Shabbat Parashat Shemot - 5783

Shabbat Parashat Shemot - 5783

Rabbi Hal Miller And these are the names of the children of Israel who came to Egypt, with Yaakov each man and his household came. [Shemot 1:1] The first verses in Shemot yield all sorts of questions. For example, the first few words are v'eileh shemot b'nei yisrael habaim mitzraymah , "and these are the names of the children of Israel coming from Egypt". Why does it start with 'and'? This is the first verse in the book! Further, in Bereishit [46:8 and on], the Torah tells us almost the same thing, although with a few differences. Both begin identically, both discuss that Yaakov went to Egypt accompanied by his family. Why would the Torah repeat this so close together? The first difference we note is that in 46:8, Reuven is specified as Yaakov's firstborn, but that is not repeated in Shemot, and in fact, Reuven is listed there with all the other brothers beginning in the next verse. The second difference is that in Bereishit, Reuven is the only son actually listed at all, with the following verses all saying the sons of each brother, whereas here in Shemot the Torah says that each brother came with his family. The third difference is that in Bereishit, the rest of the verse says "Yaakov and his sons, the firstborn of Yaakov, Reuven" but here in Shemot the rest says et Yaakov ish u'beito ba'u, literally, "et Yaakov a man and his household came". The word 'et' does not translate into English. It sets up what follows as a direct object, meaning here that something is referring to, with, or doing something to, Yaakov. It could mean that "each man" came with Yaakov, to Yaakov, or for Yaakov. The addition of the word "ba'u", that they came, seems to indicate that "et" here means with. This is also consistent with the fact that Yosef is not listed in this verse, but his family is listed with that of the brothers in Bereishit. Eleven sons came with Yaakov in our verse, but all of the descendants of Yaakov were named in Bereishit. But we knew this already, so the answer must be more complex, and tied to the other differences. Rashbam says that the Torah, which is about to tell how much the people had grown, needed to remind us first how few they were when they first came. Shemot Rabbah [1:2] cites R'Abahu, "wherever it says eileh, these, it invalidates what came before, but where it says v'eileh, and these, it adds new praise to those mentioned." This would indicate here that the people were as righteous when they left as they were when they first arrived. Malbim gets an opposite read from this, that the repetition is to show that the original brothers and their families were righteous, but only the brothers themselves qualify for that at this point, that the rest of the people have descended to the level of Egyptians. Shemot Rabbah [1:5] says that the earlier verse told us who descended to Egypt, and this verse tells us that all of them merited to be redeemed. Ramban writes that our verse is a summarization of the end of Bereishit, specifically the time in Egypt, and that it is necessary to close out that narrative. The nearly identical text is to make this clear. Thus our verse does not need to list all of Yaakov's grandsons and families. The verses in Bereishit list the sons of all twelve of Yaakov's sons, including Reuven. Reuven is listed in 46:8 for a different purpose, to show that Yaakov still held Reuven out as his firstborn. His sons are listed first in the following verses. In Shemot, he is still listed first, thus earlier it was only to show the firstborn status. The Torah here ties the time of the redemption to the time of the descent to Egypt. The next subject is the exponential growth of the people followed by their servitude. Our verse gives us a common starting point to move on in the story, reminding us of what we need to know to follow the upcoming events.