אָ֣ז יָשִֽׁיר־מֹשֶׁה֩ וּבְנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אֶת־הַשִּׁירָ֤ה הַזֹּאת֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה וַיֹּאמְר֖וּ לֵאמֹ֑ר אָשִׁ֤ירָה לַֽיהֹוָה֙ כִּֽי־גָאֹ֣ה גָּאָ֔ה ס֥וּס וְרֹכְב֖וֹ רָמָ֥ה בַיָּֽם׃
Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to יהוה. They said:
I will sing to יהוה, for He has triumphed gloriously;
Horse and driver He has hurled into the sea.
I will sing to יהוה, for He has triumphed gloriously;
Horse and driver He has hurled into the sea.
רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: 'אָז שָׁר מֹשֶׁה' אֵין כָּתוּב כָּן, אֶלָּא "אָז יָשִׁיר מֹשֶׁה", נִמְצֵינוּ לְמֵדִין שֶׁתְּחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה.
Variantly: It is not written "Then Moses sang," but then Moses will sing" — whence we derive the resurrection from Scripture.
תניא אמר רבי מאיר מניין לתחיית המתים מן התורה שנאמר (שמות טו, א) אז ישיר משה ובני ישראל את השירה הזאת לה' שר לא נאמר אלא ישיר מכאן לתחיית המתים מן התורה כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (יהושע ח, ל) אז יבנה יהושע מזבח לה' בנה לא נאמר אלא יבנה מכאן לתחיית המתים מן התורה
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: From where is resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “Then Moses and the children of Israel will sing this song to the Lord” (Exodus 15:1). It is not stated: Sang, in the verse; rather, the term “they will sing” is stated, indicating that Moses will come back to life and sing the song in the future. From here it is proved that resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah. On a similar note, you can say: “Then Joshua will build an altar to the Lord God of Israel on Mount Ebal” (Joshua 8:30). It is not stated: Built, in the verse; rather, the term “will build” is stated. From here, resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah.
אז ישיר משה. אָז כְּשֶׁרָאָה הַנֵּס עָלָה בְלִבּוֹ שֶׁיָּשִׁיר שִׁירָה. וְכֵן "אָז יְדַבֵּר יְהוֹשֻׁעַ" (יהושע י'), וְכֵן "וּבַיִת יַעֲשֶׂה לְבַת פַּרְעֹה" (מלכים א ז') – חָשַׁב בְּלִבּוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה לָהּ, אַף כָּאן יָשִׁיר אָמַר לוֹ לִבּוֹ שֶׁיָּשִׁיר וְכֵן עָשָׂה – וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֵאמֹר אָשִׁירָה לַה', וְכֵן בִּיהוֹשֻׁעַ כְּשֶׁרָאָה הַנֵּס אָמַר לוֹ לִבּוֹ שֶׁיְּדַבֵּר וְכֵן עָשָׂה – "וַיֹּאמֶר לְעֵינֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" (יהושע י'), וְכֵן שִׁירַת הַבְּאֵר, שֶׁפָּתַח בָּהּ אָז יָשִׁיר יִשְׂרָאֵל, פֵּרֵשׁ אַחֲרָיו "עֲלִי בְאֵר עֱנוּ לָהּ" (במדבר י"א), "אָז יִבְנֶה שְׁלֹמֹה בָּמָה" (מלכים א י"א), פֵּרְשׁוּ בוֹ חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבִּקֵּשׁ לִבְנוֹת וְלֹא בָנָה, לִמְּדָנוּ שֶׁהַיּוֹ"ד עַל שֵׁם הַמַּחֲשָׁבָה נֶאֶמְרָה, זֶהוּ לְיַשֵּׁב פְּשׁוּטוֹ. אֲבָל מִדְרָשׁוֹ אָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִ"לִ "מִכָּאן רֶמֶז לִתְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה" וְכֵן בְּכֻלָּן, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל שְׁלֹמֹה, שֶׁפֵּרְשׁוּהוּ בִּקֵּשׁ לִבְנוֹת וְלֹא בָנָה. וְאֵין לוֹמַר וּלְיַשֵּׁב לָשׁוֹן הַזֶּה כִּשְׁאָר דְּבָרִים הַנִּכְתָּבִים בִּלְשׁוֹן עָתִיד וְהֵן מִיָּד, כְּגוֹן "כָּכָה יַעֲשֶׂה אִיּוֹב" (איוב א'), "עַ"פִּ ה' יַחֲנוּ" (במדבר ט'), "וְיֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה הֶעָנָן" (שם), לְפִי שֶׁהֵן דָּבָר הַהוֹוֶה תָמִיד וְנוֹפֵל בּוֹ בֵּין לְשׁוֹן עָתִיד וּבֵין לְשׁוֹן עָבָר, אֲבָל זֶה שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה אֶלָּא לְשָׁעָה, אֵינִי יָכוֹל לְיַשְּׁבוֹ בַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה:
אז ישיר משה THEN SANG MOSES — with regard to the usage of the future ישיר, the meaning is: THEN — i. e. when he saw the miracle it entered his mind that HE WOULD SING a song. Similar is, (Joshua 10:12) “Then Joshua would speak (אז ידבר)”; and similar, (1 Kings 7:8) “and a house he would make (יעשה) for Pharaoh’s daughter”, which signifies “he purposed in his heart that he would make it for her”. So, also, ישיר here signifies: his heart told him that he should sing, and thus did he actually do, as it states, “and they (Moses and Israel) spake as follows, ‘I will sing unto the Lord’”. And in the same way, in the case of Joshua, it means: then (או) — when he saw the miracle mentioned in that narrative — his heart told him (prompted him) to speak, and thus did he actually do, as it is stated, “and he spake before the eyes of all Israel”. The same applies to the Song of the Well (Numbers 21:17) which begins with the words: אז ישיר ישראל, “then would Israel sing”; it expresses the intention quite plainly in the following words, “Come up, O Well — sing ye unto it” (i. e. these words are a call to the people to sing to it after Israel had expressed their intention so to do and are not part of the song itself which begins with the words that follow). With regard to (1 Kings 11:7) אז יבנה שלמה במה our Rabbis explained that He proposed to build a high place for Chemosh but actually did not build it (Sanhedrin 91b). This, too, teaches us that the י as a prefix of the imperfect is used in reference to intention to do a thing. This explanation serves to settle the literal meaning of the text. But so far as its Midrashic explanation is concerned our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said: from here (i. e. from the fact that the future tense is used) we may derive an intimation that the tenet of the Resurrection of the Dead is from the Torah (is alluded to, although only by inference, in the Torah) (Sanhedrin 91b). And thus, also, do they explain in the case of all them (all of the examples quoted) except in the case of that referring to Solomon which they explained in the sense that he purposed to build a high place but did not build it. — One cannot say that this can be appropriately explained in the same way as one explains other passages which are written in the future tense, but which really refer to an immediate action (i. e. to a then present time); for example, (Job. 1:5) “Thus was Job doing (יעשה)”; (Numbers 9:18) “At the command of the Lord were they encamping (יחנו)”; (Numbers 9:20) “And there were occasions when the cloud was (יהיה) upon the tabernacle”, because these were each of them something that was continuously happening, and there is proper to it either the future tense or the past tense (cf. Rashi on Genesis 29:3). But this (אז ישיר and other passages quoted) which happened only at the particular moment mentioned (once and once only), one cannot fittingly explain in this sense (i. e. of continuous action).
אז ישיר משה. משפט לשון הקדש לו' לשון עתיד תחת עבר עם מלת אז אז יבנה שלמה אז ידבר יהושע. אז יבדיל משה. וככה בלשון ישמעאל. משה לבדו חבר השירה ולמדוה ישראל ושורר כ"א ואומר אשירה לה'. וכמוהו ויצו משה וזקני ישראל כי המצוה משה לבדו אמרה וזקני ישראל אמרוה לכל:
THEN SANG MOSES. It is Hebrew style to employ an imperfect preceded by the word az (then) in place of a perfect. Compare, Az yivneh shelomoh (then did Solomon build) (I Kings 11:7); az yedabber yehoshu’a (then spoke Joshua) (Josh. 10:12); az yavdil mosheh (then Moses separated) (Deut. 4:41). The same is true in Arabic. Moses composed the song by himself. He then taught it to all of Israel, each one of whom then sang and said, I will sing unto the Lord. And Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people (Deut. 27:1) is similar. The commandment was first spoken only by Moses. The elders of Israel then repeated it to everyone.
בפסוק אז ישיר פרש"י עלה בלבו שישיר. וחז"ל דרשו מכאן לתחה"מ מן התורה. וי"ל דהכל אחד דמ"ש רש"י עלה בלבו שישיר היינו שלא היו יכולין להוציא אל הפועל ככל רצונם כי לא הי' העולם כדאי לקבל יותר מאלה הדברים. וז"ש ויאמרו לאמר שאלה הדברים אמרו מכלל שהי' בלבם עוד יותר. ומזה עצמו דרשו חז"ל מכאן לתחה"מ מן התורה ואז יגמרו השירה כלבבם. והכלל כל מה שאדם מייגע עצמו בעבודת הבורא ית' בעוה"ז אינו לבטלה. אם כי אינו יכול לגמור כלבבו עתה. עוד יהי' עת שיגמור ככל רצונו או בעוה"ז או לעתיד. וזה הרמז מכאן לתחיית המתים כנ"ל:
On the verse, "Then sang" (Exodus 15:1), Rashi explained that "it entered his heart that he would sing." But the Sages, may their memory be blessed, expounded from here that the revival of the dead is from the Torah. And it can be said that it is all one: That that which Rashi said that it entered his heart that he would sing, is that they were not able to actualize everything they wanted. For the world was not fit to receive more than these words [which they actually sang]. And that is [the meaning of] that which is written, "and they said, saying." That they said these words, implying that they had still more in their hearts. And it is from this itself that the Sages, may their memory be blessed, expounded that the revival of the dead is from the Torah - so that they will then finish the song, like it was in their hearts. And the general principle is that everything to which a person takes effort in this world in service to the Creator, may He be blessed, is not for naught. There will still be a time that he will complete what he wanted [to do], either in this world or in the future. And that is the hint to the revival of the dead, as mentioned above.
The Paradox of Song
But the rabbinic sages will not allow the matter to rest there. In spite of the conclusive ending of the story, they insist on reopening it. “Are the Korach conspirators destined to re-ascend from the underworld?” There are a number of hypothetical answers to the question. But the question itself is significant. Something is not quite closed: the mouth can still ask questions. After all, there is the mysterious statement a few chapters later: “And the children of Korach did not die” (26:11). A full verse is given to the statement, leaving an impression of an unfinished thought. And Korach’s children are later recorded as the singers in the Temple: several of the Psalms are attributed to the sons of Korach. But were they not swallowed up in the general cataclysm of “all Korach’s people”? (16:32). One resolution is offered in the Talmud: “A place was reserved for them in the underworld and they sat there and sang.” At the last moment, they repent; or, more precisely, they experience pangs (hirhurim) of penitence—qualms, pangs of worry. They crack open, disrupted, their humanity restored. Perhaps Moses’ words did not fall on deaf ears after all. The songs of Korach’s sons are there in the Psalms for all to read. Some, particularly Psalm 88, record the very experience of those whose voices survive to register their own redemption. Repentance and song are forces that reopen the most closed of narratives. Here, we return to Moses, whose own history includes the paradox of song. It is, again, Sefat Emet, who spoke of the crack through which grace may enter, who draws our attention to Moses’ song-moment at the Red Sea: Az yashir moshe—“Then Moses sang/would sing . . .” (Ex. 15:1). Rashi reads the unusual future-tense narrative form as a moment of intentionality: “Then there came up in his mind the intention to sing a song.” He also quotes the midrashic reading: “This is a biblical reference to the revival of the dead!” Sefat Emet comments: what Moses actually sings is that part of his internal song that lends itself to the words of the world. But a residue remains within, the fantasy of praise that cannot pass—not yet—the barrier of consciousness. This unconscious life is what the midrash refers to when it says that the text hints at the resurrection of the dead. Then, infinite desires, expressed only in fragmentary ways in this world, will find full expression. This is the intention that comes up in Moses’ mind. Beyond the words of the song that Moses authors, there is the residue of what cannot yet be sung. “Not yet” sustains the intuition of ultimate possibility. Moses’ intention of a future song emerges from his specific experience of speechlessness and song. Beyond his relation with his cousin Korach, there are songs that will yet find words: Korach’s sons will sing, and Moses’ song will redeem death itself.
But the rabbinic sages will not allow the matter to rest there. In spite of the conclusive ending of the story, they insist on reopening it. “Are the Korach conspirators destined to re-ascend from the underworld?” There are a number of hypothetical answers to the question. But the question itself is significant. Something is not quite closed: the mouth can still ask questions. After all, there is the mysterious statement a few chapters later: “And the children of Korach did not die” (26:11). A full verse is given to the statement, leaving an impression of an unfinished thought. And Korach’s children are later recorded as the singers in the Temple: several of the Psalms are attributed to the sons of Korach. But were they not swallowed up in the general cataclysm of “all Korach’s people”? (16:32). One resolution is offered in the Talmud: “A place was reserved for them in the underworld and they sat there and sang.” At the last moment, they repent; or, more precisely, they experience pangs (hirhurim) of penitence—qualms, pangs of worry. They crack open, disrupted, their humanity restored. Perhaps Moses’ words did not fall on deaf ears after all. The songs of Korach’s sons are there in the Psalms for all to read. Some, particularly Psalm 88, record the very experience of those whose voices survive to register their own redemption. Repentance and song are forces that reopen the most closed of narratives. Here, we return to Moses, whose own history includes the paradox of song. It is, again, Sefat Emet, who spoke of the crack through which grace may enter, who draws our attention to Moses’ song-moment at the Red Sea: Az yashir moshe—“Then Moses sang/would sing . . .” (Ex. 15:1). Rashi reads the unusual future-tense narrative form as a moment of intentionality: “Then there came up in his mind the intention to sing a song.” He also quotes the midrashic reading: “This is a biblical reference to the revival of the dead!” Sefat Emet comments: what Moses actually sings is that part of his internal song that lends itself to the words of the world. But a residue remains within, the fantasy of praise that cannot pass—not yet—the barrier of consciousness. This unconscious life is what the midrash refers to when it says that the text hints at the resurrection of the dead. Then, infinite desires, expressed only in fragmentary ways in this world, will find full expression. This is the intention that comes up in Moses’ mind. Beyond the words of the song that Moses authors, there is the residue of what cannot yet be sung. “Not yet” sustains the intuition of ultimate possibility. Moses’ intention of a future song emerges from his specific experience of speechlessness and song. Beyond his relation with his cousin Korach, there are songs that will yet find words: Korach’s sons will sing, and Moses’ song will redeem death itself.