Exodus

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a profound Jewish thinker, seminal scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. His preface to the Book of Exodus affords Bible students a compact overview of Genesis
as well as the second book of the five books of Moses. Here we bring a synopsis of it.

“Now these are the names of the Sons of Israel, who came into Egypt
with Jacob; every man came with his household.”

Divine wisdom, Abravanel asserts, had plenty of good reasons for dividing up the five books of Moses, as
it did, the focus here being on Exodus’ organic outgrowth from Genesis. He lists four rationales for that
link or connector. Below are the first two. See Abravanel’s World for the remaining two.

1) Genesis recounts the deeds and formidable challenges that faced remarkable individuals.
Among other men of renown, we single out Adam, Noah, Shem, Eber, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and
his sons. After Genesis concludes the narratives of these outstanding personages, Exodus
follows. It covers the Hebrew people collectively. Thus, in Exodus we read about how the
fledgling Hebrew nation languished in the Egyptian exile and servitude. Divine miracle and
redemption set them free. Later, at Sinai, the encampment heard God’s voice bellow the ten
commandments. Finally, Exodus pertains to the Tabernacle, home of the mystical Shechinah.

2) The divine Torah’s main purpose, Abravanel writes, is to hone and perfect the Hebrew people,
the Creator’s hand-picked flock. We speak of the refinement of body and soul, accomplished
through the observance of the commandments. When the Torah desired to elaborate on the
Chosen People’s mission and destiny, it began with Genesis, and a meticulous chronology of the
Hebrews’ illustrious forbears. Veritably, Jews descend from the very finest of human stock. They
are anything but a hodgepodge of nationalities, banding together under a creed or religion.
Hebrews neatly trace their lineage to humanity’s luminaries, really an ethical proving ground, if
you will. Genesis, then, lays out the Jews’ rich heritage, starting with Adam. In short shrift,
Adam’s unworthy descendants are merely mentioned in passing. In contrast to the holy seed,
the undesirables, let us label them, lacked character, moral fiber. Hebrews hail from Adam’s
third son, Seth, a moral giant. The divine spark passed through him and continued to Noah,
Shem, Eber, and the three patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

In this manner, Abravanel develops his preface to the Book of Exodus, advancing four reasons that
illustrate just how gracefully it segues from Genesis.

For Yaakov (Jacob), a bitter famine coupled with his sons’ insistence comprised formidable tailwinds propelling him to Egypt. Still, he might have braved hunger and stayed put in beloved Canaan. Perhaps he could have resisted their incessant appeals had it not been for one irresistible magnet. Its force tugged and jerked mercilessly. Uppermost in the mind and heart of the aged patriarch was an image that he hadn’t been able to shake for two decades: Yosef’s (Joseph's) face.

Abravanel’s World of Torah Shemot Vol 1 pages 13-14

Splitting the Red Sea

“And God went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar
of fire, to give them light, that they might go by day and by night. The pillar of cloud by day and the
pillar of fire by night departed not from before the people.”

‘The Almighty also provided these travelers with a pillar of fire. This flaming entity, too, was ethereal,
stretching from the sky to the ground. The Jews in the desert had not taken along lanterns or oil from
Egypt. God did not want the Jews stumbling in darkness, and He knew that an illumination source
would put a spring in their step and a smile on their faces. A burning, torch-like fire column lit up the
night. Knowing all too well that His children were in for a long haul with many zigzagging pit stops in
the wilderness, God rolled out the fire and cloud implements in advance.

Page 256 Shemot vol. I: Sinai Rules

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus 37 continues to discuss the Tabernacle. We add a parenthetical note on Biblical
measurements: one cubit roughly equals eighteen inches

“And Bezalel made the ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits in
length, one and a half cubits in width, and one and a half cubits in
height.”.

Constructing the Tabernacle had been, to state the obvious, a colossal undertaking. Beside the
structure’s parameter walls consisting of curtains, there were sacred vessels that became fixtures of the
Tabernacle’s courtyard, foyer, sanctuary, and holy of holies. Indeed, much painstaking detail went into
assembling the Creator’s sanctuary in all its glory.

But who were the builders, Abravanel asks? Moreover, when referring to the construction of the
Tabernacle, why does the Bible on occasion use a plural conjugation of the verb “to do” or “to make?”
To the point, Abravanel noted that the earlier chapter employed the plural conjugation (“And every
wise-hearted man among them that wrought work made the Tabernacle…”). Yet, the verbs in our
chapter utilize the singular conjugation. Finally, Abravanel asks: Why does our chapter’s lead verse link
Bezalel with the ark (And Bezalel made the ark…”)? Contrast that with all other Tabernacle artifacts that
do not associate any specific artisan with the holy vessels. Thus, when speaking about the table,
lampstand, altars etc., we find generic language oft repeated (“…and he made…”).

Abravanel answers as follows. In the previous chapter, “And every wise-hearted man among them that
wrought the work made the Tabernacle”speaks in broad strokes, supplying Bible students with an
introduction of the Tabernacle construction. That is, “wise-hearted” men and their staff applied their
talents and efforts into each and every holy vessel.

Regarding the sequence of production, we read first about “ten curtains: of fine twined linen, and blue
and purple, and scarlet, with cherubs…”Abravanel proposes that since the curtains may have been the
first Tabernacle items assembled, they required a joint or group effort. That would explain the verb
conjugation in plural. The artisans, with approval of the Tabernacle superintendent (Bezalel) sought to
quickly erect parameter walls. Once the Tabernacle had been demarcated, specialists could work
independently and construct smaller vessels. Thus, the Bible conjugates in singular (“…and he made…”),
repeating the same verbal phrasing for table, lampstand, altars etc.

This modus operandi of small cells of workmen clarifies how the Tabernacle and its vessels became
assembled. Abravanel notes an exception to the rule. “And Bezalel made the ark…” Owing to the ark’s
unique role and holiness, Bezalel’s own hands crafted every inch of it.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus Chapter 1 the Bible painstakingly details the Hebrew population explosion in
Egypt, one that spooked the king and terrified his subjects.

“And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and
multiplied, and waxed exceedingly mighty. And the land was filled with
them.”

Expressing fears of the Hebrews forming a fifth column, Pharaoh took action. “And he said unto his
people: Behold, the children of Israel are more and mightier than we. Come let us deal wisely with them,
lest they multiply, and it will come to pass that when there befalls a war, they will also join themselves
with our enemies and fight against us, and leave the land.”

Abravanel notes Pharaoh’s convoluted thinking. That is, if the Jews’ numbers and strength already
reached mammoth proportions, why does the monarch phrase the problem in future tense: “And it will
come to pass…they will also join themselves with our enemies?” The problem was now.

Regarding Pharaoh’s worries, Abravanel poses a second question. “And it will come to pass…they will
join themselves with our enemies and fight against us, and leave the land.”But if the Hebrews
presented an existential problem for Egypt, why does Pharaoh state that they will “fight and leave the
land?”What stops Hebrew fighters from conquering Egypt – whether in alliance with other belligerents
or by themselves?

On this topic of Pharaoh’s strategy for internal affairs, let us call them, Abravanel concludes his line of
questioning. Why should Pharaoh fear that the Hebrews would “leave the land?” That should have been
music to the king’s ears, seeing that he viewed the Hebrews as a ticking time bomb.

Abravanel explains Pharaoh’s assessment of the Jews. When the king states, “Behold, the children of
Israel are more and mightier than we” he did not mean that, at present, the Jews were more populous
than the Egyptians. They weren’t. Pharaoh meant that the Hebrews were a sizeable nation. But, in the
muscle department, they were tough, even tougher than the Egyptians.

“Come let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply, and it will come to pass that when there befalls a
war…” Pharaoh foresaw trouble afoot. Should Egyptian enemies attack, Hebrews could very well join the
invaders, the king predicted. In such scenarios, Egypt would be defeated. At that juncture, the Jews
could disgorge Egyptians and remain, or leave the country, to wherever they decided to go.

In sum, Abravanel reframes the verses. By so doing, Bible students get a better glance into our chapter,
as well as a glimpse into Pharaoh’s thinking – and planning.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus Chapter 10, Bible students read about plagues number eight and nine to hit
Egypt: locusts and darkness. (The tenth and final plague is a subject for the next chapter.)

“And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh and said unto him: Thus
says God, the God of the Hebrews. How long will you refuse to humble
yourself before Me? Let My people go, that they may serve Me. Or
else…I will bring locusts unto your border.”

Abravanel raises a question regarding Scripture’s style or editing. To preface, the Five Books of Moses
are further subdivided into (roughly) 52 portions. Each portion, independent from the next, is read
publicly in synagogues every Sabbath. Chapter 10 starts a new portion.

Abravanel finds it peculiar that this portion opens up with verses discussing locusts. As stated, this is
plague number eight – not number one – hence a strange place to begin a portion. Abravanel makes
another point about the unusual placement of locusts here. He notes that according to hallowed Jewish
tradition, it is the last four plagues which are grouped together, not the last three. Thus, if the Bible
wanted to start somewhere toward the end of the plagues, and not with the first one, it could have
begun our chapter with hail (plague #7). In a word, what lies behind the Bible’s style here?

Abravanel suggests that the arranger of the Bible’s portions had good reason to begin with locusts –
actually two reasons. For brevity, we only bring Abravanel’s first rationale. See Abravanel’s World for
the fuller discussion.

The plague of locusts brought a change in Pharaoh’s prior attitude toward the God of Israel. From here
on out, palpable improvement marked the king’s behavior. He not only began to believe in the Maker,
but he also showed signs of fearing Him. This revelation would accompany Pharaoh for the duration of
plagues numbers eight (locusts), nine (darkness), and ten (slaying of the first born). That is, from the
moment Moses told Pharaoh of an impending plague, the king shuddered. He believed that God would
deliver, as per the prophet’s warning.

To conclude, Abravanel posits that until the eighth plague, Pharaoh doubted Moses’ words and poo-
pooed the warnings. That is, until they clobbered Egypt, the king remained nonchalant. However,
starting with the plague of locusts, the light bulb went off, to be colloquial. In that vein, the Bible’s style
makes sense and explains why plague number eight is an excellent start place for a new portion.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Chapter 11 delves into the tenth and final plague: the slaying of Egypt’s first born. It also
touches on Pharaoh’s obstinacy, before relating Moses’ and Aaron’s pivotal roles in the Exodus.

“And God said unto Moses: Pharaoh will not hearken unto you, that My
wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt. And Moses and Aaron
did all these wonders before Pharaoh. And God hardened Pharoah’s
heart, and he did not let the Children of Israel go out of his land.”

Abravanel seeks clarification of our verse. Specifically, why does there appear a repetition and rehashing
of Pharaoh’s stubbornness, leading to God’s pronouncement of punishment: “That My wonders may be
multiplied in the land of Egypt”The sentence’s verb is conjugated in future tense: “That My wonders
may be multiplied…” Yet, the Maker had already dished out all ten plagues.

So, Abravanel asks what else was in store for Pharaoh and Egypt? Moreover, the very next verse informs
Bible students that Moses and Aaron completed their tasks: “And Moses and Aaron did all these
wonders before Pharaoh.”

Abravanel explains the import of our verses. Readers should not walk away from the Exodus narrative
with incorrect conclusions. Abravanel focuses first on Pharaoh’s intransigence. God had foreseen this
well in advance, and informed His purpose in bringing the plagues, “that My wonders may be multiplied
in the land of Egypt.”

Next, Bible students should not incorrectly deduce that Moses and Aaron had been careless or
negligent in performing their jobs and thereby contributed to Pharaoh’s constant backpedaling. Actually,
wonders and miracles adhered to the Maker’s playbook to a T, attesting to both prophets’ alacrity and
proficiency. Notwithstanding, all of Moses’ warnings fell on deaf ears.

This brings us to the chapter’s closing verse: “And God hardened Pharaoh’s heart…” Abravanel
interprets the oft-quoted description of the king’s bullheadedness. It teaches that God endowed
Pharaoh with stamina and a stout heart. Like a mighty warrior, the king mustered inner resolve to
withstand relentless and mounting battering implicit in the plagues.

Pharaoh’s recalcitrance, then, had nothing to do with God withholding the opportunity for the king to
repent his sins. The Creator did, however, imbue Pharaoh with a heart of indomitable will. With it, Egypt’s king chose evil. Nothing could sway Pharaoh from parting with his Hebrew servants…except for a series of debilitating plagues.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus Chapter 12 pertains to the Pascal lamb sacrifice, providing a plethora of details about it.
When was it sacrificed? What type of animal could be used? How was it eaten? These are a sampling of
some salient aspects of the divine commandment given to the Jewish nation.

“And God said unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt saying: This
month shall be unto you the beginning of months. It shall be the first
month of the year to you.”

Characteristically, Abravanel analyzes the different aspects of the Pascal lamb with painstaking care. See
Abravanel’s World for the entire discussion. For our purposes here, we select one requirement – the
timing. The Pascal lamb was to be offered in the afternoon of the fourteenth day of the first month of
the Jewish calendar. “And you shall keep it unto the fourteenth day of the same month…”

Indeed, one marvels at the precision of the Jewish calendar, one that mortals could not have devised.
This is because of the intricate mathematical calculations involved in plotting the celestials. For example,
how would astronomers account for the discrepancy between the number of days in a lunar year versus
the solar one?

“This month shall be unto you the beginning of months.” But how many days are in a month? How many
months in a year? How do we insert or intercalate leap years? Part of the genius of the Jewish calendar
is that it adds one month intermittently throughout the nineteen-year solar cycle.

Again, this blog will not go into more technical calendric detail other than to state that there are seven
years (out of a nineteen-year cycle) where the Jewish calendar adds an entire month. When an extra
month is inserted, that year has thirteen months and not twelve.

In concluding, we quote Abravanel’s ancient Greek source who expressed unabashed adulation for the
ancient Hebrews and their mathematical acumen. For him, the Jewish calendar attested to the Chosen
People’s intimate relationship with God.

“It is proof positive that prophecy rested among them.” – Ptolemy, Greek mathematician

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible. Chapter 13 tracks the escape route of the departing Hebrews from Egypt.

“And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led
them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was
near, for God said: Lest the people lose heart when they see war, and
they return to Egypt. But God led the people about, by the way of the
wilderness by the Red Sea. And the Children of Israel went up armed
out of the land of Egypt.”

Abravanel asks on a seemingly superfluous phrase in our verse that mentions Pharaoh: “And it came to
pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go.”The focal point of the verse, says Abravanel, is that God led
them out. Why repeat the fact that Pharaoh gave permission? This information can be gleaned from the
previous chapter.

Abravanel’s first response follows. From the first communication that God had with Moses at the
burning bush, the endgame had been to bring the Hebrews into the Promised Land. Of course, all
travelers to any given destination choose the most direct route. Economy is of essence. The Bible, then,
must explain why this expedient had been ignored. Why didn’t God lead His people along the Coastal
Route, through the land of the Philistines? Abravanel quotes an ancient travel guidebook: “The trip from
Egypt to Jerusalem takes eight days, if one travels via Ashkelon.”

“And it came to pass…that God led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, though that was
near…”Abravanel solves the mystery behind the Hebrew’s circuitous journey, as dictated by God. Bible
students, Abravanel says, should not draw the wrong conclusion. The Jews did not flee Egypt via the
desert route in order to throw off suspecting Egyptians, who likely would attempt to round them up and
force them back into slavery. Put differently, the Hebrews did not zigzag for purposes of misleading
Egyptians in their hot pursuit.

Our verse makes it plain that the Hebrews were not runaways or fugitives; Pharaoh sanctioned their
exit. “And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not by the way of the
Philistines…”

In sum, here is Abravanel’s answer. He writes that although the king granted the Hebrew permission to
leave, and although the Jews were not fugitives, still, there was a compelling reason behind the 
Creator’s desire to have the nation shun the Coastal Route. “For God said: Lest the people lose heart
when they see war, and they return to Egypt.”God calculated that the Philistines would defend their
borders and fight the Jews, tooth and nail, to keep them out of their territory.

See Abravanel’s World for the full discussion and true reason behind God’s interest in leading the
Hebrews into the wilderness.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus, Chapter 14 captures the dramatic story of the utter demise of Pharaoh and his army.
Down to the last man, they all drowned in the Red Sea.

“And God said to Moses saying: Speak unto the Children of Israel, that
they turn back and encamp before Pi-hahiroth…And Pharaoh will say of
the Children of Israel that they are entangled in the land. The wilderness
has shut them in.”

Abravanel asks: Why did the Creator see fit to trick and entice Pharaoh into pursuing the Hebrews? “And
God said to Moses saying: Speak unto the Children of Israel, that they turn back…” Zigzagging gave the
distinct impression that Moses had no clue how to navigate the treacherous wastelands, and so they
marched in circles. Pharaoh believed his former “confuzzled” servants were marching right into his
hands.

Abravanel learns that God resolved to obliterate the Egyptians with much fanfare for two reasons. One
stemmed from a divine commitment made from God to the patriarchs. Recall, the Maker promised to
increase their descendants’ seed, to free the Jews from Egyptian bondage, and to bring them into a
comely land.

However, when God beheld the Jewish nation, He saw a people that were in a sorry state. Here was an
abject nation, broken and weak. The mighty Canaanites, God assessed, would make short shrift of the
hapless Hebrews, if nature was to run its course. The mismatch would result in a rout, the Jews
humiliated, not to mention their population decimated.

The compassionate Almighty devised a fix. He would make sure that the news of the Egyptian army’s
defeat would reverberate far and wide. Whoever heard of Pharaoh’s sensational demise would be in
shock. Indeed, the parting of the Red Sea provided the perfect, miraculous backdrop. And, it did the
trick. Canaanites, Philistines, and Edomites to list just three hostile nations, trembled before the Jews, as
the Bible makes explicit.

Here is a second rationale for God’s luring Pharaoh into His trap: divine payback. Justice demanded
retribution for infanticide. Egyptians drowned Hebrew babies. Now the murderers would pay the price.

In summary, divine wisdom crafted a plan that would instill fear into every Canaanite’s heart. When it
came to liberating the Holy Land, Hebrew warriors would conquer it in a cinch. See Abravanel’s World.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Chapter 15 pertains to the Jew’s jubilation after experiencing the miracle at the Red Sea.
Abravanel takes the opportunity to digress from his verse-to-verse commentary and discuss song or
poetry, from a Jewish retrospective. The Hebrew essay is lengthy. Please see Abravanel’s World.

“Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel this song unto God, and
spoke saying: I will sing unto God, for He is highly exalted. The horse
and his rider has He thrown into the sea.”

Here is a shorthand summary of Abravanel’s discourse. One type of song/poem is characterized by its
form. It’s written with melody in mind, though this type does not have musical accompaniment. It is
marked by meter and rhythm. Thus, these poems adhere to a style whereby the ends of the stanzas will
share two or three common letters. Holy Writ does not contain poems of this sort, rather they came into
usage at a later historical period. This literary style flourished when the Jews resided in the Arab or
Muslim countries (circa 8 th -15 th centuries), attesting to the host culture’s influence upon those Jewish
literati. Still, those authors penned their poems in the Hebrew language. Sweet songs, common themes
praised God, the intellect, and wisdom.

Type 2 song or poem did have musical instrumentation, but not necessarily strict, poetic form. It offered
high praise to the One Above. Men of renown uttered these incantations, as David the psalmist writes:
“The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tents of the righteous; the right hand of God does
valiantly.”These poems utilized pleasant melody, vocals, and instrumentation to resonate with listeners,
inspiring greater religious awareness. Examples of type 2 can be found in the Five Books of Moses, the
Book of Job, as well as Proverbs. Emphasis was on mnemonic device, aiding listeners to commit those
songs to memory.

Type 3 relied on hyperbole, turn of phrase, and allegory. The purpose was to laud the subject at hand, or
conversely, to demean it. It sought to bring joy or pain to the audience, an emotive experience. In a
word, type 3 set out to influence man, to profoundly move him. Owing to its potency, it has been
likened to medicine; healthy people need not take it. A tonic for a hurting heart and melancholy soul.

In which category type does the song in our chapter belong? Abravanel’s World gives the answer.

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus chapter 19 sets the backdrop for mankind’s defining moment: The transmission of
the Torah on Mount Sinai.

“In the third month after the Children of Israel were gone forth out of the
land of Egypt, the same day came into the wilderness of Sinai.”

Abravanel asks about the timing of the watershed event: Why did God wait so long? Consider, the
Hebrews left Egypt three months earlier. Why now? Abravanel probes further, asking why the Creator
hadn’t transmitted the Pentateuch to Adam, the first man? Or perhaps, Abravanel writes, the Torah
should have been given to Noah, when the Maker entered into a covenant with mankind. As for
exemplary individuals, certainly the patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – ranked as worthy
recipients. Hence, why didn’t God communicate the Torah to them, as He does now with Moses?

At length, Abravanel answers this intriguing question. See Abravanel’s World for the full treatment.
Here, we will touch on the three main points of the essay. But here is the starting premise. The Torah
should not be mischaracterized as a religious text concerning conduct, a guidebook of dos and don’ts.
Rather it is a divinely-crafted and heavenly-honed system for mastering true faith, divine belief. Now let
us return to the question: Why was God’s Torah transmitted at this particular juncture in history?

One, it wouldn’t befit the Pentateuch to be given to a special individual or even a cadre of holy people.
Torah demands throngs or myriads of gathered, quality folk. Only in the midst of the Chosen Nation can
Torah be transmitted.

Two, the intermediary or transferor of the Torah needed to be a unique soul, a noble personage. With
all due respect to the phenomenal patriarchs and their illustrious ancestors (including Adam and Noah),
Moses was cut from a different cloth. Of course, we are speaking about highly unusual traits. Abravanel
lists ten. To give a sampling, first on the list is moderation of physical or spousal comforts, like sexual
intimacy. In a word – detachment. Second is disinterest in eating and drinking, illustrated by Moses’
forty-day periods without food or drink.

Three, context and orchestration are key. Thunder and lightning and shofar blasts contributed to Sinai’s
ambience and mood, promoting the proper prelude. The lead-up miracles wrought in Egypt and the
splitting of the Red Sea, too, were all indispensable.

In sum, Abravanel teaches that God’s Torah needed a specific combination or conflation of diverse
elements to perfectly fall into place, before it could be wrested from heaven and brought down to earth.
A critical mass of huddled Hebrews, under the tutelage of the greatest of all prophets – Moses, on the
heels of the wonders the Creator performed in Egypt and in the desert proved to be the requisite and
rich ensemble.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus Chapter 2, we learn of Moses’ birth. He was born to Amram and Jochebed, both
from the tribe of Levi.

“And there went a man of the house of Levi and took to wife a daughter
of Levi. And the woman conceived and bore a son. And when she saw
him that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months. And when she
could no longer hide him, she took for him an ark made of bulrushes,
and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and she put the child therein –
and laid it in the reeds by the river’s edge.”

Pharaoh had decreed infanticide on all males born to the Jews – by drowning in the Nile. Moses was a
pre term baby. For a short time, Jochebed concealed him from lurking Egyptian police, ever vigilant to
obey the king’s orders and murder Jewish babies.

Three months passed. “And when she could no longer hide him, she took for him an ark…and she put
the child therein…”Abravanel attacks Jochebed’s decision to endanger Moses by placing him in a
waterproof crib, albeit a floatable one. Harshly, he asks: How did Jochebed’s action differ from
Pharaoh’s? Drowning is drowning. If she derived comfort, Abravanel writes, that her floating device was
superior to or more humane than Pharaoh’s decree, well, then she was delusional. It wasn’t.

Abravanel provides Bible students with crucial context, allowing readers to evaluate Jochebed in its
proper light. She gave birth to Moses at the start of her seventh month of pregnancy. Jochebed
observed how the baby defied medical norms insofar as he was fully developed and had a pleasant
nature, a rarity for preemies.

Egyptian police tracked all Hebrew women’s pregnancies. Authorities knew when Jochebed was due,
and regularly checked on her, starting from her seventh month. They constantly badgered her: “Where’s
the baby?”, they interrogated.

Our chapter records that she kept him well hidden, yet lied when she told the police that her baby died
at birth. The goons didn’t believe her; they intensified their search. Eventually, Jochebed couldn’t
conceal Moses any longer.

Jochebed needed to consider the worse of two evils. If Egyptians discovered Moses, he and his parents
would be summarily executed. And so, Jochebed built her son an ark, recalling that Noah survived the
flood by so doing. “She took for him an ark made of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and pitch…”

She chose her materials wisely, because it created a cushy interior for her baby on the one hand, and on
the other hand blended in with the Nile’s riverbank surroundings. Of course, it was seaworthy.

All told, Jochebed’s choice was excruciating. Holding on to her baby any longer brought certain and
absolute death to the entire household. However, a floating crib gave Moses a fighting chance to
survive.

The wise and pious woman’s gambit succeeded. “And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe in
the river…and she saw the ark among the reeds, and sent her handmaid to fetch it.”

The rest, as the saying goes, is history.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. We read in Exodus chapter 20 that the Ten Commandments were transmitted to the
Hebrews on Mount Sinai.

“And God spoke all these words saying: I am God, Who brought you out
of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no
other gods before Me…”

Abravanel discusses exactly what makes the Ten Commandments stand out from the rest of the Bible. It
is, not surprisingly, an elaborate discourse. See Abravanel’s World for the entirety of it. Here, we will
share with Bible students Abravanel’s three, salient observations.

One has to do with the Speaker – God. In contrast to all of the other divine commandments, only the
Decalogue was from Heaven, sans an intermediary. That is, when it came to the other commandments,
Moses delivered them to the Hebrews, at God’s behest. Not so with the Ten Commandments. Neither
angel or seraph or prophet uttered them; they came directly from Above. On that historic day, the
Creator of heaven and earth descended, as it were, and addressed His nation. Understand, therefore,
the Decalogues’ intrinsic prominence.

Two stresses the audience, the Chosen People. With the other commandments, God transmitted them
to a single person, Moses, albeit His specially-designated messenger who had shown himself worthy.
Moses’ brethren were not privy to hear what Moses heard, nor see what he had seen. How different
were the Ten Commandments! Every person, young and old, heard and understood God’s words. The
myriads of Jews were an integral part of the conversation with the Divine. The fire at Sinai they beheld;
the audible voice they heard.

Three emphasizes the material upon which the Ten Commandments were written – all etched in stone.
No other verse in the Torah, no other commandment had been so indelibly engraved. Rather, they were
transcribed from God to Moses, who wrote them on parchment. As for the Ten Commandments,
moreover, no engraver’s tool had been utilized. It was the Maker’s handiwork, His imprint upon rock.
Moses hadn’t participated an iota in it.

In brief, Bible students are hereby apprised of the Ten Commandment’s uniqueness, their
otherworldliness. The Almighty alone put His imprimatur on them, in a manner of speaking, as
evidenced by the three reasons stated above.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In the latter part of Exodus Chapter 22, we read about sexual mores. For Abravanel, the
seventh commandment prohibiting adultery, like each of the Ten Commandments, is not meant to be
construed narrowly. Rather, it along with each of the other commandments in the Decalogue, contains
subcategories.

“And if a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, and lie with her, he
shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his wife.”

This blog highlights one offshoot of adultery: seduction. Abravanel learns that seduction is tantamount
to, and resembles, adultery. We shall explain.

Abravanel provides readers with what we may call a sociological context to our verse cited above. What
type of man seduces a virgin? Who might fit the profile of a rapscallion bent on enticing a girl to sleep
with him?

First of all, Abravanel dismisses out of hand what some people might erringly think. Let’s be clear, he
asserts. The Pentateuch does not draw the line of licentiousness at adultery. Nor does Holy Writ only
flag sexual relations when a woman is engaged. Sexual sin, according to the Bible, is even attributed to a
knave who “seduces a virgin who is not betrothed.”

The Creator loathes sexual promiscuity. And violators pay a steep price: “He shall pay a dowry for her to
be his wife.” What type of man commits this egregious affront, Abravanel probes?

Abravanel posits that a cad is unlikely to target a woman of his social standing, a marriageable woman
who shares his social circle. Had he found a suitable wife, he simply would court her and marry.

This scoundrel, instead, sets his sights on a woman he finds attractive, although she had been raised in a
lower socio-economic household. Not to be deterred, the rascal is keen on sleeping with her. And so, he
sweettalks her, promising matrimony in exchange for sexual favors. When his passions are spent, so too
are his empty promises. Off he gallops to brag to his friends about his exploits. Seeking to stem such
seedy scandals, the Torah slaps the culprit with a hefty fine: “He shall pay money according to the dowry
of virgins.”

Of course, Abravanel teaches, it could well be that a sex fiend will pursue a woman above his station.
See Abravanel’s World for his treatment of that situation. Before we conclude this blog, consider one
more observation that Abravanel shares on a related, later verse in our chapter.

“You shall not suffer a sorceress to live.” Abravanel learns that, generally speaking, unsavory characters
intent on illicit sex, do not work in a vacuum. Their network includes abettors, or better, groomers.
These are unprincipled women who scout out and prepare the groundwork for depraved men who seek
improper and immoral sexual dalliances.

These groomers, or as the verse calls them – “sorcerers” – have honed their skills and know precisely
how to obtain the trust of unsuspecting female victims. Enticed, seduced, and entrapped, these girls are
easy prey for unscrupulous perpetrators.

In summary, the God of Israel will not abide sexual immorality. Indeed, in His eyes the cases we have
presented are as sinful as adultery, and get characterized as such.

Don Isaac Abravanel, also spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus chapter 26 continues to discuss the Tabernacle, a topic introduced in the previous
chapter. Abravanel draws our attention to a grammatical inconsistency in our lead verse (“Moreover,
you shall make…”) when compared to the verb’s conjugation in chapter 25 (“Make an ark…and you
shall overlay it with pure gold”, “Make a table…and you shall overlay it with pure gold”, and “Make a
menorah of pure gold…”).Our verse is conjugated in future tense; whereas last chapter’s verbs are
written in the imperative or command form.

Abravanel sheds light on the linguistic discrepancy after phrasing the question. Why, he asks, doesn’t
our lead verse use the command form for literary consistency: “Make the Tabernacle…” instead of the
future tense “You shall make the Tabernacle…?”

Here is the answer. The previous chapter introduces the commandment to construct the Tabernacle,
“Make Me a Tabernacle.” It uses the command form. That creates a divine fiat to build a Tabernacle.
That earlier chapter then launches into the “how to” aspect of the first three fixtures in the sanctuary:
“Make an ark…of pure gold”, “Make a table…with pure gold”, and “Make a menorah of pure gold…”

Bible students will readily understand that the common – and most valuable – building material for the
ark, table, and menorah is gold. Gold, recall, was the first of several building materials that Hebrews
offered in order to finance the sacred enterprise, some others being silver, copper, wool etc.

Now to the point. After the last chapter listed those three fixtures made of gold, our chapter provides
the “how to” concerning the Tabernacle itself. What materials went into the Tabernacle’s walls and
partitions? “Moreover, you shall make the Tabernacle with ten curtains…” As our chapter proceeds, we
shall see that parts of the Tabernacle had also been constructed with gold, silver, copper, wool etc.

In summary, the earlier chapter foreshadows – in general terms – an impending commandment to build
a Tabernacle, hence the verb is conjugated in the future tense. Our present chapter follows up with the
“how to” manual, including dimensions and the requisite building material to get the job done,
necessitating the command form of the verb.

See Abravanel’s World for the full discussion of the Tabernace and its fixtures.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Toward the end of Exodus chapter 29, the Bible describes the inauguration of the
Tabernacle altar. Two acts readied the altar: anointing oil and the offering of two daily sacrifices.

“Now this is that which you shall offer upon the altar: two one-year-old
lambs each and every day. The one lamb you shall offer in the morning,
and the other lamb you shall offer at dusk.”

Abravanel questions: Why does the inauguration ceremony require only the daily sacrifices, but not
other sacrifices such as the sin or guilt offerings etc.? Abravanel also urges Bible students to pay close
attention to the daily sacrifices, one brought in the morning and one in the afternoon. Yet, when it
comes to the festival additional sacrifices, for example, they were brought to the altar at the same time.

See Abravanel’s World for the full discussion of the inauguration of the altar. For now, however, let us
address Abravanel’s questions raised above. His answers contribute to understanding an integral part of
Jewish belief and thought, or to restate, God’s mindset, per se.

The verses, Abravanel holds, come to disabuse a gross misconception regarding the Creator. That is, God
has not made man with an inclination to sin. Furthermore, the Maker does not desire a pattern whereby
man transgresses, begs God for forgiveness, and concludes the cathartic process with sin offerings.

Patently false. To be clear, the Creator did not establish a regime of sin/guilt offerings to be offered on
the altar after the Golden Calf affair, illustrating some inherent moral shortcoming which tilts people to
falter and stumble. And then, because man sinned, he needs sin/guilt sacrifices.

Such a mindset, Abravanel teaches, is fundamentally fallacious. Let us review this chapter, and put it in
the proper context. It begins with an overview of the induction of Aaron and his sons into the
priesthood. They were selected to serve in the Tabernacle. Next, we read about the inauguration of the
altar – its anointment and sacrifices. “Now this is that which you shall offer…The one lamb you shall
offer in the morning, and other lamb you shall offer at dusk.”

The takeaway: God would prefer for man not to err. How lovely it would be if people walked the straight
path, and not stray! How wonderful it would be if Aaron never had to assist his brethren in getting back
into God’s good graces, if you will! Had the consecration of the altar included sin and guilt offerings,
people would get the wrong idea. Hence, the dedication ceremony included only daily sacrifices.
Heaven’s sublime message rings clear: If only people would obey My commandments and not
transgress, My altar would be content with the daily offerings!

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus Chapter 3, we learn of Moses’ pilot prophecy. The Bible relates that the divine
communiqué took place in a wilderness – from the midst of a fiery, burning bush.

“Now Moses was keeping the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest
of Midian. And he led the flock to the farthest end of the wilderness, and
came to the mountain of God, unto Horeb. And the angel of God
appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. And he
looked, and behold the bush burned with fire. And the bush was not
consumed.”

Throughout his commentaries on the Bible, Abravanel deals with Moses’ prophecy at length. Here, he
focuses on the greatest prophet of all time, Moses, and the timing behind Moses’ pilot prophecy.

With the opening verse of this chapter, Holy Scripture teaches Bible students four instrumental aspects
of Moses’ prophecy, truly indispensable knowledge. See Abravanel’s World for the full treatment. Here,
however, we will cover the first one: timing.

Abravanel questions why Moses only received God’s word at this juncture, in a wasteland? Why, for
example, had he not been graced with a heavenly message while growing up in opulence, in Pharaoh’s
palace under the care of the king’s daughter? Or perhaps, Moses should have received bonus prophecy
as the young activist went out to visit his brethren, advocating on their behalf.

Indeed, timing is key. Abravanel cites an ancient history text that chronicles Moses’ life prior to tending
to Jethro’s sheep. That source writes, that after Moses fled Pharaoh’s palace, he headed south and
settled in Ethiopia. There, his career blossomed. In time, he assumed the throne. For our purposes,
though, the question is: Why didn’t the Almighty appear to Moses when he ruled Ethiopia?

Here is the first point about prophecy. It does not rest upon someone surrounded by fame and
grandeur. On this delicate – and elusive – topic of prophecy, Abravanel quotes from Maimonides.

What is the right stuff, Maimonides asks about prophets in a general sense? First, prophets need to
possess analytical prowess and express themselves eloquently. Second, for Maimonides, the Creator’s
messenger must be extraordinarily imaginative. Finally, seers display steely self-discipline, shunning
physical pleasures. Clearly, Abravanel adds, prophets run from foolish pursuits, such as politics. They
properly prioritize.

Abravanel circles back to his original query about the timing of Moses’ first prophecy. He says, that as
long as Moses engaged in politics and amassing temporal power, prophecy eluded him. After his stint in
Ethiopia, Moses left Ethiopia and traveled to Midian. There, he labored as a shepherd and spent his days
hiking deserted desert dunes. Change came, as well as personal growth.

In the “farthest end of the wilderness…the angel of God appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the
midst of a bush.”Miles from the din of civilization, Moses cared for his father-in-law’s flocks. One day, in
mindful mediation, “he looked, and beheld the bush burned with fire.”

A transformative dialogue with the One Above was about to commence.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus chapter 32 presents readers with one of the most sordid and reprehensible
scandals in the Pentateuch: The Golden Calf

“And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the
mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said
unto him: Make us a god who shall go before us. For as this Moses,
the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is
become of him.”.

Fairly, Bible students want to know what happened? How had the Hebrews fallen to such moral depths?
Just a short while earlier, God appeared before the encampment at Mount Sinai, transmitting the Ten
Commandments to them.

Abravanel asks a dozen insightful queries. Among them:

• In response to Moses’ delay, why did the people clamor for a god to lead them? Who informed
  them of Moses’ timetable on Mount Sinai, that prompted them to fear the worst?
• Since the folks presumed Moses’ absence from them, why not turn to the prophet’s brother
  Aaron to assume the leadership role?
• How should we understand Aaron’s, a saintly man, role in the stinking affair? At a minimum, the
  optics looked bad.

In answering these questions above, and many more, Abravanel provides a thorough survey of the
classic Jewish commentators, methodically studying their approaches. And, he notes, the approaches
swing widely. Some writers believed that the intention behind the golden calf was nothing short of a
return to paganism. Abravanel dismisses this notion as queer, before rejecting it out of hand.

Abravanel chose to tone down the enormity of the golden calf sin, in line with other Biblical
commentators. The main thrust of their argument (and his) builds on this central idea: The Hebrews
were not recidivists, bent on abandoning monotheism and intent in returning to polytheism.

Misguided as it was, the hare-brained scheme calls for balanced analysis. For our purposes here, the
golden calf was not conceived to be a god, one that would supplant the God of Israel.

So, if the golden cow was not designed to be an idol, what was it? For a full discussion of this topic, one
that incorporates the opinions of three classic Bible scholars, see Abravanel’s World.

The Tabernacle appeal

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus 36, we learn additional details regarding the Hebrew’s generous financing of
the Tabernacle. As discussed in an earlier blog, Abravanel breaks down the benefactors into two
categories – those who donated valuables (gold, silver etc.) and those who labored to build God’s sacred
house.

“And all the wise men who performed all the holy work came every man
from his craft which they performed. And they spoke unto Moses saying,
the people bring much more than enough for the service of the work,
which God commanded to make.”

Here, Abravanel addresses our verses quoted above, clarifying the conversation between “the wise men
who performed all the holy work” and Moses. What was the intent and why does the Torah record it?

When Moses turned to his brethren to finance the Tabernacle, he was greeted with boundless
enthusiasm. Money, precious metals, and fine linen poured – each morning. Specifically, donors handed
over the valuables to the artisans, men who “performed all the holy work.”

It got to be too much. “And they spoke unto Moses saying, the people bring much more than enough…”
Abravanel suggests that perhaps the workmen themselves gave the valuables. That means that in
addition to doing the various manufacturing jobs, they also donated the raw materials necessary for the
holy vessels. “And they brought yet unto him freewill-offering every morning” – the subject being the
artisans themselves. Other Biblical commentators differ. They say that the freewill-offerings came
courtesy of the Hebrews who were not doing the actual workmanship.

Be that as it may, as the money piles grew higher and higher, “the wise men who performed all the holy
work….spoke to Moses saying, the people bring much more than enough…” Why did the Torah record
the seemingly banal conversation?

The passage praises the Jews. First, accolades go out to the benefactors, men and women who daily and
gaily deposited gifts. Second, our chapter honors the craftsmen, honest people who kept tabs on the
money coming in, and reported the excess. Third, the Torah pays tribute to the superintendent,
overseeing the Tabernacle enterprise. In contrast to typical money-hungry project managers who
welcome surpluses, the Tabernacle chief didn’t.

“And Moses gave commandment and they caused it to be proclaimed throughout the camp saying, let
neither man nor woman make any more work for the offering for the holy work.”The scrupulous
superintendent announced the closing of the Tabernacle appeal, “so, the people were restrained from
bringing.” Only the gold and silver needed for the holy vessels, not a penny more.

Though “make any more work” appears to refer to the artisans, Abravanel asserts (with textual support
from Scripture), “work” can also mean money or fungibles. See Abravanel’s World for the full essay,
including the sources that bolster his position.