Parshas Beshalach
1. On the verse1 "ותקח מרים הנביאה אחות אהרן את התוף בידה ותצאן כל הנשים אחריה בתופים ובמחולות" ("Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aharon, took the drum in her hand, and all the women went out after her with drums and with dances"), Rashi copies the words "ותקח מרים הנביאה" ("Miriam the prophetess took") and explains: "היכן נתנבאה, כשהיתה אחות אהרן, קודם שנולד משה, אמרה עתידה אמי שתלד בן" ("Where did she prophesy? When she was the sister of Aharon, before Moshe was born, she said, 'My mother is destined to give birth to a son'")2 etc., as is stated in Sotah3. "ד"א אחות אהרן לפי שמסר נפשו עלי' כשנצטרעה נקראת על שמו" ("Another explanation4: 'the sister of Aharon' — because he gave himself over for her5 when she was stricken with tzara'as6, she is called by his name").
Simply, Rashi's intention is to resolve a simple question that arises in studying the verse — as is stated explicitly in Tractate Sotah, which Rashi cites: "אחות אהרן ולא אחות משה" ("The sister of Aharon, and not the sister of Moshe?!") (in wonderment)8. Rashi answers that the words "the sister of Aharon" are not a description of Miriam (for then the question "and not the sister of Moshe?" would be difficult); rather, they come as a continuation of the word "the prophetess" that precedes them: she was a "prophetess" when she was still only "the sister of Aharon, before Moshe was born"7. And the prophecy was: "My mother is destined to give birth to a son etc." Afterward Rashi adds a second answer (to why she is called only "the sister of Aharon"): "because he gave himself over for her etc."
But according to this, it needs to be clarified:
a) Why does Rashi copy the words "Miriam the prophetess took"? After all, the words that compel his explanation are "the sister of Aharon" (for that is what raises the difficulty "and not the sister of Moshe?"), and if so, Rashi should have copied those words9, and not "Miriam the prophetess took."
b) What compels Rashi to tell us here (in explaining the plain meaning of this verse) the content of Miriam's prophecy? Seemingly, he should have written only "And where did she prophesy? When she was the sister of Aharon," and nothing more!10
c) On the other hand, how does Rashi know, in the plain meaning of Scripture, that Miriam's prophecy was "My mother is destined to give birth to a son etc."?11
d) As is known, it is not Rashi's way to cite the source of his explanations. Where he does cite the source, it is in order to add clarification to the explanation of the verse; but this addition is not necessary for understanding the plain meaning (for then Rashi would have written it explicitly (as is his way — in a manner that even the "five-year-old (beginning Scripture)" would understand)). Rather, if the student is sharp and astute, he will find a difficulty in the explanation that Rashi brings — and to resolve that difficulty Rashi writes "as is stated etc.," so that by examining the matter there, the difficulty will be resolved.
And where the words of our Sages cited in Rashi are found in several places, and Rashi cites one of them (and not simply "as is stated in the Gemara," or the like), then his intention is that specifically by examining the place cited in Rashi will additional clarification be added to the explanation of the verse12.
Accordingly, in our case: what does Rashi intend to resolve in explaining the plain meaning of the verse by citing the source? This saying of our Sages is found in Tractate Sotah and also in Tractate Megillah, and Rashi is precise to cite Sotah — whereas, on the contrary, Megillah (which is in Seder Moed) comes before Tractate Sotah (which is in Seder Nashim) in the Talmud13 — from which it is understood that specifically through what is stated in Tractate Sotah will clarification be added to his explanation.
e) Why does Rashi, in his second explanation, copy the words "the sister of Aharon," which he already wrote in the first explanation? He should have said, "Another explanation: because he gave himself over etc."
f) It has been discussed several times that where Rashi brings two explanations without prefacing that there are two explanations here (which would show that they are of equal weight)14, this is proof that in each of the explanations there is a difficulty that is not found in the other; the first explanation is the primary one, yet nevertheless it is still not sufficient, and the second explanation is needed. And in our case: what is the difficulty in each of the two explanations?15
2. The explanation of all this:
Rashi's intention in his explanation here is to resolve: a) "the prophetess," with the definite article "ה" — meaning that she had already prophesied — where did she prophesy? b) And primarily: a simple question that arises in studying the words he copies, "Miriam the prophetess took." It is understood that when the Torah, in relating an event, adds a description to a person whom it mentions, it is either: a) to inform us whom it is speaking about, for without the description we would not know this; or b) to add understanding to the event being related.
Now in our case, where the Torah adds the description "the prophetess" to "Miriam," it is understood that this is not in order to inform us which Miriam is being discussed, for we did not yet know (until this verse) that she was a prophetess. Moreover, immediately afterward it states explicitly that she was "the sister of Aharon," which is a complete identification.
We must therefore say that the verse's intention is that the event related here is connected with the fact that she was a prophetess. But seemingly this is not understood:
We have already learned in Parshas Vayeira16: "ועתה השב אשת האיש כי נביא הוא וגו'" ("And now, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet etc."), and Rashi explains: "כי נביא הוא — ויודע שלא נגעת בה" ("For he is a prophet — and he knows that you did not touch her etc."), meaning that the function of a prophet is to know hidden things. And in Rashi on Parshas Vayeitzei17: "לפי שהאמהות נביאות היו ויודעות" ("Because the Matriarchs were prophetesses and knew etc.") — knowledge of what will come in the future18. And in Rashi on Va'eira19: "כל לשון נבואה אדם המכריז ומשמיע לעם דברי תוכחות" ("Every expression of 'prophecy' denotes a person who proclaims and makes heard to the people words of rebuke etc.").
It follows that the definition of a prophet is: one who knows hidden things, knows the future, and speaks and makes heard to the people words of rebuke etc.
If so, what is the connection of "Miriam took" with the fact that she was "the prophetess"? The fact that Miriam took the drum in her hand and said song is not a matter of knowing hidden things or the future, nor did she thereby make heard words of rebuke20; rather, it is a natural outcome of the feeling of her soul upon seeing the miracle. In Rashi's words on this very matter21: "אז כשראה הנס עלה בלבו שישיר שירה" ("Then, when he (Moshe) saw the miracle, it arose in his heart to sing a song etc. ... his heart told him to sing, and so he did etc. And similarly with Yehoshua etc., and similarly the Song of the Well, which opens with 'Then [Yisrael] sang' etc."). And it is simply understood that Miriam too, upon seeing the miracle, felt it arise in her heart to say song — so what relevance does it have here that she was a prophetess?
3. Rashi answers that the verse does not intend to say that here, in this event, there is a connection to prophecy; rather, the word "the prophetess" is connected to what is stated afterward in the verse, "the sister of Aharon" —
— for these words in his explanation are the very words of the verse (as if they were printed in large letters), only that he inserts his explanation in the middle, as is his way in several places22 — that is: she prophesied when she was still only the sister of Aharon, before Moshe was born. And the verse's intention in this is to resolve a question:
In the preceding verses, on this very subject, it is written23 "ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדו" ("And they believed in G‑d and in Moshe His servant"), from which it is understood to what extent all of the Jewish people were nullified to Moshe at that time.
And in general, even before this, they had seen that G‑d had made him "a master" (Elokim) over Pharaoh24 — while even regarding Pharaoh's viceroy it is said that without him "no man shall lift his hand or his foot"25. If so, it is not understood: how did she do such a great thing — saying song etc., "and all the women went out after her" — when we do not find that they took permission from Moshe for this?
Therefore the verse adds "the prophetess": that she was a well-known prophetess, exceedingly great, to the point that she prophesied when she was still "the sister of Aharon," before Moshe was born, and the prophecy was "My mother is destined etc." Therefore she was able to lead the song in the presence of Moshe Rabbeinu (as will be explained below).
For seemingly it would have been more fitting to say "the prophetess, the daughter of Amram," Moshe's father, as opposed to "the sister of Aharon," who was a prophet (and subordinate) to Moshe. Since the verse emphasizes "the prophetess, the sister of Aharon," we must say that its intention is to say that the point of the prophecy relates precisely to [the time of] Aharon and not Moshe — "before the birth of Moshe" — (for if its intention were only to say that she had prophesied previously, it should have said "the prophetess from long ago" or the like): "she said, 'My mother is destined to give birth to a son etc.'"
This emphasizes the greatness of her level of prophecy (and its standing relative to the level of Moshe)26: a) She prophesied and knew beforehand that Moshe (the teacher of the Jewish people — to whom all are nullified) was destined to be born. b) She prophesied regarding a matter that did not pertain to her particularly (but rather a matter pertaining to Amram and Yocheved etc.). c) "My mother is destined to give birth" — meaning that Amram and Yocheved were in the world, and nevertheless the prophecy came through her —
from all this it is proven that her level of prophecy was exceedingly great27.
And this is what the verse intends to say: since she was a prophetess — and not only that, but she prophesied before (and about) the birth of Moshe — therefore, "Miriam took etc.," "and Miriam called out to them etc.," "and all the women went out after her etc."
4. But seemingly this is still not sufficient:
Since the verse's intention is to relate the standing of her prophecy relative to Moshe, and it therefore explains the content of her prophecy [through the words] "the sister of Aharon," as above — on the contrary, it would have been more fitting to say "the prophetess, the sister of Moshe." Then too the intention would be understood: since this event is not connected with prophecy, one would have to say that "the prophetess" continues to what is stated afterward, "the sister of Moshe" — and even more so than when it writes "the sister of Aharon" — the intention being that she was a "sister" — on the level — of Moshe in prophecy, in accordance with what Rashi writes in the Book of Bereishis on the verse28 "שמעון ולוי אחים" ("Shimon and Levi are brothers"): "בעצה אחת" ("of one counsel etc.")?
And although it says29 "ולא קם עוד נביא בישראל כמשה" ("There has not arisen again a prophet in Israel like Moshe"), it immediately explains that this is in the matter of "אשר ידעו ה' פנים אל פנים" ("whom G‑d knew face to face"). And on the contrary, Moshe himself assured30: "נביא מקרבך מאחיך כמוני יקים לך ה' אלקיך" ("A prophet from your midst, from your brothers, like me, the L‑rd your G‑d will raise up for you").
One could answer, with difficulty, that in our case it is not sufficient to be "the sister of Moshe" as a "prophetess," for that would be similar to "a prophet — like me," who would not do a great thing in Moshe's time without asking him; rather, she must be a prophetess who prophesied before Moshe, in the days of Amram and Yocheved etc., as above.
Since this is forced — for the subject here is not prophecy; and further and primarily, all of the Jewish people said song, and the novelty is only in that the women too would say it (and after all, they too were part of that miracle) — Rashi therefore brings a second explanation: "Another explanation: the sister of Aharon etc." That is, there is another reason why [the verse] describes Miriam's level through the words "the sister of Aharon" (and not "the sister of Moshe"): "because he gave himself over for her when she was stricken with tzara'as, she is called by his name" — meaning that this is what people called her31; and since she was called by Aharon's name, the verse therefore calls her "the sister of Aharon."
Rashi begins his second explanation with the words "(Another explanation:) the sister of Aharon" in order to emphasize that this is not another explanation in resolving the question of how "Miriam took etc." in Moshe's presence, but only another explanation of the words "the sister of Aharon" (and not "the sister of Moshe")32; the answer to the above question, however, is as in the first explanation33.
But according to this other explanation there is a difficulty34: here the subject is the Splitting of the Sea — yet "she is called by his name," Aharon's — "the sister of Aharon" and not "the sister of Moshe" — because of an event that occurred some time later!
And further and primarily: here the discussion must be about Miriam's virtue, so how would it call her "the sister of Aharon," which recalls that she was stricken with tzara'as?! Therefore the first explanation comes first.
But seemingly there is no room to say, in the plain meaning of the verses, that she prophesied before Moshe was born, for she was then still a small child35. Therefore Rashi adds "as is stated in Sotah," for there (as opposed to Tractate Megillah) our Sages said (before this statement), in explaining the verse "ותלך העלמה וגו'" ("And the maiden went etc.")36: "מלמד שהלכה בזריזות כעלמה" ("This teaches that she went with alacrity, like a maiden"). From this it is understood that although she was young in years, she had the qualities of a grown woman ("a maiden"), and was fit for prophecy to rest upon her37.
5. From the "יינה של תורה" ("wine of Torah") in our Rashi:
Miriam represents the Sefirah of Malchus38. In the Sefirah of Malchus we find two matters40: the Sefirah of Malchus is rooted in the Essence, higher than all the Sefiros41; [and] the Sefirah of Malchus "לית לה מגרמה כלום" ("has nothing of its own") (like the moon, to which it is compared), but only what it receives from the Sefiros above it. And because it is in a state of complete self-nullification, and only receives from the Sefiros above it42, the power of the Essence that is present in the light drawn down to it can therefore be felt in it43 (even though it is not felt in the Sefiros above it39).
So too with Miriam — and this is alluded to in the two explanations in Rashi:
The first explanation speaks of Miriam's virtues — that she was a prophetess, and a great prophetess, who prophesied (and revealed and drew down) the birth of Moshe. In the second explanation it is explained that "she is called by the name" of Aharon — meaning that she is nullified and subordinate to him, and through Aharon's self-sacrifice on her behalf44 he brought it about that her speech was atoned for etc. And as explained above, according to the second explanation too, "Miriam the prophetess, the sister" emphasizes the greatness of Miriam's virtue: the fact that there are virtues in Miriam, the Sefirah of Malchus (the beginning of Rashi's comment), is because she is nullified to Aharon — the aspect of "שושבינא דמטרוניתא" ("the groomsman of the Queen")45, Z'eir Anpin46 — which is above her (the second explanation).
From this there is a special lesson for Jewish women and girls: although they have many virtues that men do not have47 (to the point that in the Time to Come, "נקבה תסובב גבר" ("a female shall encompass a man")48), nevertheless they must know that, as our Sages say49, "איזוהי אשה כשרה העושה רצון בעלה" ("Who is a worthy woman? One who does her husband's will"), and specifically through this will the virtues found in them come to be revealed.
This lesson applies not only to those virtues that are visibly received from their husbands, but also to the virtues that women possess in their own right — as is also alluded to in our Rashi:
For seemingly it is not understood: why indeed (did Aharon give himself over for her, and therefore) is "she called by the name" specifically of Aharon? However, the reason for this is the common point between them: Aharon's quality is "אוהב שלום ורודף שלום אוהב את הבריות ומקרבן לתורה" ("loving peace and pursuing peace, loving people and bringing them close to Torah")50; and likewise Miriam's quality is "פועה ומדברת והוגה לולד כדרך הנשים המפייסות תינוק הבוכה" ("she would coo, speak, and murmur to the infant, in the way of women who soothe a crying baby")51. Therefore he gave himself over for her, and she is called by his name.
And herein lies the allusion: even in matters that are virtues of women in their own right — as in Rashi's words, "in the way of women who soothe etc.," meaning that it is a woman's nature to draw others close etc.52 — regarding this too we say that she "is called by the name" of Aharon, that she must receive this too from the husband etc.
On the other hand, it is understood that after she receives from the husband, all her virtues are revealed in her in an even more elevated manner than in the husband, and she also imparts her virtues to him — until in the Time to Come the matter will come to be revealed, for "a female shall encompass a man."
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Beshalach and Yud Shevat 5727)
Notes
1) Our Parshah, 15:20.
2) In a manuscript of Rashi the wording is: "She said, 'My mother is destined to give birth to a son to save Israel etc.,' as is stated in Tractate Sotah. Another explanation etc." And in the second printing: "She said, 'My mother is destined to give birth to a son who will save Israel.' Another explanation etc." But in most printings (including the first printing) the wording is as in the text. See also below, note 37.
3) 12b, end. So too in Megillah 14a. See also the Mechilta on the verse.
4) This is from the Mechilta. See below, note 32.
5) Behaaloscha 12:11–12.
6) In the second printing: "when she was stricken with tzara'as; therefore it said so." See below, note 31.
7) As Rashi explains in Sotah, ibid., s.v. "shehaysah."
8) However, one cannot answer, according to the plain meaning of Scripture, as the Ramban writes (and similarly in Rabbeinu Bachya): "Since Moshe and Miriam were mentioned in the song and Aharon was not mentioned, the verse wished to mention him, and said 'the sister of Aharon' as a mark of honor for him etc." For this answer would be relevant if Moshe and Miriam were mentioned in this matter merely for the sake of mention; then it would be necessary to mention Aharon too. But here they were mentioned because Moshe began the song for the men and Miriam for the women; if so, what relevance is there in mentioning Aharon here?
Nor can one explain (according to the plain meaning) as the Ramban writes there (and similarly in the Rashbam and Rabbeinu Bachya): "It may be that it is the way of the verses to associate [a sibling] with the eldest of the brothers." For (besides the fact that this is not alluded to in Rashi —) in our case (and in this particular matter) it would be more fitting to associate her with Moshe, who took the Jewish people out of Egypt and split the sea, and who began saying the song for the men.
Nor can one say as the Kli Yakar writes: "And the reason it says 'the sister of Aharon' is that she was similar to him in prophecy, but not to Moshe, as is implied at the end of Parshas Behaaloscha." For what relevance does it have here that she was equal to Aharon in prophecy? — The Kli Yakar follows his own view that "now she became a prophetess."
9) Even if we say that the word "the prophetess" belongs to the answer — that she was "the prophetess" when she was "the sister of Aharon" — according to this Rashi should have copied these words as well, and not only these words. Moreover, the words "Miriam took" have no connection to his explanation, so why does he copy them?
10) Seemingly one could say that Rashi's intention here is to explain the word "the prophetess," and he therefore brings that she prophesied "My mother is destined to give birth to a son etc." — that is, that she now began to sing because she saw that her prophecy, "My mother is destined to give birth to a son who will save Israel," had been fulfilled (see Chiddushei Aggados of the Maharsha, Sotah ibid.). But according to this, Rashi should have copied primarily the words "who will save Israel" (instead of the hint "etc., as is stated in Sotah"), since these words resolve and explain that her prophecy was now fulfilled (unlike the words "My mother is destined to give birth to a son").
11) Simply, one could say that since Rashi cites "as is stated in Sotah," no source for this in the plain meaning is needed. But if it were not compelled by the plain meaning of Scripture, it would be more fitting, according to Rashi's style, to write: "And our Sages said (or the like): she said, 'My mother is destined etc.'"
12) Or he wishes to exclude the Sages' teaching as it appears in the other place.
13) This is according to the usual order of the six orders of the Mishnah, "ZeMaN NaKaT" — beginning with Seder Zera'im and ending with Taharos. This is the view of the Tikkunei Zohar in its introduction (5a) and of the Rambam in his introduction to the Commentary on the Mishnah, and so it is somewhat implied in Shabbos (31a). This is in contrast to what is implied in Bamidbar Rabbah* (13:15–16, at its end) and in Midrash Tehillim (19), the view of R. Tanchuma — "NuM KaTaN": beginning with Seder Nashim and ending with Nezikin. It is further proven (not only regarding the Aggadic part of the Torah but also regarding halachah) from Tosafos (Avodah Zarah 22a, end of s.v. ein ma'amidin) and from the Rosh (ibid.) that Seder Taharos comes before Seder Nezikin (see Noda BiYehudah, Mahadura Tinyana, Choshen Mishpat, end of §79).
*) Although in Bamidbar Rabbah (ibid.) it is explained that the Oral Torah begins with the letter mem — "מאימתי" ("From when") — and ends with mem — "בשלום" ("with peace"), which seemingly is only according to the usual order, one could say that the Mishnah at the conclusion of Uktzin does not have so much connection to the Mishnayos preceding it, as several commentators on the Mishnah have written; if so, one may say that according to all views this Mishnah comes at the conclusion of the Talmud. One could further say, regarding the beginning of the Talmud, that Tractate Berachos does not belong so much to Seder Zera'im, and was taught at the beginning of the Talmud "to begin the six orders of the Mishnah with the Oneness of the Holy One, blessed be He, and to accept upon oneself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven and the yoke of Torah and mitzvos, evening and morning etc." (Piskei Riaz on Berachos, at its beginning (also cited in a gloss to the Rambam's introduction to the Commentary on the Mishnah); see also the Meiri's introduction, at length). If so, one may say that according to all views this tractate comes at the beginning of the Talmud.
Or one could say — based on the principle of not multiplying disputes (see the sources cited in Yad Malachi, Klalei Shnei HaTalmudim, §10 (regarding disputes between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi); Darkei Shalom (printed in Sdei Chemed, vol. 10, at its end), Klalei HaShas, os lamed, §257) — that the six orders were not alluded to in the verse according to the order arranged by Rabbeinu HaKadosh, as we find similarly with the order of the Ten Plagues in Tehillim (78; 105). And more. See also Midrash Rabbah, ibid.; Baal HaTurim, Devarim 26:17; and Tosfos Yom Tov in his introductions to Seder Zera'im and Seder Nezikin.
14) See below, end of p. 141 ff.
15) The Maskil LeDavid writes: according to the first [explanation] there is a difficulty, for it should not have said "the prophetess," which implies the present; rather, it should have written in the past tense, "the sister of Aharon prophesied." But simply, the meaning of the verse — with the definite article "ה" — is that she was known as a prophetess, because she had prophesied before this.
16) 20:7.
17) 29:34.
18) So too in Rashi, Noach 10:25: that Ever was a prophet etc., [and named him] after the future etc.
19) 7:1.
20) Several commentators (cited in Tzeidah LaDerech and elsewhere) wrote that they took drums so that the men would not hear their voices, because "קול באשה ערוה" ("a woman's voice is ervah") (Berachos 24a). According to this, (not only did she not make heard words of rebuke, but) she did not make her voice heard at all. And although from the fact that Rashi does not bring this explanation it is understood that according to the plain meaning this was not their intention*, and on the contrary — from Rashi below, "The righteous women of that generation were confident that the Holy One, blessed be He, would perform miracles for them, and they took drums out of Egypt," it is implied that the purpose of the drums was to increase the joy (and it is very forced to say that Rashi's intention is that since they knew that the Holy One, blessed be He, performs miracles for them, they would certainly say song, and therefore something was needed to drown out their voices so that the men would not hear, as is understood) — nevertheless, in actuality they sang together with the sound of the drums, and their voices were certainly drowned out.
*) The reason (also according to halachah) may be that in our case this does not apply, for it is stated explicitly in Rashi (15:2) that (even) a maidservant saw at the sea what the prophets did not see; thus at that time there is no concern whatsoever etc. This is not comparable to what our Sages said in Sukkah (52a): "Now if in the Time to Come, when they are engaged in eulogy and the evil inclination has no power over them, the Torah said men separately and women separately etc." — for at the Splitting of the Sea there was more than this (as Rashi explains): "This is my G‑d" — they would point at Him with a finger.
21) 15:1.
22) See Rashi, Bereishis 4:17. See also below, p. 164, note 19.
23) 14:31.
24) Va'eira 7:1.
25) Mikeitz 41:44.
26) According to this it is simply understood why Rashi did not also copy the words "who will save Israel" (see above, note 10): the main point is to emphasize the greatness of her level of prophecy, while the content of the prophecy is not so relevant.
27) Note the Rambam, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 7:7: "A prophet's prophecy may be for himself alone, to broaden his heart and increase his knowledge etc.; and it is possible that he will be sent to a people from among the peoples of the land etc."
28) Vayechi 49:5.
29) Berachah 34:10.
30) Shoftim 18:15.
31) In contrast, according to the version in the second printing (above, note 6), the intention is only that the verse here calls her so, not that she was called so in general.
32) Note the Mechilta, which on the words "Miriam the prophetess took" explains: "Where do we find that she was a prophetess etc.? Rather, she said to her father etc."; and afterward, in a separate passage, on the words "the sister of Aharon," it asks: "And not the sister of Moshe etc.? Rather, because Aharon gave his life for her etc."
33) According to this, the question raised in the Torah Temimah is simply resolved: according to the second explanation, why did the verse attribute her so specifically in this place, and not in other places where her name is mentioned?
34) In any case, however, it is possible to say so, as Rashi says (Bereishis 2:14): "They did not yet exist, and Scripture wrote [it] according to the future." But it is forced, for there it is impossible to call it by another name, as opposed to our case.
35) See Shemos Rabbah 1:13. For this reason this is not a simple question, and Rashi explains it by way of allusion, for in studying the plain meaning of Scripture it is not necessary that she was then a small child. See below, the second gloss to note 37.
36) Shemos 2:8. See Rashi there and the next note.
37) Regarding the version in the second printing (see above, note 2), which does not cite Tractate Sotah, one could say, based on what has been discussed several times, that where the explanation is understood from what Rashi himself wrote earlier there is no need to explain it — and in our case, the above teaching is also cited in Rashi (Shemos, ibid.). Nevertheless, according to most printings Rashi cites Tractate Sotah, because: a) In our case it is not explicit, but only alluded to. b) In Rashi the wording is "she went with alacrity and vigor, like a youth (ke'elem)" (and not "like a maiden"), from which it is understood that his intention is only to resolve "why [does it say] 'the maiden'?" (Re'em, ibid.)*, and he answers that she went like a youth (masculine — forceful and strong). Thus this is unrelated to the question of whether she was a small child or grown, for even if she was grown, the above difficulty ("why 'the maiden'?") remains**; and on the other hand, even if she was a small child, there is no proof that she was grown in all her qualities and matters etc., for the main precision is that she went like a youth (masculine — forceful), but she was certainly not like a youth (male) in all her matters. In contrast, in Tractate Sotah the wording is "that she went with alacrity, like a maiden," and thus it is understood that its intention is to resolve how the verse writes "the maiden" when she was still a small child***, and it answers that she went with alacrity like a grown woman (female); thus one may say that she was so in all her matters.
*) What the Maharsha writes in Chiddushei Aggados (Sotah, ibid.), that the compelling reason is that earlier it calls her "his sister" and here it calls her "the maiden," requires investigation, for it is the way of the verses to vary their wording for the beauty of expression, as is seen with the word "the maiden" itself: at first it is written (Chayei Sarah 24:14), "והיה הנערה אשר אומר אליה וגו'" ("And it shall be that the girl to whom I shall say etc."), and afterward, in this very matter, it writes (ibid., 43), "והיה העלמה היוצאת וגו'" ("And it shall be that the maiden who comes out etc.").
**) According to this it is understood that from this Rashi too it is not compelled that she was then a small child.
***) Although an "almah" (maiden) too is tender in years (see Yeshayahu 7:14 and the commentaries of the Radak and Metzudas Tziyon there), nevertheless she is not a small child (see Mishlei 30:19; Tehillim 68:26 and the commentators there; and more).
38) See Shaar HaPesukim (Shemos 2:4); the glosses of R. Chaim Vital on Zohar II, 12a.
39) See Igeres HaKodesh, §20 (130b); Likutei Torah, Va'eschanan 5c ff.; the maamar beginning Yechayeinu 5659; Hemshech 5666, pp. 338, 345 ff., 527; the Hemshech of maamarim 5708, ch. 24 ff.; and elsewhere.
40) Etz Chaim, Shaar Arich Anpin, end of ch. 3.
41) See the maamar beginning Ashrei HaAm 5703, §13.
42) See Or HaTorah, Bereishis, the maamar beginning VaYomer Lo Yehonasan, §5 (9b ff.).
43) See the maamar Yechayeinu, ibid.; Hemshech 5666, ibid., p. 527.
44) Behaaloscha 12:11 ff.
45) Zohar I, 266b; II, 49b; and elsewhere.
46) See also Or HaTorah, Tetzaveh, p. 1657, and elsewhere.
47) See Taanis (23b): "because the woman is found at home etc." See also the Torah commentators on the verse (Vayakhel 35:22) "ויבאו האנשים על הנשים וגו'" ("The men came along with the women etc."). See also Rashi (ibid., 38:8): "Yet they did not hold back even these from bringing to the donation for the Mishkan etc." See also Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, ch. 45 (cited in Rashi, Megillah 22b, and in Tur Orach Chaim, §417); Rashi, Pinchas (26:64); and more.
48) Yirmeyahu 31:21.
49) Tanna DeVei Eliyahu Rabbah, ch. 9 (with different wording).
50) Avos 1:12. See also Avos DeRabbi Nasan, ch. 42 [as in the OCR], 3.
51) Rashi, Shemos 1:15.
52) See also Rashi (Kedoshim 19:3): "that she persuades him with words."
Key Lesson
Miriam's greatness as a prophetess is expressed through her being called "the sister of Aharon" — her virtues come to full expression through her bond with and receiving from Aharon, just as the Sefirah of Malchus, through its self-nullification, reveals the power of the Essence. So too, a Jewish woman's many unique virtues are revealed specifically through her bond with her husband; and once revealed, they shine even more brightly and she imparts them to him, until in the Time to Come "a female shall encompass a man."