Parashat Bo.

And the Lord said unto Moses go in unto Pharaoh. and warn him.

. means my setting (an infinitive of שית), so that the phrase, which literally means “for the sake of my setting these my signs”, denotes “that I may set”.

. means I HAVE MOCKED, as in, (Numbers 22:29) “Because thou hast mocked (התעללת) me”; (I Samuel 6:6) “Indeed, when he mocked (התעולל) them”, which, also, is said in reference to Egypt. It is not an expression denoting doing and action, for were this so it should have written עוללתי, similar to (Lamentations 1:22) “And do (עולל) unto them as thou hast done (עוללת) unto me”, and to (Lamentations 1:12) “which he has done (עולל) unto me”.

. Translate as the Targum: TO BE HUMBLED. It is of the same derivation as עני poor, so that the passage signifies, “thou refusest to be poor and lowly before Me”.

. means THE COLOUR OF THE GROUND.

And he. i. e. anyone who is looking, WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THE EARTH; it speaks in (uses) an elliptical expression.

לִרְאוֹת אֶת הָאָרֶץ. וְלָשׁוֹן קְצָרָה דִּבֵּר.

. means KNOWEST THOU NOT YET that Egypt has perished. (Cf. Rashi on Exodus 9:30.)

. [AND MOSES AND AARON] WERE BROUGHT BACK (The verb has a passive meaning [Hophal], not an active as the particle את before משה and אהרן might lead one to suppose), They were brought back by a messenger: they (Pharaoh’s servants) sent people after them and these brought them back to Pharaoh.

[may the Lord be with you] as i will let you and your little ones go. even though I were to let go also the flocks and herds as you have said.

. Understand this as the Targum takes it: See, the evil you are about to do wilt turn against yourself. I have heard a Midrashic explanation: There is a certain star the name of which is רעה “Evil”. Pharaoh said to them, “By my astrological art I see that star rising towards you in the wilderness whither you wish to proceed. It is an emblem of blood and slaughter”. Consequently, when Israel sinned by worshipping the calf and the Holy One, blessed be He, intended to slay them, Moses said in his prayer, (Exodus 32:12) “Wherefore should the Egyptians speak and say, He brought them forth together with רעה (i. e. under the influence of the star רעה); this is, indeed, what he (Pharaoh) has already said, “See, the ‘רעה’ is before you”. At once, “the Lord bethought Himself concerning ‘רעה’”, and He changed the blood of which this star was an emblem to the blood of the circumcision because indeed Joshua had them circumcised. This is the meaning of what is said, (Joshua 5:9). “This day have I rolled from off you the reproach of the Egyptians”, for they said to you. “We see blood impending over you in the wilderness. (Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 1:392; cf. also Rashi on Joshua 5:9.)

Not so. as you have said, to take the children with you, but 'לכו נא הגברים ועבדו את ה GO YE WHO ARE ADULT MEN AND SERVE THE LORD.

לְכוּ נָא הַגְּבָרִים וְעִבְדוּ אֶת ה'.

. means FOR THAT IS WHAT YE DID SEEK till now: let us sacrifice to our G-d, and it is not the custom for little children to offer sacrifice.

And he drove them out. This is an elliptical phrase and it does not expressly state who drove them out (i. e. the subject of the verb is omitted).

. means on account of the plague of locusts (the prefix ב signifies “on account of”).

The east wind. It was an east wind that brought the locusts because that came (blew) from the direction opposite to it (to Egypt), since Egypt was in the south-west, relative to Palestine, as it is explained in another place (Numbers 34:3).

Neither after them shall be such. That plague of locusts which happened during the days of Joel of which it is said, (Joel 2:2) “there hath not been ever the like”, which statement teaches us that it was more grievous than that in the days of Moses, was, however, caused by many species of locusts, together, those called ארבה and ילק and חסיל and גזם; but that which happened in the days of Moses consisted of only one species (the ארבה) and any ארבה like that there never was and never will be.

. means any green leaf (not “any herb”, since it speaks of the ירק of the trees); old French verdure.

. is A WEST WIND.

Into the red sea. I say that the Red Sea was, as to part of it, in the west opposite the whole southern side of Palestine, and was also eastward of the Land of Israel; therefore a west wind blew the locusts into the Red Sea which was in the opposite direction to the west of Egypt. Thus do we find mentioned regarding the boundaries of Palestine that it (the Red Sea) faces the east of Palestine, since it states, (Exodus 23:31) “[And I will set thy boundaries] from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines”, which means from east to west since the sea of the Philistines was in the west, as it is said of the Philistines, (Zephaniah 2:5) “the inhabitants of the sea-coast, the nation of the Cherethites (the Philistines)”.

There remained not one locust. not even those which they had salted, for they had salted some of them (Exodus Rabbah 13:7).

. signifies and it (the darkness mentioned in the preceding phrase, ויהי חשך) shall darken for them the natural darkness to a higher degree than the darkness of night: i. e. the darkness of night shall become even more black and dark.

. means as much as (is a contraction of) ויאמש (a Hiphil form of אמש, evening darkness). We have many words in which an א is omitted; since the sound of the א is not very marked, Scripture is not particular about omitting it. An example is: (Isaiah 13:20) “the Arabian לֹא יַהֵל there”, which is the same as לא יַאֲהֵל, shall not pitch his tent. Similar is, (II Samuel 22:40) “וַתַּזְרֵנִי with strength”, which is the same as וַתְּאַזְרֵנִי “And thou hast girded me” (cf. Psalms 30:12). Onkelos translated it in the sense of removing, from the same root as, (Joshua 1:8) “it shall not depart (ימוש)”, his rendering being, “[and there shall be darkness..] after the darkness of night has departed”, i. e. when the time approaches near to the light of day. But the statement does not then fit with the ו of וימש, because this word is written after ויהי חשך. A Midrashic statement explains it in the sense of (Deuteronomy 28:29) “groping (ממשש feeling) at noon-day”, so that the meaning would be that it was of such a double character and so thick that there was something tangible in it (Exodus Rabbah 14:1-3).

. denotes a triad of days. old French terziane; so, too, שבעת ימים everywhere it occurs denotes in old French a septaine of days (a period of seven days).

… שלשת ימים. there was darkness of gloom when no man saw another during those three days, and there was moreover another period of three days’ darkness twice as thick as this when no man rose from his place: one who happened to be sitting when this second period of darkness began was unable to rise, and one who was then standing was unable to sit down. And why did He bring darkness upon them? Because there were wicked people amongst the Israelites of that generation who had no desire to leave Egypt, and these died during the three days of darkness so that the Egyptians might not see their destruction and say, “These, (the Israelites) too have been stricken as we have”. And a further reason is that the Israelites searched (the darkness came just in order that they might do this) and saw their (the Egyptians’) jewels, and when they were leaving Egypt and asked them for their jewels, and they replied, “We have none at all in our possession”, they answered them, “I have seen it in your house and it is in such and such a place” (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 1; Exodus Rabbah 14:3).

. means SHALL REMAIN STANDING in its place.

Thou must give also. It will not be enough for you that our cattle will go with us but you will give also of yours.

. is the hoof of the foot; in old French plante.

. means WE DO NOT KNOW WITH WHAT WE MUST SERVE we do not know how heavy will be the service: perhaps He will ask more than we have in our possession.

. signifies RIGHTLY HAST THOU SPOKEN, and in its proper time hast thou spoken; for it is true that I will not see thy face again (Mekhilta; Exodus Rabbah 18:1; cf. also Onkelos).

. Onkelos renders it by גמירא, taking כלה in sense of כליל entirely; i. e. he will send all of you away.

Speak נא. The word נא is always an expression of entreaty. Here it means: I entreat you, admonish them about this which follows (impress this injunction upon them), so that righteous man, Abraham, may not say: the prophecy (Genesis 15:13) “they shall serve them, and they shall afflict them” He permitted to be fulfilled in them, but the promise (Genesis 15:14) “and afterwards they shall go forth with great substance” He did not bring to fulfilment for them (Berakhot 9a-b).

And Moses said, thus saith the Lord. Whilst he was still standing before Pharaoh this prophecy was spoken to him, because after he left him, he did not see his face again (Exodus Rabbah 18:1).

. means, WHEN THE NIGHT IS DIVIDED (i. e., when midnight arrives). כחצות is an infinitive with prefix, of similar form to, (1 Kings 18:36) בעלות, “when went up” and (Psalms 124:3) “when their wrath was kindled (בחרות)”. This is its literal meaning which fits in with the sense, for חצות is not a noun, being another form of חֵצִי (when the meaning would be about midnight I will go out etc.”, for this does not fit in with the sense, since G-d would certainly have stated exactly when He would do this). But our Rabbis took it in this sense and explained it as meaning “about the middle of the night”, and they asserted that Moses said כחצות “about midnight”, which implies near to it, either just before it or just after it, and he did not say בחצות “at midnight” (as G-d had bidden him say) because he feared lest Pharaoh’s astrologers might make a mistake as regards the time when the slaughter of the firstborn actually took place, thinking that it was a little earlier or later than midnight, and would say, in consequence of this error, “Moses is a liar!” (cf. Berakhot 4a).

Unto the firstborn of the captive. (these words are used in 12:29 instead of עד בכור השפחה “unto the firstborn of the handmaid” in this verse), Why were the captives smitten, for they had not enslaved the Israelites? In order that these might not say that their god had claimed satisfaction for the humiliation imposed upon them and had brought this punishment upon the Egyptians (cf. Mekhilta).

From the firstborn of Pharaoh unto the firstborn of the handmaid. All who were of less importance than the firstborn of Pharaoh and of more importance than the firstborn of the handmaid are included in this description. And why were the sons of the handmaids stricken? Because they, too, treated them (the Israelites) as slaves and rejoiced at their misery (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 7).

And all the firstborn of beasts. because they worshipped these as gods. When the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts punishment from a nation, He punishes their gods at the same time (Genesis Rabbah 96:5).

No dog shall חרץ his tongue. I say that it has the meaning of sharpening: “no dog shall whet his tongue”. So, too: (Joshua 10:21) “לא חרץ his tongue against any of the children of Israel”, i. e. “none whetted”; (II Samuel 5:24) “then תחרץ”, then thou shalt utter a sharp sound; (Isaiah 41:15) “a threshing-sledge חרוץ” i. e. sharp; (Proverbs 21:5) “the plans of a חרוץ”, of “an acute and sharp man”; (Proverbs 10:4) “the hand of the חרוצים maketh rich”, i. e. the hand of the acute, of sharp merchants.

. meant THAT HE MAKETH A DIFFERENCE.

And all thy servents shall come down [unto me]. He showed respect to the king, for as a matter of fact ultimately Pharaoh himself came down to him at night, (Exodus 12:31) “And he said, Arise, go out from the midst of my people”; but Moses did not at the outset say to him, “And thou shalt come down to me and shalt prostrate thyself”, out of respect for the king, (Exodus Rabbah 7:3)

. (lit., who are at thy feet), who go after (follow) thy counsel and ways.

And after that i will go out. with all my people, from thy land.

And he went out from Pharaoh. After he had concluded his words he went forth from his presence.

In fierceness of wrath. because he (Pharaoh) had said to him, (Exodus 10:28) “Do not again see my face.

So that my wonders may be multiplied. (more lit., so that my wonders may be many), referring not to one wonder alone (the slaying of the firstborn) but to the slaying of the firstborn, the division of the Red Sea and the overthrowing of the Egyptians in it.

And Moses and Aaron did. etc., It (Scripture) has already written this in the description of all the preceding wonders, and it repeats it here only in order to connect it with the chapter which comes after this (as giving a reason why the commands in the next chapter were given to Aaron as well as to Moses; cf. Rashi’s comment on the following verse).

And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron. Because Aaron had worked and toiled in performing the wonders just the same as Moses He paid him this honour at the first command by including him with Moses in the communication (Tanchuma Yahshan 2:3:8).

In the land of Egypt. This must have been outside the city! Or perhaps this is not so, but it was inside the city? Scripture however states, (Exodus 9:29) “When I leave the city [I will spread my hands (pray) unto the Lord]”. Now how was it in regard to prayer which is of light importance in comparison with a communication from G-d? He did not recite the prayer inside the city! Then, in the case of a divine communication which is of so weighty importance does it not follow all the more that this was also so!, And why, indeed, did He not converse with him inside the city? Because it was full of idols (Mekhilta).

. He showed him the moon in the first stage of its renewal, and He said to him, “The time when the moon renews itself thus, shall be unto you the beginning of the month”. (The translation therefore is: “This stage of renewal (חדש) shall be the moment of beginning the months”; cf. Mekhilta). But no Scriptural verse can lose its literal meaning, and He really spoke this in reference to the month Nisan: this month shall be the beginning in the order of counting the months, so that Iyar shall be called the second, Sivan the third.

This [stage of renewal]. Moses was in perplexity regarding the Molad of (the exact moment when begins) the new moon, how much of it must be visible before it is proper to consecrate it as new moon: He therefore pointed it out to him in the sky with the finger and said to him, “Behold it like this, and consecrate it” (i. e., when you see the moon in a stage of renewal similar to this which you now behold you may proclaim that a new month has begun). But how could He point it out to him, for did He not conserve with him only by day, as it is said, (Exodus 6:28) “And it came to pass on the day when the Lord spake [unto Moses]”; (Leviticus 7:38) “On the day when he commanded”; (Numbers 15:23) “From the day that the Lord commanded and henceforward”? But the explanation is: This chapter was spoken to him close to sunset and He pointed it out to him at nightfall (more lit., near darkness) (Mekhilta).

Speak unto all the congregation. But did Aaron speak? Has it not already been stated, (Exodus 7:2) “You (Moses) shall speak etc.”. But the explanation is: they paid respect one to the other, saying to each other, “Instruct me what to say”. and the divine communication in question issued from both of them, so that it was as though they were both speaking (Mekhilta).

. i. e. SPEAK to-day, on the first of the month, THAT ON THE TENTH OF THE MONTH they should take it (the lamb) (Mekhilta).

[on the tenth of] this [month]. As regards the paschal lamb sacrificed in Egypt it had to be taken from the flock on the tenth, but this did not apply to the paschal-lamb offered by future generations (Pesachim 96a).

A lamb for the house of their fathers. i. e. a lamb for one family (“family” here means the larger unit comprising the father or grandfather with his married sons and their families). Consequently, if they (the members of such a family) were numerous, one might think that they may take one lamb for all of them (irrespective of whether this would suffice to provide a piece as large as an olive, the minimum quantity, for each person)! Therefore Scripture states: שה לבית A LAMB FOR EACH HOUSEHOLD (Mekhilta).

. This means: if they are too few to be sufficient for one lamb, that they are unable to eat the whole of it, and it would therefore come under the category of נותר “left over”. ולקח הוא ושכנו וגו׳ THEN LET HIM AND HIS NEIGHBOUR TAKE etc., This is what these words and those that precede it imply in its literal sense, but there is also a derivation from it of a Halachic character, that the verse intends to teach that after they have counted themselves (formed themselves into a company) for it, they may reduce their number by withdrawing from it and may register themselves for a different lamb; but if they intend to withdraw and thereby reduce their number מהיות משה, they must reduce only whilst the lamb is still in being, whilst it is alive (מחיות משה = מהיות משה), and not after it has been slaughtered (Pesachim 89a; cf. Mekhilta).

. means ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER. Similar is, (Leviticus 27:23) “The number (מכסת) of thy valuation”.

[every man] according to his eating. every man who is fitted to eat the quantity prescribed by the Law; this excludes a sick person and an aged person who are unable to eat a portion the size of an olive (Mekhilta).

. means ye shall number yourselves, as the Targum renders it. (It is not to be translated: ye shall number others.)

Perfect. i. e. without blemish (Mekhilta).

Of the first year. the whole of its first year it is termed שנה בן, as much as to say, that it was born during this year (it does not mean that it is one year old, in its second year) (cf.Mekhilta).

. i. e. either from these (a lamb) or from these (a goat) (i. e. the ו of ומן does not signify “and”, but “or”); for a goat, also, is called שה, as it is said, (Deuteronomy 14:4) “the שה of the goats” (שה means the young animal, either of the sheep or of the goats) (cf. Mekhilta).

And it shall be in your keeping. (or watching), This expresses the idea of examining, and the text therefore implies that it requires examination against any blemish during the four days before slaughter (Pesachim 96a). And why did He order that it should be taken from the flock four days before its slaughter, something which He did not command in respect to the paschal-lamb that was offered by succeeding generations? Rabbi Mathia, the son of Cheresh, said, in answer: Behold, it (Scripture) says, (Ezekiel 16:8) “And I passed over thee (an allusion to G-d’s passing over the Israelites in Egypt) and looked upon thee, and behold, thy time was the time of love”, there had arrived the time to fulfil the oath which I had sworn to Abraham to redeem his children. They, however, possessed no divine commands in which to engage in order that they should merit to be redeemed, as it is said (Ezekiel 16:7) “thou wast naked and bare” (i. e. bare of all merit earned through the fulfilment of G-d’s commands). He therefore gave them two commands, relating respectively to the blood of the paschal-lamb and the blood of the circumcision, for that night they circumcised themselves, as it is said (Ezekiel 16:6) “[When I passed over thee] I saw thee wallowing in thy bloods (בְּדָמַיִךְ is plural)” i. e. in two kinds of blood. Further it states, (Zechariah 9:11) “As for thee, also, because of the blood of the covenant I released thy prisoners out of the pit wherin there is no water”. And yet another reply to this question is, that because they were sunk in idolatry and had no merit gained by the practice of a divine command, He said unto them, (v. 21) משכו “Draw”, withdraw your hands from idols; וקחו לכם צאן “and take unto yourselves a lamb” to fulfil a divine command (Mekhilta).

And they shall slaughter it. etc., But did they all slaughter it (one alone did this on behalf of the company formed to eat that particular lamb; cf. Chullin 29b)? But we derive from this statement the legal principle that a man’s agent is as himself (this is derived from the fact that although one alone slaughtered the lamb on behalf of many, Scripture still states: they shall slaughter it) (Mekhilta; Kiddushin 41b).

. it speaks here of קהל assembly, עדה congregation, ישראל Israel, whilst one of these terms alone would have sufficed; hence they (the Rabbis) said: the paschal-lambs of the congregation (a term used in contrast to that which was sacrificed by an individual on the 14th of the second month; cf. Numbers 9:9, 14) are to be slaughtered in three groups, one after the other, the first group entered and the doors of the court were closed, etc. as is to be found in the Talmud, Treatise Pesachim (64a).

At eventide. The period beginning at six hours (reckoning from six o’clock in the morning) and hence forward is called בין הערבים (Mekhilta), because the sun then inclines in the direction of the place of its setting to become darkened. The expression בין הערבים appears to me to denote those hours which are between the darkening of the day and the darkening of the night. The darkening of the day is at the beginning of the seventh hour in the day, from when the shadows of evening decline; and the darkening of the night is at the commencement of the night (this period is therefore from noon until the beginning of night). The word ערב is an expression for gloom and darkness, as in (Isaiah 24:11). “All joy is darkened".

And they shall take of the blood. This refers to the ritual reception of the blood. One might think that they must take it in the hand; therefore Scripture states, (v. 22) “[and ye shall dip it in the blood] which is in the basin (Mekhilta).

The side posts. These are the upright posts, one on this side of the entrance and one on that side.

The lintel. This is the upper post upon which the door beats (שוקף) when it is being closed; old French lintel. The expression שקף (from which משקוף lintel is derived) denotes beating, as may be seen from the Targum on, (Leviticus 26:36) “the sound of a leaf that is beaten (by another)”, which Onkelos renders by דשקיף; and from the Targum on, (Exodus 21:25) חַבּוּרָה “wheal” (a beaten spot), where משקופי is the rendering.

On the houses wherein they shall eat it. and not upon the lintel and the doorposts which are in the place used for storing straw or in the stalls of oxen, in which people do not live and eat. (Cf. Mekhilta and הגהות הגר״א thereon).

And they shall eat] the flesh. but not the sinews and bones (Mekhilta).

And unleavened bread with מררים. Every bitter herb is called מרור. He commanded them to eat something bitter as a reminder of: (Exodus 1:14) “And they made their lives bitter” (Pesachim 116b).

Do not eat of it half-done. flesh that is not roasted as much as it should be is called נא in the Arabic language (cf. Pesachim 41a).

Nor sodden at all. All this belongs to the prohibition, “Do not eat of it” (The text is, therefore, to be translated as above, and not: Do not eat of it half done, but boiled etc. The words אל תאכלו are to be supplied before בשל and כי אם צלי אש) (Pesachim 41b).

[boiled] in water. Whence may it be deduced that this prohibition extends to other liquids also? Because Scripture states here ובשל מבשל, “or boiled at all” (Pesachim 41a.).

But roast with fire. Above (in the preceding verse) Scripture promulgates the law regarding this in the form of an affirmative command; here it adds to that a negative command: Do not eat of it … except roasted by fire. (Consequently one who eats of it in in any manner except roasted by fire is liable to the punishment laid down for transgressing a negative command as well as to that for the infringement of a positive command) (Pesachim 41b).

Its head with its legs. One roasts it all in one, with its head and with its legs and with its inward parts, and one places its entrails inside it after having rinsed them (Pesachim 74a). The expression על קרבו, is like the expression, (Exodus 6:26) “על צבאותם”, which is the same as בצבאותם, “with their hosts”, which means, “just as they are” (every one of the Israelites). So, too, this phrase means: they shall roast the flesh just as it is, all its flesh, whole.

And that which remaineth of it until the morning. What does Scripture intend to teach by stating עד בקר a second time? It intends to add an earlier stage of morning to the stage of morning already mentioned: because the term morning usually signifies the period beginning with sun-rise, and Scripture here intends to advance the hour and forbid eating it even from the break of day. This is the explanation according to what the text really implies. And there is still another Halacha derived from it: it teaches that it is not to be burnt on the festival itself but on the following day, and this is how you must explain it: “[and ye shall not leave anything of it until the morning]”; והנתר ממנו “and as regards that which is left of it” unto that first morning (עד בקר), until the second morning shalt thou wait, and then shalt thou burn it (Mekhilta; Pesachim 83b; Shabbat 24b).

Your loins girded. i. e. prepared for the journey (Mekhilta).

. This is an expression denoting hurry and haste, similar to, (I Samuel 23:26) “And David made haste (נחפז) to get away”; (2 Kings 7:15) ”which the Arameans had cast away in their haste"

It is the passover of the Lord. The offering is called פסח in allusion to the springing and passing over, because the Holy One, blessed be He, passed over the houses of the Israelites in between the houses of the Egyptians and sprang from Egyptian to Egyptian, whilst the Israelite who was between them escaped. The words “And ye shall eat it in haste for it is a 'springing’-offering to the Lord” imply: Ye, therefore, do every act of sacrificial service connected with it (with the Paschal lamb) in honour of Heaven (G-d) by way of springing and leaping over (i. e. hastily), as a reminder of its name, which is called, the “springing”-offering. In old French, (Provencal) too, Pascua (the term for the Passover festival) signifies stepping over.

And i will pass. This is not to be taken literally, but is speaks of G-d as one speaks of a king who passes from place to place (Mekhilta) but in this case all were punished at a single passage and in one moment.

All the firstborn in the land of Egypt. also the first-born of other nations who happened then to be in Egypt. And whence may we deduce that the first-born of the Egyptians who happened to be in other countries also died? From what Scripture states: (Psalms 136:10) “To Him that smote the Egyptians in their first-born” (an unqualified statement) (Mekhilta).

From man to beast. He who first began the wrongdoing, from him began the punishment (Mekhilta).

And against all the gods of Egypt [will i execute judgements]. An idol of wood rotted, and one of metal melted and was poured out on the ground (cf. Mekhilta)).

I will execute judgements, i, the Lord. I, Myself, and not by means of a messenger (Pesikta Zotarta).

And the blood shall be unto you for a sign. it shall be to you for a sign, and not to others for a sign (Mekhilta). From this we may learn that they put the blood only inside their houses.

And when i see the blood. But surely everything is manifest to Him and He therefore did not need to look whether the blood had been put on the door-posts? But the meaning is: G-d says, I will set My eye (my attention) to take notice of the fact that you are engaged in the performance of My commands, then will I pass over you (Mekhilta).

. This signifies I WILL SPARE you; similar to this is, (Isaiah 31:5) “Sparing (פסוח) and delivering”. (This is the explanation of Menachem ben Seruk). But I say that wherever the root פסח occurs it is an expression for leaping and springing over, so that ופסחתי here denotes that He sprang from the houses of the Israelites when He reached them, without having entered them, to the houses of the Egyptians, for they (the Egyptians and the Israelites) dwelt one next to the other. Of a like import is, (1 Kings 18:21) “How long will ye leap (פוסחים) upon two twigs?” So, too, all פסחים lame people walk as though they were springing, and are therefore termed פסחים. This, too, is the meaning of, (Isaiah 31:5) פסוח והמליט “He springs over him and delivers him” from amongst those who are being killed.

And the infliction shall not be upon you. but it will be upon the Egyptians., In the case that an Egyptian was in an Israelite’s house one might think that he would escape! Therefore Scripture says: “and the infliction shall not be upon you”, but it shall be upon the Egyptians who happen to be in your houses! In the case that an Israelite was in an Egyptians house, I might understand from this that he would be smitten just the same as he (the Egyptian)! Therefore Scripture says, “and the affliction shall not be upon you”, wherever you may happen to be (Mekhilta).

[and this day shall be unto you] for a memorial. in future generations (i. e. in the future).

And ye shall celebrate it as a feast. Scripture states: the day that is to serve you as a memorial, that day thou shalt celebrate as a feast, but we have not yet heard which is the day that is to be a memorial; therefore Scripture says (Exodus 13:3) “Remember (זכור) this day in which ye went out” and this teaches us that the day of the Exodus itself is the day which is to be the memorial (זכרון). Now, on which day did they go forth? Scripture states, (Numbers 33:3) “On the morrow after the Passover-sacrifice they went forth”. Thus you must say that the day of the fifteenth of Nisan is that of the Feast, for on the night of the fifteenth (i. e. what we would term the night following the day of the fourteenth) they ate the Passover-sacrifice, and consequently on the next morning they went forth (Mekhilta).

. [YE SHALL CELEBRATE IT] FOR YOUR GENERATIONS etc., I might understand from this that it need be celebrated only for the minimum of a plurality of generations, viz., two; therefore Scripture goes on to state “an ordinance for ever shall ye celebrate it as feast” (Mekhilta).

. denotes a septaine (old French) of days.

Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread. But in another passage it slates: (Deuteronomy 16:8) “Six days shalt thou eat unleavened bread”! This teaches regarding the seventh day of the Passover that it is not obligatory to eat unleavened bread on it, but only this is required viz., that one should not eat leavened food. Whence may we derive that the other six days, too, are optinal as regards the eating of unleavened bread? From what Scripture states: “Six days [shalt thou eat unnleavened bread]”. For the following is a Rule by which the Torah may be expounded: Anything that is included in a general statement and goes out (i. e. Scripture singles it out) from this general statement for the purpose of teaching something, does not go out from it in order to teach something regarding itself alone but it goes out from it to teach something about everything that is included in the general statement. Now the seventh day is included in the general statement “Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread”, and in the text “Six days shall thou eat unleavened bread” it has left the general statement. How is it with the seventh day? It is optional as regards the eating of unleavened bread, (as explained in the earlier portion of this comment)! This, according to the above rule, applies also to everything that was included in the general statement i. e. to the whole seven days, and therefore the other six days are also optional in this respect! One might think that the first night of the Passover is also optional (since it is part of the first day when as we have just shown the eating of unleavened bread is optional), therefore Scripture states, (v. 18) “at evening ye shall eat unleavened bread” Scripture thus fixes it as obligatory for that night (Pesachim 120a).

Even the first day ye shall have put away leaven. This means on the eve of the festival ye shall put it away, and that day is termed “the first (הראשון) day” because it is immediately before the seven days: We find in another passage, too, that a thing which precedes another is termed ראשון, as in (Job. 15:7) “Wast thou born ראשון Adam”, i. e. wast thou born before Adam?, But perhaps the text it referring only to the first of the seven days (i. e. the word ראשון has its ordinary meaning of first, and leavened food must be removed on the first day of the Festival and not on the preceding day)! Scripture, however, states: (Exodus 34:25) “Thou shalt not offer together with leaven [the blood of my sacrifice]”, i. e. thou shalt not slaughter the Passover sacrifice whilst leavened bread is still existent (but the Passover sacrifice was slaughtered on the afternoon of the day before the first day of the Festival; consequently all leavened food must have been removed by the hour of slaughter)(Mekhilta; cf. Pesachim 5a).

[for whosoever eateth anything leavened..] that soul [shall be cut off]. if it eats unleavened bread when it is in its will (נפש) and with its full consciousness, this would exclude one who does so being under some external compulsion (force majeure) (cf. Mekhilta).

[that soul shall be cut off] from Israel. I might understand from this that he shall be cut off from Israel and that he will be able to betake himself to another nation! Scripture therefore states in another passage, (Leviticus 22:3) “[that soul shall be cut off] from my presence”, in every place that is My territory (i. e. everywhere) (Mekhilta).

. The word מקרא is an infinitive and the translation is, “And on the first day there shall be “a calling it holy”, which implies: call it holy in regard to eating and drinking and raiment (Mekhilta).

No work shall be done on them. even by the agency of others (cf. Mekhilta).

That alone. that and not such acts preliminary to it (to the preparation of food) as it was possible to do on the eve of the Festival (Beitzah 28b).

By every being. even by cattle. One might think that also food may be prepared for non-Israelites! Scripture however states, (in this verse) לכם (i. e. לכל נפש לכם) for every being that belongs to you (the responsibility for feeding which belongs to you) (Mekhilta).

And ye shall watch the unleavened bread. that it shall not reach the stage of becoming leavened; hence the Rabbis said, if it (the dough) is rising (a sign that the leavening process is setting in) she (the woman kneading the dough) polishes it with cold water (i. e. she slaps the dough with hands dipped in cold water). Rabbi Josiah said: Do not read “את המַּצּוֹת”, the unleavened bread, but את הַמִּצְוֹת “[ye shall watch] the commandements”, just as we may not cause the unleavened bread to become leavened by letting the dough remain in its raw state too long so we may not let the commandment become “leavened” by waiting too long before we perform it; but if it (a commandment) comes to your hand, perform it immediately (Mekhilta).

And ye shall guard this day. against work

Throughout your generations, an ordinance for ever. Because the expressions, “[throughout your] generations”, and “an ordinance for ever” have not been mentioned in connection with the prohibition of work but only in reference to the celebration of the Festival (v. 14), it is therefore repeated here in order that you should not say: the prohibition, (v. 16) “no work shall be done”, was not spoken for future generations but for that generation alone to whom the words were addressed.

Until the twenty-first day. Why is this stated? Has it not already been stated, (v. 15) “Seven days [shall ye eat unleavened bread]” (beginning on the fifteenth day, as Rashi shows in his comment on v. 14 and therefore terminating on the twenty-first)? The answer is: Since it is said in that verse, “[seven] days [shalt thou eat unleavened bread]”, we may ask whence do we derive that the prohibition of eating leavened bread extends also to the nights of these seven days? Scripture therefore states here, “[Ye shall eat unleavened bread] until the twenty-first-day in the evening” (Mekhilta).

No leaven shall be found in your houses. Whence may we derive that this applies also to the external properties which belong to you? From what Scripture states, (Exodus 13:7) “[Neither shall leaven be seen with thee] in all thy boundaries”. If this be so, why then need Scripture specify here “in your houses” (since this term is comprised in the more general term “in all thy boundaries”)? It is for the purpose of defining the latter term through the former. How is it the case of thy house? Everything contained in it is under thy control! So, too, the term “[leaven in all] your boundaries” means only such leaven as is in your boundaries and under your control, thereby excluding such leaven belonging to a non-Israelite as is deposited with an Israelite but for which he has accepted no responsibility (Mekhilta).

For whosoever eateth that which leaveneth. The purpose of this statement is to mention the punishment of excision for eating שאור (a synonym for מחמצת, which is something that causes the leavening process to set in, such as yeast etc., whilst חמץ denotes food which has become leavened). But has not Scripture already mentioned this punishment for eating leavened food (v. 15)? But the mention of this punishment is repeated here in connection with leaven מחמצת, in order that you should not argue as follows: For eating leavened food, a thing which is fitted to be eaten, it mentions this punishment, but if one eats leaven itself, which is something not fitted to be eaten, one should not be punished for it. If, however, it had mentioned the punishment for eating leaven but had not mentioned the punishment for eating leavened food, I might have said: For eating leaven, a thing which has the property of making other things leavened, it mentions the punishment, but if one eats leavened food, which is something that does not possess the property of making other things leavened, one should not be punished for it; therefore they are both mentioned (Mekhilta; cf. Beitzah 7b).

Whether he be a stranger or a native of the land. Because the miracle of the Exodus was performed for Israel it is necessary expressly to include the stranger who has become an Israelite in this command (Mekhilta).

That which leaveneth ye shall not eat. Here we have the prohibition regarding eating שאור (that which causes food to become leavened).

[ye shall not eat] anything that leaveneth. The use of the word כל, anything (even in the smallest degree), is intended to include food with which it (שאור) is mixed (Mekhilta).

In all your habitations shall ye eat unleavened bread. This statement is intended to teach that it (the unleavened bread which you must eat on the first night of Passover) must be fitted to be eaten in all your habitations, thus excluding leavened bread which forms “the second tithe” and the unleavened meal cakes brought with the thanksgiving offering (which might be eaten only within the walls of Jerusalem) (Mekhilta).

Draw out. He who has sheep let him draw one out from his own

Or take. and he who has no sheep let him purchase one in the market (Mekhilta).

[a lamb] according to your families. this corresponds to שה לבית אבות a lamb for the house of their fathers in verse 3.

Hyssop. a kind of herb which has thin stalks.

A bunch of hyssop. three stalks are called a bunch (cf. Shabbat 109b; Sukkah 13a).

. means WHICH IS IN THE VESSEL, as in (2 Kings 12:14) “basins (ספות) of silver.”

With the blood which is in the basin. Why does Scripture repeat this (אשר בסף) again? In order that you should not say that one dipping of the hyssop in the basin suffices for the three sprinklings, therefore it is again stated: “[you shall touch the lintel…] “with the blood that is in the basin”, to show that each separate sprinkling must be with the blood which is in the basin, for each touching of the lintel and doorposts there must be a separate dipping (Mekhilta).

And none of you shall go out. etc., This tells us that when once permission is given to the destroying angel to wound he makes no distinction between righteous and wicked (Mekhilta), and nighttime is the domain of the destroying agencies as it is said, (Psalms 104:20) “[Thou makest darkness and it is night], wherein all the beasts of the forest creep forth”.

. signifies AND HE WILL SPARE; and one can also explain it to mean, “and He will leap over them” (cf. Rashi on v. 13 and on Isaiah 30:5).

And he will not give the destroyer. He will not give him power to come in. The phrase is similar to (Genesis 31:9) “And G-d did not suffer him (נתנו, give him the power) to do me evil”.

And it shall come to pass when ye be come to the land. Scripture makes the observance of this service dependent upon their entrance into the land of Palestine (Mekhilta), and they were not under any obligation, when in the wilderness, to keep more than the one Passover which they kept in the second year after the Exodus (cf. Numbers 9:1, 5), and that, too, only in consequence of a special divine communication. (Cf. Rashi on Numbers 9:1 and כאשר דבר (תוס׳ קיד׳ ל"ז ע"ב ד"ה הואיל

According as he spake. And where did He say that He would give them that land? In the following verse: (Exodus 6:8) “And I will bring you into the land” (Mekhilta).

And the people bowed the head. in thanksgiving for the tidings of the approaching deliverance and for the promise of their coming into the land, and for the tidings regarding the children whom they would have (since v. 26 implies that they would be blessed with children).

And the children of Israel went and did. But did they really do this at once, was not all this spoken to them at the beginning of the month (cf. Rashi on v. 3) and they carried out the command only on the tenth and the fourteenth? But the explanation is: so soon as they had taken these duties upon themselves Scripture accounts it unto them as though they had already performed them (Mekhilta).

They went and did. Scripture enumerates their going also, to give them a reward for going and a reward for doing (Mekhilta).

[they did] as the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron. This is stated for the purpose of declaring Israel’s praise, that they did not omit a single matter of all the commandments of Moses and Aaron. And what is the meaning of כן עשו SO DID THEY? Moses and Aaron also did thus!(Mekhilta).

“and” the Lord. Wherever it is stated וה׳ “And the Lord” it signifies He and His celestial Court, because the prefix ו expresses an addition, just as one says, “Mr. So-and-so and Mr. So-and-so” (Genesis Rabbah 51:2; cf. Rashi on Genesis 19:24).

Smote all the firstborn. all: such, also, belonging to another people who happened to be in Egypt (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on v. 12).

. means FROM THE FIRSTBORN PHARAOH’S, Pharaoh too, was a firstborn, but he alone was allowed to remain of the firstborn; and regarding this it states, (Exodus 9:16) “[But for this cause I have maintained thee in life in order to show thee my power”, i. e. to show thee my power at the Read Sea (cf. Mekhilta).

Unto the firstborn of the captive. because they rejoiced at the misfortune of the Israelites (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 7); and a further reason why they were slain is that they should not say, if they remained alive, it was our god who brought punishment upon our oppressors, the Egyptians (Mekhilta) The firstborn of the handmaid, threatened with death in 40:5 but not mentioned here as having been slain, is included in those stated here to have been slain since it enumerates here (i. e. the terms used here are intended to include everyone) from the most important amongst all of them to the least important, and the firstborn of the handmaid as belonging to the Egyptian people, is certainly more important than the firstborn of the captive (cf. Rashi on 11:6).

And Pharaoh arose. from his bed

At night. and not, as is the way of kings, at three hours in the day (9 o’clock in the morning) (Mekhilta; cf. Berakhot 9b).

He. first, and afterwards עבדיו HIS SERVANTS, this informs us that he went round to the houses of his servants and made them get up (Mekhilta).

For there was not a house where there was not one dead. If there was a firstborn there, he died: if there was no firstborn there, then the chief person in the house died because the chief person in the house is called בכור, as it is said, (Psalms 89:28) “I also will appoint him to be a בכור, [the highest of the kings of the earth]” (Mekhilta DeRashbi 12:30; cf. Rashi on 4:22; Pesachim Rabbah, Midr. Vajosha). Another explanation is: the Egyptian women were unfaithful to their husbands and bore children from young men, unmarried, and thus they (the Egyptian men) had many firstborn sons sometimes there were five to one woman, each being the firstborn to his own father (thus there might well be no house in which there was not a firstborn) (cf. Mekhilta).

And he called for Moses and Aaron by night. This tells us that he went round to the entrances leading into the city (i. e. to each different district) crying out, “Where does Moses reside? Where does Aaron reside?” (Mekhilta).

Both ye. the men

And the children of Israel. the little ones (i. e. בני must be understood literally).

And go, serve the Lord, as ye have said. everything shall be as you have said and not as I have said: annulled is what I have said, (5:2) “I will not let you go” (“Arise, go out”); annulled is, (10:8) “who are they that shall go?” (“go, both you and the children of Israel”); annulled is, (10:24) “but your flocks and herds must remain” (“Take also your flocks and herds”) (cf. Mekhilta).

Take also your flocks and herds. And what is the force of כאשר דברתם AS YE HAVE SPOKEN? It is an allusion to (10:25) “Thou, also, must give into our hands sacrifices and burnt offerings”, it means: take of my cattle also even as ye said.

And bless me also. Pray on my behalf that I should not die because I am a firstborn (cf. Targum Jonathan on Exodus 12:32 and Mekhilta).

We are all dead men. They said, Not according to Moses’ decree is this what has happened for he said (10:5) “And every firstborn shall die”, and here all the ordinary people are dead, five or ten in one house (Mekhilta).

Before it was leavened. The Egyptians would not allow them to stay long enough for the dough to become leavened.

. (from the root שאר “to be left over”) denotes the leavings (what was left) of the unleavened bread and bitter herbs (Mekhilta).

Upon their shoulder. Although they took many cattle with them yet they bore this upon their shoulders because the commands of G-d were so dear unto them (Mekhilta).

. [THEY DID] ACCORDING TO THE WORD OF MOSES which he had spoken to them in Egypt, viz., (Exodus 11:2) “And let every man ask his fellow…”

And garments. These were even more valued by them than the silver and than the gold: the later a thing is mentioned in the text the more valued it is (cf. Mekhilta) (i. e. the fact that silver is mentioned before gold shows that the text is mentioning the objects in the ascending scale of value and consequently the garments, as being mentioned last, must have been most valued by them).

. lit., AND THEY HANDED THEM OVER, Even what they did not ask of them did they give to them: “You say “one”, take “two”, but only go!” (Mekhilta).

. The Targum translates this by ורוקינו, AND THEY EMPTIED OUT.

From rameses to succoth. These were distant from one another 120 miles and yet they reached there in one moment, as it is said, (Exodus 19:4) “and I carried you as on eagles’ wings” (cf. Mekhilta and Rashi on Exodus 19:4).

Adult males. from twenty years old and upwards (Shir HaShirim Rabbah 3:6).

A mixed multitude. a mingling of various nations who had become proselytes.

. means a cake of (made of) unleavened dough (Mekhilta); dough which has not become leavened is termed מצה.

Neither had they made for themselves any provision. for the journey. This is stated to tell how praiseworthy Israel was: that they did not say, “How can we go forth into the wilderness without provisions?” But they had faith and set forth. This it is that is referred to more explicitly in the prophets: (Jeremiah 2:1) “I remember for thee the affection of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, how thou wentest after me in the wilderness in a land that was not sown”. What reward is afterwards set forth there? “Israel is the Lord’s hallowed portion etc.” (Mekhilta).

Who abode in Egypt. after the other settlements (i. e. including those also) which they had made as strangers in a land that was not theirs (cf. Mekhilta).

Four hundred and thirty years. Altogether from the birth of Isaac until now were 400 years, and we must reckon from that event, for only from the time when Abraham had offspring from Sarah could the prophecy (Genesis 15:13) “Thy offspring shall be a stranger” be fulfilled; and there had been 30 years since that decree made at “the convenant between the parts” until the birth of Isaac. It is impossible to say that this means that they were 430 years in the land of Egypt alone, for Kohath was one of those who came into Egypt with Jacob (Genesis 46:11); go and reckon all his years and all the years of Amram his son and the whole eighty years of Moses, the latter’s son, until the Exodus and you will not find that they total to so many; and you must admit that Kohath had already lived many years before he went down to Egypt, and that many of Amram’s years are included in the years of his father Kohath, and that many of the 80 years of Moses are included in the years of his father Amram, so that you see that you will not find 400 years from the time of Israel’s coming into Egypt until the Exodus. You are compelled to admit, even though unwillingly, that the other settlements which the patriarchs made in lands other than Egypt come also under the name of “sojourning as a stranger” (גרות), including also that at Hebron, even though it was in Canaan itself, because it is said, (Genesis 35:27) “[Hebron] where Abraham and Isaac sojourned”, and it says, (Exodus 6:4) “[the land Canaan], the land of their sojournings wherein they sojourned”. Consequently you must necessarily say that the prophecy, “thy offspring shall be strangers… [four hundred years]” began only from the time when he had offspring. And only if you reckon the 400 years from the birth of Isaac will you find that from the time they came into Egypt until the time they left it, was 210 years (as alluded to in Genesis 15:13). This was one of the passages which they altered for king Ptolemy (Mekhilta; Megillah 9a).

And it came to pass at the end of the 430 years … even on the self-same day. The addition of the latter phrase tells us that as soon as the predetermined end of the bondage arrived the Omnipresent did not detain them even as long as the twinkling of an eye (Mekhilta). For on the fifteenth of Nisan the ministering angels had come to Abraham to announce to him the promised birth of Isaac, and on the fifteenth of Nisan Isaac was born, and on the fifteenth of Nisan the decree “between the parts” relating to Israel’s slavery was made.

It was night of watching [unto the Lord]. a night which the Holy One, blessed be He, was watching for and looking forward to, that He might fulfill His promise להוציאם מארץ מצרים TO BRING THEM OUT FROM THE LAND OF EGYPT.

It is this night of the Lord. it is the night of which He said to Abraham, “On this night will I redeem your children” (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on Genesis 39:11).

[it is a night] of protection for all the children of Israel throughout their generations. this night is protected, and comes as such from ages past, against all destructive forces, as it is said, (v. 33) “And He will not permit the destroyer [to enter your houses]” (Pesachim 109b; Rosh Hashanah 11b).

This is the ordinance of the passover. This chapter was spoken to them on the 14th day of Nisan.

No strange person. one whose actions are estranged from his Heavenly Father (Zevachim 22b); both a heathen and an apostate Israelite therefore are implied in this term (Mekhilta).

When thou hast circumcised him then shall he eat thereof. “he” means his (the slave’s) master; this tells us that the neglect to circumcise his slaves bars him from eating of the Paschal offering. This is the opinion of R. Joshua. Rabbi Eliezer, however, said: the neglect to circumcise his slaves does not bar him from eating of the Paschal offering. The objection was raised: if this be so what means “Then shall he eat thereof”?, The reply was given: “He” means the slave, not the master (the meaning being that the slave, so long as he is uncircumcised may not eat of it) (cf. Mekhilta).

A tolerated sojourner. this means a stranger who has settled in Palestine (having undertaken to observe the seven precepts of the “Sons of Noah”).

And a hired servant. a heathen. But why need Scripture state at all that these (the תושב and the שכיר) may not eat of the Passover lamb? These are uncircumcised and it is said (v. 48) “And no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof”? But it refers to such a one as a circumcised Arabian or a circumcised Gibeonite who is a settler or a hired servant (Mekhilta; Yevamot 71a).

In one house shall it be eaten. in one company (cf. שה לבית); meaning that those who have registered themselves for it (the Paschal offering) shall not form themselves afterwards into two companies and divide it. An objection was raised: You say that this means “in one company”, but perhaps this is not so, but it means “in one house” (or place) as it usually signifies, and it intends to teach that if they had begun to eat, for example, in the courtyard of a house and rain fell they may not enter the house to complete the eating of the offering? The reply was given: this cannot be so, because Scripture says, (v. 7) “[They shall put the blood] upon the houses (plural) wherein they shall eat it”, and from here it follows that one who is eating the Paschal offering may eat it in two places (consequently the only meaning of the term בית is “company”, as was suggested) (cf. Mekhilta and Onkelos).

Thou shalt not carry forth out of the house. this must therefore mean away from the company (Mekhilta).

Neither shall ye break a bone thereof. any bone that is fitted for eating (for the purpose of the performing the command of eating the Paschal lamb) as, for instance, one upon which there is flesh of the size of an olive, to it there is (applies) the prohibition relating to the breaking of a bone, but if there is not upon it flesh of the size of an olive there does not apply to it the prohibition of breaking a bone (cf. Pesachim 84b).

All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. Why is this stated? Since it says of the Paschal offering offered in Egypt, (v. 3) “a lamb for the house of their fathers” which means that they are to be registered for it by families, one might think that in the case of the Paschal offering offered by future generations this must also be so! Therefore Scripture states: “All the congregation of Israel may eat it” (i.e. any of them may eat it whoever they may be who combine to do so) (Mekhilta).

And he will keep the passover. (the words may mean, then he shall keep the Passover), One might think that this verse implies that any-one who becomes a proselyte (גר) must keep the Passover-offering rite immediately after his circumcision (even though this has not taken place just before Passover), therefore Scripture states והיה כאזרח הארץ “but he shall be as a native of the land”. How is it in the case of a native? He brings the offering on the fourteenth! So, too, a proselyte must bring it only on the fourteenth (Mekhilta).

And no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof. This is stated in addition to the somewhat similar text in v. 43 in order to include in the prohibition of eating the Paschal offering any person whose brothers have died in consequence of circumcision (in which case the parents are exempted from circumcising any of their children born after the death of these), because such a one is not to be regarded as an apostate who of set purpose remains uncircumcised, and the law regarding such a one cannot be derived from the statement in v. 43, “no strange person shall eat thereof” (because Rashi has explained this to refer to an Israelite whose doings have estranged him from G-d).

One law. etc., This is stated in addition to the similar text in v. 48 in order to declare that the proselyte is equal to the native also in respect to all other commands of the Torah (i. e. the preceding text has reference only to the Paschal offering whilst this is a general statement) (Mekhilta).

The first offspring of every womb. The words mean: that which first openeth the womb, the root פטר meaning to open, as in (Proverbs 17:14) “As one makes an opening (פוטר) for water so is the beginning of strife”; and so, too, is (Psalms 22:8) יפטירו בשפה i. e. “they open the lips”.

It is mine. I have acquired him for Myself through My having smitten the first born of the Egyptians.

Remember this day. This teaches that one must make mention of the Exodus from Egypt every day (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on Deuteronomy 27:9).

In the month abib. But would we not know in which month they went out (even though it were not stated here)? But Moses spake to them as follows: See the kindness which G-d has bestowed on you, that He brought you forth in a month that is fitted for going out, not hot, nor cold nor rainy. In the same sense it says (Psalms 68:7) “He bringeth forth the prisoners בכשרות” i. e. in a month that is fitted (כשר) for going out (Mekhilta).

To the land of the canaanite. And although it enumerates here only the five peoples, all the seven nations are implied (Mekhilta) for all are included in the generic term Canaanite, although there was one of the races of Canaan which had no other name than that of Canaanite (whilst the other races had, beside the generic name Canaanite, some special designation as Hittite etc.: hence under the term Canaanite one may understand either the one race bearing this name or any of the other races. Here, therefore, the introductory word הכנעני alludes to the particular tribe so called and to the two others included in this generic term, or it may allude to three tribes included in the generic term. In either case we get the “seven peoples of Canaan”).

Which he swore unto thy fathers. In the case of Abraham it says, (Genesis 15:18) “On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram [saying, To thy seed I will give this land]”; in the case of Isaac it says, (Genesis 26:3) “Sojourn in this land … [for to thee and to thy seed I will give all these countries]”; and in the case of Jacob it says, (Genesis 28:13) “the land wheron thou liest [to thee will I give it and to thy seed]” (Mekhilta).

Flowing with milk and honey. milk flows from the goats and honey flows from the dates and from the figs.

This service. that of the Paschal offering. But has it not already been said above, (Exodus 12:25) “And it shall come to pass when ye be come into the land … [that ye shall keep this service]”? Why then does it repeat it again? On account of a new matter that is introduced here; viz., in the former chapter it says, (v. 26) “And it shall come to pass when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service?” and there Scripture is speaking about a wicked son who excludes himself from the Israelite community (by saying ye, as though he does not wish to participate in the service), whilst here it states, (v. 8) “And thou shalt tell thy son”, referring to a son who does not know how to enquire, and Scripture teaches you that you yourself must open up the conversation with Agadic explanations which attract the heart (cf. Mekhilta; Shabbat 87a).

For the sake of this. for the sake that I should carry out His commands, such as this Passover offering, this unleavened bread and this bitter herb (cf. Mekhilta).

G-d did for me. Here is an indication of the reply to be given to the wicked son: that one should say to him, “G-d did for me”, and one should not say “what G-d did לנו, for us”, thus implying “not for thee”, for if thou hadst been there (in Egypt) thou wouldst not have been regarded as worthy of being redeemed (Mekhilta).

And it shall be for a sign unto thee. i. e. the Exodus from Egypt shall be to thee as a sign

Upon thine hand and as a memorial between thine eyes. meaning, that you shall write these paragraphs (verses 1, 10 and 11, 16) and bind them upon the head and upon the arm.

Upon thy hand. on the left hand; that is why the word is written יָדְכָה in its full form (not יָדְךָ) in the second section (v. 16), so that we should explain it (by dividing this word into two: יד כה) as meaning the hand that is weak (כהה) (Menachot 36b).

. means FROM YEAR TO YEAR (ימים frequently signifies a year) (Menachot 36b).

And it shall come to pass when. [THE LORD] SHALL BRING THEE … [THOU SHALT SET APART etc.], There are some of our Rabbis who learned from this statement that the firstborn who were born in the wilderness were not thus hallowed. He who says that these were thus hallowed explains this “coming” (i. e. this verse, which appears to make the hallowing of the firstborn dependent upon their arrival in the land) as follows: if you observe it (this command) in the wilderness, you will be privileged to enter the land and to observe it there (cf. Bekhorot 4b).

He swore unto thee. And where did He swear this unto thee? (Exodus 6:8) “And I will bring you unto the land concerning which I did lift up my hand etc.” (cf. Rashi on this verse where he explains that “lifting up the hand” denotes taking an oath) (Mekhilta).

And shall give it to thee. Let it be in thine eyes (regard it) as though He had given it to thee on that same day (when on each occasion you carry out this command) and do not regard it as an inheritance from your ancestors (Mekhilta).

. This word והעברת is an expression for “setting apart”. Similarly it says, (Numbers 27:8) “And ye shall set his inheritance apart (והעברתם) for his daughter” (Mekhilta).

Dropped by beast. a premature birth; and this is termed שגר because its mother casts it out (שגר) and expels it (שלחתו) from the womb before its due time (שגר is a synonym of שלח “to let go”). Scripture teaches you that although it is a premature birth it is nevertheless holy by reason of its being first born, in so far that it exempts from the law regarding the firstborn the young that comes (is born) after it (Mekhilta). It is true that an animal that is not a premature birth) is also called שגר, as (Deuteronomy 7:13) “the שגר of thy kine” (where it speaks of blessing this, and it is therefore evident that it cannot there denote a premature birth), but this שגר (i. e. its use here) is intended only to tell us something about a premature birth, because, you see, it has already written in this verse: “Every first offspring of the womb”! And if you say that also the firstborn of an unclean animal (and not a premature birth) is implied by שגר (and that this also must be hallowed) then I reply that Scripture comes and expressly states in another passage, (Deuteronomy 15:19) “[All the firstling males that are born] of thy herd and of thy flocks (thus only clean animals) [shalt thou sanctify etc.]”. Another meaning may be given in explanation of והעברת כל פטר רחם “thou shalt set apart every first born of the womb”, viz., that Scripture by the term פטר רחם is speaking of the firstborn of man (consequently the following words, שגר בהמה, need not denote an animal of premature birth, but an animal born in the natural course as it certainly means in Deuteronomy 7:13, and we thus avoid the necessity of here assigning to שגר a meaning different from that which it bears in the latter passage).

And every first offspring of an ass. but not the first offspring of other unclean animals. This exception is the enactment of Scripture, because the firstborn of the Egyptians are compared to asses (Ezekiel 23:20; Bereishit Rabbah 96); and a further reason for this exception is because they (the asses) were of assistance to the Israelites when they left Egypt, for there was not a single Israelite who did not take with him from Egypt several asses laden with the silver and gold of Egypt. (Bekhorot 5b).

Thou shalt redeem with a lamb. one gives a lamb to the priest, and the first offspring of the ass is then permitted to be made use of, whilst the lamb remains in the priest’s possession with the character of a non-holy object (חולין, an ordinary animal) (cf. Bekhorot 9b).

Then thou shalt break its neck. one breaks its neck with a hatchet from behind and so slays it (Bekhorot 13a). The reason is: he (the owner of the ass) has caused a loss to the possessions of the priest (by not giving him the lamb), therefore must he suffer loss in his own possessions (Mekhilta d['Rabbi Yishmael 13:13:2).

And all the firstborn of man amongst thy sons shalt thou redeem. His redemption money is fixed in another passage (Numbers 18:16) at five Sela’im.

When thy son asketh thee מחר. There is a usage of the word מחר that refers to “now” (i. e. to the period of time that is nearest to “now” viz., to-morrow), and there is another usage of מחר that refers to a day following after the lapse of some time, as, for example, this מחר here and as, for example, (Joshua 22:27) “That your children may not say to our children in time to come (מחר)” which occurs in the chapter about the sons of Gad and the sons of Reuben (Mekhilta).

What is this?. This is the question of a dull child who has not sufficient understanding to question very profoundly and who therefore asks in an indefinite fashion, “What is this?” In another passage (Deuteronomy 6:20) it states, “[When thy son asketh thee…], What mean the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments … [which the Lord our G-d hath commanded you?]” This, however, is the question of a wise son. The Torah in mentioning four different explanations of the Passover sacrifice-rite to be given by a father to his children, is speaking in reference to four different types of son: the wicked son (12:25 and in the second half of 13:8), and one who has not sufficient understanding how to ask (in the first half of 13:8), and one who asks in an indefinite manner (13:14), and one who asks in a wise fashion (Deuteronomy 6:20) (cf. Mekhilta; Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim 10:4).

וּלְטוֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ. "תְּפִלִּין" (אונקלוס). וְעַל שֵׁם שֶׁהֵם אַרְבָּעָה בָתִּים קְרוּיִין

. this denotes the Tephillin; and because they consist of four houses (compartments) they are called טטפת, for טט denotes “two” in Katpi and פת in Afriki denotes “two״ (Sanhedrin 4b). Menachem ben Seruk, however, placed it in the same section (gave it the same meaning) as, (Ezekiel 21:2) “And speak (הטף) to the south״; and as, (Micah 2:6) “speak ye (תטיפו) not”; so that טטפת would be an expression denoting “speaking”, and corresponds to ולזכרון (in v. 9 where it really replaces טוטפת), because whoever sees them (the Tephillin) bound between the eyes will remember the miracle (so that they become a זכרון, a reminder) and will speak about it (so that they become a טטפת. something that causes one to speak about the miracle).