Difference between revisions of "The Roundabout Route and The Road Not Traveled/1/en"
(Import script) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| − | <h2></h2> | + | <h2>Two Routes</h2> |
| − | <p></p> | + | <p>Parashat Beshalach opens by describing the route taken by the Children of Israel upon leaving Egypt:</p> |
| + | <multilang style="overflow:auto"> | ||
| + | <q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">(יז) וַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת הָעָם וְלֹא נָחָם אֱלֹהִים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים פֶּן יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם מִלְחָמָה וְשָׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה. (יח) וַיַּסֵּב אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָעָם דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּדְבָּר יַם סוּף וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.</q> | ||
| + | <q xml:lang="en"></q> | ||
| + | </multilang> | ||
| + | <p>The verses delineate both the path that was dismissed, the Philistine route, and the path chosen instead, the desert route, but the reasons for the change of course are not totally clear.</p> | ||
| − | <h2></h2> | + | <h2>The Road Not Taken</h2> |
| − | <p></p> | + | <p>Two explanations seem to be given for the dismissal of the first path – its proximity and potential wars which might cause the nation to return to Egypt. Why, though, should the fact that the path is close by be a reason for rejecting it? With whom does God fear that the nation will battle? In addition, how do these two concerns relate to each other? Which is the primary one?</p> |
| + | <p>The Torah does not explain the choice of the desert route as a replacement. Is it merely the only alternative to the dangerous Philistine route, or does it have some intrinsic benefits of its own? Moreover, how does it solve the problems raised by the first route? After all, just a few days into their journey the nation is attacked by the pursuing Egyptian army and just a few weeks later they are again attacked by the Amalekites! Should Hashem not have been concerned that this route too would lead the nation to return to Egypt?</p> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <h2>What About Mt. Sinai?</h2> | ||
| + | <p>The verses suggest, that had Hashem's concerns been nonexistent, the nation would have traveled directly to Israel via the Philistine route. This, though, is somewhat surprising considering the fact that God had already told Moshe that upon leaving Egypt we were to worship Him in the desert, on Mt. Sinai.<fn>See Shemot 3:12.</fn> Throughout his negotiations with Paroh, Moshe similarly requested leave for a three day desert holiday to serve Hashem. If so, why was the Philistine route even considered? Did we not have no choice but to travel the desert route?</p> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <h2>Additional Questions</h2> | ||
| + | <p>The verses raise several other smaller textual questions as well: | ||
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <li><b>The double "כִּי"</b> – The word "כִּי" can sustain a number of meanings in Tanakh, including not just because but also when, if or that. Which of these meanings do the two occurrences of the word take in our verse? Is the verse giving two reasons for the rejected route or just one?</li> | ||
| + | <li><b>"כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא"</b> – To what is the path close? To Egypt or Canaan?</li> | ||
| + | <li><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"</b> – Why does the text emphasize that the nation left armed? Is this relevant to the choice of route?</li> | ||
| + | </ul> | ||
| + | </p> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
</page> | </page> | ||
</aht-xml> | </aht-xml> | ||
Version as of 12:35, 12 January 2014
The Roundabout Route and The Road Not Traveled
Introduction
Two Routes
Parashat Beshalach opens by describing the route taken by the Children of Israel upon leaving Egypt:
(יז) וַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת הָעָם וְלֹא נָחָם אֱלֹהִים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים פֶּן יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם מִלְחָמָה וְשָׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה. (יח) וַיַּסֵּב אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָעָם דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּדְבָּר יַם סוּף וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.
The verses delineate both the path that was dismissed, the Philistine route, and the path chosen instead, the desert route, but the reasons for the change of course are not totally clear.
The Road Not Taken
Two explanations seem to be given for the dismissal of the first path – its proximity and potential wars which might cause the nation to return to Egypt. Why, though, should the fact that the path is close by be a reason for rejecting it? With whom does God fear that the nation will battle? In addition, how do these two concerns relate to each other? Which is the primary one?
The Torah does not explain the choice of the desert route as a replacement. Is it merely the only alternative to the dangerous Philistine route, or does it have some intrinsic benefits of its own? Moreover, how does it solve the problems raised by the first route? After all, just a few days into their journey the nation is attacked by the pursuing Egyptian army and just a few weeks later they are again attacked by the Amalekites! Should Hashem not have been concerned that this route too would lead the nation to return to Egypt?
What About Mt. Sinai?
The verses suggest, that had Hashem's concerns been nonexistent, the nation would have traveled directly to Israel via the Philistine route. This, though, is somewhat surprising considering the fact that God had already told Moshe that upon leaving Egypt we were to worship Him in the desert, on Mt. Sinai.1 Throughout his negotiations with Paroh, Moshe similarly requested leave for a three day desert holiday to serve Hashem. If so, why was the Philistine route even considered? Did we not have no choice but to travel the desert route?
Additional Questions
The verses raise several other smaller textual questions as well:
- The double "כִּי" – The word "כִּי" can sustain a number of meanings in Tanakh, including not just because but also when, if or that. Which of these meanings do the two occurrences of the word take in our verse? Is the verse giving two reasons for the rejected route or just one?
- "כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא" – To what is the path close? To Egypt or Canaan?
- "וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" – Why does the text emphasize that the nation left armed? Is this relevant to the choice of route?
