Etzba Elohim Hi

When I was a kid, I liked to think that when the chartumim say after the plague of lice that they couldn't recreate, that it was (Exodus 8:15) "etzba elohim hi", that this should be translated as "God is giving us the finger".

In point of fact, it is a great debate if they meant God or "the gods", among Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban, and see Shadal who interprets Onkelos to mean "the gods" even though he explicitly says "min kadam hashem", and see Shadal on Genesis 1:2 as well.

The debate is centered over if they admitted that God was in control and not them. Did they really recognize God? Weren't they polytheistic idolaters? If they were saying that it wasn't God but their gods, why does it say that they declared this after they couldn't recreate it? It would make sense for them to admit defeat, not blame something else. And if it means they were not admitting defeat, what does it mean that Pharaoh didn't listen to them?

I think the answer is that they were actually referring to Moses. It is the finger of Moses, who must be a god! How else could he work this magic? We should obey him!

I haven't seen anyone else offer this answer. In fact, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan explicitly says the opposite: אמרו איסטגניני פרעה לא מן כח גבורת משה ואהרן היא אלהן מחא משתלחא מן קדם י"י היא. But I think it flows thematically throughout the parsha.

Early in the parsha, God responds to Moses to recharge him with his mission, and right before Moses is to perform the plagues, the Torah interrupts to give lineage. Why? The meforshim debate this "interruption" in the narrative. Rav Hirsch thinks it was because the Torah wants to emphasize how Moses is human, not a god, not supernatural. He is mortal and like everyone else in that essential way. This is the important message to receive before hearing the amazing miracles that are wrought through him. He is the human instrument of God, not God Himself.

This is a Jewish concept. We do not believe in any one person as a god who is infallible and all-powerful.

It's a Jewish concept that Pharaoh cannot accept. In fact, God promises Moses (Exodus 7:1) that He will make Moses a god ("elohim") to Pharaoh soon after in the parsha. Again, the meforshim debate what this could mean. But I think (and I haven't seen anyone suggests this as well) that Pharaoh will come to view Moses as an actual god - his mistaken belief in the possibilities of a person being a god would allow this to happen. This is the closest to pshat in my belief.

Maimonides on "Boiling in Excrement"

Maimonides interprets "boiling excrement" to be a metaphor for embarrassing oneself when one mocks something true. I think anyone who has embarrassed oneself doing so knows this feeling quite well.

Gittin 57a: 

אסקיה לבלעם בנגידא אמר ליה מאן חשיב בההוא עלמא א"ל ישראל מהו לאידבוקי בהו א"ל (דברים כג) לא תדרוש שלומם וטובתם כל הימים א"ל דיניה דההוא גברא במאי א"ל בשכבת זרע רותחת אזל אסקיה {ליש"ו} בנגידא <לפושעי ישראל> א"ל מאן חשיב בההוא עלמא א"ל ישראל מהו לאדבוקי בהו א"ל טובתם דרוש רעתם לא תדרוש כל הנוגע בהן כאילו נוגע בבבת עינו א"ל דיניה דההוא גברא במאי א"ל בצואה רותחת 

He then went and raised Balaam by incantations. He asked him: Who is in repute in the other world? He replied: Israel. What then, he said, about joining them? He replied: Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.  He then asked: What is your punishment? He replied: With boiling hot semen.  He then went and raised by incantations [Jesus].  He asked: Who is in repute in the other world? Answer: Israel. What about joining them? Answer: Seek their welfare, seek not their harm. Whoever touches them touches the apple of his eye. He said: What is your punishment? Answer: With boiling hot excrement, since a Master has said: Whoever mocks at the words of the Sages is punished with boiling hot excrement.

Eruvin 21b: 

דרש רבא: מאי דכתיב (קהלת י"ב) ויתר מהמה בני הזהר עשות ספרים הרבה וגו'. בני הזהר בדברי סופרים יותר מדברי תורה. שדברי תורה יש בהן עשה ולא תעשה, ודברי סופרים - כל העובר על דברי סופרים חייב מיתה. שמא תאמר אם יש בהן ממש מפני מה לא נכתבו - אמר קרא עשות ספרים הרבה אין קץ. (קהלת י"ב) ולהג הרבה יגעת בשר. אמר רב פפא בריה דרב אחא בר אדא משמיה דרב אחא בר עולא: מלמד שכל המלעיג על דברי חכמים נידון בצואה רותחת. 

Raba made the following exposition: What is the purport of the Scriptural text: And, furthermore my son, be admonished: Of making many books etc? My son, be more careful in [the observance of] the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah, for in the laws of the Torah there are positive and negative precepts; but, as to the laws of the Scribes, whoever transgresses any of the enactments of the Scribes incurs the penalty of death. In case you should object: If they are of real value why were they not recorded [in the Torah]? Scripture stated: 'Of making many books there is no end'. And much study is a weariness of flesh. R`Papa son of R`Aha B`Adda stated in the name of R`Aha B`Ulla: This teaches that he who scoffs at the words of the Sages will be condemned to boiling excrements.

Maimonides writes in his introduction to the Mishna:

Translation: 

And because they knew [this fact] (peace be upon them), that all of [Hazal's] words were clear, with nothing superfluous stated, they commanded and exhorted, that no one may ridicule them: “Anyone who ridicules them of the Sages is sentenced to boiling excrement (Gittin 57a). And you have no greater boiling excrement than stupidity which made him degenerate into ridiculing the words of the Sages! Thus, you will never find anyone who hates their words, except for a man who seeks superficial pleasure, granting benefit to sensory pleasures, one whose heart does not shine with any of the shining brilliance of Torah...

The Plot Thickens - Shadal on Tikkun Soferim

There are articles out there I have been meaning to read regarding Shadal's view of "tikkun soferim" - apparently the claim held by some midrashim and some rishonim that Chazal or pre-Chazalic soferim changed some of the language of Scripture for a variety of reasons.

This is a far-out claim that flies in the face of Maimonides' Eighth Principle that nothing in the Torah was changed since Moses received it, and so the concept is usually interpreted as "God having changed the Torah as if he was a sofer changing the language".

Shadal is a bit unclear to me. Sometimes he subscribes to some idea of "tikkun soferim". We can see this on Genesis 31:39

ואיננו רחוק שקריאת גנבתי אינה אלא תקנת סופרים, שהחכמים הראשונים התקינו שתהיה הקריאה כך כדי להרחיק המליצה התמוהה גנבתי יום וגנבתי לילה.

Apparently, this is in regard to how vowelization should be.

Of course, the most famous place that "tikkun soferim" comes up is on Genesis 18:22, where Rashi quotes it, and there is some debate on his comment if he also believed it to be Chazal who changed the Torah's words to protect God's image. Interestingly, Shadal feels that this need not be relied on, but there is another pshat:

ואברהם עודנו עומד לפני ה': במסורה ובמדרשים (לא בתלמוד) הזכירו פסוק זה בכלל י"ח מלין תיקון סופרים, וזה לשון בראשית רבא (פרשה מ"ז י"ב) אמר ר' סימון תיקון סופרים הוא זה, שהשכינה היתה ממתנת לאברהם. אמנם (כדברי הראב"ע) אין לנו צורך לתיקון סופרים, כי הנה המלאך השלישי היה גם הוא הולך לדרכו אחר שסיים דבריו לאברהם, אלא שאברהם ניגש אליו והתפלל, על כן נתעכב המלאך אצלו, ואמנם סיבת התעכבו היתה כי אברהם לא חזר לאחוריו אלא עמד וניגש אליו ודיבר דבריו.

It almost seems as if he accepts it as a concept, but he doesn't think it's necessary in this. It is interesting that he is sure to note the Talmud does not seem to have such a concept.

The plot thickens, however, when we look at Exodus 9:18, where he says that the Masoretes claim that a certain word is written without a mapik heh when it should have had one, and this proves they are innocent of having changed the text, since they could have changed the words to fix the problem. Shadal for his part thinks its accurately not a mapik heh word anyway.

הנה זו ראיה על נקיון כפיהם, שלא שלחו ידם להגיה מסברה ולהוסיף המפיק שלדעתם היה ראוי להיות בתבות הללו.