magic

Where the authorities disagree

Are lahat and lat one word or two?

1. Synonyms. Targum Onkelos (to Shemos 7:11, 7:22) renders both as lachash, whispered incantation. Ibn Janach and Radak support this lexically: the triliteral ל-א-ט means "covered, hidden," and its middle aleph can drop out or morph into a vav (Shmuel I 21:10; Yeshayahu 25:7); they suggest that it drops in lat and turns to hei in lahat. Rashi (to Shemos 7:11) cites Onkelos, and on 7:22 glosses lat as something said quietly. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (Yerios Shlomo) likewise makes them one thing, the speed and dexterity of a conjuror's hand.
2. Two distinct modalities. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 67b) reads lat as the use of sheidim and lahat as kishuf. What that means is itself disputed: Rashi (to Sanhedrin 67b), the practitioner acts himself versus sending sheidim; the Tosafists (Moshav Zekenim to Shemos 7:11), sleight of hand versus compelling sheidim; Rabbi Avraham Saba (Tzror HaMor), seemingly explaining the Gemara, magical instruments versus speech-acts; Ramban (to Shemos 7:11), destructive angels (aish lohet, Tehillim 104:4) versus the imperceptible sheidim.
3. Two words, one trick. Ibn Ezra (to Shemos 7:11, 7:22) rejects the missing-hei derivation, holding that a radical hei does not sit in the middle of a triliteral root. He keeps the words separate but makes them two aspects of one act: lahat the lightning speed of the hand, lat the concealment (compare Shoftim 4:21). Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi says much the same, and so Chemdas HaChemdah (to Shemos 7:11): lahat is speed, as lahat hacherev, and lat from vayalet, covering, the sorcerer's hidden devices. Rav Hirsch (to Shemos 7:11): lahat is the shiny object that distracts the crowd, lat the quick hand while they are looking away.

Whether any of it worked.

• Rabbi Saadia Gaon, Rabbeinu Chananel ben Chushiel, Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi, and Rabbi Avraham Maimuni deny sheidim and the efficacy of kishuf. On their reading "they also did so" does not mean the chartumim achieved what Moshe and Aharon achieved; they performed the speech-acts, but those dry actions created nothing new and only seemed to copy.
• Rav Saadia Gaon (Emunos v'Deos, maamar 3) and Ralbag (to Shemos 7:11, 7:22) accordingly take both words to mean something done in a concealed or clandestine way: the chartumim pulled off the illusion at the staff, the blood and the frogs, and at the lice could not manage even the illusion.
• The Vilna Gaon (Biur HaGra, Yoreh Deah 179:13) turns a variation of this question against the Maimonidean position on kishuf, noting that the Torah itself seemingly attests to the efficacy of the chartumim's efforts.
• Rabbi David HaNaggid, the Rambam's great-great-grandson, in Klil HaYofi (to Shemos 7:11), answers: he assumes as an axiom that the chartumim did no more than an illusory ploy, and finds two dimensions in it, lahat the sleight of hand, and lat the arousing of the onlooker's imagination so that he thinks he sees what is not there, which relates to sheidim in the Rambam's sense (Moreh Nevuchim 3:46).
• Rabbi Moshe Shapiro (Shemos 5757): in the world that Avraham Avinu built, sorcery of this kind cannot exist; in the false world the chartumim built, it could.