How were the two Pillars positioned?
Rashi, Rashbam, Hadar Zekenim and Targum Onkelos: When the evening arrived, the Pillar of Fire came down in front of Yisrael as usual, while the Pillar of Cloud, instead of leaving, moved to the back of Yisrael, to make it dark for the Egyptians, and to intercept the arrows and slingshot that the Egyptians were firing at Yisrael. 1
Ramban (citing the Mechilta) and Seforno: The angel together with the Pillar of Fire went to the back of Yisrael; 2 and the Pillar of Cloud 3 positioned itself in between it and the Egyptians. 4
Targum Yonasan: The Pillar of Cloud moved to the back of Yisrael, where it became half Cloud - to make it dark for the Egyptians) and half fire - to light up for Yisrael.
Rashi (citing Mechilta, based on Hoshe'a 11:3): This can be compared to a father walking along the road, with his son walking in front of him, when suddenly, robbers attacked.... (refer to 14:20:1.1 for more about this parable).
Ramban: This was necessary in order to enable the Egyptians, who were able, through the Pillar of Cloud, to see the Camp of Yisrael moving forward, to then follow them into the sea.
Seforno: Both of which were led by the angel.
If the Pillar of Cloud made it dark, what does the Pasuk mean when it adds that it "lit up the night"?
Rashi #1, Rashbam and Targum Onkelos 1 : It means that the Pillar of Cloud made it dark for the Egyptians, while the Pillar of Fire (referred to earlier in the Pasuk) lit up the night for Yisrael. 2
Rashi #2 (to Yirmeyah 32:20): The same Mazal made it dark for the Egyptians and light for Yisrael.
Rashi #3 (to Tehilim 139:11): "Va'Ya'er" actually means, 'it made it dark.' 3
Gur Aryeh: Rashi explains this way due to the inherent contradiction here - was there darkness, or illumination? Rashi explains that the darkness and light came from two different sources; and each was directed towards a different recipient.
Like we find in Iyov 37:11, and in Tehilim 148:3 (see Rashi loc. cit). Also see Pesachim 2a-3a.
What is the Torah referring to when it writes, "v'Lo Karav Zeh El Zeh (singular) Kol ha'Laylah"?
Hadar Zekenim (citing Sefer ha'Gan): The Pillar of Fire in front of Egypt, did not approach the Pillar of Cloud in front of Yisrael - at night; but in the morning they drew close to and confounded the Egyptians (14:24). Then, Yisrael did not need the fire for light, nor the cloud to lead the way, for the water was on both sides (there was only one way to go).
Moshav Zekenim (citing Shemos Rabah 22:7): It refers to the angels, about whom it is written "V'Kara Zeh El Zeh 3 " (Yeshayah 6:3 - exchanging the 'Beis' of "Karav" for an 'Alef'). The angels did not sing Shirah that night, because Hashem's creations (the Egyptians) were being destroyed. 4
Gur Aryeh: Rashi is bothered by the word "Zeh" in singular; we would have expected the word 'Eilu,' referring to the Mitzrim and Yisraelim (respectively) in plural. Rather, the word "Zeh" refers to each camp.
Oznayim la'Torah: The Pasuk implies that the barrier was bi-directional; both camps were held back from crossing. We understand the import of the Egyptians being unable to approach the Bnei Yisrael to attack; but why would the Bnei Yisrael even have wanted to approach the Egyptian camp? When Bnei Yisrael saw that they were being given the upper hand, they wanted to turn back and directly attack the Mitzrim. But the cloud and the Mal'ach would not allow them; for it would have been against Hashem's plan - "Hashem will fight on your behalf, and you shall remain silent (i.e. passive)!" (14:14).
Moshav Zekenim (citing Vayikra Rabah 2:8): But "v'Kara Zeh El Zeh... Kadosh..." is only during the day! At night, the angels say "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso..."! This requires investigation.
Mishnas R. Aharon (Vol. 3, p. 4): But the Bnei Yisrael sang Shirah [with Ru'ach ha'Kodesh]! Shirah of the angels merely praises Hashem, since they are "Omedim" (they remain static), and Hashem did not desire such Shirah at this time. Shirah of people for a miracle, on the other hand, which strengthens their Emunah and perception of Hashgachah, and fixes it in the Nefesh, and is a remembrance for all generations - is obligatory!
"V'Lo Karav Zeh El Zeh Kol ha'Laylah" - Chazal derive from here, that Hashem did not permit the Mal'achim to sing Shirah that night, as His creations were drowning in the sea (Sanhedrin 39b). What is the derivation, and what do Chazal mean?
Ba'al ha'Turim, Rabeinu Bachyei (on this verse); Maharsha to Sanhedrin 39b: The Gemara's source is our verse's similarity to "v'Kara Zeh El Zeh [v'Amar]" (Yeshayah 6:3), which introduces the Shirah "Kadosh" of the Mal'achim. Our verse teaches that "v'Lo Karav;" i.e., tonight the angels did not recite this Shirah.
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 157, to Sanhedrin 39b): Why did Hashem not wish to receive Shirah on this night? Hashem is the ultimate Cause of everything, and He desires that His handiwork should remain in existence; as in the verse, "May Hashem rejoice in His handiwork" (Tehilim 104:31).
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "This can be compared to a father walking along the road, with his son walking in front of him, when robbers attacked them and tried to take the son captive. What did the father do? He picked up his son and placed him behind him. When a wolf approached from behind, he picked him up and placed him on his shoulders. And when subsequently, robbers attacked from the front and wolves from behind, he placed him on his shoulders and fought them off." What is the explanation for this parable (i.e. the Nimshal)?
Gur Aryeh: The "bandits" represent the uncivilized desert; Hashem sent an angel to lead the way ahead of Yisrael (13:21-22). The "wolves" are the Mitzrim, who attacked from behind (14:10); Hashem then told the angel to stand guard behind the camp. But now Yisrael was faced with both the sea up ahead, 1 and the Mitzrim from behind; so Hashem, so to speak, took us on His arms, to bring us across the sea.
According to Gur Aryeh, the second bandits in the parable, who attacked simultaneously with the wolves, are a separate group (representing the sea, whereas the first bandits represented the desert).
Rashi writes: "He came between the camp of Egypt, [and the camp of Yisrael] - A parable, to someone who was travelling with his son...." Why does Rashi associate the parable with our verse, rather than the preceding one?
Gur Aryeh: Our verse makes it clear that the reason that the angel moved from its usual position, was to intervene between the camp of Yisrael and that of the Mitzrim, to protect us - as in the parable. 1
Gur Aryeh: Also - to clarify that it was the Mal'ach who intervened, and not (only) the cloud. (Gur Aryeh seems to have had this parable, in his text of Rashi, positioned in Rashi's first comment to 14:19 (DH va'Yelech, regarding the Mal'ach); but even in that text, Rashi associates the idea with our verse (14:20)).
Rashi writes: "The pillar of fire [illuminated] the night for Yisrael; it went before them the entire night as usual." Why does Rashi add this?
Gur Aryeh: Rashi realizes that his explanation (14:20:2:1) is difficult. He must insert into the verse, both what was providing the illumination (the pillar of fire), and for whom it was for (the Bnei Yisrael)! (See 14:20:2:1 1 .) Rashi explains that both of these go without saying. We already know that the pillar of fire always illuminated the night for Bnei Yisrael, without fail (13:21-22).
Rashi writes: "... Whereas the darkness caused by the thick cloud (Arafel), was towards Egypt." What is Rashi adding?
Gur Aryeh: Do not think that this "Choshech" was the regular darkness of nighttime. Rather, it was a unique darkness, brought on by the cloud, upon the Egyptians only. "Arafel" means darkness that is thick and tangible. 1
Gur Aryeh seems to be referencing Rashi to 10:21, in his description of Makas Choshech in Egypt, where the darkness was so thick and tangible that they could not move. Indeed, Gur Aryeh to 8:5 explains (among others) that Makas Choshech in Mitzrayim lasted only six days, because it would resume later, on this night of Keri'as Yam Suf (see question 10:22:2). Oznayim la'Torah (to 10:23) - This last night of Choshech belonged to the second type of Choshech Mitzrayim; the Mitzrim could not even move. As the Mechilta writes here, "'V'Lo Karav...' - If an Egyptian was standing, he could not sit... as it says (regarding Choshech Mitzrayim), 'v'Yamesh Choshech' (10:21)." This explains what Gur Aryeh wrote above (see 14:19:2.2:1) - The cloud alone could not stop the Egyptian arrows, as it was permeable like a regular cloud (see 14:19:2.1:1**). Rather, it was the Mal'ach accompanying Yisrael, who stopped the arrows by means of the cloud (by making it thick and impenetrable). This would also match the opinion in the Midrash that Choshech Mitzrayim was not the Choshech of Gehinom, but rather the Choshech from On High (see Maharal Gevuros Hashem, beg. Ch. 34, refer to 10:21:3:1). (EK)
