You said you’d stand by me in the middle of Chapter Three
Elvis Costello
To fully appreciate Moses’ story and accomplishments, earlier scriptural themes must be considered. Long before his birth, during the time of the Patriarchs, biblical themes emerged. Three of these themes are embedded within the three chapters in Moses’ life- the Palace, the Exile, and the Exodus.
How these themes play out best explains Moses’ role in scripture. The journey begins in the Torah Portion Shemot. Moses’ life will be broken down with singular moments within each chapter.
Moses the Mystery?
Through this examination, one will find that that Moses is a man of strength, yet a man of weakness. A man of conviction, yet one of guilt. A disciplinarian, yet a man who believed in second chances. While labeled as the most humble man ever, it is apropos to also call him the most enigmatic. See Numbers 12:3.
Chapter I
But my hand was made strong by the hand of the Almighty
Bob Marley, Redemption Song
Moses, the adult, emerges onto the scene in Buddha-like fashion.
Siddhartha Guatama’s father shielded the young Buddha- a prince- from seeing real world suffering. Only when the Buddha left the palace did he witness the human condition. He experience illness and death.
Similarly, the Torah Portion Shemot tells of Moses- a young prince as well- witnessing the world outside of the palace.
The suffering that Moses’ witnessed was different from that of the Buddha. Moses saw human suffering arising from injustice. The readers are told “…and he saw an Egyptian man striking a Hebrew man, one of his brothers.” Exodus 2:11
Moses, on his own volition, takes action:
“And he turned this way and that way and saw there was no man, and he struck the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.” Exodus 2:12
Moses, initially, must have believed that he solved a problem of suffering caused by injustice. This viewpoint could have been due to his Egyptian Royal status. He assumed that as an authority figure, he capable of dispensing his own form of justice.
The Portion Shemot then tells of the next fateful day.
“And he went out on the second day, and here were two Hebrew men fighting. And he said to the one who was in the wrong, ‘Why do you strike your companion?'” Exodus 2:13 “And he said, ‘Who made you a commander and judge over us? Are you saying you’d kill me- the way you killed the Egyptian?'” Exodus 2:14.
Moses became afraid. He offered no defense to his action. Moses was a man of physical strength but lacking in refined moral education and fortitude.
Moses’ experience is similar to a Patriarchal episode involving Jacob’s daughter Dinah.
With respect to the incident involving Dinah, Jacob’s sons [including Levi] were upset. The incident [at minimum pre-marital sex] was considered as a foolhardy thing among Israel to lie with Jacob’s daughter, and such a thing is not done. Genesis 34:7.
To deal with the controversy, deceptively. Levi and Simeon slaughtered the Shechem males when they were in a weakened state. Genesis 34:25.
When Levi and Simeon were questioned by Jacob about their perceived atrocity, with the Hebrew slave, they had a reply. They responded “shall he treat our sister like a prostitute?” Genesis 34:31.
Analysis
While the actions have similarities, Moses’ narrative is lacking. Moses, unlike Jacob’s sons, appears to not be well-versed with respect to Israelite culture and laws. Unlike Levi and Simeon, Moses had no response to the Hebrew Slave.
Moses lacked the ability to articulate moral outrage. Also, he lacked the ability to act appropriately.
From a modern perspective, he acted a judge, jury and executioner. No due process was afforded. Arguably, Moses possessed unbridled zeal and strength. His moral view of the world required refinement.
Chapter II
They are who we thought they were
Dennis Green
Never miss the obvious.
After Moses fled Egypt after killing the Task Master, he began his second life as a Herder in Midian. There, the Torah tells that “[a]nd he drove the flock at the far side of the wilderness, and he came to the Mountain of God, Horeb.” Exodus 3:1
Thus, before Moses’ Burning Bush theophany, an abundance of information is delivered within the one sentence: (1) He traveled to the far side of the wilderness, and (2) He came to the Mountain of God, Horeb.
The obvious is that Moses intentionally went to the Mountain of God. Why would someone go to a Mountain of God? To meet God, of course. The mystery is “Why?”
Was Moses still burdened by his Egyptian past? Was Moses concerned about his fellow Hebrew’s suffering? Or, as Moses having a sort of mid-life crisis with his Midianite lifestyle?
Regardless of the reason, Moses’ Mountain of God experience included on special word. It is the very word which is foundational towards the Israelite Nation. Heneini– I’m here. See Genesis 22:1 This was the very word that was Abraham’s response to God’s calling.
Thus, when God said, “Moses, Moses,” it was Moses who answered Heneini, “I’m here.” Exodus 3:4.
Analysis
In these moments of theophany, one will be tasked and tested. For Abraham, it was the Binding of Isaac- a test of faith. For Moses, it would be the liberation of the Hebrew nation.
Chapter III
The cream rises to the top, yeah!
Randy “Macho Man” Savage
While some people wrestle with God, the truly elite negotiate. They do so on behalf of Humanity.
The Golden Calf incident illustrates Moses’ great moment.
The Torah tells: ” And the Lord spoke to Moses: “Go. Go down. Because your people, whom you brought up from the land of Egypt, has corrupted. They’ve turned quickly from the way I commanded them. They’ve made themselves a molten calf, and they’ve bowed to it and sacrificed to it and said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt!’
And the Lord said to Moses, ‘I’ve seen this people; and here, it’s a hard-necked people. And now, leave off from me, and my anger will flare at them, and I’ll finish them, and I’ll make you into a big nation!'” Exodus 32: 7-10.
And Moses conciliated in from the Lord, his God and said, ‘Why, the Lord, should your anger flare at your people whom you brought out from the land of Egypt with big power and a strong hand? Why should Egypt say, saying, ‘He brought them out for bad, to kill them in the mountains, and to finish them from on the face of the earth?
Turn back from your flaring anger and relent about the bad to your people. Remember Abraham, Isaac and Israel, your servants, that you swore to them by yourself, and you spoke to them: ‘I’ll multiply your seed like the stars of the skies, and I’ll give to your seed all this land that I’ve said, and they’ll possess it forever.’ And the Lord relented about the bad that He had spoken, to do to His people. Exodus 32:11-14
Moses, once again, mirrors the Patriarch Abraham’s Sodom and Gomorrah negotiations. Abraham famously queried God with respect to his plan to destroy the cities. “Will you also annihilate the virtuous with the wicked?” He asked. Genesis 18:23.
[Note: Unlike with Moses, God was worrisome over concealing this plan to Abraham. He was determined to have Abraham as the founder of a big and powerful nation. He was concerned that they would observe the Lord’s way to do virtue and judgment. Genesis 18:16-20.]
Post God’s relenting, Moses would employ the Levites to clean house. Moses, after returning from Mt. Sinai, witnesses the degradation. He called “Whoever is for the Lord: to me!” Exodus 32:26 “And all the children of Levi were gathered to him.” After this, the Levites disposed of three thousand men. Exodus 32:28.
Analysis
The difference between Abraham and Moses was that the latter would take a personal role in shaping the Children of Israel into becoming worthy of their covenant. On the other hand Abraham’s negotiation did not involve further responsibility on his behalf.
[Note: This theme’s importance is the message that every leader and decision-maker should be open towards receiving and acting upon wisdom and well founded advice. Even God, at a time of great upset, was willing to be open minded.]
Conclusion
While Moses started out to be a champion of injustice without the appropriate knowledge and wisdom, he failed. He acted independently acted sans the law and judgment to back him up.
Moses, to be an effective leader, required the ability to express himself with respect to virtue and judgment. When called by God, he answered the call. Albeit he was reluctant, he proved to be quite effective with the task at hand.
In perhaps in his greatest moment, he defended and molded a quite problematic people into a nation.
In all this, the Genesis themes are clearly connected to the Moses narrative.
Through this examination, one can find that Moses was a man of strength, yet a man of weakness. A man of conviction, yet one of guilt. A disciplinarian, yet a man who believed in second chances. While labeled as the most humble man ever, it is apropos to call him the most enigmatic man as well. See Numbers 12:3.
Be well!!
Please like, follow, comment or share
The Ten Commandments Project 
The last Torah interpretation of ”t’shuva”, requires a follow up Talmudic study-examination that addresses the same subject. Important basis of understanding: A fundamental distinction which separates the Book of בראשית from the תולדות Books of שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר — pre-revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the Gods in the Heavens; post-revelation of the Torah at Sinai-שם השם lives only within the Yatzir Ha-Tov within the hearts of the Chosen Cohen people for eternity thereafter.
Hence when the corrupt false Messiah JeZeus taught his ‘disciples’ how to pray, this Harry Potter fictional messiah did not know the basic distinction between how the Avot called upon יה, האל, אל, אלהים, אל שדי, או איש האלהים – all these Divine Names of the bnai brit soul, they thrive in the Heavens above, or עולם הבא; for example Avram cut the brit between the pieces with אל שדי touching the future born birth of all his children, but most specifically his chosen first born Cohen children – all of whom lived only in the world to come in Heaven.
Post Sinai: the שם השם – (דברים ל) — לא בשמים היא, instructs a radically Sinai “shock” distinction. Post Sinai the local tribal god of the chosen Cohen people rules only within the borders of the promised land – the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people alone; the jurisdiction of the Great Sanhedrin – likewise limited and restricted to within the borders of the 12 Tribe Cohen Republic; and despite the farcical false prophet Muhammad which taught that prophets sent to all peoples and nations, and these prophets speak in the native tongues of ‘all peoples and nations’, this fraud denies the simple Talmudic understanding that only the 12 Tribes of Israel accepted the Revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The proof for the Talmud’s instruction: Goyim pray to their Universal Gods who live in the Heavens.
The fictional Harry Potter false messiah of the noise NT fraud taught his “disciples”: Matthew 6:9-13 – Our Farter in Heaven; the NT: a Protocols of the Elders of Zion – Roman fraud counterfeit because of its complete and total ignorance of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai which makes an eternal הבדלה distinction between how pre-Sinai Avot prophets called upon their local tribal god in heaven; from how the post Sinai – the chosen Cohen eternal seed of the Avot – call upon the exact same but different local tribal god, who dwells only in the Earth. This fundamental תורה עיקרי distinction, the stinky Noise NT Roman authors did not know that pre-Sinai our local god lived in the Heavens whereas post Sinai our local god lives only within the Yatzir Ha-Tov within the heart; according to how rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi explains the k’vanna of קריא שמע תפילה דאורייתא.
The primary Talmudic locus for t’shuva is Masechet Yoma, which dissects Yom Kippur’s atonement mechanics but roots them in the post-Sinai heart. T’shuva “remembers”: A) the sworn oaths wherein the Avot cut a oath alliance brit touching the future born birth of the Chosen Cohen children of the Avot. Each Av swore a unique oath to cut the identical oath alliance brit which תמיד מעשה בראשית creates the Chosen Cohen People יש מאין על ידי את החכמה של זימן גרמא מצוות שנזקוק כוונה. Toldot positive and negative Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot do not require k’vanna. However employing these secondary commandments and halachot as בניני אבות precedents to other Torah commandments, this action raises/elevates these secondary commandments to primary time-oriented commandments. Based upon the precedent distinction which separates the Divine Names wherein the Avot of the Book of בראשית prayed to their local god in the heavens to the שם השם Sinai revelation wherein the local god of the Chosen Cohen seed of the Avot lives within the Yatzir-Tov of the heart. B) HaShem on Yom Kippur annulled His vow to profane the Torah oath alliance cut with the Avot, and establish Moshe Rabbeinu as the Father of the chosen Cohen people. Herein the Torah differentiates between oaths which neither HaShem nor Man can cancel; opposed by Vow which both Man & HaShem can annul.
T’shuva’s primary Talmudic locus in Masechet Yoma (especially 86a-b), where Resh Lakish’s teachings—”Great is t’shuva, for intentional sins become unintentional” (via fear) and “intentional sins become merits” (via love/ahavah)—embody post-Sinai heart-work. T’shuva “remembers” in two layers. The sworn oaths cut by the Avot – as contained withing the opening p’suk of קריא שמע tefillah as contrasted by Tehillem prayers, this chochmah of זמן גרמא מצוות distinct and apart from toldot prayers, commandments and halachot.
Tefillah – opens with שמע wherein אלהים separates HaShem from HaShem; wherein Israel accepts the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven-the Written and Oral Torah revelations at Sinai & Horev. Tehillem prayers do not require k’vanna because they do not qualify as time-oriented commandments as does tefillat kre’a shma. Translating the רוח הקודש שם השם to other words, regardless יה, האל, אל, אלהים, אל שדי, איש האלהים, JeZeus, or Allah etc, precisely duplicates the Av tumah avoda zarah of the Sin of the Golden Calf wherein the ערב רב שאין להם יראת אלהים translated Elohim for the רוח הקודש שם השם לשמה.
Yom Kippur, framing teshuva as an internal, post-Sinai act that “remembers” the Avot’s oaths—sworn alliances creating the Cohen people yesh me’ayin (from nothing) through chochma of zman grama mitzvot, which demand kavana to align the heart’s yetzer ha-tov with the Sinai revelation. Resh Lakish teaches: “Great is teshuva, for it causes intentional sins to be reckoned as unintentional” (when motivated by fear/yirah), and “intentional sins to be reckoned as merits” (when from love/ahava)—embodying the heart’s return that heals backsliding (Hosea 14:5). This duality reflects post-Sinai immanence: teshuva from love fully integrates sins into the yetzer ha-tov’s divine spark, unlike pre-Sinai external britot (e.g., Avram’s with El Shaddai, touching future heavenly seed). Contradictions in verses (e.g., “Return, backsliding children, I will heal” vs. “I will heal their backsliding”) resolve as love (erasing sin as if never occurred) versus fear (healing but remembering sin), or even teshuva compelled by suffering.
Yoma 86b’s baraita categorizes atonement introduces other interpretations of t’shuva based upon the kabbalah of ישעיהו כב:יד, מט:ג וגם ויקרא טז:ל. Based upon the floods of Noach profaning a Torah oath threatens the existence of the entire World. Discernment defines judgment. The dedication of a barbeque unto Heaven – the rejected offering made by Cain – the rejected first born Cohen son. Korbanot, like tefillah require שם ומלכות – an oath sworn dedication of Oral Torah middot לשמה. Ideally the tefillah oath sworn while standing before a Sefer Torah; whereas the korban the שם ומלכות Torah oath sworn while standing before the altar. Obviously if a person lacks the חכמה which discerns between the k’vanna distinctions that separates ה’ from ה’ from אל from רחום from חנון etc, such an עם הארץ lacks k’vanna just as a person who observes Shabbat but fails to discern – not doing acts of מלאכה on the day of Shabbat dedicates doing these חכמה מלאכות throughout the 6 days of Shabbat. Doing mitzvot as מלאכה defines the k’vanna of time-oriented commandments which create מלאכים in the Heavens. The creation of מלאכים through tohor time-oriented Av commandments defines the intent of מגן אברהם.
Rabbi Eliezer calls upon a Bat Kol from heaven. This Mishna of כלים addresses the most complex and difficult subject in the whole of the Sha’s Bavli – tohor vs tumah. Rabbi Meir perhaps the most profound authority on this exceptionally difficult subject; ; שם מ”ב – האל – removes av tuma avoda zara spirits from the Yatzir Ha-Raw, similar to חמץ on Pesach. Rabban Gamliel showed a tuma lack of respect to both rabbi Meir – capable of adducing 48 proofs for purity or impurity on any matter, Eruvin 13b – by expunging his Name from the Mishna and Rabbi Yehoshua – which broke the camel’s back and caused the Nassi’s own public humiliation of being replaced as Sanhedrin head. Rabbi Yehoshua understood רשות as a Torah חיוב כוונה.
The dispute between Rashi & Rabbeinu Tam appearance of 3 stars vs. פלג המנחה defines the distinction which separates how Rabban Gamliel vs. rabbi Yehoshua interpreted the k’vanna of רשות. Tefillah דאורייתא – Kre’a Shma. This tefillah ideally a person sits while wearing tefillen. Tefillen like a Sefer Torah in matters of swearing oaths. Rabbi Yehoshua understood תפילת ערבית as a רשות mitzva. Meaning the k’vanna of saying קריא שמע ערבית בזמן של פלג המנחה – its still day, therefore a person has רשות to place tefillen and affix the Kre’a Shma ערבית to the מנחה Shemone Esrei, and the ערבית תפילה to the קריא שמע המיטה, said prior to sleeping; at that time for sure 3 stars have appeared in the Heavens.
This ties into t’shuva because נידוי learns from ger tzeddik. Where the ger tzeddik qualifies as a tohor new creation’ so too the person placed into the curse of נידוי too qualifies as a “tuma new creation”. For example, if a רשע refuses to give his ex-wife her Get, a Torah court could place the curse of נידוי upon that arrogant man, who publicly profanes his קידושין made before kosher witnesses and a minyan of 10 men, and issue a Get to the enchained ex-wife. Gittin 88b: Courts may compel a get, even with rods if needed. ר”א died in cherem, so this Torah curse not limited to 30 days, shamata, like a standard nazir vow.
The Sages burned his tahor declarations and excommunicated him for not yielding; he remained isolated, with his death marked by final words of “tahor” (Sanhedrin 68a; various aggadic accounts). Post-death, Rabbi Yehoshua revoked the ban, affirming his ultimate purity (tearing garments in mourning). This shows nidui can function as a lifelong “curse” for profound communal threats, yet teshuva (or posthumous recognition) restores. The court may authorize agents to issue the get if he persists (Yevamot 90a; Ketubot 77a).
Earthly courts wield nidui as a tool of coercion and transformation, annulling vows/oaths of profanation within Israel’s borders—rejecting heavenly appeals (as in Rabbi Eliezer’s bat kol) while restoring the yetzer ha-tov’s divine spark. Rabbi Eliezer’s enduring nidui until death highlights the gravity of refusing communal authority, yet his story ends in purity, affirming teshuva’s ultimate triumph.
LikeLike