English translation — שמות א

1.

On the verse¹

"And it was because the midwives feared God, and He made them houses,"

it says in the Gemara Sotah²

: Rav and Shmuel³

One said houses of priesthood and Levite, and one said houses of royalty. The one who said houses of priesthood and Levite [meant] Aaron and Moses, and the one who said houses of royalty [meant] David also comes from Miriam.

In the Sifri⁴

it is said: These houses I do not know what they are. When it says⁵

"From the end of twenty years which Solomon built the two houses, the house of the Lord—this is priesthood, and the house of the king—this is royalty,"

Yocheved merited priesthood and Miriam merited royalty.

According to this, one must understand in Rashi in our parshah⁶,

that he stands on "and he made for them houses" and explains: "houses of priesthood and Levite and kingship that are called houses, and he built⁷

the house of the Lord and the house of the king,

priesthood and Levite from Yocheved and kingship from Miriam as it is stated in tractate Sotah⁸

That from one side Rashi brings: a)

both priesthood and kingship as in the Sifri,

and not as in the Gemara where these are opinions in dispute,

b)

the verse "the

“the house of the Lord and the house of the king” which is brought in Sifrei but not in Gemara.

c)

He says “priesthood

(and Levite)

from Yocheved and royalty from Miriam” as in Sifrei⁹,

not as in Gemara which does not specify from whom priesthood and Levite came out, but specifies from whom priesthood and Levite and royalty are — “the houses of priesthood and Levite <b>Aaron and Moses </b>and the house of royalty <b>David </b>also comes from Miriam.”

And nevertheless Rashi concludes his commentary “as it is brought in tractate Sotah” — not “as it is brought in Sifrei”?

2.

One can simply explain the first matter — based on the commentary of the commentators¹⁰

in the dispute between Rav and Shmuel in the Gemara,

that it depends on the earlier dispute between Rav and Shmuel in the Gemara there¹¹

who the midwives were: one said a woman and her daughter, and one said a daughter-in-law and her mother-in-law.

The one who said a woman and her daughter [means] Yocheved and Miriam, and the one who said a daughter-in-law and her mother-in-law [means] Yocheved and Elisheva.

According to the opinion "daughter-in-law

and her mother-in-law",

the priestly houses are from Elisheva the wife of Aharon,

and the Levite houses from Yocheved.

And according to the opinion "a woman and her daughter", "houses" also means royal houses — priestly and Levite houses from Yocheved, and royal houses from Miriam¹².

Since Rashi teaches

(as he already explained earlier)

that the midwives

(Shifrah and Puah)

are Yocheved and Miriam¹³,

it follows that "houses" are houses of priesthood and Levite and houses of royalty.

There remain however difficult¹⁴

the rest of the precise points and primarily - that he <b>infers</b> "as it is brought in tractate Sotah"¹⁵,

even though he adds the proof from the verse that is brought in the Sifri,

and also says as in the Sifri that priesthood is from Yocheved,

not like the language of the Gemara "houses of priesthood and Levite <b>Aharon and Moshe</b>"¹⁶.

3.

Also one must understand the proof that Rashi brings from the verse "the house of the Lord and the house of the king"¹⁷

a)

Rashi translates indeed "

(and he made for them)

houses" not "houses" literally a building,

but "houses of <b>priesthood </b>etc." - house

(in the sense of)

family of priesthood, Levite, and royalty,

is then the verse that Rashi brings - a proof <b>to refute</b>,

because "<b>house </b>of the Lord ..

<b>house </b>of the king" are houses <b>literally</b>¹⁸.

b)

Moreover: one finds other verses where the term "house" refers to the matter of "house" of priesthood and Levites - "House of Aaron, bless the Lord; house of Levi, bless the Lord"¹⁹,

which there it certainly does not mean a physical house,

but house in the sense of the

family,

the family of priesthood and the family of Levi²⁰.

Thus we find regarding royal palaces — "May the Lord make for my lord a faithful house"

("Hear, O house of the king")

"Hear now, O house of David"

"And the house of David is like God"

that in all these places "house" does not mean a physical house,

but rather the royal family,

now why does Rashi not bring these verses,

where "house" does not mean literally,

but rather it refers to families of priesthood and families of royalty.

3)

In the Rashi before us it says "And he built the house of the Lord and the house of the king",

but the language of the verse is not so,

in the verse it says

(as above)

"which Solomon built the two houses, the house of the Lord and the house of the king".

4.

The explanation of this: The proof that Rashi brings from the verse "the house of the Lord and the house of the king,"

is not that the word "house" is used for the houses of priesthood and Levites in the sense of the family of priesthood and Levites etc.

(As in the verses "house of Aaron ..

house of Levi, bless the Lord etc.")

- In this there is no novelty,

because Rashi already <b>earlier</b>²⁵

explained that "house" also means "his servants and his household"

(not only "house literally")

and as we find²⁶

<b>several times</b> in the Torah.

The proof that Rashi brings here is on this, that when the expression "houses" stands <b>plainly</b> without specifying about which house it speaks²⁷,

it can mean

(houses of)

priesthood, Levites, and royalty,

as Rashi continues that they are called <b>houses</b>

(in the <b>verse</b>,

as he brings the proof)

"<b>the houses</b> the house of the Lord and the house of the king"

And it may be said that this must be the reading in Rashi²⁸

- "the houses" instead of "and the houses"; the word "and the houses" as it is in the printed editions of Rashi is a scribal error²⁹,

The phrase "

(the two h)

houses" simply

(which the verse adds there³⁰,

( the verse immediately explains that this means "the house of the Lord and the house of the king".

and consequently

It is understood that the word "battim" simply that stands in a verse,

means

(also)

houses of priesthood, Levites, and royalty,

(house of God,

house of the king)

"battim" in their simple sense,

for here Rashi is only explaining that "battim" simply means - of priesthood and Levites and royalty,

and it can be "battim" in their simple sense,

or "battim" in the sense of family].

5.

One must however understand,

what is the &lt;b&gt;necessity&lt;/b&gt; in simple understanding of the verse to learn that it means specifically the three types of houses,

houses of priesthood, Levites and royalty,

one can indeed learn that it means houses in general,

like the translation of the word houses everywhere&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;

(and according to several commentators of the Torah).

a)

That the Most High established for them houses in order to protect and save them from Pharaoh&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;.

b)

that "battim" here means "banim",

families³³,

and this was the reward to the midwives for "and they kept the children alive": for their help at the birth of Jewish children and at the establishment of Jewish families,

they were paid measure for measure with children and with the establishment of their own families³⁴.

Which both interpretations are seemingly more fitting according to the plain meaning of Scripture,

because: a)

The word "battim" is then interpreted <b>literally</b>

(or physical houses³⁵,

or - families,

as one finds in many places in the Torah)

- not that this is a hint to "houses of <b>priesthood and Levites and royalty</b>" specifically,

and one must learn this from the Book of Kings.

b)

This is seemingly more plausible in "and he made houses for them" which is in the past tense,

that already then he made for them houses³⁶.

However, according to Rashi, the matter of the houses of priesthood and Levite is

Likkutei

Conversations

5

came later; and the kingdom of David came several generations later.

6.

The explanation of this: Rashi rejects the interpretations by means of what Rashi says the interpretation in proximity and in continuation to the previous verse and interpretation "And God did good to the midwives, what is the good, and He made them houses"

(and he also copies the words "and He made them")

with which he not only explains to what the "and He did good" refers

(since this stands in the verse <b>afterwards</b> - not <b>in proximity</b> to "and He did good"),

but also

(explains and)

compels the interpretation of "and He made them houses".

If the verse meant that the Supreme One made for them buildings to protect and save them,

a)

then the language would have stood "and He built for them houses"³⁷

etc.

b)

the matter of "and He did good" does not fit,

which means a good and addition of matter, not a negation,

that it should not harm them.

And likewise — if the explanation is that they bore sons and established families,

then what is the novelty and the good to them³⁸?

so this was after all

By all Jews, even before "and they made the children live" is³⁹

"And the children of Israel were fruitful, etc., very, very much"!

Therefore Rashi teaches that "houses" here means a special goodness - "houses of priesthood, Levite, and royalty."

Not simply did they establish like all Jewish families,

Rather from them emerged houses "greater excellence and greater strength" - houses of priesthood, Levite, and royalty⁴⁰.

7.

And in order to emphasize the superiority and advantage of this interpretation,

Rashi notes "as it is brought in tractate Sotah"

(which is not only to indicate the source but to explain)

At first glance: Granted, according to the above interpretations of the other commentators - the reward "and He made for them houses" is in the matter itself.

According to the first interpretation - in order to protect them from Pharaoh,

and

(obviously)

according to the second interpretation,

that "houses" means their children and families - measure for measure,

as above.

According to Rashi however,

that the reward is "

(houses of)

priesthood and Levitehood and kingship" comes out,

that here is given a "side" reward,

it is not from the matter that the midwives did,

"and they kept the children alive"?

8.

Therefore Rashi says "as it is brought in tractate Sotah",

that there comes the

Explanation and significance in continuation of the Mishnah⁴¹

and the Gemara's discussion "with the measure that a person measures, they measure for him",

and the concepts of measure for measure that the Mishnah and Gemara enumerate,

are

(including)

matters of reward

(and punishment)

corresponding to

(- in the same "measure" of)

every <b>detail </b>of the person's action.

And with this is understood the advantage in the explanation "houses of priesthood, Levites, and monarchy": this brings out not only the greatness of the reward,

but

(mainly)

how this is measure for measure,

in all the details - corresponding to the details of their action:

The action of the midwives in that "they kept the children alive" was not only that they thereby helped that Jewish families should be established,

but through this was established the

(most,

or)

entire generation of the exiles of Egypt from whom comes forth the entire people of Israel until the end of all generations;

And therefore the reward is in a manner of measure for measure and in particular,

not that <b>they</b> had sons and families⁴²,

or that <b>they</b> had children, priests, Levites, and kings,

but from them were built "<b>houses</b> of priesthood and Levites and royalty",

the special houses,

"superiority and greater strength" in Israel until the end⁴³

of all generations⁴⁴.

But not so in Sifri,

although there too it says "Yocheved merited priesthood and Miriam royalty etc.",

however the matter comes in Sifri as a)

proof that "whoever draws himself close from heaven they draw him close" - not as measure for measure precisely <b>in the particulars </b>of the measure,

but on the general movement of drawing oneself close to the Above

(as he brings there in Sifri that one finds it in several places

("because she drew herself close so the Omnipresent drew close")].

b)

not as a matter of "the house of Israel" - all Jews,

and therefore it does not say there "<b>houses of </b>priesthood and royalty",

because there it does not speak about <b>houses in Israel </b>as reward for this that through them was established all <b>the house </b>of Israel.

9.

And one can say that with "as it is brought in Maseches Sotah" another question in Rashi is answered:

The beginning of the verse is indeed "And it was because the midwives feared God",

one must learn that the reward "And He made them houses" is for that which "they feared God",

But the reward for this - one finds in the Midrash

a completely different one: "And God saw etc. as it is said etc. What is the reward of <b>the fear of the Torah</b>,

Because Yocheved feared the Holy One, blessed be He, she produced from her Moses, about whom it is written that he is good,

and the Torah was given through him, which is called a good teaching,

and it is called by his name, as it is said: Remember the Torah of Moses My servant,

and Miriam came from her

Bezalel

who was full of wisdom, as it is written

And I will fill him with the spirit of God, and he made the Ark

for the Torah etc."

What also in P'shuto shel Mikra is this seemingly more fitting and related to "And it was because the midwives &lt;b&gt;feared &lt;/b&gt;the &lt;b&gt;God&lt;/b&gt;",

because the matter of the Torah is indeed "And He commanded us, the Lord, to do all these statutes, &lt;b&gt;to fear &lt;/b&gt;the Lord our God"&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;.

Which through Moshe her son the Almighty gave the Torah to Israel].

And accordingly, one does not need to come to learn that the "And God did good to the midwives" refers to what is stated <b>at the end</b> of the verse <b>after this</b>⁵¹

as Rashi learns,

but the reward is for what is stated at the beginning of <b>this</b> verse⁵²

"for the midwives feared God"⁵³.

And this is answered

(at the end of Rashi's wording - as it is brought)

in tractate Sotah.

Yud.

In the Mishnah and sugya in tractate Sotah it is explained the matter of measure for measure not according to the feeling and intention of the person,

but according to his actual deed⁵⁴.

And the matter is emphasized in the plain meaning of Scripture,

and as Rashi already brought earlier in his commentary on the Torah⁵⁵

the matter of measure for measure - actual deed

(- they sinned with the multitude of man's evil and were punished with the great deep).

And therefore,

according to the plain meaning of Scripture it is understood that the benefit and the reward here is not

(so much)

for their intention and thought "they feared God"⁵⁶,

but

(mainly)

for their actual deed,

being midwives

(Shifrah - who improves the child,

Puah - who coos and speaks and murmurs to the child)

and "they kept the children alive" help establish houses in Israel until "all the house of Israel",

and for this is the reward,

not

(so)

that which Yocheved gave birth to a son through whom the Torah was given

(and so too the virtue of Bezalel),

for this is not any

"Beis",

this did not continue to his children and his children's children - only and he transmitted it to Yehoshua,

only the concept of "&lt;b&gt;houses of &lt;/b&gt;kehunah and Leviyah and royalty".

11.

Here one also sees how all the matters of the Torah are with utmost precision.

That although the aforementioned matter,

to which Yocheved and Miriam merited is a matter of Aggadah and Drush,

one sees however the difference in this in the aforementioned sources - as this is in Rashi's commentary

(and Gemara),

as this is in Midrash and as this is in Sifri - that the difference is in accordance with the rules and boundaries of the part of the Torah where the matter stands.

In Midrash which is Drush and Aggadah in the Torah,

about which one says "draws a man's heart like Aggadah"⁵⁷,

attributes of the heart,

and brings to fear of Heaven⁵⁸

- is the main virtue and emphasis that which "the midwives feared God",

and therefore there is emphasized the reward "what is the reward of fear? Torah etc."

In Sifrei however,

which is primarily <b>halachos</b>,

connected with action - is the reward a matter of action,

priesthood and kingship opposite their action.

The emphasis in action is however not the particular matter of the particular doing,

rather the common aspect with other actions,

drawing oneself close,

obeying the Most High.

And Rashi,

<b>the plain meaning</b> of Scripture,

which is connected with actual action

(and likewise the interpretations of the verses in the Gemara, many of which are according to the plain meaning,

as discussed several times⁵⁹)

- it begins that "not

The main thing is not the midrash but the deed”⁶⁰,

the actual deed,

that in this, in every deed, it is relevant not

(only)

the common denominator of all good deeds,

but the particular content of the particular action,

and how one performed the deed.

Therefore, the reward of <b>the houses of</b> the priesthood, Levites, and kingship is relevant,

and also connected with “the house of the Lord and the house of the king,”

houses literally, physically,

because their main virtue and accomplishment was that they established and “and they revived” — made alive — houses in Israel,

as above at length.

12.

From the aforementioned Rashi commentary, we derive a wonderful lesson:

At first glance, it is not necessarily that the matter that Moses was the one through whom the Torah was given is not a measure for measure reward for Yocheved

but this is nevertheless the greatest reward that one can have.

One emphasizes,

that there is an even greater reward,

and nachas for a Jewish mother - &lt;b&gt;houses of &lt;/b&gt;priesthood, Levites, and royalty.

Not so much that she has a son who is a great scholar,

erudite,

sharp and the like,

but rather the establishment of &lt;b&gt;houses &lt;/b&gt;in Israel,

houses of priesthood, Levites, and royalty,

&lt;b&gt;Jewish &lt;/b&gt;children and children’s children,

students&lt;sup&gt;61&lt;/sup&gt;

and students of students,

helping Jews to build &lt;b&gt;Jewish &lt;/b&gt;homes,

by effecting upon each and every Jewish child that they too should participate in

(the conduct of)

priesthood, Levites, and royalty.

What their spiritual meaning is: although in general both kohanim and levi'im their meaning is "to be set apart to stand before the Lord to serve Him and to minister to Him etc."⁶²

"The entire tribe of Levi is set apart for the service of the Temple"⁶³,

is - the main separation is with kohanim,

who perform the service of the sacrifices and incense in the Holy Temple,

and as this also expresses itself in that a kohen may not become impure⁶⁴,

may not go out to the diaspora etc.⁶⁵,

which by a levi this prohibition does not exist.

And in the service of God in each and every Jew⁶⁶,

is the concept of the priesthood,

the separation and distinction from worldly matters,

attachment and connection to Divinity⁶⁷.

A Levite goes out into the diaspora and even onto a cemetery,

D.

H.

its essence

(in "all your deeds and your ways")

is that he works and affects even such a Jew who is located outside of Jerusalem and outside the Land of Israel,

he is in the diaspora even to a level of a cemetery,

the opposite of life, may it not be said,

and the Levite makes him alive,

until that also he — "God will be his portion and his inheritance"

forever and for all eternities⁶²,

exactly like priests and Levites.

But a Levite is connected with priests "they shall cleave to you and serve you"&lt;sup&gt;68&lt;/sup&gt;,

with the service of the Temple and with a holy place.

And consequently it is understood that also their effect is not so much in the world; the place that Levites reach has a certain connection to the Temple and holiness.

The ultimate purpose, however, is to effect the kingship and dominion of the Supreme One over the entire world - royal palaces.

And this is the true nachas that a Jewish mother has,

when she establishes houses,

generations of Jewish children,

who conduct themselves in the manner of "Kehunah, Leviyah, and Malchus",

And then all the hosts of Hashem go out from this final exile - as it was in Egypt,

that "all the hosts of Hashem went out

(who were established from the Hebrew midwives)

from the land of Egypt"⁶⁹,

and at their head - Moshe

(the king in Jeshurun⁷⁰)

Aharon

(the Kohen)

and their tribe

(the tribe of Levi)

and "they go out with a high hand"⁷¹.

Shabbos Parshas Va'eira 5730)