Va’era

*Aharon to Implement the Plague of Blood* 

In this week’s parasha we read about seven of the ten makkot (plagues) that were brought upon the Egyptians. While instructing Moshe Rabbeinu about the first of the ten plagues – the plague of dam (blood), Hashem instructed that Aharon Hakohen specifically should implement the plague. Rashi, based on the Midrash, explains that it was not appropriate for Moshe Rabbeinu to implement this makkah or the next makkah of frogs, because the River Nile protected Moshe Rabbeinu when he was cast into the Nile (in Parashat Shemot, to avoid being found by the Egyptians). 

Let us stop for a moment and consider this statement: The River Nile in Egypt was not merely a water source, rather it was the primary source of life and sustenance in Egypt. This was because Egypt did not receive adequate rainfall, and thus was dependent on the Nile for irrigation, and to support all human and animal life. Furthermore, Paroh utilised the Nile as a mechanism of proving his supremacy and even to claim that he was a deity: This was because Ya’akov Avinu had blessed Paroh that the Nile should “rise to meet him” and when this bracha was actualised, Paroh took advantage of this miraculous phenomenon to prove to his nation that he, Paroh, was a deity.  

*The Purpose of the Makkot: Proving Hashem’s Dominion* 

Furthermore, the ten makkot were not merely punishments for the Egyptians; rather they were intended to show Hashem’s dominion over every facet of the world, and all contained within it. Still, Hashem deemed it inappropriate for Moshe Rabbeinu to be the one to implement the makkah of dam, because this would be “ingratitude” to the Nile for protecting him many years before. It is interesting to note that the Nile did not actively protect him from the Egyptians; rather the basket that Moshe Rabbeinu was contained in floated on the surface of the Nile. Even for this passive service, Moshe Rabbeinu was indebted, and therefore the makkah had to be implemented by Aharon in his stead.  

We see from him the extent of ingratitude, that even though the task at hand was to implement a makkah, which would show Hashem’s sovereignty in the world, Moshe Rabbeinu was unable to initiate the makkah because this would be considered ingratitude.  

*The Makkah of Kinnim* 

Similarly, regarding the third makkah of kinnim (lice) Moshe Rabbeinu was again instructed that Aharon should strike the ground to implement the makkah. Here again, Moshe Rabbeinu was not allowed to strike the ground because he was aided by the ground after he killed the Egyptian, when he buried the Egyptian in the ground. We should note that the gain here was minimal, because a mere day after this incident, when Moshe Rabbeinu reprimanded Datan and Aviram for fighting, it was already known that Moshe had killed an Egyptian (this was evident in their retort), and still it was incumbent on Moshe Rabbeinu not to show ingratitude to the ground, and only Aharon could implement the makkah of kinnim.  

And despite the fact that the ground only aided Moshe Rabbeinu for a very short time, and despite the fact that the aid was passive (i.e., Moshe utilised the ground to bury the Egyptian in) Moshe Rabbeinu was not allowed to “act ungratefully” towards the ground by striking it – even though he was involved in performing a makkah which would increase kevod shamayim.  

We see from this the importance of hakarat hatov (gratitude) even to inanimate objects, and all the more so to people. Addionally, hakarat hatov to other people brings about feelings of hakarat hatov to Hashem, which serves as a catalyst for increased avodat Hashem and limmud hatorah.