Why did Dasan use the word "Ish" here?
Rashi: He was accusing Moshe of throwing his weight around, when he was still only a youth.
On the previously day, when Dasan witnessed Moshe's killing of the Egyptian, why did he not query Moshe's credentials like he did now?
Oznayim la'Torah: He was not concerned by Moshe killing an Egyptian, especially bearing in mind that he himself had been the Egyptian's victim, whom Moshe had saved from a severe beating. 1 What irked him was how Moshe could have the 'audacity' to interfere with his right to strike another Jew. 2
In fact, it would probably not have affected him even if he had killed another Jew.
Oznayim la'Torah: In fact, he didn't seem as concerned to be under the jurisdiction of the cruel Egyptian taskmasters, as he was of being told what to do by a fellow Jew. See Oznayim la'Torah DH 'Mi Samecha le'Ish'; and to 2:13 DH 'Va'Yeitzei ba'Yom ha'Sheini' #1.
What is the significance in the phrase, "hal'Horgeini Atah Omer?" - as if Moshe was threatening to kill him with words?
Rashi: Referring to the incident that occurred the previous day, when Moshe had killed the Egyptian 1 with the Name of Hashem, 2 the man asked whether he planned to kill him too, with the Name of Hashem.
Ramban #1 (citing Ibn Ezra and Radak): He meant to ask whether Moshe intended to kill him ... 3
Ramban #2: With reference to the beginning of his statement, he added, 'Is it because you want to kill me that you rebuke me and say, 'Why do you strike your colleague''?
Moshav Zekenim (to 2:12): Moshe declined to kill the Egyptian in a conventional manner; either because he was afraid that the Mitzri might kill him first, or because had he done so, it would have been more evident and would have been more prone to become known.
Gur Aryeh: The Midrash learns this from the wording of our Pasuk, "Atah Omer" (will you now say) rather than 'Atah Mevakesh' (that you now seek). (In truth, Rashi is presenting one of the opinions in the Midrash; see 2:12:3.1.) Also see Ramban.
Ramban: See, for example, Koheles 2:1.
What did Moshe mean when he declared that "the matter is now known"? What was he afraid of?
Rashi #1, Rashbam, Seforno, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: Moshe meant now that his killing of the Egyptian was known, it would reach the ears of Pharaoh, 1 and he feared for his life; because he had thought that nobody had witnessed what he did.
Seeing as Moshe had checked that there were no witnesses before killing the Egyptian, how did what he did become known?
Seforno: Refer to 2:14:3:1*.
Midrash Rabah: Dasan and Aviram sneaked to Pharaoh. 1
Incredible, when one bears in mind that Moshe killed the Egyptian in order to save Dasan from a beating - and perhaps even from being beaten to death!
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "Moshe killed [the Mitzri] using the Divine Name." Ramban asks - If so, what indicated to the witness that it was Moshe who killed him, and not someone else?
Ramban: Moshe had placed his hand on the Mitzri's head as he cursed him. Alternatively, he witnessed Moshe burying the body, and inferred that it was Moshe's doing.
Gur Aryeh: Use of the Divine Name only works when it accompanies some action, albeit minimal. 1 Along with pronouncing the Divine Name, Moshe had to give the Mitzri a small hit.
Gur Aryeh: For example, David killed Golyas using the Divine Name, but also used a slingshot. When Moshe later split the sea, he raised his hand and staff over it.
Rashi writes: "'Atah Omer' - We learn from here that Moshe killed [the Mitzri] using the Divine Name." But the text did not indicate this above (2:12)! In the context of this verse, it only indicates that this is what the Jewish man feared would happen to him now.
Gur Aryeh #1: If Moshe hadn't killed the Mitzri using the Name, the Jewish man would not have entertained the thought that this might happen to him.
Gur Aryeh #2: Moshe had given the wicked man a verbal rebuke (2:13); to which he now responded, "Do you plan to kill me?" Seeing as Moshe had merely spoken, what indicated that he would do an act? Rather, killing the Mitzri had also been verbally.
Rashi writes: "Moshe killed [the Mitzri] using the Divine Name." In the Midrash, however, opinions differ as to how Moshe struck down the Mitzri - a) with his fist, b) with a Magrefah (work-tool), or c) using the Name of Hashem. Upon what are these opinions based?
Maharal: Refer to 2:12:3.1:1.
Rashi writes: "Moshe killed [the Mitzri] using the Divine Name." If Moshe was now afraid that the Jewish man would turn him in; why didn't he use the Name to strike down the Jewish man as well?
Gur Aryeh: It would not be correct for Moshe to do so. Perhaps the man would not inform on him in the end. Alternatively, there were many people who (now) knew of the incident; killing this one man would not have helped.
Rashi writes: "Ha'le'Horgeni Atah Omer - ... using the Divine Name." The present tense (Omer) seemingly indicates, that Moshe was actually pronouncing the Name upon the Jewish man as well! If so, why didn't the latter fall dead?
Gur Aryeh: That is not what the man meant. He was speaking in astonishment, 'Perhaps you will now be pronouncing the Name upon me, and I will surely die as a result!'
Rashi writes: "If so, the matter is known... - ... In the Midrashic sense, [Moshe was saying,] 'Now I know what this nation has done [to deserve such backbreaking slavery] ....'" Why interpret in this way?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 19, p. 85): In the simple sense, the verse should say, 'If so, they have told the matter!' The phrase 'it is known' implies something that is self-evident. Thus, the Midrash interprets Moshe as saying that the reason for their bondage is now understood.
Rashi writes: "He saw that there were evil informers among Yisrael.... 'I see that they are deserving of this (slavery).'" Why is slavery the appropriate consequence for informers?
Gur Aryeh: The Redemption was to come from a hidden, lofty source. An informer does just the opposite; he takes hidden secrets and reveals them. He thus sticks himself to a revealed, lowly level -- as low as slavery. 1
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 19, p. 85): A physical entity (Chomer) is subject to being acted upon or subjugated by others, whereas a Tzurah 2 is not. Revealing of secrets is a materialistic act, unbecoming of Yisrael.
Gur Aryeh: Yisrael's level in the world is lofty and hidden, while the nations' level is lowly and open, and he speaks verbosely (Chulin 133b). See further 2:14:3.3:1 and 2:14:3.4:1. (EK)
In Maharal's terminology, Chomer means raw material, which has the potential to be shaped towards a specific function. Tzurah is that function-specific form which material may take, actualizing its potential. Chomer is thus subservient to Tzurah. Yisrael is the world's Tzurah, they bring the word to actualizing its potential. Revealing a secret is a material act, characteristic of Chomer, and it leads to subjugation. (EK)
Rashi writes: "In the Midrashic sense, [Moshe was saying,] 'I now know what always astonished me -- What has Yisrael sinned, more so than the seventy nations, to deserve such [backbreaking servitude]? ...'" But surely the nations were guilty of such deeds as well?
Gur Aryeh: The nations are at a low, publicly revealed level to begin with, it is uncommon that they reveal hidden matters. But Yisrael start out at an inner, hidden level. 1 If they sin by revealing secrets and informing on their fellows, they descend to the lowest levels - even as far as enslavement.
Also see Maharal (Derush Al ha'Mitzvos, p. 60 et al).
Rashi writes: "'Achein, Noda ha'Davar' - ... What has Yisrael sinned, more so than the seventy nations, to deserve such [backbreaking servitude]?" What is the deeper meaning in the word "Achein"?
Gur Aryeh: The last two letters of the word "Achein" (Chaf-Nun) equal 70 in Gematriya, representing the seventy nations. The Alef (value 1) represents Yisrael. The word "Kein" means "it is so;" indicating something that is open and revealed. The Alef is a silent letter; its sound is hidden. 1 Moshe said, Due to A-Chein, I know why Yisrael is enslaved. Now that they inform on and reveal hidden secrets, they are even worse-off than the nations.'
Gur Aryeh: Also note that 'Alef' is an anagram of 'Pele' (meaning covered or hidden). These reflect their different natures; refer to 2:14:3.3:1. Also see Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 19, p. 86; Ohr Chadash p. 138, to Esther 3:8; and Derush Al ha'Mitzvos, p. 59 et al).
Rashi writes: "He saw that there were evil informers among Yisrael.... 'I see that they are deserving of this (slavery).'" But just because one man informed on his fellow, is the whole nation deserving of slavery!?
Maharal (Ohr Chadash p. 138, to Esther 3:8): There needs to be an absolute distinction between Yisrael and the nations. If even one member of Yisrael connects to the outside, they have already been joined up.
