INSIGHT
5767 - #13
POINTS OF TRANSITION
Bereishit Rabbah 100:10 states
that Moshe Rabbeinu, for forty years, was in the palace
of Pharaoh, then lived forty years in Midian and then
served forty years as the leader of the Jewish People.
While there may be some controversy within the
commentators regarding the exact length of each of these
time periods, the basic message of this midrash
seems to be straightforward. Moshe’s life can be
divided into three parts. In the first part of his life,
he lived in Egypt, basically in the world of the
aristocracy. In the second part of his life, he lived
what could possibly be described as the quiet and removed
life of the shepherd. Finally, in the last third of his
life, he lived the life for which he will always be
remembered, the public life of the teacher, across all
time and place, of klal Yisrael. Moshe’s life
was not monolithic. It was marked by change, significant
change at least twice. From the world of the aristocracy
of Egypt, Moshe had to create a new world for himself in
the grazing fields of Midian. And then from this world of
the shepherd, Moshe had to again leave his surroundings
to again adopt a completely different lifestyle, this
time as the leader of Israel. Moshe’s path to
becoming Moshe Rabbeinu, thus, was not a linear
one; it involved transition. To gain a full perspective
on Moshe Rabbeinu, it would thus seem worthwhile
to further investigate these different periods within
Moshe’s life.
What was Moshe’s life like in the palace of Pharaoh?
What was his life like as a shepherd in Midian? In
considering a study of Moshe, it would seem to be
important to look at the different stages of his life
– and thereby learn who he was and how he became
Moshe Rabbeinu. In truth, though, we have very
little information, in the Torah text itself, of the
first two stages of Moshe’s life. The various midrashic
texts, of course, do offer a great deal more information
about Moshe’s life, albeit that there are many
contradictory presentations. What is a bit stranger,
however, is that the two major points of transition
within Moshe’s life – into his life in Midian
and out of his life in Midian – are given more
significance in the text than Moshe’s entire life in
Midian. In response to the question of how the stages of
Moshe’s life affected him, the Torah seems to be
informing us that, while some information about
Moshe’s life is important in understanding who Moshe
was, knowledge of the two points of transition may be of
greater significance.1
Both of these points of transition are marked by events
and, as such, it is these two events that demand our
focus. Moshe’s transition from shepherd to leader,
his transition from Midian back to Egypt, are marked by
the extensive narrative of Shemot, Chapters 3 and 4
including what occurred at the burning bush. It is
obvious that Moshe does not wish to make this transition
but does that mean he is content with this life in
Midian. Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, Shemot 2:22
would seem to indicate otherwise. Moshe will always be a
stranger in Midian; his heart is with his people in Egypt.
The focus of Moshe’s reluctance to return to Egypt
must have been his absolute desire not to be a
leader – and this indeed is the focus of the text In
Midian, he lived a private life, and that is all that we
are told about Moshe. He had a family; he was a shepherd;
and he felt like a stranger. What does this tell us about
Moshe Rabbeinu? It is the transition point that
informs us of the significance of Midian in Moshe’s
being.
.
Yet this second transition point only provides part of
the overall story. It is the first transition point that
provides the other valuable information we need to
understand Moshe. In Shemot 2:15-21, we are
informed that Moshe fled from Egypt to Midian and that
this transition to Midian was marked by specific events
at a well. In the midrashic literature and the
commentators, this brief story in the text is expanded
upon, often in contradictory ways. There are the famous
stories of how Moshe actually spent the majority of his
years outside of Egypt as a leader in Kush.2 Rabbi
Shimshon Hirsch also seems to imply that Moshe did
not go directly to Midian upon leaving Egypt, albeit for
different reasons. Bereishit Rabbah obviously describes
Moshe as gong directly to Midian. Rashi focuses on
the events at the well in terms of marriage and, perhaps,
Moshe’s desire for family. Ramban focuses on
the injustice that Moshe observed and his need to
intervene. The text opens itself to all these
possibilities but, it there is a focus, it is the simple
focus that Moshe intervenes. Moshe fleeing from the
consequences of his intervention in Egypt, Moshe who
perhaps more than anything wishes to establish a private
life of family in this new country, Moshe who wishes more
than anything not to cause a stir in this new country and
to be left alone, intervenes.3 What we
are really introduced to at the well is a man of
contradiction. Moshe does not wish to be a public person.
This is reinforced in the story of the burning bush
and Moshe’s reluctance to be a leader. Yet, Moshe
cannot stand to see injustice. This occurred in Egypt and
occurred again at the well. Perhaps Moshe’s great
desire is for God to simply eradicate evil and leave
Moshe alone. That was his request at the burning bush.
The problem for Moshe is that this is not the alternative
that he is given. To eradicate evil demands his
involvement. A private life may be Moshe’s desire
but the private person cannot fight injustice. A public
life may be Moshe’s greatest feat but it is only the
public person that can fight injustice. This is
Moshe’s dilemma and ultimately describes the nature
of the transitions in his life.
Moshe arrives in Midian wishing a private
life. He fulfills his goal in that he marries and lives
the life of a shepherd. But is that who he is? The event
that marks his transition to Midian informs us otherwise.
He is a private person who ultimately, even against his
will, cannot be a private person. His caring for others,
his inability to suffer injustice demands of him to be a
public person. Even as he is about to enter a life of a
private person, the reality of the drive that will take
him into public life is identified. As long as the Jewish
People suffer in Egypt, he is a stranger. He indeed is a
private person. The most humble of individuals who ever
lived has no desire for public life. Yet he is also
driven towards public life for it is only in such a life
that he can battle injustice. This is Moshe’s
dilemma – a dilemma not of his mind but of his very
being.
The transitions of Moshe’s life
inform us of this contradiction of being that marked the
very essence of Moshe. Leadership if often motivated by a
desire to accomplish good. The cynical view of the
politician -- that he/she is only interested in the glory
of public life but is not really interested in the good
that public life can achieve – is generally not the
truth. Leaders usually are interested in accomplishing
good. But, while motivated to accomplish this good,
leaders also often do enjoy public life and the perks
that may be associated with it. Generally it is the way
of the world -- the way that God created us -- that the
factors of our being intersect. This was not the case
with Moshe. His private life was one of conflict. His
public life was one of conflict. His life was not linear
because his being was not linear. He did not want the
lifestyle of the public person but he did want to
eradicate evil and injustice which could only be done by
a public person. His life was about this tension. The
transition points within his life identify for us this
tension – and the essence of this leader of Israel
for the generations.
. 4.
Rabbi Benjamin Hecht e-mail
Footnotes
1 Of course, the midrashic
literature on this subject cannot be ignored and it would
be improper to draw conclusions on Moshe’s life
solely from the text itself. Yet, there is a reason why
certain information or events were mentioned in the Torah
text itself and why others were not. This is my point
here. In fact, the Torah presentation on the transition
from Egypt to Midian is itself scarce and the midrashic
literature is not only expansive but, as will be
discussed, changes the very nature of the transition
– yet the very fact that the text itself has a focus
on this transition point is to be recognized. .
2 See the Yalkut Me’am
Lo’ez on these verses.
3 A review of the
various commentators on this verse will indicate how I
arrived at this description of the event at the well.
© Nishma, 2007.
Return
to top
|