Shemoth: Names

We have names for each of the chapters of the Torah. A few are named for rituals or holidays. Most of the names are derived from the first unusual word in the chapter. Often, the relationship between the title word and the content of the chapter is ambiguous, it is not clear whether the title word captures the essence of the chapter or not. Perhaps the title word captures the essence, perhaps it is incidental. I think that Shemoth is not an accidental name.  I think that Shemoth is about the meanings of names and reputations and memorials (these are the definitions of Shemoth given in the Sefaria open source dictionary). 

The parsha opens by listing the names of the 12 tribal chiefs, the twelve sons of Israel. In the context of subsequent history, the union of these tribes into a single nation is the most significant development. The Egyptian experience of shared oppression (although the oppression may not have been equally distributed) fostered that unity and made all the children of Israel siblings, it gave them a common name. 

Soon, a new character appears, מֶ֣לֶךְ מִצְרַ֔יִם, [the] king of Egypt. Is this Pharoah? Is the Pharoah a person with two or more titles? Perhaps this is not Pharaoh, it is the equivalent of the Prime Minister. This role could be an outgrowth of the (positive) experience that Egypt enjoyed when Joseph ruled Egypt as viceroy. Politics may have dictated that new King of Egypt negate the memory of his (distant) predecessor to consolidate power. The phrase that King Egypt uses to deny Joseph 

 לֹֽא־יָדַ֖ע אֶת־יוֹסֵֽף

did not know Joseph (E1;8)

is the same as Pharoah's subsequent denial of recognition for Gd

לֹ֤א יָדַ֙עְתִּי֙ אֶת־יְ

I do not know (this) [entity]

Pharaoh's denial can be understood rationally. This (ineffable) name had very recently been revealed to Moshe as part of the instructions to liberate the Israelites from their bondage. The lack of recognition can also be seen as a denial of an entity that sees the situation, recognizes the suffering and injustice and therefore demands remediation (I will be what I will be), Pharaoh is denying the need to answer to a power greater than himself; the need to answer to history. 

Pharaoh's lack of Gd recognition contrasts with the midwives who were ordered to kill the newborn Hebrew boys. 

וַתִּירֶ֤אןָ הַֽמְיַלְּדֹת֙ אֶת־הָ֣

But the midwives feared THE Gd, and did not as the king of Miżrayim commanded them, but saved the men children alive.

This HaElokim was the entity to which Joseph attributed the power of dream interpretation to the Pharoah who elevated Joseph. The Use of the definite article, הָ֣, hay, conveys an aspect of monotheism.

In the context of my own background, I find this passage about righteous midwives very interesting. Historian Manfred Oldenburg  (quoted by Fritzsche), noted few drastic consequences for soldiers refusing to execute Jews. That is not to deny that many families were killed for attempting to rescue Jews, and certainly not to take away from the honor of the families that courageously helped my parents survive.  The families that helped often feared HaElokim, the One Gd. The price of heroism is unpredictable.

Significance is overtly attached to many of the names. Moshe (Moses) carries the name given to him by his foster mother, the daughter of Pharaoh. His biological mother (and wet nurse) does not name him. Moshe is the one who is drawn up, the one who is rescued, the man who is tied to salvation. He is recognized as a Hebrew who has been raised in the Egyptian court. When he kills the cruel Egyptian taskmaster, establishing his revolutionary outlaw status, everyone is struggling with his identity: Moshe, the Hebrews and the Egyptians. 

Moshe becomes a stranger in Midian where he marries and names his son Gershom: "I was a stranger in a foreign land." Moshe was an Egyptian in Midian; He had been a Hebrew in Egypt.  Which does he mean? Both are true. 

When Moshe returns to Egypt on his mission of liberation, the story turns pitiful. It is not surprising that Pharaoh and the King of Egypt doble down on the Israelites. Their initial oppression worked extremely well. Looking good to the (Egyptian) administration has become their highest value. Their slavery  is mostly self-imposed.

This situation is reminiscent of the Nazi organized ghetto where a document that claimed employment would rescue a person from deportation … for a while. The rules became ever harsher, the documents fewer. The documents became more precious. When the government is the oppressor, compliance and confusion are the easy answers. But when compliance means deportation to the unknown, the law yields to survival. Building sympathy for the minimally less fortunate is hard. When you are a slave, when you have almost nothing, sympathy is too expensive.

That is what we see when Moshe approaches the Pharaoh and King of Egypt to give the Hebrews some time off. When he is rebuffed by the doubling down, the denial of raw material without a reduction in the demanded quota of bricks, the Hebrew elders and the Israelites are upset by  Moshe, no by Pharaoh’s edict. The arbitrary, persecutorial dictates of the Authorities are assumed justified, while the reasonable and beneficial request of Moses is dismissed as a grounds for increased persecution.

These chapters of the Torah, describing the enslavement and persecution of the (working class) Hebrews, the difficulty in enlightening  the persecuted to their plight, and the ultimate success of revolution feel  like a guidebook for Marx and Lenin.

Liberation begins with recognition of the situation and realizing that there are options. Sometimes sympathy is expensive; it can be worth the price.