Do I tell you to bring them up. [Rashi is explaining] that this connects to v. 1: “Leave, go up from this. . . to the land of which I swore.” It does not connect to what immediately precedes, [for then it would convey:] “And I will drive out the Canaanites. . . to a land flowing with milk and honey.”

For this reason I say to you. . . I.e., this gives the reason for (32:34), “Behold, My angel will go before you.” It is because, “I will not go up among you. . . I may destroy you.” This does not connect to what immediately precedes, rather to (v. 1): “Leave, go up from this.”

And you are rebellious against Me. . . [Question:] It is written in 34:9, “Let my Master go among us, for ( כי ) it is a stiff-necked people.” Does this not show the contrary to be true, that being stiff-necked makes it fitting for God to go among them, thereby contradicting what it says here? [The answer is:] Rashi already resolved this by explaining that the כי written there means “if,” conveying: “Since You bear iniquity. . . if they will be a stiff-necked people and rebel against You. . . You will forgive our iniquity.” (Re”m)

Immediately, that you will remove your ornaments from yourselves. . . It means: I will do this to you immediately. The word “now” does not relate to that which preceded, as it does in: “Now here is your wife, take her and go” (Bereishis 12:19), and: “Now your two sons” (ibid. 48:5). [Rashi knows this] because our verse cannot be so explained. This is because the preceding statement is for their good. [To save them from destruction,] God is sending the angel rather than going Himself. Whereas this phrase, “Now remove your ornaments,” is a punishment. You might ask: Is it not written in v. 4 that they took off their ornaments of their own accord, as it is written, “No man wore his ornaments”? The answer is: There, they just removed them temporarily, out of mourning. But here, Hashem told them to remove them permanently.

I know what I have in My heart. . . I.e., it does not mean that through their removing the ornaments, He will know what to do with them, as the verse seems to imply. [Rashi knows this] because removing the ornaments is not a cause for God to know what to do with them.

Their ornaments which they possessed. . . I.e., they did not remove their ornaments while still at Mount Chorev. [Rashi knows this] because they removed them only after the incident of the Calf. There is a ש is missing, for it is [as if it says עדים שמחורב .] The Kitzur Mizrachi asks: It already said in v. 4, “No man wore his ornaments.” If so, why did Hashem have to command, “Now remove”? Rabbeinu Bechaye answers: They refrained of their own accord from wearing all their ornaments, and wore only some. When Hashem commanded them, they completely removed and stripped themselves of all their ornaments. See other answers there.

He thought: one who is ostracized by the master. . . I.e., B’nei Yisrael are ostracized by the Master, which is Hashem. Then too, [they should be] ostracized by the disciple, who is me; for I am Hashem’s disciple.

Two thousand amohs.. The reason [for this distance] was so everyone who sought Hashem could come on Shabbos to the tent, as was the arrangement in Yericho in Yehoshua’s time (Midrash Tanchuma ch. 27).

Even the ministering angels. . . Rashi derives this from כל מבקש ה' , which is an inclusive term.

To go to the tent. Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written, “Whenever Moshe went out to the tent”? It should say: “Whenever Moshe entered the tent.” Rashi answers that “went out” refers to Moshe’s exit from the Israelite camp, not Moshe’s tent.

The same as ומדבר עם משה . . . I.e., it is an ongoing action (the present tense).

“He heard the voice מִדַבֵר to him.” It is מִדַבֵר , as opposed to מְדַבֵר . This is because מְדַבֵר denotes that the king is speaking with a commoner, whereas מִדַבֵר means that the Voice is speaking to Itself.

To the Shechinah. I.e., not to the entrance of Moshe’s tent, as איש פתח אהלו seemingly implies. The only reason it says איש פתח אהלו is because the Pillar of Cloud was there [i.e., at the entrance of Moshe’s tent].

After conversing with him. . . [Rashi knows that it was in order to teach what he had learned] because otherwise, why would Moshe return to the camp after God spoke to him face to face? The place where God spoke to him was where he dwelt, as it is written: “When Moshe had gone into the tent. . .”

Until the mishkon was erected but not longer. . . Beforehand he did not act in this way because there was no time to learn or to teach, due to the troubles with the Calf, his praying for the people, and his receiving the second set of Tablets.

And on the nineteenth he went up, as it says. . . You might ask: In v. 18:13, Rashi wrote: “On the seventeenth of Tammuz he descended and broke the Tablets, and early the next day — which is the eighteenth of Tammuz he ascended.” [Why does Rashi say here that it was the nineteenth?] The answer is: In Taanis 29a, Abaye resolves a difficulty by saying that Tammuz in that year had thirty days [instead of its usual twenty-nine]. Rashi [in 18:13] calculates Moshe’s forty days and nights according to the [usual] pattern of a twentynine-day month being followed by a thirty-day month — based on Tammuz being always twenty-nine days — therefore Rashi says that Moshe ascended on the eighteenth of Tammuz. But when he calculates it according to Abaye’s statement that Tammuz in that year was thirty days [which adds a day,] he says that Moshe ascended on the nineteenth. (Re”m) Nachalas Yaakov writes: It seems to me that Re”m confused one Tammuz with another. Abaye spoke about the Tammuz when the Spies were sent, which was in the second year [after leaving Egypt]. Whereas the Tammuz of the Calf was in the first year. See there. An alternative answer: Moshe ascended on the [morning of the] eighteenth, but the calculation of forty days started only on the nineteenth. This is because the eighteenth was without the nighttime [i.e., it was not complete so it was not counted].

ראה means: Set Your “eyes” and Your “heart”. . . Re”m writes that, in his opinion, the text in our books is corrupt. [Instead of the verse quoted,] it should have written, “And this that You said to me: ‘I will send an angel before you and I will drive out. . .’ (33:2).” This is because [the present verse,] “Behold, I am sending an angel” (23:20), was stated before the incident of the Calf. It is true that Rashi explains there, “Here they are foretold that they are destined to sin, and the Shechinah would then say to them: ‘For I will not go up among you.’” Nevertheless, the primary verse is, “I will send an angel before you,” which was stated after the incident of the Calf. Nachalas Yaakov [disagrees partially with Re”m] and writes: It seems to me that it should rather say, “Behold, My angel will go before you” (32:34). First of all, this verse precedes, “I will send an angel before you” (33:2). Second of all, it is more likely to have been confused with (23:20), “Behold, I am sending an angel,” [due to their similarity,] thus causing the corruption in the text.

“By name” i.e., to recognize your importance. . . Rashi is answering the question: Does the verse not imply that God knows only Moshe as an individual, whereas His knowledge and supervision of other people is only in general, not on an individual basis? Heaven forbid we should say this! God supervises all His creatures individually, from biggest to smallest. Therefore Rashi explains that “by name” conveys that Moshe is beloved and important.

If it is so that I have found favor in Your eyes. . . Rashi is answering the question: Does the verse not imply that Moshe was unsure whether Hashem had said that he finds favor in His eyes? But earlier, Moshe told Hashem that He had said to him: “You have found favor in My eyes”! Rashi answers: Moshe surely knew it was true that [Hashem had said that] he found favor in His eyes. Moshe meant: “Is it really so that I have found favor? Perhaps when You said, “You have found favor in My eyes,” You were jesting as people have a manner of doing.

What reward do You give. . . [Rashi knows it means this] because otherwise, why did Moshe request this here?

What is this “finding of favor”. . . Explanation: This [phrase in the verse] is connected to “Please let me know Your way.” The verse conveys: Let me know what reward You give to those who find favor in Your eyes. Then I will understand the meaning of this favor which I have found in Your eyes.

So that I may appreciate. . . I.e., so I may recognize and understand what benefit this finding of favor provides. And thereby I will know the degree to which You give reward for the favor which I have found in Your eyes.

My reward for this people. . . Explanation: Just as I requested that You let me know what reward You will give me for the favor I found in Your eyes, so do I request that You let me know what reward You will give me for my leadership of this people. [Rashi knows it means this] because otherwise, why is this phrase here? (Re”m)

That is exactly what I wish. . . Although Hashem already acquiesced to Moshe and said, “My Presence will go,” nevertheless, Moshe wanted to let Him know how much the people cherished His going with them. Thus he said that if, tragically, Hashem would not acquiesce to go with them, the people would not move from there until they died: they, their children and all that is theirs.

I ask one more thing of You. . . Rashi so explained the phrase of, “So that we will be distinguished — I and Your people,” because this request is not like the first one. The first request was to know the reward of finding favor and of leading the people. But this request is that the Shechinah should not rest on the other nations, only on Israel.

His words were finding acceptance. . . [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, this request does not belong here.

The time has come for you to see of My Glory. . . [Rashi knows this] because it is evident from the verse as a whole that even without Moshe’s request, God needed to show him and teach him the order of prayer. This is because “I will cause all My goodness to pass. . .” does not answer Moshe’s request, which was to see Hashem’s Glory. Thus Rashi says that God anyway needed to teach him the order of prayer, for it can be seen from what Moshe had said that [he thought] once the merit of the Patriarchs is exhausted, no longer is there any way for someone to make a request, Heaven forbid. For Moshe said (32:13), “Remember Avraham. . .” Therefore [said Hashem], I need to teach you the order of prayer, by which someone who makes a request can have it accepted. And when I show you this order, you will receive what you requested: seeing Hashem’s glory. This means seeing Hashem’s back, which is the tefillin knot [see Rashi on v. 23,] rather than seeing His face. [His face cannot be seen] because it says (v. 20), “For no man can see My Presence and live.” (Re”m)

For My mercies are never exhausted. As opposed to the merit of the Patriarchs, where there is concern that it could possibly become exhausted.

That I will wish to be gracious. This is contrary to the verse’s apparent meaning, that God will be gracious to the people He is gracious to, and will be compassionate to the people He is compassionate to. [Rashi knows it does not mean this] because one who has received God’s graciousness does not need graciousness, and one who has received God’s compassion does not need compassion. Rather, it means: “At times I will respond, and at times I will not respond. . .”

In the mountain, where I constantly speak with you. . . Rashi is telling us that the verse is elliptic, and Scripture should have written, “In the mountain.” Rashi says, “In the mountain, where I constantly speak with you,” because the missing part should be understood from the verse itself. Rashi means to say that the place is assumedly in the mountain, as that is where God constantly speaks with Moshe. And since אתי seemingly implies [literally] “with Me,” not in the mountain, thus Rashi says: “I have a place prepared for your needs.” For this can be understood from אתי .

When I pass by you. [Rashi is explaining that] “My Glory” refers to God Himself. The proof is that afterward it is written, “Until I pass by,” rather than, “Until My Glory passes by.”

A place dug out in the rock. כריית means a place carved out in the rock, as in (21:33): כי יכרה איש בור (If a man digs a pit).

Onkelos translates it, “I will protect you with My word”. . . This is the Targum of ושכותי כפי .

Who does not need to cover him actually, with His Hand. Rather, He can cover him with His word.

ואעדי ית דברת יקרי . . . This is the Targum of והסירותי את כפי . Rashi explains that the Targum means: “When the guidance of My Glory is removed.”