What is the significance of the fact that Pharaoh's daughter (Bisyah) went down to the river to bathe?
Targum Yonasan: Hashem struck her with leprosy, which caused her to feel hot; so she went down to the river to cool down. The moment she took the basket, Hashem cured her and her leprosy disappeared. 1
Sotah 12b: She went to be Tovel and 'wash her hands of her father's idolatry and to convert.' 2
Sotah 12b: The word "Lirchotz" is as in Yeshayah 4:4.
Oznayim la'Torah: Borne out by the fact that on that very day, her father had decreed that all babies should be drowned. Now she found Moshe in the water, knowing that he was a Jewish baby, yet she took him out (perhaps even with the full realization that he was the savior in question - as the Torah hints when it writes "va'Tir'ehu Es ha'Yeled" - Sotah 12b).
"Vateired ba Par?oh Lirechotz ? ? . Why does the Torah not tell us where she went down to?
Rashi: We need to invert the words, to read ?Vateired bas Par?oh al ha?Ye?or Lirchotz?.
Why does the Torah write "Al ha'Ye'or," and not 'El ha'Ye'or' (to the river), or 'ba'Yeor' (in the river)?
Ramban #1 (according to Rashi): The word "Al" sometimes means 'to.' 1
Ramban #2: There were steps leading down from the palace to the river, and she only stood on the first step to 'bathe.'
Ramban #3: The word 'Al' sometimes means 'in." 2
Seforno: Bisyah did not actually go down to the river! She entered a private bathing room that belonged to her father, that overlooked the river, (to bathe). 3
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 17, p. 79): Her objective was not the water itself! Rather, she went to wash herself from the detestable idolatry of her father's house (i.e. to immerse herself and convert) - as Chazal interpret in Sotah 12b. 4 The Nile was simply the location where she did so.
Ramban: See for example Shmuel I 2:11, and Yirmeyah 23:35).
Ramban: See, for example, 29:3.
Seforno: As it would not have been befitting for a princess to bathe in a public place, due to the principle "The Kavod of a princess is inside" (Tehilim 45:14). Also refer to 2:5:5:1*.
Maharal (loc. cit.): Had she not taken this step, she would not have merited to save Moshe, nor would she even have been capable of doing so.
?ve?Na?arosehah Holchos .. ?What are the connotations of "ve'Na'arosehah Holchos ? "?
Rashi #1, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: It means that they were strolling along the river bank.
Rashi: Like we find in Bereishis 25:32.
Sotah 12b: When Bisyah's maidservants saw that she wanted to save Moshe, they pointed out that if a king's subjects do not adhere to his decrees, at least his children and family would be expected to do so. Hashem sent Gavriel who came and knocked them into the ground.
Why does the Torah need to inform us that Bisyah ?s maidservants were strolling along the river bank?
Rashi: When the maidservants tried to stop her from saving the Ivri boy, 1 Hashem struck them down (refer to 2:5:5.1:1). 2
Seforno: While Bisyah was bathing in the palace (see 2:5:3:4), her ?Na'aros? ( ladies-in-waiting) went out strolling by the river. This explains, a. why she saw the basket, but they did not, and b. why she did?nt send one of them to fetch it. 3
Whom her own father had decreed was to be killed - See Tosfos and Hadar Zekenim. Oznayim la'Torah: And it teaches us that she saved Moshe, in spite of her maidservants' efforts to stop her, and in spite of the probability that they would report her to her father, which no doubt they would have done, had Gavriel not killed them. Refer to 2:5:4.1:1*..
Sifsei Chachamim: ... leaving Bisyah one maidservant, as it is not befitting for a princess to travel unaccompanied.
Seforno: This was Hashem's Hashgachah! Had her ladies been available, they might have disregarded her request, and tipped the basket into the Nile. Rather, she sent her maidservant who was helping her bathe, who fulfilled her request and brought her the baby.
What exactly was "Amasah," which Bisyah sent to fetch the basket containing Moshe?
Rashi #1, Ramban, Rashbam and Seforno: She sent her maidservant. 1
Rashi #2, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: She stretched out her hand 2 and pulled it in.
Seforno: She sent the slave-girl who was assisting her to bathe (in the room overlooking the river; refer to 2:5:3:4). Sotah 12b - Even though Gavriel had killed her maidservants, he left one alive, refer to 2:5:4.1:1* and 2:5:4:1**.
Rashi: Which extended many Amos until it reached the basket. See Sotah 12b.
If Bisyah stretched out her hand, why does the Torah refer to it as "Amasah," rather than 'Yadah'?
R. Bachye: As hinted in the extra ?Nun? ans two ?Heys? in ?ki min ha;Mayim Meshisiyhu? (Pasuk 10).
Oznayim la'Torah: There were perhaps thousands of babies cast into the Nile, yet Bisyah made the effort to save just one. This teaches us that even when many people are dying or suffering, one should not be deterred from saving even just one, since one never knows who that one will turn out to be (Though in any event, saving one life is akin to saving the entire world - Sanhedrin 37a). The commentaries also learn from here, that one should make an effort to perform a good deed, even when the task appears impossible, because one is likely to enjoy Siya'ata di'Shemaya - just like Bisyah.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "'... Descended to bathe upon the river' - Invert the Pasuk in order to interpret it; 'She descended upon the river, to bathe.'" Why must we invert the Pasuk?
Gur Aryeh: One bathes in the river, not above it! 1 Rather, interpret the phrase as, 'She descended to (the banks) upon the river, to bathe therein.'
Rashi writes: "Our Sages interpret [the word] 'Holechos' (lit. 'walking') to mean 'death'... [The maidens] were going to die, because they tried to prevent her [from saving him]." Why interpret this way?
Gur Aryeh: We would expect the verse to say that her maidens were 'sitting' or 'standing' next to the Nile, near their mistress. Would they literally go off for a stroll, and leave the princess unattended?! Thus, Chazal's interpretation. 1
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 17, p. 79): If it were literal ('her maidens were strolling'), why would the Torah need to mention it? Rather, as Chazal interpret, they were dying.
Gur Aryeh: Also note that the word 'Holechos' (written without a Vav) equals the word "Misah" in Gematriya (455).
Rashi writes: "Our Sages interpret [the word] 'Holechos' to mean 'death.'" If so, why is this written as an allusion, and not explicitly?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 17, p. 79): This was not an overt miracle. They 'died' in the existential sense - their ability and Mazal were removed on High, such that they could no longer protest.
Rashi writes: "Amasah - [lit.] her maidservant. Our Sages interpret it to mean 'her hand (or arm)' -- however, according to the rules of Dikduk in Leshon ha'Kodesh, the Mem would then have a Dagesh." If this is correct, how did the Sages nonetheless interpret 'Amasah' to mean 'arm'?
Gur Aryeh #1: That opinion in fact reads the word "Amasah" with a Dagesh. Rashi is pointing out that in his current tradition, the Mem is read without a Dagesh; thus, it means 'maidservant.'
Gur Aryeh #2: According to Sotah 12b, that opinion will say that the word "Amasah" is used instead of just 'Yadah,' to teach us how it [miraculously] became greatly extended. Usually, nouns containing a Dagesh do not lose them, even in possessive (i.e. her arm) or construct form. The unusual change in the Nekudos of this word 1 is precisely the hint to the unusual, miraculous change in her arm. 2
Gur Aryeh: 'Amasah' meaning 'her arm' would have a Patach under the Alef, and a Dagesh in the Mem. Our text has a Chataf-Patach under the Alef, and no Dagesh.
Gur Aryeh: Rashi implies this as well. Even after he points out the problem in the Dikduk, he concludes, "[The Sages] interpreted 'Amasah' as 'her arm' - that her arm was extended by many Amos."
