Is thrown only with one hand. . . I do not know Rashi’s proof that Moshe threw [the furnace soot] with force. A possible answer: Here it is written השמימה , rather than על השמים as it is written about the plague of hail (v. 22). Apparently, Scripture changed the wording here to teach that Moshe sent up the soot unusually high, until the heavens. (see Re’m) But it seems to me that [we need not find a proof for this, for] Rashi means to say the following: Anything that is thrown ( נזרק ), is thrown with force. This is because נזרק implies with all of one’s force, which is with one hand. See Bereishis Rabba ch. 5 and Vayikra Rabba ch. 7. (Nachalas Yaakov)

Both his and Aharon’s handfuls. Rashi says this because it is written before, “Both of you take full handfuls.” [which is four handfuls in total].

And another, that the soot spread over the entire land of Egypt. You might ask: Since [it spread so far only because] it was a miracle, why did Rashi explain that Moshe’s one fistful held both his and Aharon’s handfuls, [so that he could throw it with force]? [The miracle would be even greater if Moshe were to throw the soot with two hands and without any force and yet it travelled such a great distance.] Perhaps his fistful did not hold it, and Moshe threw with both hands [and it spread by a miracle]. The answer is: The miracle of its spreading over Egypt was not that it went farther than Moshe could throw, but that this small amount [of soot] covered the entire land of Egypt. [The fact that he was able to throw it with force because his fistful held both his and Aharon’s fistfuls does not pertain to this miracle. Rather, it is a miracle that stands on its own.] And according to what I explained above — that Rashi inferred from השמימה that Moshe threw with force — we may answer this question as well. Since השמימה implies with force, surely he threw with one hand, for he did not to rely on a miracle.

Meaning of heat. [Rashi explains this] because the verse implies that the rash [itself] caused the boils, which is incorrect. Therefore Rashi says that שחין “has the meaning of heat,” and the boils were caused by the heat.

And whoever feared the word of God made his livestock flee. . . People ask: Why does it state here, “Whoever feared the word of Hashem” relevant to this plague of pestilence? Furthermore, why indeed were the Egyptians not warned here [as they were regarding the hail]: “Now send word and shelter your livestock. . .”? Mahara”n answers: This plague [pestilence] did not need such a warning since Moshe said clearly, “Behold, the hand of Adonoy is directed at your livestock that are in the field,” implying that the plague will manifest itself only in the field. Consequently, whoever feared the word of Hashem brought his livestock inside, since pestilence normally kills livestock. But hail does not usually kill livestock. Therefore, if the people were not warned, they would not have been particular about [not] leaving their livestock in the fields. (See Kitzur Mizrachi for other answers.)

We learn from here that מכת בכורות . . . We cannot say that “ מכת בכורות ” means the slaying of the first-born, because if so, why is it mentioned here? Therefore, Rabbeinu Tam of Orleans explains it as מַכַּת בַּכּוּרוֹת , an expression of בִּכּוּרִים (ripening produce). This is because the plague of hail, [of which this section speaks,] smote only the ripe produce — as is written (v. 31), “Since the barley was ripe, and the flax had formed into stalks,” upon which Rashi comments, “ שֶבִּכְּרוּ ”. You might object: In Parshas Shemos (4:23) it says: “Behold, I will slay your firstborn son,” on which Rashi comments that the slaying of the firstborn was the most severe plague. An answer is: The slaying of the firstborn was indeed the most severe plague for Pharaoh. But for the people, who were left without anything to eat, hail was the most severe plague. Another answer is: When Rashi said that the hail “is equivalent to all the plagues,” this refers to the plagues that preceded it. However, the plagues that followed it were even more severe. The Maharshal writes: According to Rabbeinu Tam of Orleans, why does our verse say: “For this time ( בפעם הזאת ), I will send. . .”? Rather, it seems to me that the verse means as follows: [Hashem is saying to Pharaoh,] “Do not think that I cannot kill you, by claiming that I first sent the severe plague of pestilence and then the lighter plague of boils — and thus I am unable to kill you, for otherwise why did I not kill you with pestilence.” Rather, “ בפעם הזאת I will send all my plagues.” In other words, the time will come when I will slay the first-born, [which is equivalent to all the plagues,] and then “you will know that there is none like Me in all the earth.” Then, you will admit yourself that “I [could] have extended My hand, and struck you and your people with the pestilence. . .” (v. 15).

And your people together with the animals. Rashi is explaining that when the verse says “and struck you and your people,” it [is not excluding the animals. Rather it] means “also you and your people.”

When the sun reaches here the hail will come down. [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why does our verse say: “tomorrow at this time,” whereas with the plague of pestilence it says only “tomorrow”? (Gur Aryeh) The reason the pestilence [was not given an exact time] is that the animals were spread throughout the fields and Pharaoh would not know precisely when the pestilence began, thus nothing would be gained by scratching a mark in the wall. That is why the verse said simply “tomorrow”

Over the heavens. I.e., at first Moshe had control only over matters on earth. Now Hashem lifted Moshe up and gave him control over matters in heaven, and Moshe brought a plague from heaven.

A miracle within a miracle. . . One miracle was that a flame usually ascends, but here it descended. The second miracle was that the fire and ice did not extinguish, [or melt,] one another. [*Re’m,*citing Shemos Rabba]. However, this does not seem correct [as an explanation of Rashi]. Firstly, fire descended many times from heaven to earth, both for good and for bad, and it was not considered miraculous. Secondly, the previous verse stated, “and fire came streaming down upon the earth,” but there it does not say, [“there had never been anything like it”]. There is a dispute over this point in Shemos Rabba, and it seems to me [that Rashi is following the view of Rabbi Nechemiah]. According to Rabbi Nechemiah, the fire and hail combined with each other. The fire was flashing from inside the pieces of hail, and both were burning. According to his view, the second miracle was that the hail burnt. This explanation is what Rashi intended, for he said: “The fire and the hail intermingled.” According to this, when Rashi finishes by saying: “they made peace between themselves,” he is referring to [the second miracle,] that they both were burning. (Nachalas Yaakov)

Because it was full of idols. [A question arises:] During the plagues of frogs and wild beasts, Egypt was also full of idols. Assumedly, Moshe did not pray in the city. Why did it not say there, “When I leave the city”? The answer is: With those plagues, Moshe was praying for [it to stop] the next day. Since he had plenty of time, it was not necessary to tell Pharaoh, “When I leave the city.” But here Pharaoh said, “There has been enough of Hashem’s thunder and hail,” and requested that the hail stop before reaching earth. Thus Moshe should not have tarried, and needed to explain to Pharaoh: “[I will pray] when I leave the city,” but not in the city. (Nachalas Yaakov)

And is the same form as ושפו עצמותיו . Rashi is answering the question: Since the נ [of נכתה ] is part of the root, the verb is incomplete and is missing the ה of the הפעל form, and it should have been written הנכתה . Therefore Rashi explains: “And is the same form as שפו .” In other words, since it is vocalized with a shuruk, it is considered as if it were written with a ה .

In the category of כהתוך כסף . . . [ בחלק ] is in the same category, i.e., from the same root as כהתוך כסף (the pouring of metal). (From the Maharan’s manuscript)