Prepared. As in, “Send portions of food to he who has nothing prepared ( נכון ) for him” (Nechemiah 8:10). As opposed to its [other] meaning, “correct,” as in: “If in fact the report is true and correct ( נכון )” (Devarim 13:15).

Because the first ones were with great uproar. . . בתשואות means raising the voice.

He called out in the Name of God ( וקרא בשמא דה' ). [Rashi is saying that] from Onkelos, it is evident that Moshe was the one who called. For if God was the One Who called, Onkelos would say וקרא בשמא ה' , [instead of דה' ], thus conveying: “And Hashem called out in the Name.” (Re”m)

The first before man sins. . . Explanation: Even though it is known to God that he is going to sin, still He has mercy on him because he has not yet sinned.

This, too, represents the Attribute of Mercy. . . But it is not pure mercy like the Attribute of the Four Letter Name. The Attribute of Mercy has many levels.

In case he will repent. The second attribute of “Adonoy, Adonoy” is also mercy after he sins. But it applies if he repents immediately, in which case He has mercy on him. However, this attribute is to put off His anger, hoping he might repent.

They do not have sufficient merits. [Rashi knows this] because it is written, “Abounding in kindness,” implying that when the person sinned and his merits cannot shield him from punishment because they are few, nonetheless He tilts the scales towards kindness, and has mercy on him. The first attribute of “Adonoy, Adonoy” is when he has not yet sinned. But this attribute is that He tilts the scales towards kindness even after he has sinned. (Re”m)

Which the person does before Him. I.e., not the kindness that Hashem intends to do for him. [Rashi knows this] because נוצר applies only to that which has already been done.

He does not clear those who do not repent. Although the second attribute of “Adonoy, Adonoy” also entails mercy for those who repent, the difference is: the attribute of “He clears” waives the sin and clears him as if he never did it, without bestowing any goodness upon him. Whereas the second attribute [of “Adonoy, Adonoy” bestows goodness upon him]. And this is the difference between the plain meaning, and the interpretation [of our Sages]: the plain meaning conveys that He does not completely waive the sin but exacts retribution for it bit by bit. Whereas the interpretation [of our Sages] is that He waives the sin completely. (Re”m)

Five hundred fold for regarding the Attribute of Good. . . Explanation: one generation of the Attribute of Retribution corresponds to five hundred generations of the Attribute of Good. Accordingly, the four generations of the Attribute of Retribution correspond to the two thousand generations of the Attribute of Good.

There are places where כי is used in place of אם . Rashi is answering the question: On the contrary, is not their being a stiff-necked people a reason that He should not go with them? As it is written above (33:5), “You are a stiff-necked people. Were I to go up among you for one moment, I would destroy you.” Thus Rashi explains that this כי means “if,” as he goes on to elaborate.

Take us to Yourself as a special possession. . . (An alternative text:) “That You should give us a special possession. . .” Explanation: This [special possession] is the resting of Your Shechinahupon us alone, not upon other nations. Since Hashem already answered Moshe about this, Rashi therefore says: “This is the same request as: ‘so that I and Your people will be distinguished.’” I.e., Moshe is mentioning here what he had requested before.

On this. I.e., on [the promise of] אעשה נפלאות , which has the same meaning as ונפלינו אני ועמך (33:16).

I will consider it for you. . . I.e., this comes to give a reason for the preceding [“Take care not to make a covenant”]. You might think that only their sacrificial services are prohibited, as I commanded you, “You must shatter their altars. . .” — but that nothing is wrong with making a covenant with them and participating in their feast, [while eating your own food (Avodah Zarah 8a)]. Do not think so, because “I will consider it for you as if you concur in his idol worship.”

That is male of the first-born of the cattle and sheep. . . [Rashi is explaining that] אשר is missing from תזכר , and a ב is missing from פטר , so the verse means וכל מקנך אשר תזכר בפטר שור ושה . Rashi adds a ב to פטר because תזכר refers to the livestock which gives birth, not to the פטר [the first-born animal]. The verse thus conveys: “All your livestock which a male opens its womb, [that male is Mine].”

Not of any other unclean animal. The reason it is specifically a donkey and not other unclean animals is explained by Rashi in 13:13.

It remains non-sacred in the hands of the kohein. . . [Rashi is explaining that] this is different from other consecrated and unfit animals which were redeemed, since they and [even] their replacements may not be shorn or used for work, since [the replacements] stand in their place. [And here, the baby donkey is consecrated as a first-born, but is unfit to be a sacrifice due to its species. Yet, after being redeemed with a sheep, it may be used for work.]

To teach about the severance pay to a Hebrew slave that it must be five sela’im. . . I.e., it is written “empty-handed” here, relating to a donkey’s redemption. And it is written “empty-handed” in Devarim 13:15, relating to the severance pay of a Hebrew slave. Therefore, just as the redemption of a first-born [human being, as mentioned in v. 19,] is five sela’im, so the severance pay is five sela’im. Furthermore, the “empty-handed” of severance pay is at the beginning [of the section there], while [ostensibly] it should be at the end. Thus, we apply [the meaning of] “emptyhanded” [to all that follows it:] to “flocks,” to “winery” and to “threshing floor,” so that [the value of] five sela’im of each [of the abovementioned] kind should be [paid to the Hebrew slave].

Which extends into the post-sheviis year. . . [Rashi knows this] because if it referred to Shabbos, other labors are also forbidden? Thus Rashi explains that it means not to plow a field of grain or of fruit trees, if it will benefit the [coming] sheviis year. “Harvest of the sheviis year” refers to grain that reached a third [of its growth] in the sheviis year, thus the laws of sheviis apply to it [even] in the year after sheviis.

Just as the plowing is optional. . . Explanation: There is no obligatory plowing. Even to plow specifically for the omer and the “two breads” [of Shavuos is not obligatory. Thus] it is forbidden to plow on Shabbos. Similarly, harvesting is forbidden if it is optional, but not if it is obligatory. [Harvesting the omer is considered obligatory] because even if you found it harvested, it is obligatory to harvest [a different omer. However, if you found plowed ground, it is not obligatory to plow (Makkos 8b)]. Hence from here we learn that the harvesting of the omer takes precedence over Shabbos.

When you bring the “two breads”. . . I.e., not that this is the time of harvesting the first wheat crops. Rather, they now start harvesting to bring a minchah from wheat.

All the males among you. . . [I.e., זכורך is not literal and] does not mean, “the males that are yours.” [Rashi knows this] because even male children are not yours, i.e., they are not in your ownership, and surely not the adults who are obligated in mitzvos. Rather, it means the males who are among you, i.e., in your nation.

Therefore I establish for you. . . [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why does it say, “For I will drive out”? How does this give a reason [for the preceding]?

While chometz still remains. . . I.e., rearrange the verse and explain it as follows: “Do not slaughter My [Pesach] sacrifice, and do not sprinkle its blood, ‘on’ chometz.” [The word “on”] means while chometz still remains. It does not mean literally [that the sacrifice is] actually “on” it.

Or to any member of the group. Rashi is not saying that the prohibition is on the slaughterer, or on the sprinkler, [etc]. Rather, he is saying that if one of them has chometz in his house [when the korban Pesach is slaughtered], he transgresses a negative precept. However, Rashi does not explain who transgresses: the slaughterer, the sprinkler, or both.

Remaining overnight does not render it unfit. . . מועלת is similar to the word מעילה [misappropriation of consecrated property]. Rashi is saying that if the sacrifice was on top of the altar, remaining overnight does not render it unfit. In other words, if the parts to be burnt were brought up to the altar’s top before dawn, they are not rendered unfit [at dawn,] even if they were not yet offered [on the altar’s fire].

Applies only at dawn. I.e., only if the fat remains until dawn is it rendered unfit. However, if it remains all night but is burnt before dawn, this is not called remaining overnight.

The parts to be burnt. . . [Rashi knows this] because from the korbon Pesach, [most of the meat is eaten]; only the parts to be burnt ( אימורים ) are offered.

All fats and limbs that require burning. I.e., [we learn] not to offer them after dawn, [since they are then unfit. Rashi knows] that all offerings are included, and become unfit through remaining overnight, because it is written זבח חג הפסח and not just חג הפסח .

Which are listed in praise of your land. . . Rashi does not mean that this is derived from the word אדמתך . For in Devarim 26:2, it is derived from a gezeirah shavah between ארצך (ad loc) and ארץ (Devarim 8:8). Rashi here is rather saying that אדמתך does not mean you must bring first fruits from all the [species of] fruits in your land; only from the seven species, as derived from the gezeirah shavah of ארץ ארץ .

Referring to date-honey. Rashi is answering the question: The seven species include honey, and honey is not a fruit. But regarding the first fruits, it is written, “Of all the fruits of the land” (Devarim 26:2), implying fruit only? Rashi answers that the honey is date-honey, and dates are fruit.

An admonition. . . It does not mean only “in its mother’s milk”; the admonition applies also to its own milk. It says “its mother’s milk” in order to exclude fowl, which has no mother’s milk — as Rashi goes on to explain.

Once prohibiting the cooking. . . Question: Why are two verses needed for prohibiting the mixing of meat in milk, one to forbid eating and one to forbid benefit? Regarding other Torah prohibitions where it is written, “You shall not eat,” it includes both eating and benefit. The answer is: A person is liable for eating meat in milk even if he has no benefit while eating, for instance, [the food is very hot and] his throat is burnt while eating it. This is not the case with eating other prohibited foods.

Which it is necessary to explain in many places. . . [Rashi says “in many places”] because if the Torah had explained “a goat’s kid” in only one place, we would say that here, too, it means specifically a goat’s kid. We would learn the meaning of this non-explained place from the explained place. But since it says “a goat’s kid” in several places, we thereby learn that “goat’s kid” applies only where the Torah specifically states it. This is because all Sages agree that three [or more] verses stating the same point, [each in a different place,] do not teach a general rule. Thus, wherever the Torah does not state “goat’s kid” — such as here, where it is non-explained — all suckling animals are implied.

But you are not permitted to write. . . [Rashi knows this] because “these” is an exclusionary word, [implying: “these” and not “those”].

When he brought the Second Tablets. . . When he brought the First Tablets on the seventeenth of Tammuz, it is also written that “Moshe went down from the mountain with the two Tablets of the Testimony in his hand” (Shemos 32:15), like it is written here. Nevertheless, [Rashi knows that the verse here speaks of the Second Tablets because] all the following incidents took place only with the Second Tablets.

From where was Moshe privileged for these rays of splendor. . . I.e., why was he privileged to them with the Second Tablets, and not with the First Tablets?

In the present (ongoing) tense. . . [How does Rashi know this? The answer is:] Since nothing specific was spoken here, it must refer to what God spoke to Moshe on Mount Sinai — which is the message of God to Israel. I.e., Moshe is to teach them the whole Torah. Perforce, this entire subject is in the present (ongoing) tense. Moshe would call them every day and teach the Torah and mitzvos to the leaders and then to all Yisrael, as explained further on. This continued even after the mishkon was erected.