From Artscroll on the Malbim 

https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422610732.html?srsltid=AfmBOops6Qu_nLdJTiU056CFe6pJiPNw3W8aSIdf2QAboWwdtbVDAZlY

וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָֽה׃

God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am יהוה.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.2

וָאֵרָ֗א אֶל־אַבְרָהָ֛ם אֶל־יִצְחָ֥ק וְאֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֖ב בְּאֵ֣ל שַׁדָּ֑י וּשְׁמִ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה לֹ֥א נוֹדַ֖עְתִּי לָהֶֽם׃

I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but I did not make Myself known to them by My name יהוה.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.3

Until now every time that Hashem spoke to Moshe, the Torah had stated 'vayomer Elokim, 'and God said.'

Here, for the very first time, the Torah uses the phrase

'vayedabeir Elokim,' 'and God spoke.'

This shift in language, as will be explained, marks the elevation of Moshe's prophetic level from a level that until this point had been comparable to that of the other prophets. 

From now on, however, Moshe's prophetic experience would begin its ascent to the highest possible level, to that of the 'Prophet of Torah,' level forever distinguishing Moshe from all other prophets.

Among the differences between 'dibur' ('speaking') and

'amirah' ('saying') is that dibur refers to the act of speaking, especially to speaking at length,' while amirah refers to the mes-sage, oral or otherwise imparted.

When the Torah, therefore, states that 'Hashem spoke (va yedabeir) to Moshe saying (leimor)...,' the term 'va'yedabeir' implies that Hashem spoke to Moshe at length, revealing to him all the Torah's kabbalistic secrets and elaborating upon all the halachic particulars that were to comprise the unwritten, oral tradition.

See Menachot 29b, wherein Rabbi Akiva is recorded as having derived

'heaps upon heaps' of Torah laws from every jot and crownlike frill atop the letters in the Torah scroll.

'Leimor,' on the other hand, refers to the exact wording of the statements that Moshe would inscribe in the Torah scroll.

The verses of the Torah would serve as the amirah containing

— in 'shorthand' form — all the vast information conveyed to Moshe through 'dibur.'

Much as in English the phrase giving a 'speech' means to converse at length.

Understanding the above helps us understand why the phrase

'Hashem spoke to Moshe saying...' is used only in regard to Moshe, and not in regard to any other prophet. Only Moshe, as the Prophet of the Torah, heard 'dibur,' Hashem actually speaking, fully explaining the Torah's mystical, esoteric secrets as well as all of its complex halachic details. 

The sole exception, 'And Hashem spoke to Yehoshua saying...

(Yehoshua 20:1), does not disprove the rule, because the verses that follow are essentially a repetition of halachos which appear in the Five Books of Moses Communication

Amirah is sometimes used in Tanach allegorically, describing for example the nonverbal messages of inanimate objects (e.g., Iyou 38:35; Mishlei 30:16) whereas dibur always refers to actual vocalized speech (Malbim's commentary to Toras Kohanim, Siman 3).

Simply put, the phrase 'God spoke to Moshe and said,' is no redundancy. Rather, the verse is pointing out not only what Hashem said to Moshe, but that Hashem said it via 'dibur,' clear and instructive speech.

TWO LEVELS OF PROPHECY

As we explained in Parashas Vayeitzei, Moshe's elevated level of prophecy is indicated as well in a subtle shift in the verse's verb choice: 'I appeared to Auraham, Yitzchak, and to Yaakou...but My Name, Hashem, was not known to them.' The Zohars contrasts the two verbs used in this verse,

'appearing' as opposed to 'knowing': Hashem 'appeared to them,' a prophetic experience limited by visualization, but 'was not known to them.' Moshe's prophecy, via the 'aspeklaria me'ira,' the 'radiant prism,' brought him to the higher level of knowing, beyond that which any picture can describe.

TWO NAMES OF HASHEM

Our verse begins by referring to God as 'Elokim' and ends with 'I am Hashem,' which, as the Zohar explains, indicates the elevation of Moshe's prophecy to a new and higher level:

The name Elokim signifies God as working within nature through hidden miracles, which had been Hashem' s way

of relating to the Jewish People ever since the time of the

Patriarchs and until now, The Four-Letter Name of Hashem, the Tetragrammaton, 10 indicates Hashem's essence as totally above and beyond nature, pertorming miracles as novel as the creation of the world itself. This miraculous mode of running altairs was to be Hashem's way of relating to Moshe and to his generation,

starting now.

Informing Moshe of this new state of affairs served to answer Moshe's question 'why have you done evil to this nation?' (Shemos 5:23). Moshe thought that the redemption from Mitzrayim would come about through hidden miracles in a seemingly natural fashion like the dawning of a new day, and that as such it would arrive and grow gradually. Moshe therefore assumed that his mission to Pharaoh would result in at least some slight reduction in the Jewish suffering, and he questioned why the opposite had occurred.

Were the redemption to have occurred through God's

'Elokim' mode of working through nature, then Moshe would have been correct. By saying 'I am Hashem,' however, Hashem informed Moshe that the opposite was to occur, that the redemption would come about through the openly miraculous mode described by the Name 'Hashem'; and that, as such, it was fitting that the redemption come not gradually, but rather that it

burst forth from amid the height of

Jewish suffering, just as a newborn

emerges when the mother's travail

their lowest point, the reaches its.

Thus, in the previous verse Hashem told Moshe, 'now you shall see that which I will do to Pharaoh...' Specifically now that the Jewish People have reached

their lowest point would the redemption suddenly shine forth like a blinding light from out of the pitch darkness.

https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422610732.html?srsltid=AfmBOops6Qu_nLdJTiU056CFe6pJiPNw3W8aSIdf2QAboWwdtbVDAZlY

This week Hashem tells Moshe to inform the B’nai Yisrael, that the good times will soon come.

לָכֵ֞ן אֱמֹ֥ר לִבְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֮ אֲנִ֣י יְהֹוָה֒ וְהוֹצֵאתִ֣י אֶתְכֶ֗ם מִתַּ֙חַת֙ סִבְלֹ֣ת מִצְרַ֔יִם וְהִצַּלְתִּ֥י אֶתְכֶ֖ם מֵעֲבֹדָתָ֑ם וְגָאַלְתִּ֤י אֶתְכֶם֙ בִּזְר֣וֹעַ נְטוּיָ֔ה וּבִשְׁפָטִ֖ים גְּדֹלִֽים׃

Say, therefore, to the Israelite people: I am יהוה. I will free you from the labors of the Egyptians and deliver you from their bondage. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and through extraordinary chastisements.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.6

וְלָקַחְתִּ֨י אֶתְכֶ֥ם לִי֙ לְעָ֔ם וְהָיִ֥יתִי לָכֶ֖ם לֵֽאלֹהִ֑ים וִֽידַעְתֶּ֗ם כִּ֣י אֲנִ֤י יְהֹוָה֙ אֱלֹ֣הֵיכֶ֔ם הַמּוֹצִ֣יא אֶתְכֶ֔ם מִתַּ֖חַת סִבְל֥וֹת מִצְרָֽיִם׃

And I will take you to be My people, and I will be your God. And you shall know that I, יהוה, am your God who freed you from the labors of the Egyptians.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.7

וְהֵבֵאתִ֤י אֶתְכֶם֙ אֶל־הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֤ר נָשָׂ֙אתִי֙ אֶת־יָדִ֔י לָתֵ֣ת אֹתָ֔הּ לְאַבְרָהָ֥ם לְיִצְחָ֖ק וּֽלְיַעֲקֹ֑ב וְנָתַתִּ֨י אֹתָ֥הּ לָכֶ֛ם מוֹרָשָׁ֖ה אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָֽה׃

I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will give it to you for a possession, I יהוה.”

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.8

It did not mean much. “

וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר מֹשֶׁ֛ה כֵּ֖ן אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְלֹ֤א שָֽׁמְעוּ֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה מִקֹּ֣צֶר ר֔וּחַ וּמֵעֲבֹדָ֖ה קָשָֽׁה׃ {פ}

But when Moses told this to the Israelites, they would not listen to Moses, their spirits crushed by cruel bondage.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.9

Next Hashem tells Moshe to tell Pharaoh to let the Jews out. Moshe responds with a reply filled with deductive reasoning. “

וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר מֹשֶׁ֔ה לִפְנֵ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר הֵ֤ן בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ לֹֽא־שָׁמְע֣וּ אֵלַ֔י וְאֵיךְ֙ יִשְׁמָעֵ֣נִי פַרְעֹ֔ה וַאֲנִ֖י עֲרַ֥ל שְׂפָתָֽיִם׃ {פ}

But Moses appealed to יהוה, saying, “The Israelites would not listen to me; how then should Pharaoh heed me, me—who gets tongue-tied!”

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.12

Our sages explain 

See Rashi quoting (Genesis Rabbah 92:7).

that this is on of ten “kal v’chomer” instances in the Torah. It is an example of reasoning used to logically come to halachic conclusions. ( eg. If a weightlifter can not lift the stone, surely a child can not!)

The problem is, that the reasoning seems flawed. “The Children of Israel did not listen toMoshe from shortness of breath and hard work. ” 

Although the Siftei hahamim give a detailed explanation I would like to share what I saw from Rav Mordechai Kamenetzky asks 

Pharaoh did not suffer from either of those shortcomings! If the weightlifter with a broken back, can’t lift a stone, it plays no role in telling us whether or not a child can.)

So what was Moshe’s logical refutation to G-d’s command?

Yesterday 23 Teves, was the Yahrzeit the great Gaon, Rabbi Mordechai Gifter z”l. The Rabbi was the great father of a close friend of mine and when her son asks me halachic questions I often ask him what would your great grandfather say. 

As a student at the Telshe Yeshiva in Europe he developed a strong relationship with one Europe’s foremost scholars of that era, Rav Mordechai Pogramanski z”l. He used to relate on a story Rav Pogramanski would share with his students.

A disheveled man was touring the Louvre with a group of tourists. As they passed Rembrandt’s works the man looked at everyone and yelled, “Sour milk!” Puzzled, everyone thought he was crazy. He repeated it again. “It looks like sour milk!”

They moved on and passed the Mona Lisa. Again he screamed, Sour milk!” This went on a few more times until a wise man looked at the fellow. “Let me see your glasses.”

The critical man gave them to him. “What did you have for breakfast?” he asked.

“Why cereal and milk,” he answered.

The wise man laughed. Look at your glasses! They are speckled with milk! No wonder everything you look at appears as sour milk!

Moshe knew that Jews inherently believe. However the suffering of hard work and the evil treatment of Egyptian masters tainted their faith. 

But hard work alone does not taint faith. It is only when it is exasperated by the torment of the taskmasters, and their cruel taunts. How much more so, he figured, would Pharaoh be inattentive of the command thatHashem is in charge, and the Jews should be let free. 

If hard work stains the thought process, blocking the beauty of Hashem’s word to filter through, how much more so does the idolatry and heresy of Pharaoh impede them from penetrating!

We look at Hashem’s creation. We go to synagogue. We hear mussar. We read the prophets. But somehow it does not get through. The words are beautiful. Those who hear them can be inspired. 

But so many impediments block our vision and our hearing. Our lifestyles. Our desires. Even our work.

If we’d open our eyes we would see so much holiness! But only if their glasses are not tainted with sour milk.

זה אחד מעשרה ק'ו שבתורה. רוצה לומר, שאל תאמר דהאי איך ישמעני פרעה מילתא בפני עצמו הוא, כלומר וגם פרעה לא ישמע אלי מסבה אחרת, דהיינו ואני ערל שפתים, לכן פירש זה אחד מעשרה קל וחומר, והכל חדא היא. ובזה ניחא מה שהפך רש'י, ופירש ערל שפתים קודם ואיך ישמעני פרעה, שלא על סדר המקרא. והקל וחומר הוא הכי, ומה ישראל ששמועה טובה היא להם, והיה להם לקבל דברי, ואפ'ה לא שמעו לי, פרעה ששמיעה רעה היא לו, כ'ש שלא ישמע. וא'ת איכא למיפרך, דמה שלא שמעו ישראל למשה, היינו כמו שמפרש הפסוק לעיל (פסוק ט') ולא שמעו אל משה מקוצר רוח וגו'. ויש לומר דמשה לא היה ידע שלא שמעו בשביל קוצר רוח, אלא הוא סבר דבשביל שהוא ערל שפתים לא שמעו לו. ומה שכתוב בקרא כן, היינו התורה כתבה לפי האמת, אבל לפי דעתו שהיה סובר משום שהיה ערל שפתים לא שמעו אליו. הוי שפיר ק'ו ואין להקשות. אעפ'כ היה לו למשה להבליע הפירכא, אף אחר שגילה לו הקב'ה שמה שלא שמעו אליו הוא מקוצר רוח, והק'ו שלו הוא נפרך, כמו שמצינו בכמה מקומות בתלמוד. יש לומר דפירכא הכתובה בתורה הוא, שהכתוב מעיד שמה שלא שמעו הוא מפני הקוצר רוח, ואין להבליע הפירכא. [כן כתב הרא'ם]:

This is one of the ten a fortiori inferences in the Torah. Rashi is telling us: Do not say that “How then will Pharaoh listen to me” is a separate statement [from “B’nei Yisrael have not listened to me”], and it means that Pharaoh will not listen for a different reason, which is: “I whose lips are covered.” Therefore, [to exclude this,] Rashi explains: “This is one of the ten a fortiori inferences.” Thus [it follows that] the entire verse is one statement: [because Moshe’s lips are covered, therefore B’nei Yisrael did not listen — how then will Pharaoh listen?] This explains why Rashi switched the order of the verse and explained “I whose lips are covered” before explaining “How then will Pharaoh listen to me.” The a fortiori inference is as follows: To B’nei Yisrael, the redemption is good tidings and they should have listened to me, yet they did not. To Pharaoh, it is bad tidings — all the more so he will not listen! You might object: This inference can be refuted, as B’nei Yisrael did not listen to Moshe for the reason of their great distress, as explained above (v. 9), [whereas Pharaoh is not in distress]. The answer is: Moshe did not know that B’nei Yisrael failed to listen out of distress; he thought it was because his lips are covered. Although the Torah writes that it was because of their distress [that they did not listen], as this was the true reason, Moshe did not know that. Thus he considered his inference to be solid, [although in truth it was refutable]. [You might ask:] Nevertheless, even after Hashem revealed to Moshe that they failed to listen due to their distress, [why is Moshe’s inference incorrect?] He could have incorporated the refutation into the a fortiori, as we find a number of times in the Talmud, [and reasoned as follows: To B’nei Yisrael, the redemption is good tidings and despite their distress they should have listened to me, yet did not. To Pharaoh, it is bad tidings — and despite his lack of distress, all the more so he will not listen!] The answer is: This refutation is [based on a fact] written in the Torah. The Torah itself testifies that the [true] reason they failed to listen was their distress. Such a refutation cannot be incorporated [into the a fortiori]. (thus wrote the Re’m)

https://www.sefaria.org/Siftei_Chakhamim,_Exodus_6.12.2

Some people simply never learn. For nearly a year, Pharaoh was relentlessly struck by one devastating plague after another, yet he stubbornly refused to let the Jewish people leave Egypt. Time and again, during each plague, he begged Moshe to intervene and put an end to the calamities afflicting his land. Though he made repeated promises to release the Jews, he never truly admitted fault or took responsibility. Each time disaster struck, Pharaoh implored Moshe to stop the suffering—but his stubbornness remained unshaken.

וַיִּקְרָ֨א פַרְעֹ֜ה לְמֹשֶׁ֣ה וּֽלְאַהֲרֹ֗ן וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הַעְתִּ֣ירוּ אֶל־יְהֹוָ֔ה וְיָסֵר֙ הַֽצְפַרְדְּעִ֔ים מִמֶּ֖נִּי וּמֵֽעַמִּ֑י וַאֲשַׁלְּחָה֙ אֶת־הָעָ֔ם וְיִזְבְּח֖וּ לַיהֹוָֽה׃

Then Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, “Plead with יהוה to remove the frogs from me and my people, and I will let the people go to sacrifice to Hashem .”

Sometimes he would offer unrestricted freedom, only to renege when the plagues ceased. Never, except on one occasion, did Pharaoh admit that G-d was correct and he was corrupt.

That exception was the plague of hail. In fact, the plague of hail was so powerful that evenHashem Himself categorized it in a unique way. Moshe quoted Hashem to Pharaoh

כִּ֣י ׀ בַּפַּ֣עַם הַזֹּ֗את אֲנִ֨י שֹׁלֵ֜חַ אֶת־כׇּל־מַגֵּפֹתַי֙ אֶֽל־לִבְּךָ֔ וּבַעֲבָדֶ֖יךָ וּבְעַמֶּ֑ךָ בַּעֲב֣וּר תֵּדַ֔ע כִּ֛י אֵ֥ין כָּמֹ֖נִי בְּכׇל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃

For this time I will send all My plagues upon your person, and your courtiers, and your people, in order that you may know that there is none like Me in all the world.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.9.14

Why did Hashem consider the hail a more powerful act than His turning water into blood, or delivering pestilence, or wild animals or frogs? 

True, the hail did miraculously contain a fire ensconced in the ice, but all the plagues had miraculous attributes to them. Turning the Nile into blood is not an everyday occurrence either! What characteristic did the hail have to label it “all my plagues?”

Even more troubling is Pharaoh’s response. After the plague strikes Egypt 

וַיִּשְׁלַ֣ח פַּרְעֹ֗ה וַיִּקְרָא֙ לְמֹשֶׁ֣ה וּֽלְאַהֲרֹ֔ן וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֖ם חָטָ֣אתִי הַפָּ֑עַם יְהֹוָה֙ הַצַּדִּ֔יק וַאֲנִ֥י וְעַמִּ֖י הָרְשָׁעִֽים׃

Thereupon Pharaoh sent for Moses and Aaron and said to them, “I stand guilty this time. Hashem is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.9.27

What caused Pharaoh to utter those submissive words at this particular time? Didn’t he already see blood, frogs, pestilence, boils, wild animals, and a host of different miraculous misfortunes that befell his people? What was so special about the fire and ice that fell from the heavens that charred even this man’s cruel temper?

Being that I furnish hotels, Rabbi Mordechai Kamenetzky reminded me of an interesting story. 

one of America’s wealthiest and most prominent families during the Gilded Age, was infamous for its internal feuds. William had a contentious relationship with his aunt, Caroline. 

Caroline was the reigning queen of New York high society and fiercely protective of her social standing. She maintained the famous “Four Hundred”—a list of New York’s elite families, which she deemed the only ones worth associating with. William’s father, John, was snubbed by Caroline and excluded from her inner circle, which deeply offended William. This feud sowed the seeds of bitterness between William and Caroline.

In 1890, William inherited over 100 million dollars, his father’s vast fortune, becoming one of the wealthiest men in America. However, his disdain for Caroline and his general frustration with American society led him to relocate to England, where he became a British citizen and later a peer, earning the title Viscount.

Before leaving New York, William sought a way to spite his aunt. He decided to demolish his family mansion, which stood next to Caroline’s grand residence on Fifth Avenue, and replace it with something that would disrupt her genteel lifestyle.

In 1893, William built a Hotel on the site of his former mansion. It was a luxurious, 13-story hotel, towering over Caroline’s home at 350 Fifth Avenue. It had 530 rooms, 350 baths, and a whopping 970 employees. The Hotel catered to the new wealthy elite—industrialists and financiers whom Caroline often dismissed as vulgar “new money.”

The hotel was seen as a deliberate affront to Caroline, whose home was now overshadowed by the bustling activity of a high-end hotel. It was an audacious move, as Fifth Avenue was still a residential area at the time.

Caroline, never one to back down, responded by encouraging her son, John(William’s cousin), to build his own rival hotel. In 1897, John constructed a Hotel, an equally opulent structure, right next to the cousins. The two buildings stood side by side, separated only by a narrow alleyway, symbolizing the bitter divide between the two branches of the family.

Realizing the potential for profit, Williams manager brought the two feuding cousins together and they eventually decided to “bury the hatchet”—or as some say, replace it with a hyphen. 

They merged their hotels, connecting them with a grand corridor known as “Peacock Alley.” 

The combined hotel, renamed after William Waldorf and Caroline Astor as the Waldorf-Astoria, opened in 1897 and became one of the most luxurious accommodations in the world setting new standards for hospitality, offering unprecedented amenities such as electric lighting, private bathrooms, and telephones in every room. It quickly became a symbol of wealth and sophistication, attracting elite guests, including U.S. presidents, royalty, and celebrities.

• The original Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was eventually demolished in 1929 to make way for the construction of the Empire State Building.

• A new Waldorf-Astoria was built on Park Avenue in 1931, continuing the legacy of luxury and innovation.

Today there are luxurious Waldorf Astoria hotels throughout the world. 

The rabbi noted, There are many opposing forces in the world. However, when they work in tandem, they are the most powerful force possible. 

During this plague, fire and ice, two opposing forces in the world of nature disregarded their differences all in the service of the Supreme Commander. When Hashem announced that He will send all of His plagues, he was referring to conflicting forces that work harmoniously. After that, even Pharaoh was sensible enough, albeit for a short moment, to see his frailty and delusions. 

When even the worst of men see fire and ice dance together on one mission, there is nothing he can do but watch in amazement and admit, “Hashem is the righteous one and I and my people are the wicked ones.” 

When opposing opinions gather for one objective – to do the will of Hashem – they are as unstoppable as the hail that brought Pharaoh to his knees.

Based on Parsha Parables of my dear friend Rabbi Mordechai Kamenetzky 

 The interaction between man
and the **Nachash (serpent)** in the Garden of Eden is a pivotal moment in the
Torah that introduces confusion and inconsistency into the world. Here's how it
unfolds: 

### **The Temptation** 

In Genesis 3, the Nachash
tempts Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, despite God's
command not to do so. The Nachash convinces Eve that eating the fruit will make
her like God, knowing good and evil. 

### **The Consequences** 

When Eve eats the fruit and
gives some to Adam, they both become aware of their nakedness and feel shame.
This marks the introduction of **sin and moral confusion** into the world.
Before this event, Adam and Eve lived in a state of innocence and clarity. The yetzer
hara (evil inclination) now becomes internalized.  

The Talmud and Midrash
elaborate on the Nachash's role in introducing confusion. The **yetzer hara**
is seen as a force that causes people to rationalize sinful behavior,
convincing them that what is wrong is actually right. This inner conflict leads
to inconsistency in thoughts and actions. 

In Kabbalistic thought, the
Nachash represents a cosmic force of chaos and deception. By tempting Eve, the
Nachash brings about a spiritual dissonance that affects all of humanity,
leading to a struggle between good and evil within each person. 

I would like to begin where
we left of last week: 

Chava's decision to eat from
the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, after being tempted by the Nachash,
introduces confusion and moral ambiguity into the world. This act represents a
moment of weakness and inconsistency, as she wavers from God's command. 

- **Consequences**: Her
actions lead to the introduction of sin and the yetzer hara (evil inclination)
into humanity, resulting in a lasting struggle between good and evil within
each person. 

The rabbis tell us that this
spiritual impurity of the Nachash became a part of her first child Kayin and
extends into his prodigy.  

As we read last week, The
midwives, Shifrah and Puah, defied Pharaoh's order to kill the Hebrew newborns,
showing unwavering commitment to preserving life. Similarly, Batya, Pharaoh's
daughter, defied her father's decree by rescuing and raising Moses, a Hebrew
baby. 

- **Steadfastness**: These
women exemplified moral clarity and steadfastness, choosing to act according to
their principles, even in the face of potential consequences. Their actions
were guided by a strong sense of justice and compassion. 

We also mentioned that we see
this moral clarity embodied in Moshe in the first three stories  

The Egyptian beating Datan 

Datan and Aviram fighting 

Rescuing the daughters of
Yitro  

While Chava's actions brought
about moral confusion and an internal struggle, the actions of the midwives and
Batya brought about clarity and righteousness. They acted with unwavering
commitment to their beliefs, showcasing the power of steadfastness. 

Chava's story reminds us of
the potential consequences of wavering from moral clarity and succumbing to
temptation. It highlights the importance of maintaining steadfastness in our
faith and actions. 

These contrasting narratives
offer valuable lessons on the significance of consistency, moral clarity, and
steadfastness in our lives. 

At the beginning of this
month, we delved into the kavanot, the thoughts one should have transitioning
from Kislev to this dark and cold month of Tevet and in attempting to bring the
light of Hanukah into the darkness of Esav’s month and into our lives 

This Shabbat we will announce
Rosh Hodesh Shevat. Shevat is a very powerful month. Shevat is when we
commemorate the Yahrzeit of my Rabbi and my father. Three of my dad’s siblings
passed away in Shevat along with my uncle Hymie Gindi. But Shevat is powerful
as a transition for the Jewish people. Rosh Hodesh is next Thursday.  

I recall that we used to say
just as Tu BeAb breaks the judgement of the summer and brings us into the
Holiday season, the same of Rosh Hodesh Shevat which breaks the din of the
winter and brings us into the Pesach Holiday season with something every two
weeks until summer  

RH 

Tu Bishvat 

Rosh Hodesh 

Purim or Purim Kattan in leap
year  

RH 

Pesach  

Shevii 

RH 

Lag BaOmer  

We can add Yom HaAtzmaut and  

Yom Yerushalayim  

RH 

And Shavuot through 13th 

Understand Rosh Chodesh
Shevat 

We have discussed many times
that the Kavana  

The thought one must have in
MUSAF  

Each month different  

Crucial  

Mekadesh Yisrael ve Rashai
Chodashim 

Must visualize Hashems name 

And each month we visualize a
bit differently  

We know the name of Hashem as
written is four letters 

A Yud and a Heh and a Vav and
a Heh  

We can make 12 different
permutations of those letters and there is one for each month  

We visualize and relate each
to a verse  

So for Shevat 

To have in mind tomorrow when
we say the blessing 

We must see the name of
Hashem as  

But Heh Yud Vav Heh  

הָ יְ ו ה 

reversing the Yud and the Heh  

SEE VAYIKRA 27 for the source of the verse  

לג לֹא יְבַקֵּר
בֵּין-טוֹב לָרַע, וְלֹא יְמִירֶנּוּ; וְאִם-הָמֵר יְמִירֶנּוּ, וְהָיָה-הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה-קֹּדֶשׁ לֹא יִגָּאֵל. 

33. He
shall not inspect [a tithed animal] for a good or a bad one, nor shall he offer
a substitute for it. And if he does replace it, then [both] that one and its
replacement are holy; it cannot be redeemed. 

Someone makes donation  

Take sacrifice 

Then changes mind  

Maybe he has a better animal
to give or maybe he gets cheap and wants to switch it for one he wants to get
rid of 

Two sins 

Double lashes 

Because changed 

What’s the big deal 

We can understand if inferior
but what if he just wants to do better and give something better  

Let me switch  

Whats the big deal 

Not allowed to 

Why not 

If you do 

Both old and new holy 

Both are given away  

You get double lashes 

Why? 

Decided to be better Jew and
punished? 

No – not for that 

Problem is  

You changed your mind  

What’s so bad about changing
your mind 

How does it relate to this
month and these especially these parshiot of Shovevim  

This week we read VaErah  

This Perasha is really a
continuation of last week’s perasha 

וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָֽה׃

God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am יהוה.

https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.6.2

וידבר אלהים וגו'. צריך לדעת מה דיבר אלהים. גם הודעת אני ה' אחר שכבר אמר לו למעלה זכרון השם ואמר לו (ג טו) זה שמי לעלם.

 וידבר אלוקים אל משה, G'd spoke sternly to Moses, etc. Why did the Torah not tell us what G'd said? Besides, why did G'd refer to Himself as י־ה־ו־ה after He had already told Moses who He was in 3,15? At that time He had added: 'this is My name forever!' Why then did He have to tell Moses at this juncture אני ה׳?

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.1

אכן להיות שדיבר משה לפני אל נורא ואיום דברים שאינם מהמוסר ובפרט לפני מלך גדול, ודבר זה נמשך לצד שהראה לו פנים צוחקות פנים שמחות הרשומים בשם הוי'ה, לזה הראהו ה' פנים של מורא שהם בחינת הדין הרשומים בשם אלהים, והוא אומרו וידבר אלהים אל משה. ושיעור אומרו וידבר אלהים הוא כי הכתוב יגיד שהיה ה' מדבר כל הדברים האמורים בפרשה בבחינת שם אלהים שהם פנים המפחידים ומרעידים את הנדבר אליו.

Inasmuch as Moses had spoken in an unseemly manner in the presence of the Almighty, something that he never would have dared to do if G'd had not previously shown him His smiling face as represented by the attribute י־ה־ו־ה, G'd had to show him a different attribute i.e. אלוקים before answering him in detail. The Torah introduces this chapter (from verse 2) by letting us know that G'd spoke in His capacity as the attribute of Justice, i.e. אלוקים.

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.2

ואומרו ויאמר אליו אני ה' פירוש על דרך אומרם (ברכות ל':) במקום גילה שם תהא רעדה, נתכוון לומר לו כי הגם כי הראהו מדת הרחמים בדברו עמו לא מפני זה יסיר מסוה הפחד וידבר בלא מורא מלכות שמים, וזה לך האות כי ה' הוא האלהים שהרי הוא מדבר עמו בפנים הנוראים והבן:

When G'd appears to make a turnabout at the end of our verse and refers to Himself as the attribute of Mercy this is in line with the principle expressed in Berachot 30 that 'wherever there is גלה, joy in one's relationship with G'd, there must be רעדה, fear or dread, simultaneously.' Although G'd had previously displayed His attribute of Mercy this did not mean that man should not display an appropriate degree of trepidation when facing Him.

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.3

עוד ירצה על זה הדרך וידבר אלהים פי' דבר אתו משפט ומה הוא המשפט כי טענו טענה הנשמעת ואמר אני ה' פי' איך אתה מייחס לי מדה רעה ב'מ ותאמר אלי למה הרעתה והלא אני ה' ומדתי מדת החסד והרחמים וטוב אני לכל, וכמו שכן אמר הנביא (איכה ג') מפי עליון לא תצא הרעות כי אם הטובות, ומה שאמר שם והטוב הוא על בחינת פרט טוב אחד שהוא להיות אדם צדיק לא יגזור ה' דבר כן אלא ביד כל אדם לבחור בטוב. ותמצא שבכל פעם שיזכיר ה' זכרון תשלום הרע לעושי רשעה ידקדק לומר (ש'א כד) כי מרשעים יצא רשע וכן הוא אומר (ידמי' ב') תיסרך רעתך, (ישעי' ס'ד) ותמוגנו ביד עונינו, (איוב ח׳:ד׳) וישלחם ביד פשעם, מה שאין כן הטוב (תהלים פ'ה) ה' יתן הטוב, (שם קמ'ה) טוב ה' לכל, ומעתה לו יהיה שעברה צרה על ישראל מי יודע אם היו חייבין כן ועונם גרם או לצד הקודם לתשלום גזירת העינוי, או לצד קצת מהם שלא האמינו כראוי וכדומה, והנך רואה כי הזקנים חזרו לאחוריהם ולא הלכו עם משה לפני פרעה כאומרם ז'ל (שמו'ר פ'ה) והקפיד ה' עליהם באופן כי מהם יצא להם דבר זה, ואיך הוציא מפיו דברים נכרים לומר למה הרעתה.

Our verse may also be understood thus: וידבר אלוקים, G'd spoke to Moses on matters of justice. Since G'd wanted Moses to know that his argument had been heard and considered, He added: אני השם. The use of this attribute at this juncture is equivalent to G'd asking Moses: 'how could you attribute to Me a negative virtue such as being the originator of harm befalling My people? My outstanding characteristic is the sttribute of חסד, love, mercy, etc.' Even the prophet Jeremiah has already made it plain that evil never originates with G'd (compare Lamentations 3,38: 'Evil does not originate from G'd (but only Good).' The letter ו in front of the word והטוב in the verse in Lamentations refers to the fact that G'd does not interfere if a person wants to be good or evil. These decisions are up to each individual. It is up to man to choose good rather than evil. When you study the Bible you will find that whenever G'd mentions that the wicked are being remembered when they receive their deserts, the Bible underlines that the evil they are being punished for is of their own making. Compare in this respect Samuel I 24,13: 'Wicked deeds come from wicked men.' Jeremiah 2,19: 'Your evil deeds will cause you to be disciplined.' Isaiah 64,6: 'You have made us melt because of our iniquities.' There are many more similar quotations in the Bible. In view of this what gave Moses the right to assume that the Israelites' additional hardships were not due to something they had done themselves? It is also possible that the Israelites had not yet been adequately punished for whatever they had been guilty of prior to Moses' appointment. Perhaps some of the people had even become guilty of lack of faith after Moses had accredited himself as their prophet and leader. Your best proof that this was possible is the fact that the elders who set out to face Pharaoh together with Moses and Aaron dropped out on the way. Perhaps G'd would not have allowed Pharaoh to make the decree of withholding straw if the elders had not abandoned Moses on the way? At any rate Moses had been too quick to describe what happened to the people as being G'd's fault.

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.4

עוד ירצה על זה הדרך להיות שאמר משה למה הרעתה למה שלחתני באה התשובה, כנגד למה הרעתה דבר אתו קשות שדיבר לפני אלהיו בלא דרך כבוד והעלים הכתוב הדברים לצד כבודו של משה, או אפשר שאמר לו שיעמידנו במשפט על זה בעת משפט, וכנגד למה שלחתני השיב ואמר אליו אני ה' פי' רחמן אני לזה לא יכולתי לסבול ראות ישראל בצער עד עת קץ והקדמתי לשולחך קודם הגעת הקץ להקל מעל ישראל הצרה של הגלות. ותשובה זו אינה צודקת אלא אחר שהקדים לומר לו עתה תראה כי תיכף ומיד יפליא פלא בפרעה מכות נפלאות ותיכף נסתלק השעבוד.

Perhaps G'd simply responded to the two questions Moses had raised in their proper order. G'd responded harshly to the question: 'Why have You let evil happen to the people? Moses' question/accusation had been inappropriate. The Torah was so concerned about Moses' honour that it did not spell out the fact that he had spoken in an inadmissible fashion. G'd responded kindly to Moses' question: 'Why have You sent me?' G'd may even have hinted that in due course Moses would have to answer for his question and this is why the details are not spelled out here. When G'd reverted to 'I am the merciful G'd,' this was the answer to 'Why have You sent me?' G'd meant that He had sent Moses because He could not longer sit idly by when His people were being tortured, and this is why He had decided to advance the date when they would cease to suffer by sending Moses now so that he could orchestrate a string of plagues with which G'd would hit the Egyptians. Moses would begin to see immediately how at least the slave labour would come to an end.

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.5

עוד ירצה על דרך אומרם ז'ל (במד'ר פ'ג) בפסוק מוציא אסירים בכושרות בכי למצרים ושירות לישראל והם ב' מדות מדת הדין ומדת רחמים, ולזה אמר הכתוב כנגד מה שהכין לדון את המצריים אמר וידבר אלהים שהוא בחי' הדין, וכנגד מה שרצה להטיב לישראל אמר ויאמר אליו אני ה'. ובכלל זה רמז לו כי המכות הגדולות המוכנות לבא על המצריים הגם שיבואו דרך כלל על כל מצרים וישראל נתונים נתונים המה בתוכם ודבר ידוע כי אין המשחית מבחין ומחבל הכל ובפרט בבא החשך הדעת נותנת כי בודאי כי יחשיך דרך כלל לכל יושבי ארץ, לזה אמר כי ערך הדינים הרמוזים בשם אלהים אשר הכין ה' להשקות את המצריים תשמש מדת הרחמים לערך ישראל, והוא אומרו אני ה'. וכן הוא אומר (לקמן כג) ולכל בני ישראל היה אור, (ט ו) וממקנה ישראל לא מת וגו'.

Perhaps we can understand G'd manifesting Himself simultaneously as the attribute of Justice and the attribute of Mercy through reference to Bamidbar Rabbah 3,6 where we find a discussion about what merit led to the Exodus of the Jewish people from Egypt. One of the sages quotes Psalms 68,7 מוציא אסירים בכושרות to mean that the word כושרות is a combined form of בכי, weeping, and שיר song. Accordingly, two attributes of G'd were at work during the Exodus. G'd applied His attribute of Justice to the Egyptians, hence weeping, whereas He applied His attribute of Mercy to the Israelites, hence song. In our verse we find a parallel to that when G'd is introduced as אלוקים i.e. His attitude to the Egyptians, and immediately afterwards as י־ה־ו־ה i.e. as His attitude to the Jews. We have a principle that once G'd allows the destructive forces free reign, those forces do not distinguish between the guilty and the innocent. This principle is especially apparent when the innocent and the guity dwell in close proximity to one another, something that was certainly the case with Jews and Egyptians at that time. Moses would have assumed that when G'd would bring the plagues on the Egyptians there would be a negative fallout also on the Israelites. This is why G'd hinted already at this time that whereas He would act as אלוקים against the Egyptians, He would at one and the same time act as השם towards the Jews so that they would not suffer from any of these plagues. All of this is spelled out later in greater detail such as that even in the midst of such a plague as darkness no darkness engulfed a single Jew (compare Exodus 10,23). The same occurred in 9,6 during the plague of pestilence when not a single one of the animals owned by Jews died.

https://www.sefaria.org/Or_HaChaim_on_Exodus.6.2.6

Moses’ reaction at the end of Parshat Shemot (Exodus 5:22-23) when he questions God, saying, “Why have You done evil to this people? Why did You send me?” is a profound and complex moment in the Torah.

Biblical Context:

1. Moses’ Complaint (Exodus 5:22-23):

After Pharaoh increases the Israelites’ workload in response to Moses’ demand, Moses appears disillusioned. Despite being told by God that Pharaoh would refuse and that redemption would be a process (Exodus 3:19-20), Moses struggles with the immediate suffering of the people.

2. God’s Response (Exodus 6:1):

God reassures Moses, saying, “Now you will see what I shall do to Pharaoh,” indicating that Moses does not yet fully grasp the plan or the nature of God’s power.

Rabbinic Interpretations:

1. Moses Is Punished for His Words:

• Midrash Shemot Rabbah 5:22: The Midrash notes that Moses was punished for questioning God. His punishment came later when he was barred from entering the Land of Israel. This is connected to his striking the rock in Numbers 20:12, which the Midrash links back to his earlier display of doubt.

• Rashi (Exodus 5:22): Rashi comments that Moses spoke harshly and inappropriately, as if accusing God of doing wrong.

Lesson: Even prophets like Moses, who are deeply faithful, can falter when overwhelmed by the suffering they witness. His punishment demonstrates the high standard to which God holds His chosen leaders.

As we begin VaEra 

The Midrash comments and relates Moses thinking process to that of king Solomon in thinking that things did not apply to him. 

Remember we have said 

למשה

שלמה

Same 

Connection 

Commentary based on Artscroll 

Solomon's Stumble 

Solomon reasoned that since he was blessed with superior wisdom, he could overcome the normal tendency for his many wives to sway him. What was his miscalculation?

As a preface, we must clarify Solomon's motivation for marrying so many women. 

R' Nassan Tzvi Finkel, the Alter of Slabodka (Ohr Tzafun Il, P. 18ff), demonstrates that Solomon's motivation was noble. He wanted to draw the nations of the world close to God and to sanctify His Name (see Yalkut Shimoni, Proverbs, Ch. 31). Solomon sought to marry the daughters of powerful kings, extending his influence over their kingdoms. He would use his influence to convince them to forsake their idolatrous practices and to accept the True God. 

We see the strong influence that Solomon had on the queen of Sheba, who visited the king and was amazed by his remarkable wisdom. Before leaving she said to him (I Kings 10:9), 'May HASHEM, your God, be blessed, Who has chosen you.' 

This was the impact he had on a visitor to the palace. The influence he held over his wives who were always present in the palace was certainly much greater. 

In Kabbalistic terms, Solomon sought to draw forth the sparks of holiness that lay dormant in the nations (see Shem MiShmuel, Exodus, p. 65). 

What was Solomon's error?

The Alter posits that before Solomon decided that the prohibition against taking many wives did not apply to him, he surely performed an unbiased evaluation, concluding that he was not at risk for being led astray by his wives. And since he had a compelling reason to take so many wives — to disseminate knowledge of God throughout the world — Solomon reasoned that it was his duty to do so. What he failed to consider sufficiently, though, were the implications of the Torah's disclosure of the reason for this prohibition. The Torah rarely does so.

Why, then, did it do so here? It is to emphasize that the danger warned of by this disclosure is exceedingly great — so great that no one can ever be confident that he is beyond such danger. In failing to make this analysis of the Torah's disclosure, Solomon erred.

The Dubno Maggid (Ohel Yaakov, Noach, s.v. NX U V71221) views Solomon's error differently. The wise Solomon's self-evaluation was indeed accurate. His wisdom and character were indeed powerful enough to withstand the harmful influence of many wives. He did not miscalculate on that score. His error, rather, was in thinking that the reason stated by the Torah - and inapplicable to him — was the sole reason for this prohibition.

Generally speaking, there are two categories of mitzvos: mishpatim, ordinances, or logical commandments; and chukim, decrees

- commandments whose reasons we are unable to fathom. 

The Dubno Maggid demonstrates, however, that even those mitzvos of the former category, which are readily explained, still possess an aspect of

'decree'; they must be observed even when their reasons do not apply. Indeed, many of the details of these 'rational' laws seem not to follow from the law's reason. This is because apart from the obvious reason for a law, there are hidden reasons of which we are unaware.

Therefore, although the reason revealed by the Torah for prohibiting a king from taking many wives did not, indeed, apply to Solomon, the prohibition still remained in full force. For, like all other mitzvos, there are other reasons for the mitzvah to which we are not privy.

That Solomon was ultimately led astray by his wives was a punishment for his having assumed that he could disregard this Torah prohibtion because the revealed reason was not applicable to him.

Returning to Moses 

2. Moses’ Reaction as a Test of Empathy:

• Rabbi Yehudah Leib Alter (Sfat Emet): The Sfat Emet interprets Moses’ complaint as an expression of his profound empathy for the suffering of the Israelites. Though God had told him Pharaoh would resist, seeing the pain firsthand was overwhelming. This teaches that a true leader must feel the suffering of their people deeply, even if they cannot yet understand the divine plan.

• Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch: Hirsch emphasizes that Moses’ reaction reflects his human limitations. God’s plan unfolds on a divine timeline, but Moses, as a human being, struggles with the immediate reality of suffering.

Lesson: Moses’ response reminds us that even great leaders are human and must balance faith in God with the emotional burden of witnessing suffering.

He said to Abram, 'Know with certainty that your children will be strangers in a land which is not theirs — they will serve them, and they will afflict

them — four hundred years.'

(Bereishis 15:13)

The 'Covenant Between the Pieces' between God and Avram demonstrated the power of offerings, brought with proper intent, to keep the Jewish people on the level at which they would deserve to retain control over Eretz Yisrael.

The climax of this covenant was God's announcement to Avram that, nonetheless, before his descendants would be able to enter the Land, they would first have to go through a purifying process of exile to bring them up to the necessary level. This would have three distinct stages, each one more difficult than the one before:

First, 'Your children will be strangers in a land which is not theirs,' without specific suffering, but subject to the whims of the local rulers. This stage would begin with Yitzchak Avinu himsel, who had strife with the Philistine king and his people, something that never happened to Avraham. The experience of being strangers would take away something of their sense of freedom, prompting them to turn their minds toward awareness of God, since they would perceive the limits of their own power.

Next, 'They will serve them.' After the deaths of the sons of Yaakov, the Jews in Egypt began to work for Pharaoh, first willingly as part of a general work tax imposed by the government, and afterward through coercion. Slavery would weaken their tendency to pursue material possessions as an end, and make them more spiritual in that aspect of their themselves.

The last stage would be, 'They

willaffict them,' this time phrased in terms of what the Egyptians would do to them, since it would be imposed on them involun-tarly. This suffering would help them to conquer the desire for physical pleasures, reaching the level of true sacrifice for God.

SEE MALBIM