שמות, פרק ד׳, פסוק י״ט

Before embarking on the monumental mission to free the Israelites, Moses prepares to leave his sanctuary and face the heart of the Egyptian empire. At this pivotal juncture, God approaches him with a profound message of reassurance, declaring that the danger to his life has entirely passed. Some scholars suggest that the chronology of events is fluid and that this divine assurance was actually granted earlier at the Burning Bush, serving as an initial promise that Moses could return without fear [אבן עזרא, הטור הארוך]. However, the primary approach among commentators is that this was a new, distinct communication. It occurred only after Moses had fully accepted his calling and returned to seek permission from his father-in-law to depart [רמב״ן, חזקוני, קאסוטו]. This sequence reveals the sheer magnitude of Moses' character. He committed to a highly perilous journey before receiving any guarantee of personal safety, motivated solely by his dedication to the mission. Only after he definitively resolved to go did God inform him that his enemies were no longer a threat [אור החיים, קאסוטו]. The specific location of this revelation is also deeply significant. Moses had previously made a solemn vow to remain with his father-in-law, and God was now formally releasing him from that obligation in the very place it was originally made [תורה תמימה].

The divine directive was not merely a call for a temporary visit, but a command to relocate completely and settle permanently in Egypt [העמק דבר, מלבי״ם]. Empowered by the knowledge that the immediate physical threat was gone, Moses understood that he must bring his wife and children along. Taking his family from a life of freedom, safety, and respect down into a land of brutal subjugation served a vital psychological purpose for the Israelites. It was designed to instill unwavering confidence that their redemption was imminent. The people would logically conclude that a rational, free man would never subject his own family to Egyptian slavery unless he possessed absolute certainty that they would all be leaving together in the very near future [רמב״ן, הטור הארוך, קונטרס חיבה יתירה].

God's reassurance rests upon the fact that the men who once sought to kill Moses have died. A literal interpretation maintains that this refers to the actual, physical death of the former Pharaoh, his loyal servants, and the grieving relatives of the Egyptian whom Moses had slain years prior, all of whom had harbored a desire for revenge [רשב״ם, ספורנו, רלב״ג, חזקוני, ביאור יש״ר]. Conversely, an extensive interpretive tradition identifies these enemies not as Egyptians, but as two prominent Israelites, Dathan and Abiram. According to this perspective, they did not physically die. Instead, they suffered a catastrophic loss of their wealth, drawing upon the ancient principle that a severely impoverished person is considered as though they are dead [רש״י, דעת זקנים, הדר זקנים]. Moses was not actually afraid of Pharaoh, as God had already promised to protect Him against the Egyptian king. Rather, his lingering anxiety was directed toward these wicked individuals from within his own nation who might continue to persecute him [העמק דבר]. The phrasing implies that these enemies still exist but have been rendered completely powerless. Stripped of their fortunes, their voices carry no influence in the royal courts, and they lack the financial means to bribe officials or act as dangerous informants [תורה תמימה, דברי דוד, הרא״ש].

The identification of poverty with death requires a deeper conceptual understanding. Ancient traditions categorize four types of people as being akin to the dead: the impoverished, the leper, the blind, and the childless. By examining the later lives of Dathan and Abiram during their infamous rebellion in the wilderness, the latter three categories are systematically ruled out. They were clearly not lepers, as they resided comfortably within the main Israelite camp rather than being quarantined outside of it. They were not blind, as they later made explicit rhetorical references to their own eyesight. Finally, they were not childless, since historical accounts of their rebellion explicitly mention their wives, sons, and small children. The only logical conclusion remaining is that they suffered a complete and devastating loss of their fortune [הרא״ש, שפתי חכמים, ברטנורא]. On a philosophical level, a destitute person is likened to the dead because they lack independent vitality and are entirely reliant on the goodwill of others. Just as a natural spring whose source is blocked ceases to be called living water even if a stagnant puddle remains, a person entirely cut off from the flow of worldly abundance is viewed as devoid of true life, even as they continue to physically walk the earth [גור אריה].