This week we read Parshah Bo (Exodus 10:1-13:16), which comprises the last three plagues, the institution of the religious calendar and the annual observation of Passover, the hasty departure of Israel from their homes without leavening their bread, and the instruction to teach our children about the exodus.
There are a lot of what-ifs here. Of course, there’s Pharaoh’s odd combination of flip-floppery and obstinacy, where he refuses to make good policy decisions despite promising them. And, of course, there’s still Moses insisting on the full exodus that requires the humiliation of the Pharaoh, rather than simply leaving with a smaller group and allowing the Pharaoh to keep his pride (and his first-born). By the way, in connection with this, I’ll point out that Ex 10:2 pretty clearly should read that the Lord “made a mockery of the Egyptians”, as the New American Standard Bible translates, rather than the more common translation that the Lord did ‘things’ or ‘works’ or just ‘wrought’ mighty or marvelous things, as most of the other translations say. The RSV gets it more or less right; the others are, I think, following the Vulgate, which is an error. This idea of mocking the Egyptians is important, as the choice of the ten plagues is pretty clearly deliberately chosen with specific reference to the Egyptian pantheon, thus adding blasphemy to the devastation.
Anyway, what struck me this time through was 11:2 and 12:35-36 (using the KJV, here), “And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them [such things as they required]. And they spoiled the Egyptians.” In the translation ‘spoiled’ is very iffy, as the root natzal is not generally used in a negative sense, but might better be translated as delivered (from) the Egyptians (thank you Vulgate). Anyway, it’s clear that although the Jews left Egypt in so much of a hurry they couldn’t allow their dough to rise, they lifted plenty of dough from their neighbors (See, by the way, 3:22 in Parshah Sh’mot two weeks ago).
Anyway, what if Moses had not asked them to do so, and if they hadn’t done it, or if the Egyptians hadn’t been so ... generous in the wake of the series of disasters? What if the Israelites had gone out into the desert with nothing but the clothes on their backs and a handful of matzos? Well, the natural response is that nothing would have been particularly different; the wanderers didn’t have any pawn shops to take the jewels nor restaurants to spend the cash if they did. In fact, the gold is not used for any good purpose, but is melted into a golden calf, for to get into more trouble (Exd: 32:2 ff). Is that why the Egyptians were impoverished? Later, though, jewels, silver and gold go into the making of the sanctuary; perhaps that was the ultimate aim.
Or was it to weigh down the Israelites? Did they take 40 years to get from Egypt to Canaan because they were schlepping useless heavy baubles? Or was it, perhaps, not for the Israelites at all, but for the Egyptians, to teach them that all their wealth (got from price-gouging during a previous natural disaster) was not really good for them? Hertz suggests that the parting gift is to sweeten the relations between the peoples, so that the Jews would not bear a grudge or grow bitter over their slavery, but maintain humility and gratitude (towards the Lord, not towards the Egyptians). There’s also a rabbinic tradition that the valuables were those stolen from the Israelite slaves to begin with, and the Israelites were simply recovering their own property (there’s a memorable story that goes along with this of the darkness-plagued Egyptians immobile in their homes whilst the Israelites, in light, search their homes around them, and are thus able to ask for specific pieces, describing not only what they look like but where they are hidden).
Anyway, what if the whole gold-and-silver thing hadn’t happened? Would the wanderers not have made a golden calf? Would the Lost Ark be a simple box of wood? Would the Egyptians have hired a new army to chase the Israelites into the Holy Land? Would the first Diaspora Jews in Egypt have been tolerated less, or more? Would the Septuagint never have happened?
Next week, Parshah B’Shalach, the Red Sea parts, the bitter water is made sweet, mannah, quail, and Joshua shows his prowess against the Amalekites.
Thank you,
-Vardibidian.
There is another interpretation of the “deliverance” or “despoiling” of the Egyptians by the Israelites: First of all, asking for items of value is the first act of freed slaves, and a good sign that, while they still suffer from the mental bondage of their recent slavery, they are capable of asking for something for themselves, and then taking it. (The Hebrew for “borrow” and “ask” is the same – perhaps something like, “can I borrow a kleenex?”) It is also only through the Israelites “asking” for items of value from the Egyptians that the Egyptians are saved. For hundreds of years they were either actively or passively complicit in the cruelty and enslavement of the Israelites. It is through voluntarily giving gifts – something like reparation – that they, themselves are redeemed. Imagine what a different history of race relations we might have had if freed slaves had asked white southerners to voluntarily give them valuable items, and the southerners had assented.
I think that’s a valid point, and one worth keeping in mind. Egypt doesn’t become a type (or a code word, depending on how you read it) for the Evil Nation, as Edom or the Amalekites. Which, considering the centrality of the Exodus, is interesting, and I think it’s fair to connect it with this passage.
Thanks,
-V.
Interestingly, though, Pharaoh is a code word for “The Man” in certain communities.
Pharaoh’s army got drownded/Oh Mary don’t you weep.
Thanks,
-V.