וינהג את הצאן אחר המדבר. “he guided the flock out into the wilderness;” Ibn Ezra understands this expression in light of the fact that Midian was sort of a satellite state, subject to Pharaoh’s sphere of political influence. This necessitated that Moses became a shepherd, a vocation that enabled him to operate beyond the reach of Pharaoh and his secret service. Once G’d told him that Pharaoh and the members of his regime whom he had fled had died, he was able to name his son Eliezer by saying that G’d had saved him from the sword of Pharaoh. (compare Exodus 18,4)

אל הר האלוקים חרבה, “to Mount Chorev, the mountain of G’d.” Some people are astounded and cannot understand that Moses took the sheep of his father-in-law such a great distance away from Midian, seeing that the territory of Midian is far to the east of Sinai. Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer (chapter 40) claims that on occasion the flock Moses tended went for 40 consecutive days without food.

וירא מלאך ה', “An angel of the Lord appeared to him;” First the Torah reports that an angel of the Lord appeared to Moses, and afterwards we read that G’d saw that Moses had taken note of the spectacle of the burning bush whereupon G’d called out to him. This prompted Ibn Ezra to say that the word אלוקים in verse 4 refers to the angel mentioned in verse 2 as מלאך ה', “an angel of the Lord.” We find a parallel construction in Genesis 32,31 where Yaakov describes himself as having “seen G’d face to face.” This in spite of the fact that G’d had described himself to Yaakov as “the G’d of your father.” The fact is that the messenger is permitted to assume the name of the One Who has dispatched him while he is carrying out the instructions of his master. [clearly, Yaakov had not had a vision of G’d Himself, face to face, something which is impossible, as explained by G’d to Moses in Exodus Ed.] Nachmanides disagrees with the commentary of Ibn Ezra, claiming that Moses, the most outstanding of all the prophets would certainly not be afraid to look at the vision of an angel, a vision granted to many prophets who were inferior to him. He goes on to say that our sages describe the angel Moses saw as being Michael, a most high ranking angel, not one of the lower ranking angels that appeared to other prophets. He identified this angel with the one described by Yaakov before his death as המלאך הגואל אותי in Genesis Elsewhere this angel is described by G’d as incorporating some of G’d’s essence, שמי, “within him.” (compare Exodus 23,21). (see Bereshit Rabbah 97,3 that whenever Rabbi Yossi ha-aruch is mentioned the listeners felt that his mentor, Rabbi Yehudah hanassi, was personally present. [Rabbi Yossi ha-aruch was not only a disciple but a personal valet of Rabbi Yehudah hanassi while the latter was alive. Ed.] The Midrash brings this example in order to illustrate the concept of angels of the caliber of, for instance, the one describing himself as שר צבא ה' in Joshua This type of angel, the one described as bearing the name of the Lord, is understood as being the category closest to the throne of G’d in the celestial regions. At the revelation of the burning bush, Moses encountered one of these angels.

והנה הסנה בוער, “and lo, the bush continued burning.” The word בוער is equivalent to the expression דולק באש, “is in flames.” As to the Torah describing Moses as wanting to investigate why the bush did not turn into ash,מדוע לא יבער הסנה הסנה, he marveled at the phenomenon, seeing that flax in similar circumstances would have disintegrated into ash without delay. It is also possible to understand the word יבער as a form of בעור, destruction, elimination, as in ובערת הרע מקרבך, “you must eliminate evil from your midst.” (Deut. 13,6 and 8 other times in the Torah) Some commentators follow a forced approach to the words אסורה נא ואראה, understanding these words as an introduction to the statement that Moses wanted to find out why this bush would not be consumed by the flames. [I suppose the reason why our author describes this interpretation as “forced,” is that the Torah had already described Moses as having observed the phenomenon. He had not remained at a safe distance. Ed.]

ויקרא אליו אלוקים מתוך הסנה, “G’d called out to him from inside the bush.” A reference to the immediate area of thorns, the raw material attacked by the flames, a place which was uncontaminated, seeing that neither man nor beast would walk there, being afraid of being stung by the thorns. This was the reason that site qualified for a manifestation of the Divine. Ibn Ezra writes that the reason that this mountain was subsequently known as הר סיני, was in commemoration of the סנה, the burning bush which refused to be consumed by the flames.

משה משה, there is no comma between these two words. It is similar to אברהם אברהם in Genesis 28,19, or יצחק בני יצחק, (Chronicles I 1,34) [the author quotes a couple more examples of such constructions, without elaborating. Ed.]

אל תקרב הלום, “do not come any closer.” This was a warning to Moses that he had not yet attained the degree of holiness permitting him unrestricted entry to holy sites. We know that prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai, Moses entered the thick cloud in which the holy mountain was enveloped at the time without hindrance or harm befalling him. (Exodus 20,18) The Torah describes G’d there as being behind this thick cloud. Moses having turned aside his face when coming face to face with a supernatural spectacle, was prompted by the same consideration of his inadequacy in matters spiritual, which at that time were still very strong within him.

של נעליך!, “remove your shoes!” It is noteworthy that whereas when Moses and Ezekiel were commanded to remove their shoes, they were told to remove both shoes, or in the case of Ezekiel, not to remove them, whereas Joshua was commanded to remove only one shoe, נעלך, (compare Joshua 5,15) The reason may have been that Moses being a shepherd by vocation, wore big boots in the manner of the shepherds. Ezekiel, who was also a farmer, may similarly have worn big boots. Joshua being a highly placed officer, almost a crowned head, wore only light shoes in the manner of all the kings. Both of his shoes, נעליך, would have been equivalent to only one of Moses’ shoes in size and weight. Furthermore, the angel speaking to Joshua described only the immediate site on which Joshua was standing as a holy site, אדמת קודש, whereas in the case of Moses the entire mountain was holy ground. It is also interesting that whereas Joshua is reported as having complied with the command to remove his shoes, no such thing is reported of Moses. Perhaps, Moses not having entered holy ground before being told to take off his shoes, preferred not to come closer so that he would not have to remove his shoes, whereas Joshua was told to do so only after he had already been standing on holy ground, so that he had no other option.

אנכי אלוקי אביך, “I am the G’d of your father, etc.” according to our sages, Amram, Moses’ biological father, is referred to in this verse. Nachmanides writes that when the sages said this they meant that G’d meant that He was Moses’ G’d, but that He preferred to associate His name with a righteous man who had already died, instead of with a living person, whose freedom of choice still enables him to turn his back on G’d at some time in the future if he so desires, and to thereby make G’d’s association with him a mockery. At a later stage, G’d referred to Himself as the G’d of the patriarchs, implying that He was the G’d of the entire Jewish people. Ibn Ezra explained that the word אביך in our verse refers to the first patriarch Avraham, seeing he had been the first to proclaim G’d’s name and his faith in Him in public. In subsequent visions G’d speaks of also being the G’d of the other patriarchs. According to the plain meaning of the text, the expression אלוקי אביך is not materially different from the Torah having written אלוקי אבותיך, “the G’d of your forefathers.” The reason why the Torah uses the word אביך in the singular mode here is that people generally refer to G’d as their “father.” We find a similar description in Kings II 20,5 when Isaiah is instructed to give a message to King Chiskiyah, a parallel verse in Isaiah 38.5 when G’d describes Himself as the G’d of his father.

ויאמר ה' ראה ראיתי, “The Lord said: ‘I have truly seen, etc.” Although throughout this portion G’d appears in His attribute of אלוקים, the attribute of Justice, in this verse He is referring to Himself as the attribute of Mercy, the ineffable name. The reason is that here He demonstrates His pity on the condition His people find themselves in.

ראה ראיתי, according to Ibn Ezra the formula here describes G’d’s response to the unnecessarily harsh and violent conduct of the Egyptians vis a vis their Hebrew slaves. G’d assures Moses that although the Egyptians had usually chosen to practice their violent attacks on the Israelites in the privacy of their homes or the dark of night, He, the G’d of the Israelites, was aware of it all. He was also aware of the feelings of the Israelites that were being so maltreated.

אל ארץ טובה ורחבה, “to a good and spacious land.” G’d first praises the quality of the land, i.e. its climate which is healthy for its inhabitants, and secondly, that the land is spacious so that it can accommodate the entire nation without danger of the country becoming crowded. It is also possible that the meaning of the words ארץ רחבה is that the land contains wide expanses of both valleys and mountainous regions, and that though there are mountains, they do not cover most of its territory. The Torah comes back to describe the land as especially suitable for cattle and sheep raising, i.e. a land flowing with milk and honey. This also implies that the water supply in this land is ample and that it is of good quality, as otherwise it would not be ideal for raising sheep and cattle. Seeing that mountainous regions do not produce fat cattle, G’d assures Moses that the land is suitable to raise good cattle also.

אל מקום הכנעני, “to the area now inhabited by the Canaanites.” The reason that G’d did not describe that region as ארץ הכנעני, “the land of the Canaanite,” as is customary when referring to lands inhabited by different peoples, is a hint that the Canaanites will be uprooted and dispossessed. The Israelites would not share the land with the Canaanites but would live there instead of the Canaanites.

הכנעני והחתי והאמורי והפריזי והחוי והיבוסי. Note that the “Girgashi,” another one of the Canaanite tribes inhabiting that region, is not mentioned here. The reason is either that their land may not have been as excellent, or that these people would emigrate rather than defend their land against the Israelites, being aware that the Jewish G’d Who had made good on His threats against Pharaoh would most likely also make good on the promises He had made to the Jewish people beginning with Avraham. Ibn Ezra writes that the reason why the Girgashi has not been mentioned here is that that tribe was relatively insignificant in terms of manpower and military might. He questions that seeing that six Canaanite tribes have been listed here by name, why did the Torah have to use the word הכנעני, “the Canaanite” altogether? We all know that these tribes form part of the Canaanite family of nations. He answers that the entire region was known as the “land of Canaan,” and it extends beyond the regions inhabited by the six tribes listed here, especially in the north.

וזה לך האות כי אנכי שלחתיך, “and this will be the sign for you that it I Who have sent you as My messenger.” Nachmanides refers to numerous interpretations of the above line; the correct interpretation according to the plain meaning of the text being that seeing that G’d told Moses two distinctly different things, i.e. that He would liberate the Israelites from the yoke of the Egyptians and that He would lead them up to the land inhabited by the Canaanites which would become their future homeland, and Moses’ reply had been to ask how he could be expected to accomplish even the first one of these tasks. In response to G’d telling Moses that he would be leading them to the land of the Canaanites, Moses added that the people would not follow him, being afraid to face a land populated by powerful nations, and considering the prospect of warring against these nations as unrealistic. G’d reassured Moses on both scores separately, knowing that Pharaoh’s releasing them and their engaging in a march to dispossess the Canaanites were matters that were conceptually not connected. Concerning Moses’ misgivings in connection with the chances of Pharaoh releasing the Israelites, G’d told him not to worry, that He would be with him, and that he would have proof of this once the Israelites would accept the Torah on this very mountain that he was facing at that time. This revelation would also serve the Israelites as a sign that they had nothing to fear from the Canaanites. Pharaoh would agree to let them travel a relatively short distance of three days’ march to the Sinai region. Rabbi Joseph Kimchi understands the words וזה לך האות as G’d’s promise that He will be at Moses’ side all the time, enabling him to face that despot without fear or trembling. The fact that Moses would face down Pharaoh would be the great miracle. As to the line about what would happen at Mount Sinai, this was a reference to the second aspect of the liberation, the need to secure a country for themselves. At that mountain the people would become inspired to accept the Torah, and with it gain the confidence of securing the land of Canaan as their future ancestral home.

ואמרו לי מה שמו, “(how am I to answer them) when they will say to me: ‘what is (this G’d’s) name?” Nachmanides writes that this verse cries out to be interpreted (not just read). It is quite inconceivable that the verse means that Moses said to G’d: “what is Your name, what shall I say to them?” and that the instruction by G’d to tell them His name would be the kind of אות, convincing sign or symbol that he was trustworthy in his claim to be this G’d’s appointee, sent to orchestrate their deliverance. How could such a simplistic statement as telling them of G’d’s name make believers out of confirmed non-believers? What proof did Moses bring with him that would encourage the people to believe that he indeed had been chosen by G’d to be their redeemer? We see indeed that immediately after G’d told him to relate His name to the people, Moses countered that he was convinced that the people would not believe him. Ibn Ezra understands Moses’ question to refer to the numerous attributes, (names) of G’d, and his wanting to know which of these attributes he was to stress when telling them that he had been sent to deliver them from the yoke of Pharaoh. It was a well known fact that miracles are not performed by the attribute Shaddai, but only by the four-lettered ineffable name of G’d. Ibn Ezra’s words do not appear acceptable at all, seeing that the question of performing any miracles had not yet been raised by either G’d or Moses. Moses had not been instructed as yet to perform any miracles in Egypt; he had only been told to lead the Jews out of Egypt by convincing Pharaoh in G’d’s name to release the Israelites from bondage. Moreover, the people had the tradition that Joseph had spoken of the attribute elokim remembering the Israelites when the time came to take them out of Egypt, (Genesis 50,24) There would therefore appear to be no reason for Moses to refer at this stage to any other possible attribute of G’d. Also the patriarch Yaakov had already told his sons that the attribute elokim would come to the assistance of the people when the time would be ripe. (Genesis 48,21) Seeing that the attribute of elokim had been sufficient to assure Avraham’s single-handed victory over the four Kings who had defeated the five kings of Sodom, there was no reason at all for Moses to suggest that another attribute of G’d need to be invoked in order to make the Exodus from Egypt possible. I believe (still Nachmanides writing) that we must understand matters in the following manner. At that time Moses was already privy to profound prophetic insights, having previously mastered all the philosophic wisdom available at his time, [perhaps also having composed the Book of Job at that time, a book that testifies to the profound wisdom of its author. Ed.] In light of his knowledge of the complex nature of G’d and His attributes, he enquired under which heading G’d had intended to appoint him as the leader of the Israelite nation. He was convinced that this would be the first question by the elders of the people that he would have to answer in order to establish some degree of credibility. The elders knew of two of G’d’s attributes, the attribute elokim, i.e. el shaddai, the attribute which had successfully assisted the patriarchs throughout their lives, and the attribute Hashem, i.e. the attribute under whose aegis miracles of supernatural character are performed. The obvious reason which prompted Moses to raise this question was that G’d had introduced Himself to him as the G’d of the patriarchs, i.e. אלוקי אביך. Seeing that the patriarchs’ lives had been guided by the attribute of shaddai, it was quite possible that the Exodus would also be orchestrated under that heading. If G’d, at that time, had mentioned a specific attribute of His as enabling Him to forthwith orchestrate the redemption of the Jewish people, Moses would not have raised the question at all. G’d’s answer now was to ask Moses to wait until the people would come to Mount Sinai and experience the revelation, when it would become clear that such an event could not occur under the aegis of the attribute shaddai. The people would experience an attribute of G’d with which even the patriarchs had not been familiar. This was the attribute used to create the world, not the attribute employed to merely keep the world functioning as a going concern. Moses wanted to know if he were to reveal this attribute of G’d to the people already at this time. In other words, was he to reveal to them at this time universal aspects of G’d, or was he to restrict himself to representing G’d in His capacity as manager of the earth in its present format? When G’d answered אהיה אשר אהיה, this meant that there was no need for Moses to broaden the people’s theological base by dragging in the universal dimensions of G’d as the Creator, etc. It would suffice to assure the people that the same G’d (attribute) Who had been with the patriarchs would continue to be with both Moses and the people. This attribute would suffice, if called upon during periods of distress, to propel G’d to help His people. G’d’s response to His people’s prayers would be enough proof to them and to the people around them that there was a living G’d Who took an interest in the fate of His creatures. This corresponds to how our sages explained the name אהיה אשר אהיה, i.e. “just as I have seen them through this major problem, so I will see them through any major problems in the future.” It is assumed that the Jewish people, whenever they are in distress, will call upon this attribute of G’d asking for relief. The manifestation of the attribute of shaddai on such occasions is abundant proof of the existence of a living and caring G’d. Moses felt that it was premature to hint at future times when the Israelites might encounter similar distress; this is why he suggested that he introduce G’d simply as אהיה, the four letters of the ineffable name, the attribute of Mercy, an attribute which presupposes that this G’d is the Creator, hence He can operate freely in all of His creation, that He is the universal G’d. The word אהיה is repeated here three times, indicating that in G’d’s approach to the universe, seeing that He is eternal, there are no such concepts as past, present, and future, they are all one, i.e. , היה, הווה, יהיה“He was, He is, He will be,” are parts of the same concept. Only to mortals such as we, are these concepts separate and non-interchangeable time zones. Some commentators see in the expression אהיה אשר אהיה, a command for Moses to tell the people that G’d Himself suffers with the people whenever they endure suffering. G’d explained that the reason why Moses was granted this vision of G’d was precisely because the people had turned to Him, pleading for relief, and that G’d was about to answer their plea. He was sure, He said, that as soon as Moses would tell the people this they would indeed believe him when he said that he had been sent by this G’d. In other words, the answer to Moses’ question “what shall I tell them in order that they will believe me?” is that ”I will be with them.” Still another approach to our problem. Moses made the same mistake as Yaakov had made when he asked the angel in his nocturnal encounter his name, and who had been told that this was irrelevant. Celestial forces, unlike terrestrial phenomena, do not have fixed names, as they adopt names that match whatever task they perform at a given point in history. Seeing that G’d is active simultaneously on many different “fronts,” He ”travels” under many different “names.” [In colloquial terms: “G’d uses many different passports on different occasions.” Ed.] The meaning of the words אהיה אשר אהיה is simply “I will adopt whatever name the occasion and the circumstances call for at the time I manifest Myself.”

וזה זכרי לדור דור, “and this is My remembrance from generation to generation.” G’d reverts to His reference as being the G’d of the patriarchs. He assures Moses, and through him the people of Israel, that His covenant with the patriarchs is of an eternal, enduring nature, one that will always be referred to at critical times in Jewish history. He responded to the children of the patriarchs in the past and will continue to do so.

ויאמר, הראני נא את כבודך. “I said: please reveal to me Your glory.” Moses requested that G’d show him His true face in a vision, something our sages are in the habit of referring to as אספקרלריא המאירא, “a clear, unambiguous visual image.” G’d answered him that what He would do was to parade before him a number of phenomena, each of which represented some of the ways in which He demonstrated His earnest desire to be of benefit to His creatures; as a result of viewing these phenomena one after another, he, more than any other human being, would develop an appreciation of what G’d’s essence was all about; however, it was impossible to do more without terminating Moses’ life, as it was not given to mortals to get a still deeper insight into what an Eternal G’d, the Creator of the universe, was truly like.

ולא יתן אתכם מלך מצרים להלוך, ולא ביד חזקה“and the King of Egypt will not let you go, except through a strong hand.” According to Rashi, the line means that G’d says that as long as G’d would not display His strong hand Pharaoh would not let the Israelites go. According to Nachmanides we are to understand the line as follows: Pharaoh will not let the Israelites go voluntarily, not even when I apply pressure, until I will display all the power at My command. I will use a strong hand in demonstrating this power of Mine to him, working many miracles. This is a preview of what the Torah describes later progressively as יד חזקה, זרוע נטויה, אותות ומופתים, “a strong hand, an outstretched arm, a variety of supernatural miracles.” All these instruments of G’d’s persuavive power would have to be experienced by Pharaoh before he would dismiss the Israelites.

ושאלה אשה משכנתה, “Each woman will request from her neighbour, etc.” even though the Torah had used the masculine mode when speaking of the actual event, i.e. (Exodus 112, and 12,35) implying that both the males and the females would request valuables from their Egyptian neighbours, the reason that a feminine mode was chosen by the Torah here is that it is usually women who borrow from their neighbours, not men.