THEY SHALL TAKE SOME OF THE BLOOD AND PUT IT ON

THE TWO DOORPOSTS AND THE LINTEL OF THE HOUSE IN WHICH THEY ARE TO EAT IT.

(Shemot

12: 5)

And

put it on the two doorposts and the lintel – On the inside. Are you saying it

should be on the inside or, rather, on the outside? We learn from the verse, the

blood shall be a sign for you (12: 13) – a sign for you and not for others.

(Mechiltah

Bo Masekhet DePaskha 6)

The Blood on the Lintel: Inside? Outside?

For Whose Benefit?

Many

said that blood was placed on the lintel and the two doorposts in order to show

that the abomination of Egypt was being publicly slaughtered, since by that

time, they [the Egyptians] were afraid of them [the Jews]. But if that were

true, the blood would have been placed on the gate of the courtyard, yet they

placed the blood secretly after closing the gate of the courtyard, and they

slaughtered [the paschal lamb] at twilight, nearing night-time, so that no one

would see them. Furthermore, no one went outside the door of his house until

morning (12:

22),

at which time they set off on their way and each person closed the gate of his

courtyard, since the Egyptians thought that they would return. The only reason

for placing blood on the lintel was as an atonement for all those eating within

the house, and as a sign for the destroyer to see [and pass over the house], in

the manner [described in the verse] and put a mark [on the heads of

those to be spared] (Ezekiel

9: 4).

(Ibn

Ezra on Shemot 12: 7)

We

have been commanded to slaughter the paschal lamb and to sprinkle with its

blood in Egypt the gates from outside, so that we should make manifest our

rejection of these opinions, proclaim what is contrary to them, and bring forth

the belief that the act, which they deemed to be a cause of destruction, saves

from destruction.

(RaMBaM,

Guide of the Perplexed III: 46, pg. 582 of Pines translation)

Between Servitude and Freedom

Moshe Landsman

Parashat Bo is the third of the trilogy treating

Israel's liberation from Egyptian servitude. In parashat Shemot we see

the process of enslavement, the consequences of oppression, and the factors

internal to the Jewish People that form a foundation that makes liberation

possible. Parashat Va'Eirah describes the moment of transition in which

the people begin replacing their slave mentality with a mentality of freedom. In

our present parasha, we see the people already released from their toils

(according to the Sages, by this stage the people were no longer employed in

hard labor), moving quickly and with an outstretched arm towards physical

liberation from the Egyptian culture.

The most salient act of liberation in the

parasha is the offering of the Paschal lamb, and it is accompanied by a

pronouncement: This month shall mark for you the beginning of the months; it

shall be the first of the months of the year for you (12: 2). This

announcement serves to endow the offering of the Paschal sacrifice in Egypt

with historical significance. We count the months of each year from this act,

starting each new year with a new beginning of liberation. Actually, our

parasha and the preceding parshiyot of liberation are replete with

pronouncements regarding the historical significance of the Exodus from Egypt. Incidentally,

the historical significance established by this trilogy does not only look

forward to the future, but also to the past as well. It situates the present

within the flow of Jewish history and within the continuous dialogue between

Israel and God. Indeed, the late Salvadoran psychologist, Ignacio Martin-Baro,

wrote that the restoration of an oppressed people's historical consciousness is

an important element in the process of its liberation.

The problem is that after liberation, and,

actually, throughout the five books of the Torah, Israel repeatedly suffers

pangs of nostalgia, wishing to return to servitude. Its conduct vacillates

between moments of longing for enslavement and "servile" behavior,

and yearnings for freedom. I believe that a number of principles may be learned

from this process:

1.   Liberation is

not identical with freedom. Liberation is a process, a coming-to-be, while

freedom is a mode of being.

This is readily seen in our parasha, and

even more so in the two preceding it. The attitudes and conduct of the Hebrews

and of the Egyptians are in constant flux. Even Pharaoh with his hardened heart

revises his position as the plot thickens.

2.   Freedom is not

a static condition, but rather dynamic and unstable. This derives from the very

nature of freedom – its most central characteristic being the ability to make

choices. That it, the freedom to choose allows a person to choose servility and

endanger freedom itself, throwing it off-balance.

An example of this may be found in Moses'

request that God erase him from His book if the Jewish People should lose its

role in the spiritual history of the world. This request is not just part of

the bargaining in which Moses engaged with God after the sin of the golden

calf. It also represents Moses' freely taken decision; if all of the earlier

events would be drained of significance, he no longer wishes to participate in

the process.

3.   By virtue of

its preoccupation with the present, freedom lacks the historical vision that is

sometimes exploited in order to justify actions that would be considered

questionable under normal conditions. In parashat Bo, this becomes evident in

connection with the exploitation of the Egyptians. In contrast to the

historical attitude of liberation, free people make use of the dynamic

orientation of the present, usually without any concern for future

consequences. Thus, the notion of "ends justifying the means" is appropriate

to the libratory process, but not to the actual experience of freedom.

4.   Sacrifice is

part of both liberation and freedom, but it is expressed in different ways. During

the process of liberation, the ability and willingness to make sacrifices

develops together with the capacity to plan for the future. Sometimes

engagement with the people's heritage inspires sacrifice. It expresses a

willingness to merge with a common fate, often a fate belonging wholly to the

future. In contrast, sacrifice stemming from freedom is a result – often

unavoidable – of present moral choice. Sacrifice associated with freedom is

unplanned. It sometimes occurs out of lack of concern for future consequences. While

the sacrifices of liberation involve melding together with a group, those of

freedom stem from an individual's personal decision, sometimes taken in a mood

of profound isolation.

In the parasha of Shemot, Pharaoh's daughter

sees a Hebrew infant crying and decides to take pity on him. She transgresses her

father's command and even returns the baby to his mother to be nursed. This was

a personal decision taken without consideration for immediate or long-term

consequences.

5.   Liberation is a

means, while freedom is the goal. A corollary of this is that liberation does

not always bring freedom. However, sometimes freedom can be used to help

promote liberation.

Moses' background – a Hebrew raised as a freeman

– is an example. A freeman can promote the process of the people's liberation

because having experienced freedom himself, he is acquainted with its nature.

As I have said, liberation does not necessarily

bring freedom. The book of Devarim concludes without resolving whether the

people are bound towards servitude or towards freedom. Will the people become

free individuals, serving God in joy and gladness (Devarim 28: 47), or will

Yeshurun grow fat and kick (paraphrase of Devarim 32:15)? The historical perspective of a people

undergoing liberation may be short-sighted.

There is an additional reason why liberation

does not always lead to freedom: Freedom generates anxiety. As I mentioned

above, freedom is realized in isolation. Similarly, freedom requires us to

stand before the abyss of nothingness. Choice, made by leaping into

uncertainty, always leads to yet another moment of choice. The uncertainty is

unending; in its place comes yet greater uncertainty. When the process of

liberation leads us to recurring anxiety, we may very well flee from it and

choose a less taxing path.

Despite all of he above, there is something

within us which leads us towards freedom. We experience this force as light,

authenticity, or self discovery. The flight from freedom brings about feelings

of betrayal, of unreceptiveness. We find it difficult to flee from ourselves.

Today we must also examine where the process of

our people's liberation is taking us. It is easy to know if we are moving in

the right direction: the nearer we approach freedom, the greater will be our

anxiety.

Dr. Moshe

Landsman is an educational and developmental psychologist.

And So It Shall Be as a

Sign Upon Your Hand

And

so it is with a person's two hands, for the left hand, being weaker, is near

the heart, the seat of wisdom. The intellectual portion of the heart weakens

the hand, for the hand deals with physical actions. However, the right hand is

near the liver, which is the seat of the appetitive faculty, which does not

oppose the hand, for that is its main power, but the seat of rational mind is

near the weak hand. And when He says and so it shall be as a sign upon your

hand, it is as if He said it shall be as a sign upon your heart,

since the heart causes the hand to be weak. Thus the point of the mitzvah of tefillin

(phylacteries) is that it serves as a reminder at the locations where the mind

resides, in the brain and heart. The tefillin of the head are placed between

your eyes because the eyes and he heart are panderers of sin (J. Berakhot 1: 5). That is why

those two places need something to remind them of God's existence and power, in

order to make people turn from sin.

(Keli

Yakar Shemot 13:16)

"Light and Darkness"

And

so, the pure righteous ones do not complain about darkness, instead, they add

light. They do not complain about evil, but instead add justice. They do not

complain about heresy, but instead add faith. They do not complain about

ignorance, but instead add wisdom.

(R.

A. Y. Kook zt"l Arpelei Tohar 27-28)

"Mixed Multitude": Two Views

Your

people have acted basely (Shemot 32:7) – It does not say the people but rather, your people: a mixed

multitude that you decided to take in and convert of your own initiative,

without consulting Me, and you said it would be good to bring converts close to

the Divine Presence. Now they have become debased and debase others.

(Rashi

on Shemot 32: 7)

Lover,

indeed, of peoples (Devarim

33:3).

Including the nations of the world such as the

mixed multitude and those of the nations who converted and came to accept the

Torah together with Israel – These, too, are beloved of God, He accepted them

and His presence rested upon them.

(RaShBaM

Devarim 33:3)

[Now

when Pharaoh let] the people [go…] (Shemot 13: 17): The numerical

value of the people [et ha'am] is equivalent to that of also a mixed multitude