The fall of the Egyptian Empire
The fall of the Egyptian Empire

The onslaught of plagues continues in this week’s Torah portion, led by Arbeh, the horde of locusts that descend onto Egypt. While every plague has its own unique set of ideas surrounding it, Arbeh stands apart for some fascinating reasons. The end of Egypt was in sight, and Arbeh heralded this finality.

The story of the seventh plague begins with a vague set of commandments form God to Moshe (Shemot 10:1-2):

The Lord said to Moses: ‘Come to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, in order that I may place these signs of Mine in his midst,and in order that you tell into the ears of your son and your son's son how I made a mockery of the Egyptians, and [that you tell of] My signs that I placed in them, and you will know that I am the Lord.’”

What were Moshe and Aharon supposed to relate to Pharaoh? The Torah makes no mention of this, continuing with the warning concerning Arbeh (ibid 3-4):

So Moses and Aaron came to Pharaoh and said to him, ‘So said the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, How long will you refuse to humble yourself before Me? Let My people go, and they will worship Me. For if you refuse to let [them] go, behold, tomorrow I am going to bring locusts (Arbeh) into your borders.’”

In a fascinating reaction, the servants of Pharaoh beg him to let the Jewish people leave Egypt (bid 7):

Pharaoh's servants said to him, ‘How long will this one be a stumbling block to us? Let the people go and they will worship their God. Don't you yet know that Egypt is lost?’”

There is an oddity that stands out in the Torah’s presentation of this particular plague. In all the previous instances, there was a direct commandment from God to Moshe, detailing the warning and subsequent plague. Here, though, there is no mention of a plague. Rather, God instructs Moshe and Aharon to visit Pharaoh, along with an allusion to a story to be told for all generations.

What are we to make of this glaring gap in information? Many commentaries chalk this up to a more “efficient” presentation on the part of the Torah. Rather than parse out every detail, the Torah sticks to what is essential to know, and for whatever reason why, there was no need to include that information. However, there are a minority of commentators (such as Rav Chaim Paltiel or the Daat Zekainim Baalei Tosfost) who take a markedly different approach. They ask the question alluded to above: how did Moshe deduce the upcoming plague? This very question presupposes the fact that God did not reveal any outright information regarding this plague. Thus, the question in fact is how could Moshe make such a deduction?

The first answer offered refers to a Midrashic explanation regarding Moshe’s staff. Inscribed on the staff were the first letters of the ten plagues. Therefore, Moshe saw the letter “Aleph” by the seventh plague, and concluded this must refer to Arbeh. This possibility is rejected (surprisingly not for the reason that the letter “Aleph” could mean many different plagues). The answer given is that if Moshe knew the specific plagues following Arbeh, God would not have had to offer any future specific instructions. How, then, did Moshe know that this plague was to be Arbeh?

The final answer offered is a deduction from the verse that speaks of the episode being told by all future generations. The story is referring to this plague (rather than the phenomenon of the plagues), and there is one “category” of natural calamity whose effects reverberate from generation to generation: Arbeh. Moshe did not derive his conclusion out of thin air. There is a reference to an attack of locusts in the prophecy of Yoel (in the first chapter). There, like here, there is mention of the locust invasion being remembered by future generations. The idea then is that, like hurricanes and earthquakes, attacks by locusts are the type of event that people speak about as difficult and rare natural calamities. The plague of Arbeh would be the one they would always speak of as a reference point in future bouts with locusts.

These answers are anything but sufficient, and the Torah’s description of Arbeh is mystifying, to say the least. How could Moshe have intuited a plague on his own? Allowing Moshe to deduce a commandment by God is a fearful precedent, no matter how great of a person Moshe was. What was so unique about Arbeh that the servants of Pharaoh chose this moment, right before its onset, to beg the ruler of Egypt to let the Jews leave and to describe Egypt as being “lost”? Was this upcoming plague more destructive than Barad or Arov?

Looking closely at how the plague is described in its inception and subsequent inflicting upon the Egyptian people, the focus appears to be on the devouring of the remnants of what was left from the previous plague of Barad (ibid 12):

The Lord said to Moses, "Stretch forth your hand over the land of Egypt for the locusts, and they will ascend over the land of Egypt, and they will eat all the vegetation of the earth, all that the hail has left over."”

The above suggests that the destructive capacity of this plague was not on par with plagues like Dever or Dam, as only remnants were being consumed. It is possible, then, that the focus of this plague was not on its specific formula of destruction, but the result it produced. Whereas by other plagues, the method of delivery was the primary feature, the same did not hold true by Arbeh. For example, having the waters of the Nile turn to blood signified a level of control by God over the natural world, attached to an area of economic and religious significance to the Egyptian people. Barad demonstrated another aspect of control, as fire and ice co-mingled but still expressed their unique properties individually. Arbeh? There was not much left for the locusts to consume, and nothing fantastical in the insects themselves other than the vast quantity (ibid 15):

The locusts ascended over the entire land of Egypt, and they alighted within all the border[s] of Egypt, very severe; before them, there was never such a locust [plague], and after it, there will never be one like it. They obscured the view of all the earth, and the earth became darkened, and they ate all the vegetation of the earth and all the fruits of the trees, which the hail had left over, and no greenery was left in the trees or in the vegetation of the field[s] throughout the entire land of Egypt.”

The key description above emphasizes the lack of any remaining vegetation in the land. All the other plagues up to this point were centered on the physical destruction of Egypt. The culmination of this process was Arbeh. The coming onslaught of Arbeh meant that this epoch of Egyptian grandeur had come to an end, as Egypt was now desolate. There was no prospect of rebuilding for that generation. All that was left were the people. In fact, the last two plagues reflect this viewpoint. Choshech brought a crippling darkness to the Egyptians, affecting them on a deep psychological level. MakatBechorot is self-explanatory. There was nothing left of Egypt as a country to destroy. This could also be the reason why the servants of Pharaoh reacted so dramatically to the potential of Arbeh. They saw the end of Egypt through the calamity of Arbeh, and sought to avoid the final step to the annihilation of their country and its identity. Arbeh, then, was being used to bring about the end of that era of Egyptian history.

The apparent shift in focus from vehicle of destruction to the ensuing effects might also help us understand how Moshe was able to deduce Arbeh. A direct causal chain is difficult to ascertain, but we can at least get a sense of Moshe’s overall thinking in this situation. Whereas with the other plagues Moshe received the identity of said plague, there was no specific commandment given here. The lack of commandment must have given indication about a considerable shift in the objective of the plagues. Surveying what remained of Egypt, Moshe understood that the pure physical destructive aspect of the plagues had come to an end. As each plague had a specific idea attached to it, meaning a unique idea about God’s control found within the nature of the plague itself, a verbal commandment was always necessary. With Arbeh, it was the historical significance of the event that was the intended message, expressed in the prediction of its story being told to subsequent generations (and seen in Yoel). When would the entire country defined as being uninhabitable? The upcoming plague was that final step. Using a natural calamity as a vehicle to demonstrate this idea, Moshe saw Arbeh as the choice of plague. Its numerous precedents in Egyptian history would help bring about the desired outcome.

Arbeh signified the end of the Egyptian prominence, a fallow land without any hope of recovery. The final chapter of the Egyptian enslavement of the Jewish people was coming to a close, and now the Egyptians themselves faced punishment from God.