Shibud mitzrayim: a necessary evil?

R. O. Seforno writes (Bereishis 46:3) that had the Israelites stayed in Canaan they would have intermarried and assimilated, never developing a distinct national or religious identity, but being shepherds which was abominable to Egyptians they'd be given their own place to live and allowed to become a distinct national unit. 

אנכי האל אלהי אביך – אני הוא שאמרתי  "אל תרד מצרימה" (בראשית כ"ו:ב'), אני הוא שאומר אליך אל תירא מרדה מצרימה – אתה, וזה כי לגוי גדול אשימך שם – כי אמנם אם היו בניך יושבים פה היו מתחתנים בגויי הארץ ומתערבים עמהם, אבל במצרים לא יקרה זה, "כי לא יוכלון המצרים לאכל את העברים לחם" (בראשית מ"ג:ל"ב), ובכן יהיו לגוי נבדל, כאמרם זכרונם לברכה: "ויהי שם לגוי" (דברים כ"ו:ה'), מלמד שהיו מצוינים שם (ספרי שם). 

Ramban says that Hebrew was the spoken language in Canaan:

רמב"ן בראשית מ"ה:י"ב

ויתכן שאמר להם כך לאמתלא ולפיוס, כי איננה ראיה שידבר אדם אחד במצרים בלשון הקדש, כי על דעתי הוא שפת כנען. [כי אברהם לא הביאו מאור כשדים ומחרן כי ארמית היא, והגל הזה (בראשית ל"א:מ"ז-מ"ח) עד, ואיננו לשון לאיש אחד לבדו, אבל הוא שפת ארץ כנען] ורבים במצרים יודעים אותו, כי קרוב הוא, ואף כי המושל, שדרך המלכים והמושלים לדעת הלשונות. 

Although spoken by many and definitely by the aristocracy it was not the lingua franca of Egypt which was Egyptian and would further help to keep them apart as they developed their unique national-religious identity 

Rambam writes (Moreh 3:32) that people are slow to change and that God and the Torah are geared to work with human nature as it is. 

No reason is provided for why Avraham's progeny had to be subjugated in a foreign land for so long—it is delivered matter of factly: 

בראשית ט"ו:י"ג

וַיֹּאמֶר לְאַבְרָם יָדֹעַ תֵּדַע כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא לָהֶם וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה. 

There's nothing quite as unifying and effective at creating a tough and durable new national religious identity that is opposed to reigning popular culture than having a group face adversity over a long stretch of time, particularly on foreign soil, enabling the people to grow into a distinct nation, with its own language and raison d'etre, pushing it to develop an amazing resiliency. 

Perhaps no specific sin or crime is necessary to have caused shibud mitzrayim (altho many are posited) but rather that starting a radical new movement and nation of ethical monotheism by definition requires certain conditions to allow it to launch and escape the gravitational pull of the surrounding customs and beliefs. 

The new religion that Avraham was chosen to found perhaps required the conditions provided by shibud mitzrayim to purge it from residual canaanite dross (Devarim 4:20) and to enable the fledgling and nascent monotheistic family-nation to develop a strong and durable identity that would equip it to withstand millenia of alien and pagan winds and cultures, not to mention expulsions, massacres and persecutions, and still stay true to its national calling. 

R. Yaakov Emden writes (here and ff) that  Israel's survival throughout the ages is a greater miracle than all the open miracles in our history. 

Not to detract from its miraculousness however I would add that for a people to survive like that with it's national religious indentity firmly intact also requires an unbreakable national consciousness which years of persistent persecution in a foreign country would go a long way toward forging.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sukkos: Pesach in the fall

This piece attempts to uncover an entirely new way of looking at the significance of Sukkos in what essentially amounts to a paradigm shift about the chag Vayikra 23:42-43 בַּסֻּכֹּת תֵּשְׁבוּ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים כׇּל הָאֶזְרָח בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשְׁבוּ בַּסֻּכֹּת. לְמַעַן יֵדְעוּ דֹרֹתֵיכֶם כִּי בַסֻּכּוֹת הוֹשַׁבְתִּי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהוֹצִיאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם אֲנִי י"י אֱלֹהֵיכֶם. There is no other biblical record of our forefathers ever having stayed in booths, certainly not immediately after the exodus. The rishonim (ad loc) quote a disagreement (bavli sukkah 11b) between R Eliezer and R Akiva as to the identity of the pasuk's obscure referent: כי בסכות הושבתי – איזו סכות היו, ר' אליעזר אומר ענני כבוד היו, ר' עקיבא אומר, סכות ממש then saying that it works out acc to R Eliezer but acc to R Akiva what exactly are we celebrating?; see there for various solutions. The rishonim have in common an understanding that the holiday is somehow related to hitherto un
Read more

Are Jews innately unique

This write up attempts to explain why Haman planned for genocide whereas the Greeks opted for religious suppression As reflected in the differing formulations of al hanissim for Purim and Chanuka respectively, Haman was out for Jewish blood whereas Antiochus was for eradicating Jewish rites and rituals.  Practically speaking, Judaism would have been a relic of the past had either of them had their way.  That different approaches were employed may have been a function of most Jews having been religiously observant during the Purim story as opposed to during the Chanukah story when most were already hellenized—easier to annihilate a people than to get them all to change their ways as opposed to by the Chanukah where only a minority were still practicing it made more sense to just stamp out what remaining observance there was than to exterminate an already mostly hellenized nation.   Perhaps a more philosophical approach can be suggested: There's a well known divide amongst Jewish thi
Read more

Zionism done right

This piece attempts to provide some color to a comment of Chazal regarding the Bnos Tzelafchad's חיבת הארץ as well as explain away an apparent inconsistency in a specific Amora's approach to it Bamidbar 27 opens with the daughters of Tzelafchad making their case to share in the distribution of EY by inheriting their sonless father Tzelafachad's portion instead of his brothers. Chazal posit a love for the land of Israel as their motivation, explaining that the reason this narrative is juxtaposed with the previous chapter owes to it being illustrative of an inferred contrast therein that only the men died out in the midbar as only they had cast aspersions on the land (to the extent of wanting to return to Egypt) as opposed to the women that were lovers of the land and wanted to proceed apace even after the report of the spies. Namely, ibid 26:64: וּבְאֵלֶּה לֹא הָיָה אִישׁ מִפְּקוּדֵי מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֲשֶׁר פָּקְדוּ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמִדְבַּר סִינָי with Rash
Read more