had retracted His statement that “he [Aaron] shall be your spokesman,” and now wanted Moses himself to do all the speaking, not Aaron. Therefore, he said, “Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips.” To this it says, And the Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron and gave them a command, showing that He had not retracted this, and Aaron would be Moses’s spokesman, thus fixing everything.

According to the simple understanding, we can also say that there is no refutation to this kal vachomer [a fortiori argument]. Because Moses did not understand their intention when they did not listen due to shortness of spirit, and he thought that they did not listen to him because they did not believe in his prophecy. Therefore, he reasoned, all the more so Pharaoh would not believe him. But the Holy One, blessed be He, knew the truth that they did not listen because of shortness of spirit. Therefore, He did not bother to respond to him at all regarding thiskal vachomer, for the Holy One, blessed be He, knew that there was no substance to this kal vachomer. And He only responded to Moses’ statement I am of uncircumcised lips by saying that Aaron would be his interpreter, as mentioned. And what Moses said a second time at the end of the matter Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, was because it was said, Speak to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, all that I speak to you, and Moses thought that what God would speak to him and to Aaron would be the speech that Aaron would be his mouthpiece for, but what God would speak to him alone, he alone would need to speak to Pharaoh. For this is implied by the language all that I speak to you. Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, responded to him, You shall speak, etc., and Aaron your brother shall speak to Pharaoh all the words, even what I speak to you alone.

These are the heads of their fathers’ houses. Because God wanted to give the threefold Torah through a tribe that was tripled in many ways of triplets mentioned in the Gemara (Shabbat 88), therefore He began to examine the heads of their fathers’ houses and found Reuben had four families, Simeon had five families, and Levi had three families. Therefore, He rejected the first ones and chose Levi who was tripled twice. And the commentators said that He was searching first in Reuben to see if He could find among his sons a man after His heart who would be suitable for this mission, just as the prophet Samuel searched among the sons of Jesse. And we learn “searching” from “searching” in that case — just as there He rejected the first ones until He found a man after His heart, so too He wanted to search here among the sons of Reuben and Simeon, and He searched but did not find until He examined the character of Levi and found Aaron and Moses, and then He no longer needed to search.

“He is Aaron and Moses. He is Moses and Aaron.” Since concerning the essence of the mission, it appears that Moses is the primary one, as God appeared to him alone at the burning bush. So I might have said that Aaron was secondary to him, therefore Scripture teaches us He is Aaron and Moses, to whom God said, “Bring out the children of Israel”, telling you that Aaron has a share in the exodus just like Moses. Therefore, it puts Aaron first. But regarding speaking to Pharaoh, it seems that Aaron is the primary one and Moses is subordinate to him, since Moses was slow of speech and slow of tongue. Therefore it says, “They are the ones who spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt, he is Moses and Aaron,” putting Moses first to tell you that even in the matter of speaking to Pharaoh, he is not secondary to Aaron, but they are equal in every matter.

Another interpretation: Before this mission, we find that Aaron was sent to the Israelites to turn them away from their evil ways, in order that they should be worthy of leaving Egypt. In that mission, Aaron was the primary one, and due to this Moses said, Send, I pray, by the hand of him whom You will send (Exodus 4:13), meaning, by the hand of the one whom You are accustomed to sending, as Rashi explains on that verse. And regarding that mission it says, He is Aaron and Moses to whom God said, “Take out, etc.” — because in that mission Aaron was the primary one, therefore he is mentioned first. But in the current mission, which was primarily to Pharaoh, certainly Moses was the primary one, therefore he is mentioned first, and it says, These are the ones who spoke to Pharaoh, etc. — it is Moses and Aaron.

“And it was on the day when the Lord spoke to Moses, etc.” Rashi explained that this [verse] is connected to the following verse, and all other commentators criticized him saying, “If that is so, why is there a break in between?” I say that this [verse structure] is intended to teach us about the superiority of Moses our teacher’s prophecy over all other prophets. For all [other] prophecies come in night visions, as it is written, If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make Myself known to him in a vision, and will speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses, etc. (Numbers 12:6) For his prophecy was literally during the day, as our Sages learned (Yalkut Shimoni, Tzav 511) from the verse on the day when He commanded stated (in Parashat Tzav 7:38), that Moses was commanded all the commandments during the day. Therefore, it says here, And it was on the day — when it was actually daytime, then the Lord spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt. Since this was the beginning of his prophecy, therefore [the Torah] informs us that the beginning of his prophecy was during the day, and presumably all of Moses’ prophecies were during the day.