We have read the story of Moshe Rabbeinu so often that we surely haven't missed anything--have we? But the deeper one digs, more the Torah text reveals, and it is the Torah that sweeps away our preconceptions and misconceptions. Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger explains:
Moshe Rabbeinu is perhaps the greatest and most influential figure in the history of the Jewish People. He was their redeemer, lawgiver, leader, prophet, defender, sustainer, and teacher. While the Torah is blueprint for all of creation, it is also named “the Five Books of Moses.”
A Levite man went and took a Levite woman
and they had a child. At this point all identities are insignificant, anonymous
and irrelevant. The narrative is familiar -- so, skipping ahead, Pharoh’s
daughter notices the child floating in the Nile and directs an attending maiden
to retrieve him. She is compassionate toward what is obviously (to her) a Hebrew
child.
The Midrash and most readers of the text interpret
Shemot 7:10 in the narrative as Pharaoh’s daughter (i) adopting the child as
her own, (ii) naming him Moshe (“because he was drawn from the water”) and
agreeing to his care by Jewish nursemaids (not in that order). However, as one reads these verses and the
subsequent text, this is not what happened.
The child was taken by the princess’s
retainer from the water, but he certainly could not have been raised by her. Thus,
she was put in the care of nursemaids. After a period of time when he grew (Shrmot
2:10), he was brought before her. This implies that there was no previous
relationship between them. Linguistically, the Torah creates a Hebrew narrative
that, in fact differs from the actual (and the actual is more consistent with
all that follows).
To digress for a moment. The Egyptian suffix
mss (or mosses) means “son of” or “child”. The best example of
this is the line of Egyptian royalty that adopted the name Ramses – Ra was
their main deity, the Sun God – thus Ramses was the “son of” the Sun God. In
this instance, to Pharoh’s daughter this boy was NOT a son, he was merely moses
(with a small m), a child that she had compassion for.
This conclusion is supported by logic, by
fact and by the six verses that follow:
1. In ancient times a princess was currency, a political asset to be married off to rulers of other kingdoms or to important noblemen. Logic dictates that such a princess could not have had a son identified with her.
2. In Shemot 2:11, Moshe goes out to see his “brothers” and he sees their burdens (“sivlotam”). This word, sivlotam is used only one other place, in Shemot 1:11 – and it refers to the burdens of the Egyptians (see Rashi on that verse). This being so, the main burden of the work and taxes was on the Egyptians (as they were the vast majority of the population, the Jews were still a small minority). They were also involved in the harsh labor; It was their burdens that Moshe went out to witness! He was a compassionate person and reacted to the scene he was witnessing. Had he been a prince, he would have been able to order the taskmaster to stop – but he was merely an “ish” an Egyptian commoner!
3. In Shemot 2:14 as he witnesses the two Jews fighting, they refer to him simply as an “ish”. Moshe is afraid, again, as we see in the next verse (Shemot 2:15), because he is merely a common Egyptian. He is not viewed as the son, real or adopted, of Pharaoh’s daughter. He has no privilege.
4. Finally. as he flees to exile in Midian, in Shemot. 2:19 Yitro’s daughters identify him as an Egyptian man (“ish Mitzri”).
Moshe was no longer an anonymous Egyptian
man. He was now the greatest Jew who ever lived, tasked with ending his people’s
Exile. All of his capabilities had lain
dormant within him, awaiting the exact moment for them to emerge. May the
latent abilities of the anonymous Mashiach who hopefully is walking among us
soon be realized.
Postscript
After I developed the thoughts and
structure of this devar Torah, I found a very similar analysis in Rabbi
Zvi Grument’s new Book, Exodus: The Genesis of God’s People (Maggid
Books, Jerusalem, 2025) pp. 15-26.
