Source: http://yhwh-qra.com/exodus-10-notes.aspx
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 14:43:59+00:00

Document:
The Egyptians dreaded locusts like every other ancient civilization. They had particular gods to whom they looked for help in such catastrophes. The locust-scaring deities of Greece and Asia were probably looked to in Egypt as well (especially in view of the origins in Egypt of so many of those religious ideas). The announcement of the plague falls into the now-familiar pattern. Yahweh tells Moses to go and speak to Pharaoh but reminds Moses that he has hardened his heart. Yahweh explains that he has done this so that he might show his power, so that in turn they might declare his name from generation to generation. This point is stressed so often that it must not be minimized. Yahweh was laying the foundation of the faith for Israel – the sovereignty of Yahweh.
The verb is שִׁתִי (shiti, "I have put"); it is used here as a synonym for the verb שִׂים (sim). Yahweh placed the signs in his midst, where they will be obvious.
The expression is unusual: תְּסַפֵּר בְּאָזְנֵי (tésapper bé’ozne, "[that] you may declare in the ears of"). The clause explains an additional reason for Yahweh’s hardening the heart of Pharaoh, namely, so that the Israelites can tell their children of Yahweh’s great wonders. The expression is highly poetic and intense – like Ps 44:1LEB, which says, "we have heard with our ears." The emphasis would be on the clear teaching, orally, from one generation to another.
The verb הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי (hit’allalti) is a bold anthropomorphism. The word means to occupy oneself at another’s expense, to toy with someone, which may be paraphrased with "mock." The whole point is that Yahweh is shaming and disgracing Egypt, making them look foolish in their arrogance and stubbornness (W. C. Kaiser, Jr., "Exodus," EBC 2:366–67). Some prefer to translate it as "I have dealt ruthlessly" with Egypt (see U. Cassuto, Exodus, 123).
"of Egypt." The place is put by metonymy for the inhabitants.
The word "about" is supplied to clarify this as another object of the verb "declare."
The form is the perfect tense with vav consecutive, וִידַעְתֶּם (vida’tem, "and that you might know"). This provides another purpose for Yahweh’s dealings with Egypt in the way that he was doing. The form is equal to the imperfect tense with vav (ו) prefixed; it thus parallels the imperfect that began v. 2 – "that you might tell."
The verb is מֵאַנְתָּ (me’anta), a Piel perfect. After "how long," the form may be classified as present perfect ("how long have you refused), for it describes actions begun previously but with the effects continuing. (See GKC 311 §106.g-h). The use of a verb describing a state or condition may also call for a present translation ("how long do you refuse") that includes past, present, and potentially future, in keeping with the question "how long."
The clause is built on the use of the infinitive construct to express the direct object of the verb – it answers the question of what Pharaoh was refusing to do. The Niphal infinitive construct (note the elision of the ה [hey] prefix after the preposition [see GKC 139 §51.l]) is from the verb עָנָה (’anah). The verb in this stem would mean "humble oneself." The question is somewhat rhetorical, since Yahweh was not yet through humbling Pharaoh, who would not humble himself. The issue between Yahweh and Pharaoh is deeper than simply whether or not Pharaoh will let the Israelites leave Egypt.
הִנְנִי(hinni) before the active participle מֵבִיא (mevi’) is the imminent future construction: "I am about to bring" or "I am going to bring" – precisely, "here I am bringing."
One of the words for "locusts" in the Bible is אַרְבֶּה (’arbeh), which comes from רָבָה (ravah, "to be much, many"). It was used for locusts because of their immense numbers.
The verbs describing the locusts are singular because it is a swarm or plague of locusts. This verb (וְכִסָּה, vékhissah, "cover") is a Piel perfect with a vav consecutive; it carries the same future nuance as the participle before it.
"eye," an unusual expression (see v. 15; Num 22:5LEB, 11).
The text has לִרְאֹת וְלֹא יוּכַל (vélo’ yukhal lir’ot, "and he will not be able to see"). The verb has no expressed subjects. The clause might, therefore, be given a passive translation: "so that [it] cannot be seen." The whole clause is the result of the previous statement.
As the next phrase explains "what escaped" refers to what the previous plague did not destroy. The locusts will devour everything, because there will not be much left from the other plagues for them to eat.
הַנִּשְׁאֶרֶת(hannish’eret) parallels (by apposition) and adds further emphasis to the preceding two words; it is the Niphal participle, meaning "that which is left over."
The relative pronoun אֲשֶׁר (’asher) is occasionally used as a comparative conjunction (see GKC 499 §161.b).
"which your fathers have not seen, nor your fathers’ fathers."
The Hebrew construction מִיּוֹם הֱיוֹתָם (miyyom heyotam, "from the day of their being"). The statement essentially says that no one, even the elderly, could remember seeing a plague of locusts like this. In addition, see B. Childs, "A Study of the Formula, ‘Until This Day,’" JBL 82 (1963).
"he"; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
The question of Pharaoh’s servants echoes the question of Moses – "How long?" Now the servants of Pharaoh are demanding what Moses demanded – "Release the people." They know that the land is destroyed, and they speak of it as Moses’ doing. That way they avoid acknowledging Yahweh or blaming Pharaoh.
"snare" (מוֹקֵשׁ, moqesh), a word used for a trap for catching birds. Here it is a figure for the cause of Egypt’s destruction.
With the adverb טֶרֶם (terem), the imperfect tense receives a present sense: "Do you not know?" (See GKC 481 §152.r).
The question is literally "who and who are the ones going?" (מִי וָמִי הַהֹלְכִים, mi vami haholékhim). Pharaoh’s answer to Moses includes this rude question, which was intended to say that Pharaoh would control who went. The participle in this clause, then, refers to the future journey.
"we have a pilgrim feast (חַג, khag) to Yahweh."
Pharaoh is by no means offering a blessing on them in the name of Yahweh. The meaning of his "wish" is connected to the next clause – as he is releasing them, may Yahweh help them. S. R. Driver says that in Pharaoh’s scornful challenge Yahweh is as likely to protect them as Pharaoh is likely to let them go – not at all (Exodus, 80). He is planning to keep the women and children as hostages to force the men to return. U. Cassuto (Exodus, 125) paraphrases it this way: "May the help of your Yahweh be as far from you as I am from giving you permission to go forth with your little ones." The real irony, Cassuto observes, is that in the final analysis he will let them go, and Yahweh will be with them.
The context of Moses’ list of young and old, sons and daughters, and the contrast with the word for strong "men" in v. 11 indicates that טַפְּכֶם (tappékhem), often translated "little ones" or "children," refers to dependent people, noncombatants in general.
The "trouble" or "evil" that is before them could refer to the evil that they are devising – the attempt to escape from Egypt. But that does not make much sense in the sentence – why would he tell them to take heed or look out about that? U. Cassuto (Exodus, 126) makes a better suggestion. He argues that Pharaoh is saying, "Don’t push me too far." The evil, then, would be what Pharaoh was going to do if these men kept making demands on him. This fits the fact that he had them driven out of his court immediately. There could also be here an allusion to Pharaoh’s god Re’, the sun-deity and head of the pantheon; he would be saying that the power of his god would confront them.
The word is הַגְּבָרִים (haggévarim, "the strong men"), a word different from the more general one that Pharaoh’s servants used (v. 7). Pharaoh appears to be conceding, but he is holding hostages. The word "only" has been supplied in the translation to indicate this.
The suffix on the sign of the accusative refers in a general sense to the idea contained in the preceding clause (see GKC 440-41 §135.p).
"they"; the referent (Moses and Aaron) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
The verb is the Piel preterite, third person masculine singular, meaning "and he drove them out." But "Pharaoh" cannot be the subject of the sentence, for "Pharaoh" is the object of the preposition. The subject is not specified, and so the verb can be treated as passive.
The preposition בְּ (bet) is unexpected here. BDB 91 s.v. (the note at the end of the entry) says that in this case it can only be read as "with the locusts," meaning that the locusts were thought to be implicit in Moses’ lifting up of his hand. However, BDB prefers to change the preposition to לְ (lamed).
The noun עֵשֶּׂב (’esev) normally would indicate cultivated grains, but in this context seems to indicate plants in general.
The clause begins וַיהוָה (va’adonay [vayhvah], "Now Yahweh…."). In contrast to a normal sequence, this beginning focuses attention on Yahweh as the subject of the verb.
The verb נָהַג (nahag) means "drive, conduct." It is elsewhere used for driving sheep, leading armies, or leading in processions.
The text does not here use ordinary circumstantial clause constructions; rather, "the morning was, and the east wind carried the locusts." It clearly means "when it was morning," but the style chosen gives a more abrupt beginning to the plague, as if the reader is in the experience – and at morning, the locusts are there!
The verb here is a past perfect, indicting that the locusts had arrived before the day came.
This is an interpretive translation. The clause simply has כָּבֵד מְאֹד (kaved mé’od), the stative verb with the adverb – "it was very heavy." The description prepares for the following statement about the uniqueness of this locust infestation.
"eye," an unusual expression (see v. 5; Num 22:5-11LEB).
The verb is וַתֶּחְשַׁךְ (vattekhshakh, "and it became dark"). The idea is that the ground had the color of the swarms of locusts that covered it.
The third part of the passage now begins, the confrontation that resulted from the onslaught of the plague. Pharaoh goes a step further here – he confesses he has sinned and adds a request for forgiveness. But his acknowledgment does not go far enough, for this is not genuine confession. Since his heart was not yet submissive, his confession was vain.
The Piel preterite וַיְמַהֵר (vaymaher) could be translated "and he hastened," but here it is joined with the following infinitive construct to form the hendiadys. "He hurried to summon" means "He summoned quickly."
The severity of the plague prompted Pharaoh to confess his sin against Yahweh and them, now in much stronger terms than before. He also wants forgiveness – but in all probability what he wants is relief from the consequences of his sin. He pretended to convey to Moses that this was it, that he was through sinning, so he asked for forgiveness "only this time."
Pharaoh’s double emphasis on "only" uses two different words and was meant to deceive. He was trying to give Moses the impression that he had finally come to his senses, and that he would let the people go. But he had no intention of letting them out.
"Death" is a metonymy that names the effect for the cause. If the locusts are left in the land it will be death to everything that grows.
"and he"; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
Or perhaps "sea wind," i.e., a wind off the Mediterranean.
The Hebrew name here is יַם־סוּף (Yam Suf), sometimes rendered "Reed Sea" or "Sea of Reeds." The word סוּף is a collective noun that may have derived from an Egyptian name for papyrus reeds. Many English versions have used "Red Sea," which translates the name that ancient Greeks used: ejruqrav qalavssa (eruthra thalassa).
The name Red Sea is currently applied to the sea west of the Arabian Peninsula. The northern fingers of this body of water extend along the west and east sides of the Sinai Peninsula and are presently called the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqaba or the Gulf of Eilat. In ancient times the name applied to a much larger body of water, including the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf (C. Houtman, Exodus, 1:109–10LEB). See also Num 14:25LEB; Num 21:4LEB; Deut 1:40LEB; Deut 2:1LEB; Judg 11:16LEB; 1 Kgs 9:26LEB; Jer 49:21LEB. The sea was deep enough to drown the entire Egyptian army later (and thus no shallow swamp land). Yahweh drives the locusts to their death in the water. He will have the same power over Egyptian soldiers, for he raised up this powerful empire for a purpose and soon will drown them in the sea. The message for the Israelites is that Yahweh will humble all who refuse to submit.
The ninth plague is that darkness fell on all the land – except on Israel. This plague is comparable to the silence in heaven, just prior to the last and terrible plague (Rev 8:1LEB). Here Yahweh is attacking a core Egyptian religious belief as well as portraying what lay before the Egyptians. Throughout the Bible darkness is the symbol of evil, chaos, and judgment. Blindness is one of its manifestations (see Deut 28:27–29LEB). But the plague here is not blindness, or even spiritual blindness, but an awesome darkness from outside (see Joel 2:2LEB; Zeph 1:15LEB). It is particularly significant in that Egypt’s high god was the Sun Yahweh. Yahweh Sun was now being shut down by Yahweh Yahweh. If Egypt would not let Israel go to worship their Yahweh, then Egypt’s god would be darkness. The structure is familiar: the plague, now unannounced (21–23), and then the confrontation with Pharaoh (24–27).
Or "the sky" (also in the following verse). The Hebrew term שָׁמַיִם (shamayim) may be translated "heavens" or "sky" depending on the context.
The verb form is the jussive with the sequential vav – וִיהִי חֹשֶׁךְ (vihi khoshekh). B. Jacob (Exodus, 286) notes this as the only instance where Scripture says, "Let there be darkness" (although it is subordinated as a purpose clause; cf. Gen 1:3LEB). Isa 45:7LEB alluded to this by saying, "who created light and darkness."
The Hebrew term מוּשׁ (mush) means "to feel." The literal rendering would be "so that one may feel darkness." The image portrays an oppressive darkness; it was sufficiently thick to possess the appearance of substance, although it was just air (B. Jacob, Exodus, 286).
The construction is a variation of the superlative genitive: a substantive in the construct state is connected to a noun with the same meaning (see GKC 431 §133.i).
S. R. Driver says, "The darkness was no doubt occasioned really by a sand-storm, produced by the hot electrical wind…which blows in intermittently…" (Exodus, 82, 83). This is another application of the antisupernatural approach to these texts. The text, however, is probably describing something that was not a seasonal wind, or Pharaoh would not have been intimidated. If it coincided with that season, then what is described here is so different and so powerful that the Egyptians would have known the difference easily. Pharaoh here would have had to have been impressed that this was something very abnormal, and that his god was powerless. Besides, there was light in all the dwellings of the Israelites.
The perfect tense in this context requires the somewhat rare classification of a potential perfect.
Or "dependents." The term is often translated "your little ones," but as mentioned before (Exodus 10:10LEB), this expression in these passages takes in women and children and other dependents. Pharaoh will now let all the people go, but he intends to detain the cattle to secure their return.
B. Jacob (Exodus, 287) shows that the intent of Moses in using גַּם (gam) is to make an emphatic rhetorical question. He cites other samples of the usage in Num 22:33LEB; 1 Sam 17:36LEB; 2 Sam 12:14LEB, and others. The point is that if Pharaoh told them to go and serve Yahweh, they had to have animals to sacrifice. If Pharaoh was holding the animals back, he would have to make some provision.
The form here is וְעָשִּׂינוּ (vé’asinu), the Qal perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive – "and we will do." But the verb means "do" in the sacrificial sense – prepare them, offer them. The verb form is to be subordinated here to form a purpose or result clause.
This is the obligatory imperfect nuance. They were obliged to take the animals if they were going to sacrifice, but more than that, since they were not coming back, they had to take everything.
The same modal nuance applies to this verb.
"from it," referring collectively to the livestock.
Moses gives an angry but firm reply to Pharaoh’s attempt to control Israel; he makes it clear that he has no intention of leaving any pledge with Pharaoh. When they leave, they will take everything that belongs to them.
The expression is לֵךְ מֵעָלָי (lekh me’alay, "go from on me") with the adversative use of the preposition, meaning from being a trouble or a burden to me (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 84; R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 51, §288).
"add to see my face." The construction uses a verbal hendiadys: "do not add to see" (אַל־תֹּסֶף רְאוֹת, ’al-toseph ré’ot), meaning "do not see again." The phrase "see my face" means "come before me" or "appear before me."
The construction is בְּיוֹם רְאֹתְךָ (béyom ré’otékha), an adverbial clause of time made up of the prepositional phrase, the infinitive construct, and the suffixed subjective genitive. "In the day of your seeing" is "when you see."
This is a verbal hendiadys construction: "I will not add again [to] see."

References: v. 
 §106
 §51
 v. 
 §161
 §152
 v. 
 §135
 v. 
 §133
 §288