Appointing Moshe's Assistants/2

Appointing Moshe's Assistants in
Shemot 18, Bemidbar 11, and Devarim 1

Exegetical Approaches

In analyzing the relationship between the three accounts, the primary question is whether Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 speak of events which occurred at totally different times, or of simultaneous and perhaps even the same events. The secondary question is which of the two stories (or both) is retold in Devarim 1.

Two Unrelated Events

Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 tell of different events, and Devarim 1 recaps only one of them. Shemot 18 describes the creation of a judicial system to assist Moshe with his case load in the first year in the desert, while Bemidbar 11 speaks of the subsequent appointment of seventy elders in the second year to share and ease Moshe's administrative burden. This approach subdivides regarding which of these two distinct stories is being retold by Moshe in Devarim 1.

Devarim 1 = Shemot 18 (and not Bemidbar 11)

Both Shemot 18 and Devarim 1 recount events of the first year, while Bemidbar 11 speaks of the events of the second year.

Sources:R. Yochanan in Devarim RabbahDevarim Rabbah 1:10About R. YochananAbout Devarim Rabbah,¹ RambanShemot 18:1Devarim 1:9Devarim 1:12Devarim 1:18About Ramban, Ibn KaspiShemot 18:1Devarim 1:9About Ibn Kaspi, and Ma'asei HashemMa'aseh Torah 5About Ma'asei Hashem. This may also be the position of Sifre DevarimDevarim 15About Sifre Devarim and RashiDevarim 1:15About Rashi,² and is probably the opinion of R. Yosef Bekhor ShorDevarim 1:9About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor.³

Parallels between Shemot 18 and Devarim 1 – This approach accounts for their verbatim parallels (see Table) regarding the selection of the rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, and their judicial function, as well as their omission in Bemidbar 11.⁴

Differences between Shemot 18 and Devarim 1 – This position has difficulty explaining why in Shemot 18 the initiative is Yitro's and there is no hint of Moshe complaining,⁵ while in Devarim 1 the initiative comes from Moshe and Yitro is not even mentioned.⁶

Chronological setting of Shemot 18 – According to most of those who adopt this position, all of the events of Shemot 18 transpired in the first year of the desert before the Decalogue and are told in their chronological place.

Context of Devarim 1 – As Devarim 1 speaks of the events of the second year, it is unclear why it would digress to discuss an appointment of judges which took place in the first year.⁷

Devarim 1 = Bemidbar 11 (and not Shemot 18)

Both Bemidbar 11 and Devarim 1 recount events of the second year, while only Shemot 18 speaks of the events of the first year.

Sources:R. ChiyyaDevarim Rabbah 1:10About R. ChiyyaAbout Devarim Rabbah,⁸ Sifre ZutaBemidbar 11:17About Sifre Zuta, second option in Ibn KaspiShemot 18:1About Ibn Kaspi.

Parallels between Bemidbar 11 and Devarim 1 – This approach accounts for the similarity between Moshe's complaints in these chapters,⁹ and the mention of "officers" (שוטרים) in both (Bemidbar 11:16 and Devarim 1:15),¹⁰ elements not found in Shemot 18.¹¹ See Table.

Differences between Bemidbar 11 and Devarim 1 – The major difficulty with this position is that Bemidbar 11 describes the appointment of seventy elders to share in the administrative burden, while Devarim 1 (and Shemot 18) speaks of the selection of rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens to serve as judges. Additionally, in Bemidbar 11, Hashem commands Moshe to make the selections, while in Devarim 1 Moshe instructs the people to choose, and Hashem does not play a role.¹²

Chronological setting of Shemot 18 – According to this position also, all of the events of Shemot 18 transpired in the first year of the desert and are told in their chronological place.

Context of Devarim 1 – Devarim 1 retells the events of the second year, which is when the episode of Bemidbar 11 occurred.

Same or Simultaneous Events

Shemot 18 + Bemidbar 11 = Devarim 1. All or part of Shemot 18 occurred in the second year at the same time as Bemidbar 11, and Devarim 1 combines the accounts of these two chapters into one story. For each variation of this approach, one must examine whether the events described in Shemot and Bemidbar are identical or merely simultaneous.

All in 2nd Year

Both Yitro's advice and its implementation (all of Shemot 18) occurred in the second year, and Devarim 1 merges the entire Yitro story with the story of Moshe's own complaints (Bemidbar 11).

Sources:Ibn EzraShemot Long Commentary 18:1Shemot Long Commentary 18:21Shemot Long Commentary 18:24Shemot Short Commentary 18:1Devarim 1:9Devarim 1:12About Ibn Ezra.¹³

Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 – Same or Simultaneous – Ibn Ezra's approach needs to reconcile the selection of rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens to serve as judges in Shemot 18 (and Devarim 1) with the appointment of seventy elders to share in the administrative burden in Bemidbar 11. Ibn Ezra could claim that the two stories describe the exact same event (albeit from different perspectives), and that a single set of appointees was given both judicial and administrative responsibilities.¹⁴ Alternatively, he might contend that Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 were two analogous but separate incidents which occurred within the span of a few days, and that Devarim 1 merges them into one story because of their proximity and similarity.¹⁵

Parallels between Shemot 18, Bemidbar 11, and Devarim 1 – The major advantage of this position is its ability to explain how Devarim 1 contains parallels to each of Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11, and why some elements are found in all three stories. See Table.

Differences between Devarim 1 and the two earlier accounts – Ibn Ezra needs to explain why Devarim 1 mentions neither Yitro's initiative (Shemot 18) nor Hashem's role (Bemidbar 11).¹⁶

Chronology – Ibn Ezra claims that Shemot 18 is not in its chronological place and that the Torah presents this part of the story of the appointments already in Shemot in order to juxtapose Yitro with Amalek – see Chronology of Shemot 18 for elaboration.¹⁷

Context of Devarim 1 – Devarim 1 retells the events of the second year, which matches the time frame of the Shemot 18/Bemidbar 11 episode according to Ibn Ezra.

Part in 1st Year

Only the implementation of Yitro's advice (Shemot 18:24-26) took place in the second year, and Devarim 1 synthesizes the story of Moshe being unable to deal with the burden of the nation found only in Bemidbar 11 with the accounts of the appointments of assistants recorded in both Shemot and Bemidbar.

Sources:Akeidat YitzchakSha'ar 43About Akeidat Yitzchak, AbarbanelShemot 18Devarim 1About Abarbanel, MalbimShemot 18:24Devarim 1:12About Malbim, opinion cited in Hoil MosheHoil Moshe Devarim 1:9About Hoil Moshe, R. Yaacov Medan in Megadim 17.¹⁸

Delay in Implementation – According to this position, Yitro offered his advice already in the first year, but Moshe waited a year before acting on Yitro's advice, and did so only when he was overwhelmed by the burden of the nation at the beginning of the second year. The exegetes offer different possible explanations for this delay:

• Judges could be appointed only after the laws were received – Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel Shemot 18, Malbim.¹⁹ Abarbanel posits that Yitro had assumed incorrectly that the judges could issue verdicts based on their intuition alone, even without a law code.²⁰ According to him, Moshe's implementation differed significantly from Yitro's proposal – see Implementation, and this is why Yitro's name is not even mentioned in Devarim 1.²¹
• Leaders were necessary only in preparation for entrance to the land of Israel when an organized army would be required and the nation would settle throughout the country – Abarbanel Devarim 1.
• Assistants were necessary only when the nation resumed their travels because that is when complaints spiked – Hoil Moshe,²² R. Medan.

Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 – Same or Simultaneous – Malbim and R. Medan state explicitly that Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 describe two separate sets of appointments. These are merged in the account of Devarim 1 because of their similarities and near simultaneity. This would seem to also be Abarbanel's position.²³ Alternatively, this approach could maintain that the two stories describe the identical appointments from different perspectives, and that the appointees were given both judicial and administrative responsibilities.²⁴

Parallels between Shemot 18, Bemidbar 11, and Devarim 1 – According to this approach, the account in Devarim 1 combines the background of Moshe feeling burdened from Bemidbar 11 with the implementation described already in Shemot 18. One can thus readily understand why the first part of Devarim 1 more closely parallels Bemidbar 11 (and not Shemot 18:13-23 which took place a year prior) and does not mention Yitro, while the implementation section of Devarim 1 parallels Shemot 18. See Table.

Differences between Devarim 1 and the two earlier accounts – This position needs to explain why Devarim 1 mentions neither Yitro's initiative (Shemot 18) nor Hashem's role (Bemidbar 11).²⁵

Chronology of Shemot 18 – Most of Shemot 18 happened in the first year and is recorded in its chronological place. The last four verses of the Chapter 18, despite occurring in the second year, are combined with the earlier part of the chapter in order to provide closure for the Yitro pericope.

Context of Devarim 1 – Devarim 1 retells the events of the second year, which is when Shemot 18:24-26 and Bemidbar 11 occurred.

¹ This explanation of R. Yochanan's position would appear to be the simple understanding of his dispute with R. Chiyya (who maintains that Devarim 1 = Bemidbar 11 – see below). However, R. Z"W Einhorn in his commentary on Devarim Rabbah suggests that R. Yochanan maintains that all three accounts speak of the same event which occurred in the second year.

² The Sifre says that Devarim 1 is the implementation of Yitro's advice, but does not comment regarding when this took place or the relationship to Bemidbar 11. See below that the Sifre Bemidbar 93 equates Devarim 1 with Bemidbar 11. Rashi cites the position of Sifre Devarim, but he too is not explicit regarding when the appointments occurred or the relationship to Bemidbar 11.

³ In Devarim 1:9, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor says that Devarim 1 is recounting the events of Shemot 18, however he doesn't address whether Bemidbar 11 may also be speaking of the same incident. See R. Yosef Bekhor Shor for examples of where he claims that the stories in Shemot and Bemidbar are describing the same event. In addition, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor Shemot 16:34 says that Yitro came before the Tabernacle was built, but he never explicitly states when Yitro's advice was given or implemented.

⁴ Additionally, Ramban Devarim 1:12 suggests that the three terms "your encumbrance, and your burden, and your strife" in Devarim 1:12 parallel the three roles of Moshe described in Shemot 18:15-16 – see Moshe's Duties and Yitro's Advice.

⁵ 4Q22PalaeoExodusm and the Samaritan Pentateuch "solve" part of this problem by harmonizing the texts of Shemot 18 and Devarim 1, and inserting the verses from Devarim 1 into Shemot 18. See Textual Variants for a comparison table and analysis. The Samaritan Pentateuch did not harmonize these two chapters with Bemidbar 11, presumably because it thought that Bemidbar 11 was a separate event.

⁶ Ramban Devarim 1:18 struggles to suggest that Moshe may have omitted Yitro's name because of Yitro's modesty, or to avoid reminding his audience that he (Moshe) had married a Midianite woman (presumably a sensitive topic in the aftermath of the worship of Baal Peor). Alternatively, see R. Eliezer Ashkenazi in Ma'asei Hashem, Ma'aseh Torah 5, who argues that in Devarim 1 Moshe is concerned only with the implementation, and not the genesis of the idea, and therefore doesn't mention Yitro. He points out that in similar fashion, Moshe doesn't always mention that an instruction came from Hashem. Regarding the omission of "officers" in Shemot 18, see Ramban Shemot 18:20.

⁷ Ramban Devarim 1:9 explains that the phrase "at that time" ("בעת ההיא") in Devarim 1:9 does not imply that the judicial appointments occurred at the same time as the rest of the events of that chapter, but rather indicates a flashback to the previous year (see also Ibn Kaspi Shemot 18:1, and see Indicators of Achronology for an analysis of the phrase "בָּעֵת הַהִוא" in Tanakh). He adds that Moshe mentions this story here to demonstrate that if not for the sin of the spies the nation was all prepared to enter the land of Israel and that they even had a judicial system in place. See Ma'asei Hashem 5, for an alternative explanation.

⁸ See note 1 above that the simplest explanation of R. Chiyya's dispute with R. Yochanan is that they disagree over whether in Devarim 1 Moshe is retelling the story from the first year of Shemot 18 or the story from the second year of Bemidbar 11. However, if one assumes that this is the same R. Chiyya as R. Chiyya Rabbah in Bereshit Rabbah 22:5 who asserts that Yitro came after the Decalogue, it is possible that he maintains that Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 are two accounts of the same event, and that Devarim 1 is combining them. A third understanding is suggested by R. Z"W Einhorn, who contends that this is a different R. Chiyya who thinks that Yitro came before the Decalogue and that Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 are discrete events, but nevertheless says that Devarim 1 is an amalgam of both earlier events. The version found in Yalkut Shimoni Devarim 802 reads Resh Lakish in place of R. Chiyya.

⁹ In both chapters, Moshe also refers to the large size of the population.

¹⁰ However, the word ושטריו in Bemidbar 11:16 seems to refer to previously chosen officers, not ones selected in Bemidbar 11 itself. Thus one could argue that the selection of officers in Devarim 1:15 must refer to the earlier story of Shemot 18. A parallel issue exists regarding the "elders" mentioned in Bemidbar 11:16, who are possibly identical with the "heads of your tribes," (see Devarim 29:9 and 31:28).

¹¹ Similarly, the omission of Yitro in Devarim 1 is readily understood, as this is a different event.

¹² Compare though to similar cases – see Ma'asei Hashem, Ma'aseh Torah 5 and see Literary.

¹³ In his commentaries on Shemot, Ibn Ezra claims that Shemot 18 and Devarim 1 recount the same story which took place in the second year when Chovav=Yitro (according to Ibn Ezra) visited, but he does not discuss Bemidbar 11. However, in his commentary to Devarim 1:9,12 he maintains that the story of Devarim 1 synthesizes elements from both Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11, making this a likely reconstruction of his position.

¹⁴ See Moshe's Duties and Yitro's Advice for the position of the Vilna Gaon that the rulers of thousands were administrative and military leaders, the rulers of hundreds judged and were also military leaders, the rulers of fifties educated, and the rulers of tens were enforcement officers (שטרים).

¹⁵ Cf. the analyses below of the positions of Abarbanel and Malbim.

¹⁶ See footnotes 6 and 12 for various possible approaches.

¹⁷ If Ibn Ezra says that Shemot 18 and Bemidbar 11 speak of the same appointments, he would also need to maintain that the internal order of events is reversed in one account or the other, as in the former Moshe implements the advice before Yitro leaves, and in the latter Chovav=Yitro departs (Bemidbar 10:29-32) prior to the appointments.

¹⁸ All of these exegetes split Shemot 18 and link the implementation of Yitro's advice to the account in Devarim 1. While Abarbanel and Malbim in their commentaries on Devarim indicate that Devarim 1 alludes also to the events of Bemidbar 11, this position is advocated most explicitly by R. Medan.

¹⁹ It is not clear why according to them Moshe needed to wait until the second year – see Chronology of Shemot 18 for the possibility that he waited until the completion of the giving of all of the laws at Sinai. What is clear is that their variation enables them to link all of Shemot 18, Bemidbar 11, and Devarim 1.

²⁰ See Did Moshe Need Yitro's advice for the very different perspective of the Akeidat Yitzchak regarding Yitro and the value of his advice.

²¹ See Ma'asei Hashem, Ma'aseh Torah 5 who critiques Abarbanel's theory and notes that the Torah states that Moshe followed Yitro's advice to the letter.

²² The Hoil Moshe also notes that Moshe wanted to first hear all of the laws to be sure that they did not contradict Yitro's advice.

²³ See Question 8 in his commentary on Devarim 1. See also Moshe's Duties and Yitro's Advice for a discussion of Abarbanel's position that the appointees in Yitro's advice filled not only judicial, but also military and administrative roles.

²⁴ Cf. the analysis of Ibn Ezra above and the position of the Vilna Gaon cited in the note there.

²⁵ See footnotes 6 and 12 for various possible approaches.