When did Moshe send Yisro away?
Why is Yisro's return to his land, recorded at this point in the Torah, prior to the account of Matan Torah? According to Rashi (to 18:13), he returned home only in the second year (as recorded in Bamidbar 10:29-32)! Especially to the opinion that Yisro only arrived after Matan Torah (and that his arrival was recorded at this point, only to show what it was that inspired him to join Bnei Yisrael - see 18:1:7:1 and 18:1:8:4) - why does the Torah record his return home at this point?
Maharal #1 (Derush Al ha'Torah p. 4): This tells us that the Torah was given only to Yisrael, who had been enslaved in Egypt. 1 Had Hashem not taken us out, the Egyptians would have finished us off; henceforth we are beholden to Hashem to accept His sovereignty. 2 Yisro, in contrast, would be like an "Eino Metzuveh v'Oseh" (i.e. fulfilling Hashem's Mitzvos voluntarily); his very acceptance of Torah would come of his own volition. As such, he had no connection to the day of Yisrael's Kabalas ha'Torah. 3 Hashem therefore 4 brought it about that on that unique day, Yisro was away in Midyan to convert his family. (He later returned, and was with Yisrael as they prepared to travel by their banners, in Sefer Bamidbar.) 5 So too regarding the opinion that Yisro arrived after Matan Torah - the Pasuk alludes to the reason why Yisro was not yet present with Yisrael at Matan Torah - as above.
Maharal #2 (ibid. p. 5): It was not fitting that Kabalas ha'Torah be of two types - Yisrael under duress, and Yisro willingly.
Maharal #3 (ibid.): Torah is given only via Yisurim (hardship, suffering); because Torah is Ruchani, transcendent above everything physical. Only Yisrael, who had been enslaved in Egypt, could receive the Torah.
Maharal: As Hashem opened the Aseres ha'Dibros, "I am Hashem... Who took you out of the land of Egypt."
Maharal: The ultimate purpose of Yetzi'as Mitzrayim was that we accept the Torah. To refuse the Torah would be to reject that salvation and return to slavery; we had to accept the Torah. Hashem had to bring it about this way; our willing acceptance with "Na'aseh v'Nishma" would not endure.
Maharal (ibid. p. 5): Chazal teach that Hashem went around to all of the nations, asking if they wished to accept the Torah (Avodah Zarah 2b). They declined - but even had they accepted, Yisrael would have been foremost in receiving the Torah and comprehending its secrets; and all others would have received it from Yisrael (had they wished to do so). As for Yisro, on the other hand, had he been present at Matan Torah, he would not have been secondary to Yisrael, but rather at equal standing. Maharal adds (ibid. p. 6) - Chazal teach that the Torah was given in the desert specifically, which is no-man's land, and open to all; symbolizing that anyone who wants to can acquire Torah. Yet the above remains true - the nations can acquire it only as secondary to Yisrael. (Although the Eirev Rav were among Yisrael during Matan Torah, they were mixed In (Mis'arev) with Bnei Yisrael and became subsumed within them. The name "Yisro," on the other hand, expresses the meaning "extra," or "add-on." Yisro retained his own identity; because the Bnei Yisrael needed him, he could not become negated to them.) Chazal say that Gerim are as difficult for Yisrael as a "Sapachas" (Yevamos 47b) - which means an 'add-on;' and 'something extra is like something missing.' All the goodness granted to Yisrael is as descendants of the Avos - and Gerim interrupt that correlation. Maharal (Netzach Yisrael Ch. 32, p. 149) - Rus and Na'amah were not "add-ons" to Yisrael, but rather served as their completion as the ancestors of Mashiach Ben David. Yisro is considered first of the Gerim. (For elaboration about how Yisro was nonetheless distinct from future Gerim, see 18:1:2.4:1 above.)
Maharal, ibid. p. 5.
Maharal seems to differ with Rashi (to 18:13) on this point - who holds that Yisro did not leave at all until the tribal banners were assigned, because we do not find that he returned in the interim (see 18:27:3.1:1 ).
How can some say that Yisro was not at Matan Torah (see the preceding question, and 18:1:154 )? Yisro's descendants would be called "Tir'asim Shim'asim... " (Divrei Hayamim I 2:55), which Chazal (see Mechilta) interpret that to mean that he heard the Teru'ah at Har Sinai!
Rosh (to 18:4): Perhaps Yisro's sons were exiled in Egypt, and suffered, [and thus merited to be at Matan Torah]. 1
Rosh: A support for this is "va'Yelech Lo El Artzo" (18:27), and Rashi writes that that he went to convert his family. Where do we find that those converts came with Yisrael? Rather, we must say as above.
Why did Yisro leave Bnei Yisrael?
Why did Yisro decline to accompany them to Eretz Cana'an (see Bamidbar 10:29-32)?
Rashi and Targum Yonasan: Refer to 18:27:2:1.
Seforno: On account of his old age. 1
Mechilta: Because he considered it inappropriate 2 for a Ger to travel together with Yisrael. He said, "Of what benefit is a lamp, when it is placed between the sun and the moon?!"(i.e., Moshe and Aharon). 3
Ramban (to 18:1): Although Yisro initially declined to accompany them, we see that he had nothing to respond to Moshe's entreaties -- such that it would appear that he remained with Bnei Yisrael! 4
Seforno: Like Barzilai ha'Gil'adi in the time of David ha'Melech, in Shmuel II 19:38 . Yisro's sons, however, did accompany Yisrael to Eretz Cana'an - as is evident in Shoftim 1:16.
Though this is difficult to understand, bearing in mind the large contingent of Eirev Rav that accompanied them out of Egypt.
Also refer to 18:27:1:2* .
Ramban (ibid.): Our Pasuk tells us that Yisro temporarily returned home to convert the members of his family; after which he returned to Bnei Yisrael - and they were still encamped at Har Sinai.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "He left to his [own] land - to convert the members of his family." What indicates this? Perhaps Yisro left for mundane reasons, e.g. to return to his home and possessions?
Gur Aryeh: The Torah speaks of Yisro's departure in Parshas Beha'alosecha (Bamidbar 10:29-32) as well, yet with significant differences from our Pasuk. In that Parshah, Yisro responds, "Rather, to my land and my birthplace I will go" (ibid. v. 30) - which implies that his initial motivation to return was his land and property back home. Moshe then pleads with him to remain with Bnei Yisrael (ibid. v. 31); and indeed, the Torah does not record there that Yisro left anyway - implying that he acquiesced to Moshe, and stayed! But since our Pasuk tells us that Yisro did leave, 1 it must have been with worthier motivations - to convert his family. After doing so, he returned to Bnei Yisrael. 2
Gur Aryeh assumes that the two accounts describe one and the same visit. Unlike Ramban, (to 18:1), who answered that Yisro left to convert his family before Matan Torah, and returned prior to the Degalim and Parshas Beha'alosecha, Gur Aryeh holds that he left to convert his family only later, in Beha'alosecha, and he returned at some un-stated later point.
Gur Aryeh: In Sefer Shoftim 1:16, we find that Yisro's descendants were still among Bnei Yisrael.
