Ilustration Credit: Elad Lifshitz, Dov Abramson Studio
Midrash מִדְרָשׁ
(ב) וַיֵּ֤ט אַהֲרֹן֙ אֶת־יָד֔וֹ עַ֖ל מֵימֵ֣י מִצְרָ֑יִם וַתַּ֙עַל֙ הַצְּפַרְדֵּ֔עַ וַתְּכַ֖ס אֶת־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃
Aharon held out his arm over the waters of Mitzrayim (Egypt), and the frog came up and covered the land of Mitzrayim.
Throughout the story, this plague is described as צְפַרְדְּעִים (tzfarde’im, frogs)—in plural. Why does our pasuk switch to the singular word: הַצְּפַרְדֵּעַ (ha-tzefardei’a, the frog)?
Rashi quotes a midrash to explain. He also offers what he thinks is the פְּשַׁט (peshat, straightforward meaning) of the pasuk.
צְפַרְדֵּעַ אַחַת הָיְתָה, וְהָיוּ מַכִּין אוֹתָהּ, וְהִיא מַתֶּזֶת נְחִילִים נְחִילִים, זֶהוּ מִדְרָשׁוֹ.
וּבִפְשׁוּטוֹ יֵשׁ לוֹמַר: שֵׁרוּץ הַצְפַרְדְּעִים קוֹרֵא לְשׁוֹן יְחִידִית.
There was one frog, and they would hit it, and it would spray out masses of frogs. This is the explanation in a midrash.
The peshat explanation is that a swarm of frogs can be described in singular language.
According to the midrash, at first there was just one single frog. But people kept hitting it and making more and more frogs, and that’s why frogs ended up swarming all over Mitzrayim.
- Why would people keep hitting this frog if they saw that it sprayed out more frogs each time it was hit? How might they have been feeling when they were acting this way?
- What lesson is this midrash trying to teach us?
According to Rashi’s peshat explanation, a group of things can sometimes be described with singular language. This is true in English too! Think of grass and fish (we don’t usually say “grasses” or “fishes”).
- Can you come up with other English examples?
- Why do you think Rashi brought two explanations for this pasuk? What does the midrash explain that the peshat doesn’t?
-------------------
