Monday, January 18, 2010

Bo as "come to Pharaoh"?

Summary: Does it make sense to tell someone to come to person X, instead of to go to person X? I favor Baal HaTurim's answer over that of Avi Ezer.

Post: The first pasuk of Bo:


א  וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, בֹּא אֶל-פַּרְעֹה; וְדִבַּרְתָּ אֵלָיו, כֹּה-אָמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי הָעִבְרִים, שַׁלַּח אֶת-עַמִּי, וְיַעַבְדֻנִי.
1 Then the LORD said unto Moses: 'Go in unto Pharaoh, and tell him: Thus saith the LORD, the God of the Hebrews: Let My people go, that they may serve Me.

But Bo means come, not go! Avi Ezer begins his commentary on the parasha by asking this question:



That is, Halicha is the language of distancing from the speaker -- English "Go", like "go to him". Bo is the language of coming close to the speaker -- English "Come", like "come to me". If so, it does not make sense to say "Come to Pharaoh", as it does in this pasuk and several others. His solution is since Hashem is truly everywhere, Hashem can use Lech and Bo interchangeably.

An interesting idea, but I think ultimately incorrect. After all,
dibra Torah kilshon benei Adam. And even if it is technically acceptable, for the exceptional reason given, why choose such a strange deviation? More than that, I am unconvinced that only Hashem will say "Bo towards X". The case that leaps to mind is an instruction to come before another king, namely Achashverosh.

ח  וְאֶת-פַּתְשֶׁגֶן כְּתָב-הַדָּת אֲשֶׁר-נִתַּן בְּשׁוּשָׁן לְהַשְׁמִידָם, נָתַן לוֹ--לְהַרְאוֹת אֶת-אֶסְתֵּר, וּלְהַגִּיד לָהּ; וּלְצַוּוֹת עָלֶיהָ, לָבוֹא אֶל-הַמֶּלֶךְ לְהִתְחַנֶּן-לוֹ וּלְבַקֵּשׁ מִלְּפָנָיו--עַל-עַמָּהּ.
8 Also he gave him the copy of the writing of the decree that was given out in Shushan to destroy them, to show it unto Esther, and to declare it unto her; and to charge her that she should go in unto the king, to make supplication unto him, and to make request before him, for her people.

There are many instances of Bo el X, involving intercourse. These might be good counter-evidence, but aside from these, we have:
בראשית פרק ז
  • פסוק א: וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה לְנֹחַ, בֹּא-אַתָּה וְכָל-בֵּיתְךָ אֶל-הַתֵּבָה:  כִּי-אֹתְךָ רָאִיתִי צַדִּיק לְפָנַי, בַּדּוֹר הַזֶּה. 
  • פסוק יג: בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה בָּא נֹחַ, וְשֵׁם-וְחָם וָיֶפֶת בְּנֵי-נֹחַ; וְאֵשֶׁת נֹחַ, וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת נְשֵׁי-בָנָיו אִתָּם--אֶל-הַתֵּבָה. 


though admittedly the instruction is from God. But then Moshe says:

שמות פרק ג
  • פסוק יג: וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל-הָאֱלֹהִים, הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָא אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאָמַרְתִּי לָהֶם, אֱלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם שְׁלָחַנִי אֲלֵיכֶם; וְאָמְרוּ-לִי מַה-שְּׁמוֹ, מָה אֹמַר אֲלֵהֶם. 

and there is:

שמות פרק לד
  • פסוק יב: הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ, פֶּן-תִּכְרֹת בְּרִית לְיוֹשֵׁב הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה, בָּא עָלֶיהָ:  פֶּן-יִהְיֶה לְמוֹקֵשׁ, בְּקִרְבֶּךָ. 

and regarding Calev:

במדבר פרק יד
  • פסוק כד: וְעַבְדִּי כָלֵב, עֵקֶב הָיְתָה רוּחַ אַחֶרֶת עִמּוֹ, וַיְמַלֵּא, אַחֲרָי--וַהֲבִיאֹתִיו, אֶל-הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר-בָּא שָׁמָּה, וְזַרְעוֹ, יוֹרִשֶׁנָּה. 

and
מדבר פרק לב
  • פסוק ט: וַיַּעֲלוּ עַד-נַחַל אֶשְׁכּוֹל, וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וַיָּנִיאוּ, אֶת-לֵב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל--לְבִלְתִּי-בֹא, אֶל-הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר-נָתַן לָהֶם, יְהוָה.

and
דברים פרק ד
  • פסוק כא: וַיהוָה הִתְאַנַּף-בִּי, עַל-דִּבְרֵיכֶם; וַיִּשָּׁבַע, לְבִלְתִּי עָבְרִי אֶת-הַיַּרְדֵּן, וּלְבִלְתִּי-בֹא אֶל-הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה, אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה. 


and
דברים פרק ז
  • פסוק א: כִּי יְבִיאֲךָ, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, אֶל-הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר-אַתָּה בָא-שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ; וְנָשַׁל גּוֹיִם-רַבִּים מִפָּנֶיךָ הַחִתִּי וְהַגִּרְגָּשִׁי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי, וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי--שִׁבְעָה גוֹיִם, רַבִּים וַעֲצוּמִים מִ...

etcetera.

It does seem that Baal Haturim considered the question, well before, and came up with a better alternative. He writes:



That is, בא is an instruction to go to him in his house, while לך is an instruction to meet him at the water.

Indeed, it strikes me that Targum Onkelos says similarly. In Vaera, he translates:


ז,טו לֵךְ אֶל-פַּרְעֹה בַּבֹּקֶר, הִנֵּה יֹצֵא הַמַּיְמָה, וְנִצַּבְתָּ לִקְרָאתוֹ, עַל-שְׂפַת הַיְאֹר; וְהַמַּטֶּה אֲשֶׁר-נֶהְפַּךְ לְנָחָשׁ, תִּקַּח בְּיָדֶךָ.
אִיזֵיל לְוָת פַּרְעֹה בְּצַפְרָא, הָא נָפֵיק לְמַיָּא, וְתִתְעַתַּד לְקַדָּמוּתֵיהּ, עַל כֵּיף נַהְרָא; וְחֻטְרָא דְּאִתְהֲפֵיךְ לְחִוְיָא, תִּסַּב בִּידָךְ.


an in Bo he translates:

י,א וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, בֹּא אֶל-פַּרְעֹה:  כִּי-אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי אֶת-לִבּוֹ, וְאֶת-לֵב עֲבָדָיו, לְמַעַן שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה, בְּקִרְבּוֹ.
וַאֲמַר יְיָ לְמֹשֶׁה, עוֹל לְוָת פַּרְעֹה:  אֲרֵי אֲנָא יַקַּרִית יָת לִבֵּיהּ, וְיָת לִבָּא דְּעַבְדּוֹהִי, בְּדִיל לְשַׁוָּאָה אָתַי אִלֵּין, בֵּינֵיהוֹן.


"Ul" means "enter", or "go in", just as the JPS translation renders it. To me, that implies an audience in the chamber of the king.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You may want to do a post on the Avi Ezer and how he very often tries to make the Ibn Ezra fit the "frum" palate.

joshwaxman said...

indeed. maybe eventually, but there is just so much material out there to show this. in fact, most of my avi ezer posts go to this very point...

kt,
josh

Anonymous said...

So I am beginning to see, although I am a newcomer to your blog... I don't know what you do or how you have the time, but I do very much enjoy reading it.

Since I see you posting on grammer, perhaps you can advise as to the lalechet with two segols under the lameds despite it being over an esnachta in parasht Vaeyra. In Kohelet (pasuk 7) at the end of the pasuk it's lalachet with two kametzes under the lameds. Also, see Shoftim (chapt 19) where it has lalechet like in Vaeyra.

Lastly, in relation to lying for the benefit of the hamon am, I would note that R' Zvi Hirsch Chajes seemed to be in favor based upon his gloss in Yoma on the issue of the Kohen picking up the lot for azazel in the wrong hand...

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin