5 min read

Who the Doorway Lets Through in Shemot Rabbah

Blood on a lintel, a convert at the gate, two letters of Torah grammar, Aaron in the Holy of Holies. Four thresholds. One question: who gets across.

Curated by Arthur · Told by Maggid ·
Table of Contents
  1. The Night the Destroyer Waited Outside
  2. Akilas at the Dawn of Creation
  3. What Two Letters of Torah Grammar Revealed
  4. What Gave Aaron the Right to Enter

The Night the Destroyer Waited Outside

The blood was not there to protect the Israelites from God. The rabbis of Shemot Rabbah made this precise. On the night of the final plague, there were two figures at every marked doorway. God, who passed. And the destroyer, a separate being whom God had deputized to move through the Egyptian houses, and whom God blocked at every threshold where the blood had been painted.

The blood was a sign held up to the destroyer, not to God. God already knew which houses held Israelites. The blood was the instruction the destroyer needed, the order to stand aside, the visible mark of a household the destroyer was not permitted to enter. God protected from the inside out. Not by stopping the destroyer before it got to Egypt, but by standing at each individual door.

Shemot Rabbah, the midrashic commentary on Exodus compiled in Palestine between the tenth and twelfth centuries, widened the frame from there. At the Flood, God had judged while seated, from a throne, at a distance. In Egypt, God judged while passing, door to door, close enough to mark which lintel carried what. The level of divine engagement had increased. The judgment had gotten personal.

Akilas at the Dawn of Creation

The midrash moved from Passover to a different kind of threshold: the boundary between Jew and convert. Akilas was a Roman who had come to accept the God of Israel. He wanted to convert. He came to the community and asked.

The tradition preserved his asking and the answer it received, which was not an immediate yes. The process of conversion is a doorway with its own requirements. Not because converts are unwelcome but because the passage itself is meaningful. A person who passes through it without understanding what the threshold marks has not really passed through it. The community that receives without examination has not really received.

What Akilas eventually crossed into was a community that the midrash connected back to the dawn of creation itself. The converts who entered Israel were not latecomers grafted onto something already finished. They were, in the Midrash's telling, part of what the creation had been building toward. The threshold they stood at was as old as the first threshold: the gate of the garden that had swung closed and whose reopening was always the direction the whole story was moving.

What Two Letters of Torah Grammar Revealed

The Midrash paused over a grammatical detail in the Torah: the difference between the word for these, elleh, and the word for and these, v'elleh. When the Torah used elleh alone, it was setting aside what came before. A clean break. These things begin now. When it used v'elleh, with the vav prefix meaning and, it was connecting what followed to what preceded. The new law was continuous with the old.

This distinction was not a grammatical footnote. It was a threshold marker. The Torah used these two forms to mark which laws were amendments and which were continuations. A student who knew when to look for the vav and when to look for its absence had a key that unlocked the architecture of the legal code. The doorway of the letter let through readers who knew how to read it and held back everyone who was moving too fast to notice what was standing at the gate.

What Gave Aaron the Right to Enter

The Holy of Holies was the innermost room of the Tabernacle, and later of the Temple. No one entered it except the High Priest, and even he entered only on Yom Kippur, and even then only with specific offerings and specific vestments and specific intentions. The threshold of the Holy of Holies was the most carefully guarded doorway in Israelite religious life.

Aaron had disgraced himself at the calf. He had stood in the middle of the worst apostasy Israel had committed and made excuses that did not hold up under examination. Moses had interceded for him. God had forgiven him. But the question Shemot Rabbah asked was: on what basis could such a man approach the most sacred threshold in the world?

The answer it gave was precise. Aaron's right to enter came not from his own merit but from the process of the forgiveness itself. He had not bypassed the threshold. He had come to it in the only way the threshold accepted: through acknowledged failure, through intercession, through the restoration of a relationship that had been damaged and then repaired. The blood on the lintel, the vav before the letter, the convert's passage, Aaron's entry. Four thresholds. One question. The answer was never about who was clean enough. It was always about who had properly approached.


← All myths

From the tradition

Sources

4 sources

The texts this telling draws on, in full. Open a card to read inline, or expand it for a wider, quieter read.

Shemot Rabbah 17:5Shemot Rabbah

The Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary), specifically Shemot Rabbah, a compilation of rabbinic interpretations on the Book of Exodus, asks a profound question about this verse. It quotes (Job 31:14): “What shall I do when God rises? When He reckons, what shall I answer Him?” The Midrash attributes this verse not just to Job, but also to the angel who oversees the world, and even to all of humankind. Why? Because it speaks to a universal anxiety about divine judgment.

The Midrash then draws a fascinating parallel between three different periods and modes of divine judgment: the time of the Flood, the Exodus from Egypt, and the Messianic future.

We find regarding the generation of the flood that God judged them while sitting, as it is stated: “The Lord sat enthroned at the flood” (Psalms 29:10). The judgment was absolute: “He blotted out all existence” (Genesis 7:23). A devastating, complete erasure.

But in Egypt, the Midrash tells us, God judged them while passing. As it is stated: “The Lord will pass to smite Egypt,” (Exodus 12:23) and “I will pass in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 12:12). A more targeted, yet still devastating, judgment.

Now, consider the future, the Messianic Age. The Midrash envisions a different kind of judgment. As it is stated: “And His feet will stand on that day” (Zechariah 14:4). And further, “Therefore wait for Me, said the Lord, until the day that I rise up forever… for all the earth will be devoured with the fire of My jealousy” (Zephaniah 3:8).

The implication is clear: if God judged the generation of the Flood while sitting, and the Egyptians while passing, what will happen when He stands to judge the world? Who will be able to withstand such a judgment? This is why, the Midrash says, mankind will echo Job’s question: “What shall I do when God rises?”

But there’s more to it than just fear. The Midrash offers a reason for this future "standing" judgment. It's "because of the outcry of the poor, for the sigh of the needy." As (Psalm 12:6) says: “For the oppression of the poor, for the sigh of the needy, now I will rise, says the Lord.”

So, the ultimate judgment isn't just about divine power or wrath. It's about justice. It's about God responding to the cries of those who suffer. It's a powerful reminder that our actions have consequences, and that God is ultimately concerned with how we treat the most vulnerable among us.

This Midrash from Shemot Rabbah isn't just a historical analysis of different periods of judgment. It's a call to action. It challenges us to consider our own role in creating a more just and compassionate world, so that when the time comes, we might have a better answer to that eternal question: “What shall I do when God rises?”

Full source
Shemot Rabbah 19:4Shemot Rabbah

It's a feeling that Judaism, in its wisdom, addresses head-on. We find a fascinating exploration of this theme in Shemot Rabbah, a collection of rabbinic interpretations on the Book of Exodus. Specifically, Shemot Rabbah 19 wrestles with the question of the "foreigner" – the ger (גר).

ger can mean both "foreigner" and "convert," and that double meaning is really at the heart of this whole discussion. The text starts with a seeming contradiction. On one hand, we have the verse about the Paschal offering: "No foreigner shall eat of it" (Exodus 12:43). But then, another verse opens the door: "When a stranger will reside with you, and will perform the paschal offering to the Lord, circumcise all his males..and he will be like a native of the land" (Exodus 12:48-49). So, what's going on here? Is the Torah welcoming or exclusionary?

They use the words of the prophets and the wisdom literature to paint a picture of a God who welcomes everyone. Job says, "The stranger shall not spend the night outside" (Job 31:32). And Shemot Rabbah connects this to the idea that God "does not reject any creature, but rather, He accepts everyone. The gates open at all times, and anyone who seeks to enter may enter." Beautiful. Rabbi Berekhya takes it a step further. He suggests that converts (gerim) are destined for greatness, even to serve as priests in the Temple! He bases this on the verse, "The stranger will join himself with them, and they will be appended to the house of Jacob" (Isaiah 14:1), linking the word "appended" (venispeḥu) to the priesthood, drawing a parallel from I (Samuel 2:36). They are even destined to partake of the showbread (lechem hapanim), the special bread offered in the Temple!

The text even brings in the story of Akilas, a proselyte, who asks a very pointed question: if God loves the stranger, promising food and clothing (Deuteronomy 10:18), is that all there is to it? The Rabbi answers by connecting this to Jacob's request for "food to eat, and clothing to wear" (Genesis 28:20). But it's not just about physical needs. Jacob, whose name became Israel, was asking for assurance that God would be with him, establishing the world through his descendants – sons who would be priests, partaking in the showbread and wearing priestly garments. In other words, Akilas. And all converts, are not merely tolerated but embraced as vital parts of the community.

And the text doesn't shy away from addressing potential objections. What about those who might feel disqualified because of their past? The Rabbis bring up the story of the Gibeonites, who deceived the Israelites but were ultimately protected by God, even when King Saul tried to harm them (II Samuel 21). If God could show mercy to the Gibeonites, who acted out of fear and deceit, how much more so will He accept and exalt converts who come in love and serve for the sake of His name?

However, Shemot Rabbah also offers a stark warning. While the door is open to all, there are still conditions. The text emphasizes the importance of circumcision as a sign of commitment to the covenant. It even suggests that those who scorn the statute (ḥok) of circumcision risk being cast into Gehenna (hell). But even here, there's a twist. Rabbi Berekhya suggests that even wicked, circumcised Israelites might have their foreskins restored by an angel before descending to Gehenna! It's a powerful image, emphasizing the idea that true belonging requires more than just outward symbols.

So, what does all of this mean for us today? I think it's a powerful reminder that Judaism, at its best, is a tradition of radical inclusion. It challenges us to look beyond superficial differences and to recognize the inherent worth and potential of every human being. It reminds us that the gates are always open, and that anyone who seeks to join themselves to the Divine is welcome, not just to enter, but to flourish. And it also asks us to examine our own hearts, to ensure that our commitment is more than skin deep. Are we truly embracing the stranger, the convert, the outsider? Are we creating a community where everyone feels like they belong? That's the challenge, and the promise, of Shemot Rabbah.

Full source
Shemot Rabbah 30:3Shemot Rabbah

In Jewish tradition, even a single letter can unlock hidden depths." It's a difference that, according to some rabbinic interpretations, can tell us what's being included and what's being left out.

The Shemot Rabbah, a collection of rabbinic homilies on the Book of Exodus, explores this very question. Rabbi Abahu points out a fascinating pattern: whenever the word ve'eleh is used, it adds to what came before. But when it's just eleh, it excludes something. It's like a subtle code built into the very fabric of the Torah.

So, how does this work in practice? the story turns to some examples.

The creation story in Genesis says, "Eleh are the generations of the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 2:4). Rabbi Abahu asks, what is being rejected here? Well, the Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary) suggests that God experimented with different versions of heaven and earth, ones that didn't quite meet his standards, before settling on this one. Those earlier attempts? They're not part of the final, enduring legacy.

Similarly, "Eleh are the generations of Noah" (Genesis 6:9). This excludes, according to the Shemot Rabbah, the generations of Enosh, the generation of the Flood, and others deemed unworthy. The Torah then goes into great detail about Noah’s descendants, while the preceding generations receive far less attention. It's as if the Torah is drawing a line in the sand, saying, "These are the ones who matter, the ones whose story continues."

Now, contrast that with instances of ve'eleh. "Ve'eleh are the generations of Ishmael" (Genesis 25:12). This adds to what was previously mentioned. The text then refers back to the children born to Abraham by Keturah, implying a connection, even a similarity, between them and the descendants of Ishmael. The Shemot Rabbah even suggests they were wicked like them!

Another instance: "Ve'eleh are the generations of Isaac" (Genesis 25:19). This adds to what came before – the sons of Ishmael. So, does that mean Jacob, too, is lumped in with the not-so-righteous Esau? Here’s where it gets even more interesting.

The text notes that the word for "generations" – toledot – is usually written in a shortened, or "defective," form in the Torah. Except in two places: "toledot of the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 2:4) and "toledot of Peretz" ((uth 4:1)8). Why?

The Shemot Rabbah offers a powerful reason. The creation of the world was complete and perfect, without the presence of the Angel of Death. And the lineage of Peretz is significant because the Messiah will emerge from his line, and in the Messianic era, death will be swallowed up forever, as it says in Isaiah (25:8), "He will eliminate death forever." So, these two instances of toledot are written in full, symbolizing completeness and the ultimate triumph over death.

Back to Isaac. The fact that toledot is written defectively in "ve'eleh are the generations of Isaac" is interpreted to exclude Jacob from the negative association with Esau. The Messiah can be traced back to Jacob as well, but the text makes a point to separate him, at least in this context.

We see this pattern repeated. "Ve'eleh are the names of the children of Israel" (Exodus 1:1) adds to the previous narrative, linking these individuals to those listed earlier in Genesis (46:8-27) who went down to Egypt. Similarly, "Ve'eleh are the generations of Aaron" (Numbers 3:1) connects them to the righteous individuals counted by Moses and Aaron (Numbers 1:44).

And finally, we arrive at "Ve'eleh are the ordinances" (Exodus 21:1), the very verse that sparked this whole exploration. What does it add to? It adds to the statutes and ordinances established earlier (Exodus 15:25). The Shemot Rabbah beautifully illustrates this by comparing the Torah to a noblewoman walking with armed guards on either side. Justice precedes it, as seen in the earlier ordinances, and justice follows it, in the form of the laws that come after. It's a Torah framed by righteousness.

So, what do we take away from all this? It's more than just a grammatical exercise. It's a reminder that words matter. That even seemingly small choices in language can reveal profound theological and moral insights. And it encourages us to look closely, to ask questions, and to appreciate the layers of meaning woven into the sacred texts we inherit. What else might we be missing, hidden in plain sight?

Full source
Shemot Rabbah 38:8Shemot Rabbah

What allowed him, a human, to step into the most sacred space?

Shemot Rabbah, a treasure trove of biblical interpretations, explores this very question. "This is the matter," it says, kicking off a fascinating discussion. On what merit could Aaron enter?

Rabbi Ḥanina son of Rabbi Yishmael suggests a powerful idea: the merit of circumcision! He finds a connection in the verse, "With this [bezot] shall Aaron come [into the Sanctuary]" (Leviticus 16:3). "This [zot]," he argues, echoes the phrase used to describe the covenant of circumcision: "This is [zot] My covenant that you shall observe" (Genesis 17:10). There's a beautiful symmetry here, suggesting that the very act of entering into the covenant with God paved the way for Aaron's entry into the divine presence. It's also written, "My covenant was with him, life and peace” (Malachi 2:5).

The exploration doesn't stop there. Rabbi Yitzḥak offers another perspective: the merit of the tribes of Israel. He draws our attention to the verse, "This is [vezeh] the matter that you shall do to them." (Exodus 29:1). Now, get this: the numerical value of the Hebrew word zeh, zayin (7) plus heh (5), equals twelve. Twelve, like the twelve tribes! Rabbi Yitzchak connects this to the twelve stones on Aaron's breastplate, each bearing the name of a tribe. According to Ginzberg's retelling in Legends of the Jews, these stones were arranged in a specific order, each tribe associated with a particular gem: Reuben with ruby, Simeon with topaz, Levi with emerald, and so on.

Why this arrangement? The Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary) tells us that God would look upon these stones, these representations of the tribes, and be reminded of their merit as Aaron entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement). It’s a powerful image: the High Priest carrying the symbolic weight of the entire nation into the heart of the sanctuary. It is said that the High Priest would wear four garments of white linen when he entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur. He would not be wearing the breastplate with the stones representing the tribes. Nonetheless, when the High Priest would enter the Holy of Holies in accordance with the Torah’s requirements, the merit of that observance and the merit of the priestly garments he would wear most of the time would arouse Divine mercy.

Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin, quoting Rabbi Levi, brings a captivating parable to illustrate this point. Imagine a king's son who has displeased his father. The son's tutor wants to intercede, but fears the king's wrath. So, what does the king do? He clothes the tutor in royal purple, a sign of authority and protection, so that all will respect him.

Similarly, Aaron's entry into the Holy of Holies was fraught with potential danger. The ministering angels were there, powerful and awe-inspiring. So, God clothed Aaron, not in purple, but in the holy garments, endowing him with the merit and protection he needed. As it says: “You shall make tunics for the sons of Aaron” (Exodus 28:40) just as it is written: “And He donned righteousness like a coat of armor and a helmet of salvation on His head; He donned garments of vengeance [for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak]” (Isaiah 59:17).

What does all this mean for us? Perhaps it’s a reminder that even the most sacred spaces and endeavors are approached through merit, through covenant, and through the collective strength of community. It's a beautiful thought, isn't it? That we all, in our own way, carry the potential to enter into the "holy of holies" in our lives, protected and empowered by the merits of our ancestors, our community, and our connection to something greater than ourselves.

Full source