Moshe the Suburban Liberal

R. Mosheh Lichtenstein dedicated a book to studying the life of Moshe based on a close reading of the Torah and midrashim -- Moses: Envoy of God, Envoy of His People. Regarding Moshe's early life, R. Lichtenstein (pp. 3-19) begins by noting that there is little midrashic discussion of what Moshe did during his many years in Midian. This is in sharp contrast to the midrashic details of Avraham's life in Ur. Why is that period of Moshe's life left without elaboration?

He then creates a fascinating portrait of Moshe that echoes contemporary patterns. Moshe, as R. Lichtensteins describes him, was educated in Pharaoh's palace, and became an idealist, an enlightened liberal. Going out into the field and seeing slaves beaten, he acted on his idealistic beliefs and killed the offender. He then went out among the Jews, expecting them to join him in rebelling against the cruelty. He wanted them to know that he had killed an Egyptian so that they would join his cause.

Click here to read moreHe then creates a fascinating portrait of Moshe that echoes contemporary patterns. Moshe, as R. Lichtensteins describes him, was educated in Pharaoh's palace, and became an idealist, an enlightened liberal. Going out into the field and seeing slaves beaten, he acted on his idealistic beliefs and killed the offender. He then went out among the Jews, expecting them to join him in rebelling against the cruelty. He wanted them to know that he had killed an Egyptian so that they would join his cause. But all he found were people stuck in a slave mentality, arguing amongst themselves and unwilling to take real action. This profoundly disillusioned Moshe and led him to abandon his Jewish identity while in Midian. Those years spent in Midian were essentially lost years, when Moshe was running away from his identity and from all responsibility. He was a classic disillusioned liberal who had given up, who went into a bitter solitude. It was only the episode of the burning bush that turned him around.

This is a delightful read of the story, and R. Lichtenstein's telling includes many textual and midrashic readings. But is it viable? R. Hayyim Angel, in his review of R. Lichtenstein's book ("A Modern Midrash Moshe: Methodological Considerations" in his Revealed Texts, Hidden Meanings: Finding the Religious Significance in Tanakh), does not believe that it is. He writes: "[T]his reading appears to be against the Torah's account of Moshe's deliberate efforts to conceal his act of killing the Egyptian and his subsequent surprise that the matter had become known. Moshe did not abandon his community out of disgust for the Israelites' apathy or because they were fighting one another; he fled for his life."

I suggest that R. Lichtenstein has more going for him than R. Angel acknowledges. Most importantly, "[T]he ideas advanced in these chapters are midrash and not peshat" (p. 221). He fully acknowledges that his approach is not peshat. However, this does not mean that he can say something against the peshat.

There are two indications in the text that Moshe tried to hide his murder of the Egyptian slavemaster: 1) that he looked both ways and saw that there was no "man", 2) he buried the body. Regarding the former, R. Lichtenstein reads the word "man" as meaning more than no witnesses. It means that there was no sense of humanity around. There was no human morality to be found.

R. Lichtenstein also suggests that from the fact that the Jews did learn about Moshe's action, it can be inferred that Moshe really wanted them to. From them, it would eventually get to the Egyptians via informers, but, presumably, by then the revolt would have started. But that never happened.

As to the reason for Moshe leaving Egypt, R. Lichtenstein writes based on a midrash that there were two reasons: 1) escaping from the Egyptian police, 2) withdrawing from the Jews. There are two textual cues that inform this reading. First, when Yisro's daughters refer to Moshe as an Egyptian man, he does not correct them. The midrash sees this as an abandonment of his Jewish identity. Additionally, the verse that says that Moshe left Egypt is as follows: "But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh and settled in the land of Midian; and he dwelled by a well" (Ex. 2:15). It splits the act into two -- leaving Egypt because of Pharaoh and settling in Midian. The latter, evidently, was not because of Pharaoh because, if it was, the verse would have stated: "But Moses fled to the land of Midian from the face of Pharaoh." Rather, Moshe deliberately settled in Midian as a way of abandoning his people.

Is this the only way to read the story? No, and R. Lichtenstein makes that clear. But I found it an interesting commentary based on contemporary experience.