How Many Plagues Were There/2

How Many Plagues Were There?

Exegetical Approaches

Twelve Miracles

The twelve miracles from the sign of the תַּנִּין through the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf all form one unified series.

Sources:R. N"H WesselyRuach Chen 12 (pp.210-224)Yein Levanon Avot 5:5Shirei Tiferet, Intro. to Vol. 3About R. Naftali Herz Wessely,¹ R. Y"S ReggioShemot 7:3About R. Yitzchak Shemuel Reggio,² ShadalShemot 7:17About R. S.D. Luzzatto³

"אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and "שְׁפָטִים" – These exegetes maintain that the terms denote different categories of miracles,⁴ with "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" referring to the four interspersed signs of תַּנִּין,‎ כִּנִים,‎ שְׁחִין, and חֹשֶׁךְ which were relatively harmless, and "שְׁפָטִים" (literally, "acts of judgment") being the other eight much harsher plagues and punishments.⁵ Thus, the full set of twelve miracles consists of four triads, each of which opens with an initial warning sign ("אוֹת וּמוֹפֵת")‎⁶ which is then followed by two more severe punishments ("שְׁפָטִים").‎⁷ Alternatively, though, "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" may refer to the first ten miracles, and "שְׁפָטִים" could describe the Plague of the Firstborn and the Splitting of the Sea.⁸

Purpose of the miracles

• According to these sources, the four signs and wonders were intended to warn, instill fear, and embarrass the magicians, while the eight destructive plagues were meant to punish the Egyptian nation. 
• Alternatively, the process as a whole was meant to ensure that the Israelites, who might have been hesitant to leave Egypt for good, had no choice but to leave and never return.  Thus, the process only ends after the Splitting of the Sea when the nation no longer had the option of returning to Egypt. [For elaboration, see Purpose of the Plagues.]

Inclusion of תַּנִּין – The sign of the תַּנִּין is similar in purpose to the warning plagues of כִּנִים,‎ שְׁחִין, and חֹשֶׁךְ, and it deserves to be counted just as they are.

Inclusion of Yam Suf – As the process of the punishment of the Egyptians was completed only with their drowning in Yam Suf, the Splitting of the Sea is also included in the count of twelve. Moreover, as it was only with the Egyptians drowning that the Israelites were truly free, with no option of returning to Egypt and their previous masters, it is this miracle, and not the killing of firstborns, which marks the end of the process.⁹

Patterns – The grouping into four sets of three creates certain patterns as far as the agent who brings the plague, the object of destruction, the role of the magicians, and the lessons to be learned. See Patterns in the Plagues for details.

Interruptions of the narrative flow – This approach could argue that the legal material in Chapters 12–13 is secondary to the main storyline of the twelve miracles.

Hardening of Paroh's heart – According to this approach, exactly midway through the plagues (after two of the four triads), Paroh's resolve weakens and Hashem begins to harden Paroh's heart.

"עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא" – This verse which precedes the Plague of the Firstborn would be interpreted as saying that there would be one more plague before the Exodus, but not that this would conclude the entire series.¹⁰

Eleven Miracles

One can arrive at this total by including either the תַּנִּין or the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf.¹¹

Blood – Yam Suf

The eleven miracles from the Plague of Blood through the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf all form one unit, but the תַּנִּין is not included.

Sources:SefornoShemot 4:23Shemot 7:4Shemot 8:12About R. Ovadyah Seforno

"אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and "שְׁפָטִים" – Seforno contends that the first nine wonders were simply signs and are referred to in the verses as "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים".‎¹² In contrast, the last two – the killing of the firstborn and drowning in Yam Suf – were actual plagues, and thus the Torah refers to them as "שְׁפָטִים".‎¹³

Dual purpose of the miracles – According to Seforno, the first nine signs had an educational purpose, to inspire the Egyptians to recognize Hashem and repent. In contrast, the last two plagues were to exact retribution from the Egyptians measure for measure.¹⁴

Exclusion of תַּנִּין – Surprisingly, Seforno does not include the תַּנִּין in his grouping of signs. Perhaps the omission is related to the exclusive nature of the sign. Since it was viewed only by Paroh and his staff and did not affect the rest of the Egyptian nation, it was a much less effective educational tool.

Unique character of the Plague of the Firstborn – Seforno notes that the original warning for this plague is the only one which emphasizes the concept of a measure for measure.

Inclusion of Yam Suf – As the ultimate retribution was completed only with the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf, the Splitting of the Sea is also included in the count.

Literary patterns and breaks in the narrative – Seforno's count and division might be supported by the distinct literary styles of his two groupings. While the first nine plagues follow a somewhat similar pattern (the transmission of a command to Paroh to release the nation, the bringing of the plague, negotiations, the hardening of Paroh's heart and his refusal to free the people) and flow one into the other, the descriptions of the last two plagues are exceptional. Each plague is surrounded by outside narrative unrelated to the plague itself, and each focuses not just on the Egyptians but also on the Israelites.

"עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא" – This verse which precedes the Plague of the Firstborn would be interpreted as saying that there would be one more plague before the Exodus, but not that this would be the final one of the entire series.

Tanin – Firstborn

The eleven miracles from the sign of the תַּנִּין through the Plague of the Firstborn are all part of one series, but Yam Suf is not included.

Sources:RalbagShemot 8, Toelet 2About R. Levi b. Gershom¹⁵

"אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and "שְׁפָטִים" – Ralbag maintains that these three terms are all synonyms which refer to the same series of eleven miracles.¹⁶

Inclusion of תַּנִּין – Shemot 7:9 explicitly describes the תַּנִּין as a "מוֹפֵת", and this warrants its inclusion. Ralbag explains that Hashem began the sequence with a relatively harmless wonder in order to gradually ratchet up the pressure on Paroh.

Purpose of the miracles and the exclusion of Yam Suf – As the primary goal of the miracles was to compel Paroh to let the nation go, this process ended once permission was granted. Ralbag views Yam Suf as a completely separate event, with the different objective of the Egyptians recognizing Hashem.¹⁷

Escalating process – Ralbag delineates how these eleven miracles intensified in severity step by step.

Frame – The wonders from the תַּנִּין through the warning regarding the Plague of the Firstborn are framed by mention of the "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים", suggesting that all of the miracles which are in between (including the תַּנִּין, but not Yam Suf) are part of the same process.¹⁸

"עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא" – This verse supports the notion that the Plague of the Firstborn was the culmination of all of the wonders.

Ten Miracles

One can obtain a total of ten by including either the תַּנִּין or the Plague of the Firstborn.

Blood – Firstborn

The ten plagues from the Plague of Blood until the Plague of the Firstborn create a complete set.

Sources:JubileesChapter 48About Jubilees, PhiloOn the Life of Moses I, XVII (96-97)About Philo, Mishna AvotAvot 5:4About the Mishna, R. Yehuda in Sifre DevarimDevarim 301About Sifre Devarim and Midrash TannaimDevarim 26About Midrash Tannaim, TanchumaVaera 3Bo 4About the Tanchuma, most commentators

"אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and "שְׁפָטִים" – This approach could either understand that all of these terms refer to the entire Ten Plagues, or that "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" refers to the first nine plagues while "שְׁפָטִים" refers to the Plague of the Firstborn.¹⁹

Purpose of the miracles – Jubilees and Philo view the Plagues as retributive and punitive in character. Alternatively, this approach might view the miracles as a means of facilitating the Exodus, and ensuring that Paroh freed the Nation of Israel.  See Purpose of the Plagues.

Exclusion of תַּנִּין – As the תַּנִּין did not punish the Egyptians or have harmful repercussions, it is not counted as one of the Ten Plagues.

Exclusion of Yam Suf – If the purpose of the "Plagues" was to facilitate the Exodus, this process was completed with the Plague of Firstborns.  The drowning of the Egyptians at Yam Suf is viewed as its own distinct unit because of the magnitude of the miracle, its distinct goal of instilling belief in the masses, or because it occurred outside of Egypt and only after the Exodus.²⁰

Patterns and divisions – This approach can divide the first nine plagues into three triads, each of which shares a number of common elements and features.²¹ For a full discussion, see Patterns in the Plagues.

Hardening of Paroh's heart – The Tanchuma notes that it is exactly midway through the Plagues that the verses state that Hashem begins to harden Paroh's heart (rather than Paroh himself doing the hardening).

"עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא" – This verse supports the idea that the plagues reach their climax with the Plague of the Firstborn.

Tanin – Darkness

The ten miracles from the תַּנִּין through the Plague of Darkness are a distinct unit.

"אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and "שְׁפָטִים" – This approach would maintain that the terms "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" refer to the ten wonders from תַּנִּין to the Plague of Darkness,²² while the word "שְׁפָטִים" refers to the Plague of the Firstborn.²³

Purpose of the miracles – The "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" may have been designed to lead the Egyptians to recognize Hashem, while the "שְׁפָטִים" were intended simply to punish or to compel Paroh to release the Israelites.

Inclusion of תַּנִּין – Shemot 7:9 explicitly describes the תַּנִּין as a "מוֹפֵת", and this warrants its inclusion in the set.

Exclusion of בכורות and "עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא" – This approach might suggest that the first ten miracles are distinct in purpose from the Plague of the Firstborn. Only the Plague of the Firstborn is referred to as a "נֶגַע" and thus stands alone.²⁴

Literary patterns and the narrative flow – The narrative from the sign of the תַּנִּין through the Plague of Darkness is recounted in a similar literary style, with a recurring cycle of features present in these ten miracles.²⁵

Frame – These ten wonders are framed by an introduction where Hashem mentions the upcoming "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" and a summary in which we are told that Moshe and Aharon executed them.²⁶

Nine Miracles

The set includes only the nine wonders from the Plague of Blood until the Plague of Darkness.

Sources:No exegetes take this position, and it is basically a variation which combines elements from the different options above.

¹ R. Wessely did not write a commentary on Shemot, but he finds opportunities to discuss the Plagues at length in these other works. He also takes pains to explain how his count does not contradict the Rabbinic sources which speak of only ten. Cf. Ibn Kaspi in the note below.

² R. Reggio and Shadal closely follow the course charted by R. Wessely.

³ Two recent articles adopt a similar position, each also noting the symbolism of twelve being the number of the tribes of Israel as well as the number of months and zodiac signs. See מנחם בן ישר, "אותות ומופתים באדמת בני חם", דף שבועי של אוניברסיטת בר-אילן, פרשת וארא תשס"א (available here) and מאיר שפיגלמן, "פרשת וארא", בית המדרש הוירטואלי של ישיבת הר עציון ע"ש ישראל קושיצקי, תשס"ג (available here).

⁴ See R. Reggio's commentary in which the definition of these terms serves as the point of departure for discussing the boundaries of the series.

⁵ This is how R. Reggio and Shadal reproduce R. Wessely's position. The difficulty with this approach is that some of the eight harsher plagues are also called "אוֹתֹת" in the Torah – see Shemot 8:19 and 10:1-2, and the word "שְׁפָטִים" is mentioned only by the Plague of the Firstborn. R. Wessely, himself, actually vacillates regarding the meaning of "אוֹתֹת", and in one place he suggests that it refers to the eight harsher punishments (and is synonymous with "שְׁפָטִים" rather than "מֹפְתִים"). While this variation avoids the difficulties from Shemot 8:19 and 10:1-2, it does not account for the cases in Tanakh in which "אוֹת" and "מוֹפֵת" appear as a pair and do not refer to a punishment (e.g. Devarim 13:2-3).

⁶ This understanding explains why there is no warning before the sign of the תַּנִּין and the plagues of כִּנִים,‎ שְׁחִין, and חֹשֶׁךְ, as they themselves constituted warnings for what was to come.

⁷ For elaboration, see Patterns in the Plagues.

⁸ See discussion of Seforno's position below.

⁹ This assumes that many Israelites were reluctant to leave Egypt and, had they been given the opportunity, would have returned to the familiarity of slavery, despite its hardships.  As slavery was the only life they had even known, it was far less frightening than heading to a new land, under a new leader and God with whom they were just beginning to recognize.  For more, see The Exodus Narrative and the Four Children and Purpose of the Plagues.

¹⁰ The verse does highlight the fact that the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf is quite separate from the other plagues, occurring after the actual Exodus. It is likely that for this reason other exegetes do not include it in their counts.

¹¹ There is also a third method suggested by R. Yosef ibn KaspiShemot 11:10About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi. He is the only commentator to explicitly mention the number eleven, and he obtains this number without counting either the תַּנִּין or the drowning in Yam Suf. He rather splits the initial Plague of Blood into two parts – the bloodying of the Nile and the death of the fish. See also his comments regarding the non-binding nature of the Rabbinic count of ten plagues.

¹² These terms appear also in some of the individual descriptions of these nine wonders – see Shemot 8:19, 10:1-2, 11:9-10.

¹³ This term is found also in Shemot 12:12 with regard to the Plague of the Firstborn.

¹⁴ See Hardened Hearts that according to Seforno, even the last two plagues had an additional goal of motivating the Egyptian masses to repent and recognize Hashem.

¹⁵ Ralbag begins his list from the תַּנִּין, but does not explicitly mention the number eleven.

¹⁶ According to his interpretation, the consecutive verses of Shemot 7:3-4 speak of the identical process, with verse 4 explaining the purpose of the events of verse 3.

¹⁷ See Ralbag's interpretation of Shemot 7:5.

¹⁸ For elaboration, see Structure of Sefer Shemot regarding the introductory verses of 7:3-5 and Malbim's interpretation of them. While Ralbag and Malbim explain that 7:5 is referring to the Splitting of Yam Suf, it is possible that, like the two preceding verses, this verse also refers to the series of plagues which culminates with the Plague of the Firstborn.

¹⁹ The plural form would refer to both aspects of the final plague – see Shemot 12:12.

²⁰ It may also have affected only the Egyptian army and not the entire nation.

²¹ This corresponds to the mnemonic of R. Yehuda in the Sifre DevarimDevarim 301About Sifre Devarim and Midrash TannaimDevarim 26About Midrash Tannaim. Philo, however, offers an alternative categorization.

²² These words appear repeatedly in this unit – see Shemot 7:9, 8:19, 10:1-2, 11:9-10.

²³ The word appears again in the description of this plague in Shemot 12:12. Cf. Seforno above.

²⁴ The word "עוֹד", though, is problematic as it suggests a connection to what came before.

²⁵ The Plague of the Firstborn does not share these features, and it is surrounded by legal material and narrative unrelated to the plague itself.

²⁶ Although the warning for the Plague of the Firstborn is found within this frame, the actual plague is not.