וחזקתי את לב פרעה, “I shall stiffen the heart of Pharaoh;” seeing that Pharaoh lately had become so humiliated, unless G’d would give him back some self-confidence, he would not dare to pursue the Israelites whom he himself had not only chased out, but had begged to offer prayers on his behalf. Without such Divine intervention, even if Pharaoh should have reached the conclusion that the Israelites had fled, he would not, in his present state of mind, have the audacity to mount a pursuit.

ויוגד למלך מצרים כי ברח העם, “The King of Egypt was informed that the people had fled, etc.” He was told that wherever the Israelites went they left a trail of destruction; this convinced the King that they had no intention of returning. Alternately, the King was told that the people marched in a disorderly fashion, did not have a definitive objective; this persuaded the King that they had fled rather than set out on a prearranged goal where to observe the ritual they had spoken of Still another possibility is that the King was told that the people marched proudly, like victors, had made flags for themselves as a symbol of their independence, and behaved generally like a well organized body of people, not like a bunch of undisciplined slaves who would be coming back to their former masters. According to the Midrash, the King had dispatched messengers (spies) at the time the Israelites left, whose task it was to monitor their movements. Rashi quotes that Midrash. As soon as the three days of which Moses had spoken were up, these messengers reported back to Pharaoh that the people had not turned around, but kept moving further away from Egypt. The difficulty with this explanation is that the Israelites did turn back on the third day, so how did these messengers know that they did not intend to come back to Egypt? This would presuppose that they had gone in one direction only for two days, and if so how could the messengers know that they had no intention of returning to Egypt? They were not far enough away from their starting point to allow such a conclusion to be drawn at the end of the second day! Moreover, the same Midrash claims that Pharaoh and his chariots covered a distance of six days’ march in a single day’s pursuit and that they then caught up with the rear of the Israelites, seeing that the splitting of the sea occurred on the seventh day (21st Nissan)? However, the Midrash adds that on the first day the Israelites miraculously covered a distance of approximately 120 kilometers. This represents the distance a people normally travel in three days. Accordingly, Pharaoh did not receive the report until the evening of the fifth day, spent the 6th day chasing after the people. He caught up with them on the evening between the 20th and the 21st of Nissan. This is when the Israelites descended into the bottom of the sea that split for them.

ויקח שש מאות רכב, “He took 600 chariots.” Rashi, basing himself on the Mechilta, in answering the question where Pharaoh took the horses from which pulled these chariots, seeing that all the livestock supposedly had been killed by the fifth plague of pestilence, points out that the Torah had reported that the livestock of the farmers who had heeded Moses’ warning, took their animals indoors, so that they survived that plague. This prompted Rabbi Shimon in Tanchuma Beshalach 8 to coin the phrase that טוב שבגויים הרוג, “that the only good gentile is a dead one.” The Jerusalem Talmud limits the applicability of this proverb to periods when the gentiles are at war with us. The version there is that “the gentiles are considered as irrelevant.” According to this approach, when Rashi commented on our verse (9,20) that “the people who heeded G’d’s warning took their animals indoors,” this is not an appropriate comment, as any animals which at the time had not been outdoors for any reason were also saved, without their owners being rewarded for heeding G’d’s warning. Horses and mules, which are used for transporting humans, are generally kept in stables indoors so as to be at hand when their owners need them, so that the whole question of whence these animals came from appears superfluous.

כל סוס רכב פרעה, “all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh.” Ibn Ezra says that the point made by the verse is that all these chariots traveled as a unit, not each one separately.

וייראו מאד, “they were very much afraid.” Ibn Ezra expresses surprise that a body of 600,000 armed men such as the Israelites, should have displayed fear because an army of only 600 chariots pursued them. Why were these people not prepared to defend their lives and the lives of their children against this miniscule force of Egyptians? The answer is strictly psychological. All the Israelites had been raised from infancy to see in the Egyptians their natural masters, and to willingly bear the burden of being slaves to these masters. They had absolutely no knowledge of how to conduct a self defense. We have evidence from the encounter with Amalek, a small people. The Israelites who far outnumbered them, would have been lost if not for the support offered by the knowledge that Moses prayed for their victory. Eventually, this slave mentality caused the death of the whole generation who had left Egypt as adults, and only their children, who had not been slaves, could be relied upon to face the Canaanites in battle and not to run scared. If Ibn Ezra would have taken a look at the Midrash, which deals with the meaning of the words שלישים על כולם, he would have seen that the Israelites, at least according to that Midrash, were outnumbered by three Egyptians to each one of them. Some sages challenge Ibn Ezra, saying: “who told him that the Amalekites attacked with only a small army?”

ויצעקו בני ישראל אל ה', “The Children of Israel cried out in supplication to Hashem.”

ויאמרו אל משה המבלי אין קברים, “They said to Moses: ‘are there not enough burial places in Egypt, etc.?’” Nachmanides explains that it is clear that after the Israelites had pleaded for help to G’d, they would not immediately hereafter insult Him by the aforementioned cynical question, and by adding: ”what did You do to us by taking us out of Egypt?” We therefore must understand the verses here as reflecting the manner in which different groups of Israelites reacted to the imminent threat of annihilation which they faced. One group of Israelites resorted to prayer, another resorted to ridiculing the chance of a miracle being performed for them. Seeing that they did not believe in miraculous salvation they made peace with their impending death, but not before accusing Moses of instead of having been their redeemer having become their angel of death. It is this division among the people at that point in time to which the psalmist refers in Psalms 106,7 וימרו על ים בים סוף, “they rebelled at the sea, at the Sea of Reeds.” This is also why once the people are described as העם, “the people,” and once they are described as בני ישראל. The latter were the elite, few in number, who turned to G’d for help, the former were the masses whose attitudes were still not much different from what they had been while they were slaves and cynicism was the only weapon at their command. The people who were desperately afraid were therefore the “העם,” whom Moses told in verse 13 to stop acting so scared. This עם were the ones who are described after the event in verse 31 as “being in awe of Hashem, seeing that previously they had only made sarcastic remarks. The elite, i.e. the בני ישראל, did not need this education. In the Mechilta the sages explain that as a first step the people had prayed to G’d that Pharaoh should have a change of heart and should desist from pursuing them. When they noted that their prayer had not helped, they became heretical in their attitude, making above-mentioned sarcastic comments to Moses, blaming him for their present predicament.

לקחתנו למות במדבר, “have you taken us to die in the desert?” Remarkably, they did not accuse Moses of letting them become victims of a losing battle against the Egyptians, but of dying a meaningless death. This pattern repeated itself in verse 12, i.e. ממותנו במדבר. They recalled that they had always been afraid of dying in the desert even if they would not come under attack by hostile armies. Nachmanides explains that the people made it plain that even if there were no danger of war, etc. they were dead set against going into the desert. They were simply afraid that in the desert they would perish from the results of thirst and hunger. It is perfectly possible that they had already voiced their misgivings as soon as Moses did not lead them the route which was well traveled and which would have taken them via the land of the Philistines. They may even have told Moses that the route via the land of the Philistines presented unacceptable, risks, as did the route which led straight to the sea of Reeds, and that any route requiring them to travel trough the desert was perhaps the greatest risk of all. [they were understandably of the opinion that having neutralized their former masters, it was their turn to be the rulers in Egypt. Ed.] They may have preferred death followed by burial, to death in the desert where no trace of their bodies and graves would ever remain.

לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד, ”you will not ever again see the Egyptians in a threatening posture.” Nachmanides writes that according to our tradition it is a negative commandment applicable throughout the generations not to return to Egypt. Our verse must be understood as follows: “present yourself in an upright posture exuding confidence, and do not fear or appear to be afraid, for you will never again have reason to fear the Egyptians.”

מה תצעק אלי?, “what is the good of your crying out to Me?” Ibn Ezra points out that Moses had not been crying out, seeing G’d had already told him that He would bring severe judgments on Pharaoh and all those with him (verse 4). G’d meant: “what is the point of the Israelites crying out to Me?” Moses, in this instance, is addressed as the representative of the whole people who had been crying out. Nachmanides points out that if Ibn Ezra were correct, the people, not having been given the assurance that Moses had been given, would have been entitled to cry out. Why does G’d then criticize them? Our sages comment that Moses was indeed crying out, i.e. offering an urgent prayer, something that was the appropriate thing to do under the circumstances. He prayed for guidance. As to the meaning of the line: מה תצעק אלי, G’d simply criticized the nature of the prayer Moses had offered. He told Moses that instead of uttering a sort of complaint, he should simply have asked G’d how to act in this new set of circumstances, a situation for which he had not been prepared. Seeing that I had given you an assurance that I would deal with Pharaoh, all you had to do was to ask for guidance how to act in this situation.

הרם את מטך, “raise your rod!” Some commen-tators understand the word הרם as meaning the same as הסר, to remove, so that it would parallel the meaning of Ezekiel 21,31 הסיר המצנפת והרם העטרה, “remove the turban and lift off the crown!” G’d, according to this, told Moses to divest himself of his staff and to use his bare hand instead. i.e. to make it appear as hanging inactive by his side. This would also explain that in response (verse 21) Moses is described as ויט משה את ידו, “Moses inclined his hand.” Seeing that I have explained earlier that in most of the miracles Moses deviated somewhat from the literal meaning of the instruction he had received, unless the Torah writes ויעש כן, i.e. he did exactly as instructed, here too the line “he did as instructed” is missing. (compare Exodus 17, 6 and Numbers 8,3, the only time the Torah reports instructions as having been carried out precisely as given.) The Torah does not criticize Moses for departing slightly from the instructions received, [presumably because unless someone else had heard the instructions he had received, this would not be a desecration of the word of G’d. Ed]

ויסע מלאך האלוקים ההולך לפני מחנה ישראל, “the angel of G’d who had been traveling in front of the camp of the Israelites, moved, etc.” Some commentators believe that the angel mentioned here was the one that manifested itself as the pillar of fire by night, in order to provide for the Israelites at night. The reason this pillar of fire is called “angel,” is that it descended from the celestial regions just as angels are in the habit of doing. During that night the angel took up position behind the Israelites, in order to protect them against the pursuing Egyptians who were closing in on them. As soon as the pillar of fire that had traveled ahead of them had changed position, the pillar of cloud also changed position on their account, taking up position behind them in order that the Egyptians would not be able to see exactly where the Israelites ahead of them were located. Instead of the pillar of cloud departing at night as it had been doing so far, on this occasion it remained “on duty,” but instead of in front of the people, behind them. It darkened the atmosphere making it harder for the Egyptians to see. Ibn Ezra describes the angel in question as the שר הגדול, the commander in chief of the celestial armies. He was usually accompanying the Israelites by “marching” in front of them. It is this angel that the Torah had had in mind when writing: “and the Lord was walking ahead of them by day, etc.” (verse 21)

וישקף ה' אל מחנה מצרים בעמוד אש וענן, “The Lord looked down at the camp of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and the cloud, etc.” The verse describes the removal of the pillar of fire that manifested itself daily at night in front of the Israelites, and, instead, positioned itself as an ”observer” over the camp of the Israelites, and the cloud was positioned in a manner that served the needs of the Israelites during the day.

ויהם את מחנה מצרים, “He caused confusion in the camp of the Egyptians.” They did not know how to cope with the heat radiated from the pillar of fire.

ויסר את אופן, “He removed the wheel, etc.” The reason why G’d removed only one wheel, i.e. אופן of each two-wheeled chariot, is that had He removed both wheels the chariot would have retained a balance though it could not have rolled. By removing only one of the wheels G’d created an imbalance that the riders found impossible to compensate for. Ibn Ezra writes that the meaning of the words ויסר אופן, is that G’d loosened the wheel from the crossbar it was attached to and the link between the chariot and the horses pulling it. This would enable the horses to flee more easily. G’d’s having created confusion in the minds of both riders and horses worked against the efforts of both to escape to the relative safety of the shore. Every motion required the overcoming of obstacles, i.e. בכבדות.

ויט משה את ידו על הים, “Moses stretched out his hand over the sea.” Nachmanides writes that it had been G’d’s will to split the sea by means of a strong easterly wind which would create the impression that the wind’s heat had dried out the sea. The result would be to deceive the Egyptians into thinking that they were facing a natural rather than a supernatural phenomenon, i.e. that the wind had dried out the sea. Rabbi Joseph Kimchi writes that these two verses appear to contradict one another, seeing that one verse makes it appear that the splitting of the sea was G’d’s doing, whereas the other verse makes it appear as if it had been a natural phenomenon. One can reconcile these two verses by positing that initially Moses split the sea by means of a miracle when he stretched out his staff, whereas the hot easterly wind blowing, dried out the bottom of the sea to make it passable. If that natural phenomenon, i.e. the wind, had not aided in the matter, the Israelites would likely have drowned in the bottom of the sea, as it was too muddy after so short a period to have dried out sufficiently. The correct interpretation of the verse therefore is as follows: “G’d made a powerful easterly wind blow across the sea all night long in order to dry out the mud at the bottom of the sea, seeing that the waters themselves had already been split by Moses.”

לכל חיל פרעה, “of Pharaoh’s entire army;” according to Rashi these words are superfluous, however, this is not an uncommon occurrence in our Scriptures. Nachmanides writes that in this instance these words are not superfluous, but that the meaning of the words לכל חיל פרעה is that part of the army described thus was the infantry, as opposed to the cavalry who were riding in chariots. The latter Pharaoh had taken with him immediately he heard about the Israelites having made a U turn at Baal Tzefon, whereas the infantry took longer to catch up with the cavalry.

לא נשאר בהם עד אחד, “not a single one of them survived.” Ibn Ezra explains this verse as he had explained in 9,7, i.e. “not even a single one.”

ובני ישראל הלכו ביבשה בתוך הים, “and the Children of Israel walked in the midst of the sea on dry land.” Ibn Ezra writes that the Torah writes this a second time in order to inform us that while some Israelites were still in the dried out sea, at a location quite nearby, Pharaoh was already drowning in that same sea. This is a great miracle in itself, seeing that the easterly wind was still blowing on the part of the sea the Israelites were in the process of walking across on the dried out bed of the sea. At the same time, another wind was blowing melting the frozen waters so that they collapsed on top of the Egyptian army which was struggling, and the waters reversed their course and drowned them. Some of these events are reflected in the song of thanks by Moses and the Israelites in the chapter following.

ויושע ה' ביום ההוא, “on that day the Lord saved Israel, etc.” until that point in time they had not really been saved, seeing that they were still in awe of Pharaoh.

וירא ישראל את מצרים מת על שפת הים, “Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the shores of the sea.” The Torah does not speak here of the individual Egyptians whose bodies had not been swept back to shore by the waves of the sea. The word תבלעמו ארץ (15,12) means that the earth beneath the waves had swallowed those Egyptians once and for all. Rather the Torah refers to the Israelites standing on the shore of the sea witnessing the death of the Egyptians by drowning. While this is the plain meaning of the text, it does not conform with the interpretations offered by our sages.

את היד הגדולה, “the great hand, etc.” Ibn Ezra understands the words as meaning “the great plague,” and refers us to Exodus 9,3 where the plague of pestilence is introduced as being יד ה'.