What is the connection between Sefer Bereishis and Sefer Shemos?
Ramban: 'Sefer Bereishis,' also known as 'Sefer Yetzirah,' records the Creation and the events of the lives of the Avos, including the hints at future events of their children. 1 'Sefer Shemos,' also known as 'Sefer Ge'ulah,' which begins recording the realization of those hints, records the first Galus, 2 'Galus Mitzrayim,' and the details of the Ge'ulah 3 (the Redemption) from it (up to the building of the Mishkan). 4
Why does Sefer Shemos begin with a 'Vav'?
Ramban: Because, since the descent to Egypt was already mentioned in Bereishis 46:7, the Pasuk is basically continuing where it left off. 1
Moshav Zekenim: Bereishis ends with Yosef being put in a coffin. "V'Eleh Shemos" teaches us to write the name of the deceased on the monument, and that we mark off graves to prevent the Kohanim from becoming Tamei.
Ramban: See 1:1:1:1***. As a matter of fact, the current Pasuk is all but an exact replica of the following Pasuk there (46:8) - in the same way as it does in Sefer Ezra, which follows Divrei ha'Yamim. See Ramban.
Having already counted Yisrael by name in Parshas Vayigash, Bereishis 46:8, why does the Torah see fit to name and count them again?
Rashi (citing Midrash Rabah): To teach us Hashem's deep love of the Bnei Yisrael, inasmuch as He compares them to the stars, which He takes out by number and brings back in by number and by name.
Ramban (in the introduction): Refer to 1:1:1:1***. See note. 1
Rashbam, Da'as Zekenim (to 1:2) and Hadar Zekenim (to 1:5): Since the Torah is about to inform us 2 that the nation multiplied at a phenomenal rate, it needs first to tell us that only seventy souls actually arrived in Egypt.
Seforno: To inform us that only those listed here were worthy to be individually mentioned by name, which also explains why that generation did not turn to evil ways. 3
Da'as Zekenim: Egypt imposed taxes on them after Yosef died, and it is as if they came that day.
Hadar Zekenim (to 1:2): This is like a king whose pearls fell into the earth - he found them and counted them. Yisrael fell among the evil Egyptians and the Torah names them to demonstrate that, like the pearls, they had not degenerated.
Moshav Zekenim: The Torah teaches us that they retained their Jewish names - "v'Eleh Shemos...." 4
Ramban: The Ge'ulah was only complete when they received the Torah at Har Sinai, and built the Mishkan. When Hashem rested His Shechinah among them, as that was when they regained their fathers' former level.
In 1:7.
Seforno: Which is why, in 1:6, the Torah includes the words "and all that generation" alongside Yosef and his brothers.
'They came down to Egypt as Reuven and Shimon; and they left as Reuven and Shimon.' Oznayim la'Torah (to 1:5) - In fact, the Torah points out (here and in 1:5) that even Yosef, whose name - on the day of his 'coronation' - was changed to Tzafenas Pa'ne'ach - retained his name 'Yosef' throughout.
"... Bnei Yisrael that are descending to Egypt." To what was their sojourn in Egypt comparable?
Maharal #1 (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 3, p. 25): The Torah compares Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim to gold being refined 1 in an iron crucible (Devarim 4:20). Maharal - This illustrates how the Mitzrim acted against us with a heavy hand; they would never have permitted us to leave.
Maharal #2 (ibid.): The Midrash compares Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim to a developing fetus in the innards of an animal (see Devarim 4:34). Maharal - This illustrates how we ourselves were subsumed under the Mitzri nation, without our own identity. We then developed and came to be a nation there. 2
Maharal (ibid. p. 27): Every nation possesses two aspects - their physical nationhood (Chomer), as well as the identity and mission particular to each individual nation (their Tzurah. For explanation of Maharal's terminology, refer to 1:1:2.9:1*and 1:1:2.8:1*). In Egypt, in addition to being enslaved in the physical sense, we were made to suffer, which the Torah compares to heating by fire. The Tzurah of Mitzrayim was diametrically opposed to that of Yisrael, due to our unique status as Hashem's nation; and this clash was evident. A smith uses heat to refine and purify the gold; so too our Tzurah was similarly refined and purified by our suffering in Egypt.
Maharal (ibid. p. 27): This analogy describes the physical enslavement of the nation (in terms of Chomer). Also see Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 126, to Bava Basra 123a) - At seventy souls, Am Yisrael was considered a nation. Had they reached the number seventy prior to their descent, they would be like a fetus outside of the animal (i.e. they would lack the environment they needed in which to grow). Had they come without 70, they would lack their own identity, and be subsumed among the Egyptians.
Why were the Bnei Yisrael enslaved to Egypt specifically?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 4, p. 28): It was fitting that we would be enslaved to a nation that was our diametric opposite. 1 The Egyptians were steeped in licentiousness; whereas the Bnei Yisrael were holy and chaste. 2
Maharal (ibid. p. 29): The Mitzrim were base physicality (Chomer is raw material, open to be affected by anything, with no specific form). Yisrael attained the level of Tzurah (in that they are responsible to fulfill a goal and purpose. For further explanation of these terms, refer to 1:1:2.9:1*). Also refer to Bereishis 15:7:151.1:2 and the note there.
How is it possible that Bnei Yisrael were enslaved to such a depraved nation as Egypt?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 4, p. 29): The Mitzrim were Chomer, while Yisrael were Tzurah (refer to 1:1:2.8:1*), as well as the note here). Tzurah means completion - but the Bnei Yisrael were not yet complete! 1 Their very existence was therefore still lacking, and so they were enslaved to the most depraved of nations.
In the terminology of Maharal, "Chomer" is raw material or potential, while "Tzurah" (lit. "form") is the actualization and fulfillment of that potential. (To illustrate, in a knife, the iron is the Chomer, and the sharp edge is the Tzurah.) In this case, the Mitzrim had unlimited opportunity, and were not bound by anything. The Bnei Yisrael were just the opposite in this regard (see 1:1:2.8:1*). However, deficient Tzurah cannot exist, as Tzurah by definition means full actualization. (EK)
Why had slavery been decreed upon [the descendants of] Avraham Avinu, at the Bris Bein ha'Besarim (Bereishis 15:13)? (The Gemara (Nedarim 32a) presents three opinions as to why Avraham was punished with this decree - a. He used his students (who were Talmidei Chachamim) to fight the war against the four kings (Bereishis 14:14); b. He asked, "By what shall I know that I will inherit [the Land]?" (Bereishis 15:8); c. He returned the captured populace of Sedom to their king, preventing them from entering under the Shechinah (Bereishis 14:21-22). Why were these sins causes of the Egyptian exile?)
Maharal #1 (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 9, p. 55): Perhaps all agree that we went down to Mitzrayim to learn Emunah in Hashem; by witnessing both the great punishments that would befall the Egyptians, and Hashem's great kindness to us. If so, there are three events which might display Avraham's shortcoming in Emunah (which needed to be rectified), as follows - a) In the war against the four kings, although one may not rely on miracles, one who truly believes in Hashem is not afraid, and does not bring out Talmidei Chachamim from the Beis Midrash to where they ought not to be. b) Avraham asked for a sign that he would merit the tremendous gift of Eretz Yisrael [of which his descendants would need to remain worthy]; this nonetheless showed a slight lack of faith (refer to Bereishis 15:6:0.2:1), therefore, they were exiled in order to attain complete Emunah. c) When Avraham refrained from accepting the people of Sedom, they were held back from acquiring Emunah in Hashem. We went down to Mitzrayim so that all the nations would hear of the great miracles of the Exodus, and [many would] be inspired to convert.
Maharal #2 (ibid. p. 56): The opinions differ as to why Avraham's descendants were punished specifically with slavery. a) A person's physical dimension (Chomer) is made to be subjugated and ruled over, and Talmidei Chachamim (who rule over their physicality) are those who ought to be truly free (Avos 6:2). So too, the Jewish people should be free from any foreign subjugation (Eruvin 54a). Avraham used Talmidei Chachamim; so too were the Jewish people subjugated in Mitzrayim. b) A slave is dependent on others, whereas a Ma'amin shows that he can stand on his own without dependency. Avraham was the first of the Ma'aminim, yet he asked for a sign, therefore so too, his descendants would be subjugated in exile. c) When Yisrael lends support to the nations, they receive the ability to overpower us.
Maharal #3 (ibid. p. 57): Avraham was the root of Am Yisrael, and even a slight deficiency in the root will become very evident in the branches. What was the deficiency 1 that Avraham exhibited? a) Avraham was a "Rosh," the first of the Avos, but he misused this trait to "rule" over and use his students. Therefore, the same happened to his descendants. b) Avraham was missing Midas ha'Din, the trait of Yitzchak. This led to his request for a sign, which brought Midas ha'Din upon his descendants. c) Avraham was missing Midas ha'Emes, the trait of Yaakov, who had no impropriety in his offspring. Avraham therefore declined to accept the people of Sedom as converts. So too, his sons would be enslaved, and [temporarily] given over from Hashem's possession to the Egyptians. 2
Maharal (ibid.): These three opinions are related to the three traits of the three Avos, and each reflects a shortcoming of Avraham regarding one particular trait. a. Midas ha'Chesed (of Avraham) is portrayed as influence and spreading - the opposite of Midas ha'Din (of Yitzchak), which connotes boundaries. Avraham over-spread his influence upon his students. b. A gift (e.g. the Land) is Chesed, and can be undone by sin, whereas a bequest by law and decree (Din, Gezerah) cannot be retracted. From the perspective of Midas ha'Din, Avraham should not have asked for a sign. c. Yaakov's trait would be Emes; and that there was no one unworthy among his offspring. Avraham's declining to accept converts showed a shortcoming in this trait. (EK)
Maharal writes further, that each opinion diminishes the severity of Avraham's shortcoming. Earlier, Maharal discusses other possible reasons for our descent to Mitzrayim, and objections to them (e.g. see Ramban to Bereishis 15:13; refer to Bereishis 15:13:4:1).
If Avraham's descendants were to endure exile and slavery, due to Avraham's sin (refer to 1:1:2.91), why didn't Avraham himself suffer exile?
Maharal: Refer to Bereishis 15:13:4.4.
Why does it say "Bnei Yisrael"? Later, the verse calls him Yaakov!
Harchev Davar (from Bereishis Rabah 63:3): Yitzchak is called Yisrael; Yaakov was his son. 'Yisrael' implies supernatural conduct in three matters - protection, income and guarding Shalom. These correspond to the three Avos. In Egypt, this name applied to the nation of Yisrael only regarding income, Yitzchak's Midah.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "'V'Eleh Shemos' - Even though [the Shevatim] were counted by name during their lifetime, they are counted again [here] after their death; this shows how dear they are...." Moshe Rabeinu wrote down the Torah long after the death of the Shevatim; in what sense were they counted 'during their lifetimes'?
Mizrachi: Rashi means that [it was not the Torah's narrative, but rather] Hashem Himself counted the Shevatim as they descended to Egypt (Bereishis 46).
Gur Aryeh: We see that when Moshe wrote down the Torah, 1 he recorded their names and number upon their descent, as well as now after their passing; surely this indicates that Hashem Himself counted them at these times.
The Torah is written from the perspective of Moshe Rabeinu; for example, the accounts of Sefer Bereishis are in past tense. But note that the Bnei Yisrael's descent to Egypt (in our verse, as well as in Bereishis 46:8) is an exception; the word "ha'Ba'im" means "that are coming," in present tense. Also refer to Bereishis 46:8:2:1*. (CS)
Rashi writes: "This shows... that they are comparable to the stars...." Why are specifically the Shevatim like stars, more so than the other Tzadikim?
Gur Aryeh: There are twelve Shevatim, to parallel the twelve main constellations. 1 Just as a constellation is comprised of many stars, so too, is each tribe inclusive of very much.
Rashi writes: "This shows... that [the Shevatim] are comparable to the stars...." How so?
Gur Aryeh (to Bereishis 50:21): The twelve tribes represent the twelve constellations of stars, which bring light to the world. Thus, it is impossible that even one of the tribes could be destroyed. 1
Maharal (Derech Chayim p. 58, to Avos 1:18): Just as the constellations are all connected, and are all at peace with each other, so too, the twelve tribes cannot exist without each other.
Rashi writes: "... [Hashem] brings the stars out and brings them in, by number and by name; as it says, 'Who brings out by number their hosts; to all of them by name He does call' (Yeshayah 40:26)." But this is a partial proof; how does it show that Hashem also brings the stars in again?
Riva: In fact, Midrash Tanchuma learns from a different Pasuk - "Moneh Mispar la'Kochavim" (Tehilim 147:4) is bringing in; and 'l'Chulam Shemos Yikra' (ibid.) is taking out.
Gur Aryeh #1: The conclusion of that Pasuk, 'He does call,' means calling them back in; as the term 'Keriah' means to call for someone to come. The verse places the two modifiers (i.e. 'by number,' and 'by name') between the two verbs ('to bring' and 'to call'), to show that they apply to both. 1
Gur Aryeh #2: Even if the verse says only that the stars are brought out by number, and then called in by name, we can derive one from the other by a Kal va'Chomer.
Gur Aryeh: Although this Kal va'Chomer would be two-directional, it is valid.
Rashi writes: "This shows... that [the Shevatim] are comparable to the stars, which [Hashem] brings out and brings in, by number and by name." If so, why aren't all 70 souls listed here by name, as they were upon their descent to Mitzrayim (Bereishis 46)?
Gur Aryeh: When the 70 members of Bnei Yisrael were born, each was listed by name, because each would now become the head of an entire independent family. 1 Now, on the other hand, they are listed upon their passing. Because only the head of each tribe was 'brought in,' only these twelve are listed by name. 2
Rashi writes: "This shows... that [the Shevatim] are comparable to the stars, which [Hashem] brings out and brings in, by number and by name." Why doesn't Rashi suffice by saying as he does at the opening of Sefer Bamidbar - "Because they are so dear, Hashem is constantly counting them!" (Rashi to Bamidbar 1:1)?
Gur Aryeh: Rashi in Sefer Bamidbar draws a parallel to a shepherd who counts his remaining sheep after some catastrophe befell them; see Rashi to Bamidbar 26:1 (as well as Rashi to Shemos 30:16). But that would only explain counting the living, whereas our Perek counts the Shevatim after their death. Therefore, Rashi illustrates using a different metaphor, comparing them to the stars. 1
It is noteworthy that Rashi, in his commentary to the very first Pasuk of each of the five books of the Torah, highlights the special status of Klal Yisrael. (CS)
