Difference between revisions of "The Roundabout Route and The Road Not Traveled/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
<li><b>Ensure war</b> – Seforno, in contrast, suggests that Hashem feared that the nation would panic at the site of the Egyptians and flee rather than fight.  Hashem, thus, took them on a path which guaranteed that they knew of the Egyptians only at the last moment when flight was no longer an option,<fn>See below for elaboration.</fn> forcing a confrontation which would lead the Egyptians to drown in Yam Suf.</li> | <li><b>Ensure war</b> – Seforno, in contrast, suggests that Hashem feared that the nation would panic at the site of the Egyptians and flee rather than fight.  Hashem, thus, took them on a path which guaranteed that they knew of the Egyptians only at the last moment when flight was no longer an option,<fn>See below for elaboration.</fn> forcing a confrontation which would lead the Egyptians to drown in Yam Suf.</li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
− | <li><b> Future wars</b> – Y. Bin-Nun asserts instead that the concern related to any future wars which might lead the nation to return to Egypt for protection.  Hashem wanted to ensure a total defeat which would free the nation from mental servitude, severing their dependence on their former masters.</li> | + | <li><b> Future wars</b> – Y. Bin-Nun asserts instead that the concern related to any future wars which might lead the nation to return to Egypt for protection.  Hashem wanted to ensure a total defeat which would free the nation from mental servitude, severing their dependence on their former masters.<fn>See Y. Barzilai, "וימרו על ים בים סוף - התכנית שלא התממשה"  in על דרך האבות (Alon Shevut: 2001): 297-315 available <a href="http://lib.cet.ac.il/pages/item.asp?item=11733">here</a>, who agrees with Y. Bin- Nun's general approach but questions why the nation continuously asks to return to Egypt if their dependence was severed after the miracle.  He therefore suggests that Hashem had originally planned that the people themselves would defeat Paroh at Yam Suf.  Only their own victory would give them the necessary courage to turn their backs on Egyot in the future.  The nation, though, was not up to the task and in the end Hashem wrought the miracle instead, which saved the people but did not accomplish the primary goal of achieving complete independence.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b><ul> | <point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b><ul> | ||
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
<point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor understands the verse to refer to food provisions. If so, one might say that the choice to travel through the desert necessitated a supply of food, and that is why the fact is mentioned here. Seforno, in contrast, understands it to refer to military arms and suggests that the verse is highlighting that despite being armed, the nation lacked the courage to fight their masters.</point> | <point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor understands the verse to refer to food provisions. If so, one might say that the choice to travel through the desert necessitated a supply of food, and that is why the fact is mentioned here. Seforno, in contrast, understands it to refer to military arms and suggests that the verse is highlighting that despite being armed, the nation lacked the courage to fight their masters.</point> | ||
<point><b>What about Sinai?</b> Seforno asserts that Mt. Sinai was always meant to be the second stop; first, though,Hashem wanted to drown the Egyptians.</point> | <point><b>What about Sinai?</b> Seforno asserts that Mt. Sinai was always meant to be the second stop; first, though,Hashem wanted to drown the Egyptians.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Biblical Parallels</b> – Seforno compares Hashem's plan here to the words of Devorah to Barak in Shofetim 4, "וּמָשַׁכְתִּי אֵלֶיךָ אֶל נַחַל קִישׁוֹן אֶת סִיסְרָא | + | <point><b>Biblical Parallels</b> – Seforno compares Hashem's plan here to the words of Devorah to Barak in Shofetim 4, "וּמָשַׁכְתִּי אֵלֶיךָ אֶל נַחַל קִישׁוֹן אֶת סִיסְרָא"  There, too, Hashem drew an enemy to follow Israel to a certain site with intent to defeat him there.</point> |
</category> | </category> | ||
<category name="">Intrinsic Value in the Desert Route | <category name="">Intrinsic Value in the Desert Route | ||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
<opinion name="">Building Fortitude for the Conquest | <opinion name="">Building Fortitude for the Conquest | ||
<p>The route afforded the nation both the time and atmosphere needed to lose their slave mentality and gain the confidence and independence necessary to conquer and rule Canaan.</p> | <p>The route afforded the nation both the time and atmosphere needed to lose their slave mentality and gain the confidence and independence necessary to conquer and rule Canaan.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot>Various opinions in <multilink><a href="ShemotRabbah20-11" data-aht="source">Shemot Rabbah</a><a href="ShemotRabbah20-11" data-aht="source">20:11-16</a><a href="Shemot Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Shemot Rabbah</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonShemot13-18" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonShemot13-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:18</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamMoreh3-32" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMoreh3-32" data-aht="source">Guide to the Perplexed 3:32</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shadal #1</a><a href="ShadalShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RHirschShemot13-17" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a><a href="RHirschShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>,<fn>Malbim combines this approach with that below which speak of the nation's need for spiritual growth.</fn> <multilink><a href="RDZHoffmannShemot13-17" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDZHoffmannShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="CassutoShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="CassutoShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink></mekorot> | + | <mekorot>R. Eliezer in <multilink><a href="MekhiltaVayehi" data-aht="source">Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael</a><a href="MekhiltaVayehi" data-aht="source">Beshalach Vayehi</a><a href="Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael" data-aht="parshan">About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael</a></multilink>, Various opinions in <multilink><a href="ShemotRabbah20-11" data-aht="source">Shemot Rabbah</a><a href="ShemotRabbah20-11" data-aht="source">20:11-16</a><a href="Shemot Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Shemot Rabbah</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonShemot13-18" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonShemot13-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:18</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamMoreh3-32" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMoreh3-32" data-aht="source">Guide to the Perplexed 3:32</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shadal #1</a><a href="ShadalShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RHirschShemot13-17" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a><a href="RHirschShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>,<fn>Malbim combines this approach with that below which speak of the nation's need for spiritual growth.</fn> <multilink><a href="RDZHoffmannShemot13-17" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDZHoffmannShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="CassutoShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="CassutoShemot13-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 13:17-18</a><a href="Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink></mekorot> |
+ | <point><b>Where is the Philistine Route?</b> Most of these commentators do not address the issue but many readers assume that it refers to the route that leads northeast out of Egypt, traversing the Philistine cities of Ashkelon and Ashdod, near the Mediterranean Sea (also known as דרך הים). At the time of the Exodus, though, the Philistines who later live in this area had not yet arrived,<fn>The route was instead filled with Egyptian garrisons who used the path on their campaigns to the North.  Cassuot suggests that as such, this route was not considered at all, and the Hashem was left to choose between Th shorter Philistine (Negev) Route and the more roundabout Desert Route.<br/>See, below, though that some modern scholars suggest that verse really was referring to the northeastern route (דרך הים) and Hashem rejected it specifically due to the Egyptians stationed there.</fn> leading Cassuto to asserts that the verse instead refers to a path that leads from Egypt to Israel via the Negev, home to the Philistines of Avraham's time.</point> | ||
<point><b>"כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא" – Close to what?</b> According to this approach, the problematic issue is the proximity of the route to Canaan. The shortness of the route would mean that the people would arrive in Canaan and be forced to begin the wars of conquest before they were physically and mentally prepared to fight.</point> | <point><b>"כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא" – Close to what?</b> According to this approach, the problematic issue is the proximity of the route to Canaan. The shortness of the route would mean that the people would arrive in Canaan and be forced to begin the wars of conquest before they were physically and mentally prepared to fight.</point> | ||
<point><b>War with whom?</b> The war to be avoided was the battle of conquest in Canaan.</point> | <point><b>War with whom?</b> The war to be avoided was the battle of conquest in Canaan.</point> | ||
<point><b>Double "כִּי"</b> – According to these commentators, both appearances of the word mean because, and the two reasons given work together. Though one might have thought that a quick route would be advantageous, in this case it itself is the problem. If the nation was forced to wage war against the Canaanites so soon after being freed, when they were still not ready for battle, they would inevitably choose to return to Egypt and servitude.</point> | <point><b>Double "כִּי"</b> – According to these commentators, both appearances of the word mean because, and the two reasons given work together. Though one might have thought that a quick route would be advantageous, in this case it itself is the problem. If the nation was forced to wage war against the Canaanites so soon after being freed, when they were still not ready for battle, they would inevitably choose to return to Egypt and servitude.</point> | ||
<point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b><ul> | <point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b><ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Growth through trials</b> – Rambam emphasizes how the scarcity and hardships of desert life would instill courage and strength. R. Hirsch adds that the challenges encountered would teach them to trust in Hashem, which, in turn, would give them the self-confidence needed to fight. Shadal further asserts that the time in the desert provided time to learn the skills necessary for self rule.</li> | + | <li><b>Growth through trials</b> – Rambam emphasizes how the scarcity and hardships of desert life would instill courage and strength.<fn>See similarly R. Eliezer in Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael.</fn> R. Hirsch adds that the challenges encountered would teach them to trust in Hashem, which, in turn, would give them the self-confidence needed to fight. Shadal further asserts that the time in the desert provided time to learn the skills necessary for self rule.</li> |
<li><b>New generation</b> – Rambam proposes that the forty years in the desert meant that it was a new generation that had never been enslaved which entered the land.<fn>Cf. <a href="IbnEzraShemotLongCommentary14-13" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra </a> similarly.</fn> This generation was not encumbered by a slave mentality, and was thus more capable of dealing with the challenges of conquest and government.<fn>This is assuming that from the beginning the nation was meant to wander in the desert for forty years. A simple reading of the text, though, assumes that had they not sinned, the nation would have entered the land soon after Matan Torah.</fn></li> | <li><b>New generation</b> – Rambam proposes that the forty years in the desert meant that it was a new generation that had never been enslaved which entered the land.<fn>Cf. <a href="IbnEzraShemotLongCommentary14-13" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra </a> similarly.</fn> This generation was not encumbered by a slave mentality, and was thus more capable of dealing with the challenges of conquest and government.<fn>This is assuming that from the beginning the nation was meant to wander in the desert for forty years. A simple reading of the text, though, assumes that had they not sinned, the nation would have entered the land soon after Matan Torah.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li><b>Miracles as morale booster</b> – Malbim maintains that the splitting of the sea and other miracles of the desert would both instill fear in the Canaanites<fn>See Shemot Rabbah similarly.</fn> and boost the belief, and hence the courage, of the Israelites enabling a victory over their enemies.</li> | + | <li><b>Miracles as morale booster</b> – Malbim maintains that the splitting of the sea and other miracles of the desert would both instill fear in the Canaanites<fn>See Shemot Rabbah similarly. Cf. Akeidat Yitzchak below.</fn> and boost the belief, and hence the courage, of the Israelites enabling a victory over their enemies.</li> |
− | <li><b> | + | <li><b>Stalling for the Canaanites</b> – Malbim<fn>See also the Mekhilta deRabbi Yishmael which is somewhat more ambiguous: "כי קרוב הוא בקרוב ירשו כנעניים את הארץ שנ' ודור רביעי ישובו הנה".</fn> adds that the extra time afforded by the Desert Route ensured that the sins of the Emorites would be complete and they would be deserving of conquest by the time the nation arrived in the land.<fn>See also similar opinions in Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and Shemot Rabbah that suggest that Canaanites had ruined the agriculture of Canaan and Hashem wanted to give the land time to rejuvenate.  Another possibility raised there relates to the fact that the oath of Avraham not to harm the Philistines was still in effect, necessitating a forty year delay until conquest could begin. <br/>All these opinions might be assuming that the nation of Israel left Egypt earlier than intended.  Had they stayed the full 430 years as originally planned, the land would have been ready for conquest, but since Hashem needed to save the Israelites from the oppression earlier, a delay was needed in the desert.  See <a href="Duration_of_the_Egyptian_Exile/2" data-aht="page">Duration of the Egyptian Exile</a> for different approaches that suggest that Hashem shortened the length of the original enslavement.<br/><br/><br/></fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b> – Shadal asserts that the verses point this fact out to highlight that it was not due to lack of weaponry that the nation would flee, but rather to their lack of courage.</point> | <point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b> – Shadal asserts that the verses point this fact out to highlight that it was not due to lack of weaponry that the nation would flee, but rather to their lack of courage.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>What about Sinai?</b> This approach | + | <point><b>What about Sinai?</b> This approach might maintain that Hashem knew in advance which path the nation was to travel and therefore He previously told Moshe that the nation would serve him at Sinai. This, though, was not the reason for the change of route, for, as R. D"Z Hoffmann asserts, had He wanted to, God could have chosen any site He wanted for revelation.</point> |
+ | <point><b>What about Yam Suf?</b></point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
<opinion name="">Spiritual Growth | <opinion name="">Spiritual Growth | ||
Line 67: | Line 69: | ||
<point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b> The desert route enabled the nation to witness the miracles of the splitting of the sea, manna, and water which instilled faith in God. It further allowed them to receive the Torah and learn God's commandments.<fn>See Josephus, R. Yehoshua in Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, and the Keli Yekar.</fn> Finally the isolated atmosphere protected them from outside influences<fn>This is emphasized by the Neziv and Meshekh Chokhmah.</fn> and gave them the opportunity to grow and learn without the concerns of having to provide for themselves.<fn>See Shadal who develops this point.</fn></point> | <point><b>How is the Desert Route a solution?</b> The desert route enabled the nation to witness the miracles of the splitting of the sea, manna, and water which instilled faith in God. It further allowed them to receive the Torah and learn God's commandments.<fn>See Josephus, R. Yehoshua in Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, and the Keli Yekar.</fn> Finally the isolated atmosphere protected them from outside influences<fn>This is emphasized by the Neziv and Meshekh Chokhmah.</fn> and gave them the opportunity to grow and learn without the concerns of having to provide for themselves.<fn>See Shadal who develops this point.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b></point> | <point><b>"וַחֲמֻשִׁים"</b></point> | ||
− | <point><b>What about Sinai?</b> According to this approach, getting the Torah on Mt. Sinai | + | <point><b>What about Sinai and Yam Suf?</b> According to this approach, getting the Torah on Mt. Sinai and witnessing miracles such as the splitting of the Sea were some of the main advantages of the route. It is unclear, if so, why they are not given as the reason in the verses.</point> |
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Line 75: | Line 77: | ||
<point><b>War with whom?</b> Commentators divide regarding the enemy that needed to be avoided: | <point><b>War with whom?</b> Commentators divide regarding the enemy that needed to be avoided: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Philistines</b> – According to many of these commentators, the Philistines presently living on the route itself were the threat.<fn>Both Ramban and Abarbanel assert that the Philistines would not want outsiders trespassing their land, and as such would fight to prevent them from doing so. R. Paltiel, instead, proposes that the Egyptian and Philistines were related (see <a href="Bereshit10-13-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit 10:13-14</a> ), making them more likely to fight the fleeing nation | + | <li><b>Philistines</b> – According to many of these commentators, the Philistines presently living on the route itself were the threat.<fn>Both Ramban and Abarbanel assert that the Philistines would not want outsiders trespassing their land, and as such would fight to prevent them from doing so. R. Paltiel, instead, proposes that the Egyptian and Philistines were related (see <a href="Bereshit10-13-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit 10:13-14</a> ), making them more likely to fight the fleeing nation.</fn></li> |
<li><b>Past wars</b> – Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and the first opinion in Shemot Rabbah assert that the fear related not to the consequences of present battles, but to the remnants of past wars. Thirty years earlier members of the tribe of Ephraim attempted to make their way to Israel but fell at the hand of the Philistines. Hashem did not want the Israelites to see their fallen bodies, panic, and then return to Egypt.</li> | <li><b>Past wars</b> – Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and the first opinion in Shemot Rabbah assert that the fear related not to the consequences of present battles, but to the remnants of past wars. Thirty years earlier members of the tribe of Ephraim attempted to make their way to Israel but fell at the hand of the Philistines. Hashem did not want the Israelites to see their fallen bodies, panic, and then return to Egypt.</li> | ||
<li><b>Egyptians</b> – According to modern scholars,<fn>See, for example, N. Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996):103-106.</fn> the Philistine Route might be identified with what is known in Egyptian texts as the "Wall of Horus".<fn>This means the wall of the ruler, and refers to the heavily guarded, defensive line protecting Northern Egypt. This might be the equivalent of the Biblical דרך שור.</fn> At the time of the Exodus, it was under Egyptian control and heavily fortified with Egyptian sentries and garrisons. Traveling via such a route would inevitably lead to conflict with the Egyptians, and Israelite terror of their hated masters would lead to a quick surrender and return to servitude.<fn>Moreover, if Paroh decided to chase, the nation would have been trapped and feel like they had no choice but to give in.</fn></li> | <li><b>Egyptians</b> – According to modern scholars,<fn>See, for example, N. Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996):103-106.</fn> the Philistine Route might be identified with what is known in Egyptian texts as the "Wall of Horus".<fn>This means the wall of the ruler, and refers to the heavily guarded, defensive line protecting Northern Egypt. This might be the equivalent of the Biblical דרך שור.</fn> At the time of the Exodus, it was under Egyptian control and heavily fortified with Egyptian sentries and garrisons. Traveling via such a route would inevitably lead to conflict with the Egyptians, and Israelite terror of their hated masters would lead to a quick surrender and return to servitude.<fn>Moreover, if Paroh decided to chase, the nation would have been trapped and feel like they had no choice but to give in.</fn></li> |
Version as of 14:14, 29 January 2015
The Roundabout Route and The Road Not Traveled
Exegetical Approaches
Facilitate the Drowning at Yam Suf
The choice of route was aimed at ensuring the drowning of the Egyptians in Yam Suf, thereby spreading knowledge of Hashem through the miracle and/or ridding the nation of their dependence on Egypt.
- With Egypt – According to both R"Y Bekhor Shor and Seforno, Hashem feared the Israelite's fearful response to an encounter with Egypt. They differ, though, with regards to whether Hashem wanted to prevent a fight or ensure one:
- Prevent war – According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, Hashem wanted to prevent a war on two fronts, from both the pursuing Egyptians and the Philistines. He, thus took them on a route which would lead instead to the Egyptian's drowning, thus sparng them the conflict.
- Ensure war – Seforno, in contrast, suggests that Hashem feared that the nation would panic at the site of the Egyptians and flee rather than fight. Hashem, thus, took them on a path which guaranteed that they knew of the Egyptians only at the last moment when flight was no longer an option,4 forcing a confrontation which would lead the Egyptians to drown in Yam Suf.
- Future wars – Y. Bin-Nun asserts instead that the concern related to any future wars which might lead the nation to return to Egypt for protection. Hashem wanted to ensure a total defeat which would free the nation from mental servitude, severing their dependence on their former masters.5
- Presence of sea – R"Y Bekhor Shor maintains that only on the Desert Route was there a sea in which Hashem could drown the Egyptians. Although God could have ensured a victory even in a land battle, the miracle of the splitting of the sea would be greater.6
- Lack of spies – Seforno, in contrast, believes that both routes would have ultimately led to Yam Suf,7 but the Desert Route was chosen since it was empty of spies and informers. As such, the Israelites would not be aware of the chasing Egyptians until they were already upon them, leaving them no choice of retreat. Hashem did not want to avoid a confrontation, but rather to ensure one, thus accomplishing His primary purpose, the drowning of the Egyptians.
- Different meanings – R"Y Bekhor Shor and Y. Bin-Nun understand the first "כִּי" to mean "that"8 and the second to mean "because". The Philistine route, which was shorter, was nevertheless rejected due to fear of the Israelite response to war.
- Identical meaning – According to Seforno both appearances of the word mean "because", and the two phrases together constitute the full dual concern.9
Intrinsic Value in the Desert Route
The Desert Route was not just the default alternative to a rejected route, but rather had value in its own right, as it offered the nation vital opportunities that the Philistine Route could not. This approach subdivides regarding what the route had to offer:
Building Fortitude for the Conquest
The route afforded the nation both the time and atmosphere needed to lose their slave mentality and gain the confidence and independence necessary to conquer and rule Canaan.
- Growth through trials – Rambam emphasizes how the scarcity and hardships of desert life would instill courage and strength.14 R. Hirsch adds that the challenges encountered would teach them to trust in Hashem, which, in turn, would give them the self-confidence needed to fight. Shadal further asserts that the time in the desert provided time to learn the skills necessary for self rule.
- New generation – Rambam proposes that the forty years in the desert meant that it was a new generation that had never been enslaved which entered the land.15 This generation was not encumbered by a slave mentality, and was thus more capable of dealing with the challenges of conquest and government.16
- Miracles as morale booster – Malbim maintains that the splitting of the sea and other miracles of the desert would both instill fear in the Canaanites17 and boost the belief, and hence the courage, of the Israelites enabling a victory over their enemies.
- Stalling for the Canaanites – Malbim18 adds that the extra time afforded by the Desert Route ensured that the sins of the Emorites would be complete and they would be deserving of conquest by the time the nation arrived in the land.19
Spiritual Growth
The time in the desert enabled the nation to receive the Torah at Mt. Sinai and witness many more miracles, thereby deepening their belief in and connection to Hashem and His ways.
- Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and Shadal explain that once they arrived they would disperse to their own inheritances and work, losing the opportunity to learn Torah and be guided spiritually by Moshe.
- Meshekh Chokhmah maintains that God feared the influence the idolatrous Canaanites would have on such a fledgling nation.
- Netziv stresses that the first reason given (proximity) was the primary one. He points out that as the people did desire to return to Egypt when facing war even on the longer path, this could not have been a major concern and goes as far as to suggest that God just said this because the nation would not have understood the real fear of assimilation.21
- Toledot Yitzchak, R. Hirsch, and Malbim, though, maintain that the reasons work together. Without the benefit of a long route in which to grow spiritually, the nation would lack the trust in God needed to fight wars and win.
Avoiding the Philistine Route
The choice of the Desert Route was a response to the dangers lurking on the Philistine Route. Hashem worried that the wars the nation would encounter en route would frighten them into returning to Egypt.
- Philistines – According to many of these commentators, the Philistines presently living on the route itself were the threat.26
- Past wars – Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and the first opinion in Shemot Rabbah assert that the fear related not to the consequences of present battles, but to the remnants of past wars. Thirty years earlier members of the tribe of Ephraim attempted to make their way to Israel but fell at the hand of the Philistines. Hashem did not want the Israelites to see their fallen bodies, panic, and then return to Egypt.
- Egyptians – According to modern scholars,27 the Philistine Route might be identified with what is known in Egyptian texts as the "Wall of Horus".28 At the time of the Exodus, it was under Egyptian control and heavily fortified with Egyptian sentries and garrisons. Traveling via such a route would inevitably lead to conflict with the Egyptians, and Israelite terror of their hated masters would lead to a quick surrender and return to servitude.29
- Because – Rashi and Ibn Ezra imply that it, too, means "because." Hashem is, thus, giving two related reasons why to avert the Philistine route. Fear of war was significant specifically because the route was so close to Egypt. The proximity made it more likely for the nation to return to Egypt upon encountering war.
- Even though or that – Chizkuni maintains that the first "כִּי" means "even though", while Ramban proposes that it means "that". According to both, the verse is giving but one reason to avoid the Philistine Route. Even though it was the shorter (and thus seemingly more logical route), Hashem chose to dismiss it because of the wars it would lead to.
- According to most of these commentators, the verse is saying that the route is close to Egypt, and either despite this fact, or because of this fact, it is rejected.
- Chizkuni30 raises a more metaphoric read of the verse, suggesting that the subject of "הוּא" is the Philistines themselves (not the route) who were relatives (קרובים) of the Egyptians and thus more likely to fight against the Israelites.31
- Ramban asserts that the only wars that might have caused the nation to return were ones against settled peoples whose lands were being trespassed. Amalek was exceptional, as they attacked en route. As such, flight would have been pointless since the Amalekites would have continued to fight even as the nation ran. Ramban further proposes that once the nation went a roundabout route, they no longer knew the way back to Egypt.
- Abarbanel points out that the war against the Philistines would have been almost immediate (due to their proximity to Egypt) and as such was much more likely to lead the nation to flee back to Egypt.