All the Jewish commentators regard the first passage of this Sidra as a direct continuation of the previous Sidra of SH’MOT. It contains Hashem’s reply to Moshe’s angry complaint that He had not saved the Israelites and had, in fact, made their suffering even harder to bear. Moshe’s exact words were: “Why have you been bad to this people, why did you send me?” Some of our ancient rabbis think that Moses’ complaint was inappropriate and arrogant. But, in Moshe’s defence, other commentators take the view that Moshe’s anger stemmed from his compassion for his people. He really was very upset with the situation. That is the reason that our rabbis interrupted the conversation, in order to signify that God took time to consider his reply.
However, even after the interval, God remained angry with Moses. Rashi maintains that we see this from the first word in the Sidra VAYYEDABBER, which is a harsh word meaning ‘He spoke’. It is in contrast to the verb AMAR, which means to say. God reprimanded Moshe Rabbeinu for his lack of faith and trust, implying that God does not keep His promise. God declared to him: ‘I am the Lord’. It means that: “I can be trusted to grant reward to those who walk before me.” He reassured Moshe that He would keep all the promises that He had undertaken to the patriarchs, which He had not yet fulfilled. Rashi also explains that when God told Moses that he had appeared to the Patriarchs only by the name of KEL SHADDAI, and not by his name Y-K-V-K, he conveyed the message that they had not witnessed the fulfilment of the promises given to them. (The K in the two divine names has been substituted for the letter HEY. This is because it is forbidden to write the true name of God on a piece of paper which may be discarded or destroyed). This explanation is based on the understanding that the name KEL SHADDAI refers to God as the God of nature and not the God of history. Nachmanides elaborates on this point. The Patriarchs experienced God in their daily lives. He saved them from death by famine and when they went to war, he rescued them from danger. He gave them wealth, honour and goodness. The patriarchs observed the three festivals, Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkoth as nature festivals. After the Exodus, the Torah gave them a historical significance.
The second verse in the Sidra mentions the names of the three patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Rashi’s comment on these names is brief and strange. He explains that they were our forefathers. Why does Rashi have to tell us that they were our forefathers? For all the readers of the Torah this must be obvious. Our Darshanim, preachers, have tried to interpret this. Rashi wants to teach us that Isaac was not only Abraham’s son, but also a patriarch in his own right, with great leadership qualities. Jacob was not only Isaac’s son and Abraham’s grandson. He was a patriarch in his own right, with his own unique achievements. The lesson is that it is not sufficient to rely on one’s parents’ reputation. We can be proud of our parents’ achievements, but we also have a duty to do our very best to attain greatness, on our own merits. Our patriarchs achieved the distinction of producing outstanding leaders for three generations. This is extremely rare.
God’s speech to Moses includes the five expressions of redemption, which are represented by the 5 cups of wine at the Seder. We drink four of the cups and we reserve the fifth for the Prophet Elijah. The first expression promised the Israelites that the hard labour, imposed upon them, would cease. The second expression promised that the Egyptian domination would end completely. The third expression promised that the Egyptians would be punished for their crimes. The fourth expression of redemption was the promise that the Israelites would arrive at Mount Sinai and receive the Torah. The fifth promise was that the Almighty would take the Israelites into the land of our fathers and give it to them.
In chapter 6 verse 9 the Torah relates that Moses repeated this speech to the Israelites, but they refused to listen. They were still angry and extremely disappointed because Moses’ first attempt to liberate them, had failed. Secondly, because their work was so gruelling that they simply had no patience to listen to him.
God’s response to Moses was that he should go back to Pharaoh and demand the liberation of the people. But the Israelites response put him off yet again. He was consumed by doubt. He no longer had his own people’s support. He said to God that it was illogical to go to Pharaoh, when the Israelites didn’t want to be free. A leader must have followers, otherwise he is not a leader. Moreover, Moses insisted that he was not a good orator. He argued that since he had lacked the power to persuade his own people, when he was merely delivering to them God’s own speech, how could he possibly persuade Pharaoh with his own words? God’s responded by speaking to Moses and Aaron together. Even this did not satisfy Moses and he continued to resist the mission.
One of the most important questions regarding the story of Exodus concerns Pharaoh. Several times the Torah states that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. In other words, God forced him to sin. On the surface this seems to contradict one of the most fundamental teachings of the Jewish Religion i.e. that man has Free Will. However, Maimonides formulates a novel and surprising qualification of the principle of Free Will. He says that there are occasions when people commit such serious crimes that God withdraws from them the right to repent. God has decreed that people, who reach an absolutely intolerable level of wickedness, can never become good again. They deserve to die. Few would wish to argue with this concept. There have been people in the history of the world who did not deserve ever to be forgiven for their crimes. A modern example of such a person is Adolf Hitler. But there have been others. This is divine justice.