We celebrate the splitting of the sea on the seventh day of Pesach but why was it important? We already had the 10 Makkos to prove G-d’s dominance and they were the reason the Jews were freed from Egypt.
On the side of Egypt it seems like the 10 plagues did not really convince them since they ended up pursuing the Jews. They seem to have rationalized that G-d was not the supreme Deity and that the desert spirit Baal Tzfun was and that the sea split naturally because of the wind. However it couldn’t be a lesson for them since they were killed by the sea
On the other side, the Jews weren’t convinced by the 10 Plagues because they were still kvetching about dying in the wilderness. Apparently believing that Moshe was simply a great magician. But after the splitting of the sea they believed in Moshe and G-d. But shortly after crossing the sea and being filled with Ruach hakodesh to sing shira – they went back to kvetching. In fact the Jews were very fickle and didn’t fully believe until they experience G-d directly at Sinai. So following the view of Ramban and others, these experiences were simply lessons in faith but not the cause of lasting faith.
Rashba[i](4:234): We learned from our forefathers not to accept something which contains the slightest doubts or uncertainties until it has been thoroughly investigated and the truth is ascertained. This we see concerning the acceptance of Moshe as a true prophet. They were uncertain whether to believe him - even though he came to announce that they were to be rescued from the horrible servitude of Egypt. This is why Moshe said they won’t believe me. This is because it was known that they were inherently skeptical and did not believe anything except that which was unquestionably true. Therefore, even though G‑d did incredible miracles in Egypt until they were taken out with an outstretched arm and awesome events - it was not sufficient to remove the doubts about Moshe from their hearts. These doubts were caused by the fact that all that occurred in Egypt were possibly just coincidental or natural events or from magical powers. Because of these doubts, they did not have unconditional faith in Moshe until the Splitting of the Sea - as the verse says, “that they [now] believed in G‑d and Moshe His servant” (Shemos 14:31). The Targum (Shemos 14:31) says they now believed in the prophecy of Moshe that it was true and was not the result of natural events. This event removed the last vestige of doubt that the miraculous events in Egypt could have been the result of random natural events. It was obviously impossible that the sea could have been split at night and the next day return to its normal state. Therefore, the splitting of the sea removed the doubts from their hearts - for the time being. However soon after the Splitting of the Sea, the doubts returned. They thought perhaps Moshe, who was more knowledgeable than any other man had ever been, knew how to do this by natural means which they couldn’t ascertain. The only remaining option for clarifying the truth of Moshe’s prophecy was by their own prophecy and this is what in fact occurred at the Revelation of Sinai when they final established the truth.
[i] שו"ת הרשב"א (ד:רלד)... ויורה ע"ז לדעתי, שלשה ענינים. האחד, שממנו למדו האבות, שלא [יתפתו] אחר הדברים שיכנס בהם שום ספק, עד שיבחנוהו [הרבה], שאין בו צד פקפוק אלא האמת. והוא שהי' משה נביא האמת, עליו השלום, מסתפק אם יאמינו לו, אע"פ שהוא בא לבשרם להצילם מן העבודה הקשה. כאמרו: לא יאמינו לי. וכלל הענין ההוא, לפי שידענו שלא יאמינו, רק בדבר אמתי והכרחי, אין בו שום צד פקפוק. וע"כ אף כשהגדיל ה' לעשות הנפלאות והנוראות במצרים, עד שהוציאם בזרוע נטויה, ובמוראים גדולים. עוד הוצרך להוציא הפקפוק מלבבם, מפני שכל מה שנעשה במצרים, אפשר שנתפשטו בהם, או מקריים טבעים, או עניני החרטומי'. ולפיכך, לא האמינו במשה אמונה מוחלטת, עד עמדם בקריעת ים סוף יורה על זה, מה שאמר שם: ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדו. ותרגם המתרגם: ובנביאות משה עבדיה. שזה באמת נמלט מטבע המקריים, שאין הים נקרע במקרה בלילה אחד, ובבקר ישוב לאיתנו. וזה הוציא מלבבם הפקפוק, אמנם לשעתם. והוא שאמרה רחב הזונה: כי שמענו את אשר הוביש ה' את מי ים סוף מפניכם. לא הזכירה אחד מן הפלאים והמופתי' הקודמים במצרים, רק זה לבדו, לכונה שאמרתי. ואמנם, אף לאחר קריעת ים סוף, נכנס עוד בלבם צד פקפוק, אולי משה לבד שהיה חכם מכל האדם, ומכל מי שקדמו, ידע לעשות כן, והם לא יבחינוהו. וחזרו עוד להמשך אחר הספק והפקפוק. ומעתה, לא נשאר להם שום בחינה בנבואת עשה, זולתי שיגיעו הם בעצמם לענין נבואי, להוציא מלבם כל פקפוק. וזה היה במעמד הנכבד ההוא, ונתאמת האמת [ונצדק] קודש. והשני הוא אומרו. בעבור ישמע העם בדברי עמך. ומן המפורסם, שאין החוש משיג דבר השם בדברו עם נביאו. ואלו דבר עם משה, אף בקול נברא נכבד ונורא מאד, למעלה מקול השופר והרעמים והלפידים. אם לא השיג והורה בחושים, לא נמלט עדיין מן הפקפוקים הקודמים, ואין זה להם פלא גדול, מקריעת ים סוף, ובמה יבחונוהו. אלא אותו הקול, לפחות קול נבואיי היה. וא"כ, כבר עלו למדרגה ממדרגות הנבואה. והשיג כל אחד כפי מה שהוא, משה מחיצה בפי עצמו, אהרן מחיצה בפני עצמו, ונדב ואביהוא מחיצה בפני עצמם, ושאר העם. כל אחד מחיצה בפני עצמו. ולא שהשיגו כל העם השגה אחת, זה כזה. השלישי, מה שאמרו רבותינו ז"ל: אנכי, ולא יהיה לך; מפי הגבורה שמענום. ואיך שמעום מפי הגבורה, אם לא בדרך נבואי....
The Rashba only suggests his answer as a possibility. And it has the weakness that it didn't help as the Jews were still doubtful afterwards. So the powerful question remains. What was the purpose of splitting the sea?
ReplyDeleteMy theory. God behaves tricky with the wicked. God tricked the wicked Pharaoh to attack the Jews.
ReplyDelete“He brought me out to freedom; He rescued me, because He was pleased with me. The Lord rewarded me according to my merit; He requited the cleanness of my hands. For I have kept the ways of the Lord, And have not been guilty before from my God. I am mindful of all His rules And have not departed from His laws, I have been blameless before Him And have guarded myself against sinning---And the Lord has requited my merit, According to my purity in His sight. With the loyal you deal loyally; With the blameless hero blamelessly. With the pure You act in purity, And with the perverse You act wily. To humble folk you give victory, And you give scorn on the haughty.” (2 Samuel 22:20-28).
שמואל ב פרק כב פסוק כז - כט
(כז) עִם נָבָר תִּתָּבָר וְעִם עִקֵּשׁ תִּתַּפָּל:
(כח) וְאֶת עַם עָנִי תּוֹשִׁיעַ וְעֵינֶיךָ עַל רָמִים תַּשְׁפִּיל:
“And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying: Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn back and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon, over against it shall ye encamp by the sea. And Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel: They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in. And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and he shall follow after them; and I will get Me honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; and the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD. And they did so. And it was told the king of Egypt that the people were fled; and the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was turned towards the people, and they said: What is this we have done, that we have let Israel go from serving us? And he made ready his chariots, and took his people with him. And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over all of them. And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he pursued after the children of Israel; for the children of Israel went out with a high hand. And the Egyptians pursued after them, all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his army, and overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pi-hahiroth, in front of Baal-zephon.” (Exodus 14:1-9).
as stated it was another lesson in emuna
ReplyDeleteTorah thought daf hayomi
ReplyDeleteShekalim 13a
“Mishnah 5. Once in thirty days prices were fixed [on behalf of] the chamber [the treasury chamber where the shekels were deposited; III, 1]. If a man had undertaken to supply fine flours at four [se'ahs for a sela] and they now stood at three [se'ahs for a sela] he must [still] supply at four [se'ahs]. [if he had undertaken to supply] at three [se'ahs for a sela] and they now stood at four, he must [also] supply at four, for the sanctuary has the upper hand [cf. Kid. 29a]. If the fine flour became worm-eaten the loss is his; if the wine became sour the loss is his. for he is not entitled to his money [even if he had received it in advance] except after the altar has accepted the offering [as a valid one].”
Kiddushin 29a
“Mishnah. All obligations of the son upon the father, men are bound, but women are exempt. But all obligations of the father upon the son, both men and women are bound. all affirmative precepts limited to time [literally, caused by the time, which are performed at particular times or seasons], men are liable and women are exempt. but all affirmative precepts not limited to time are binding upon both men and women. and all negative precepts, whether limited to time or not limited to time, are binding upon both men and women; excepting, ye shall not round [the corners of your heads] [Lev. XIX, 27], neither shalt thou mar [the corner of thy beard], and, he shall not defile himself [Ibid. XXI, 1] to the dead [In the Mishnaic language these are turned into substantives by the use of bal (not) joined to the second pers. impf. of the relevant verb. These ordinances are binding upon men only.].”
Beautiful. The treasury chamber has the upper hand. The treasury chamber contracted with a supplier for fine flours. Price of fine flour rose from 4 se’ahs to a selah at time of commitment to 3 se’ah to a selah at time of delivery. Price of fine flour fell from 3 se’ahs to a selah at time of commitment to 4 se’ah to a selah at time of delivery. The treasury chamber pays the lower price.
My theory. Women in marriages and divorces have the upper hand. Fine. Good men love their wives. Netanyahu loves Sarah. Of course, no condoning of criminal activity (true criminal activity, the true Scotsman fallacy-thanks KA):
“New York Domestic Relations Law Sec. 253 Removal of Barriers to Remarriage 1.This section applies only to a marriage solemnized in this state or in any other jurisdiction by a person specified in subdivision one of section eleven of this chapter...8.Any person who knowingly submits a false sworn statement under this section shall be guilty of making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree and shall be punished in accordance with section 210.40 of the penal law. 9.Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize any court to inquire into or determine any ecclesiastical or religious issue. The truth of any statement submitted pursuant to this section shall not be the subject of any judicial inquiry, except as provided in subdivision eight of this section.”
Section 210.40 of the penal law states: “A person is guilty of making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree when he commits the crime of making an apparently sworn false statement in the second degree, and when (a) the written instrument involved is one for which an oath is required by law, and (b) the false statement contained therein is made with intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official functions, and (c) such false statement is material to the action, proceeding or matter involved. Making an apparently sworn false statement in the first degree is a class E felony.”