Difference between revisions of "Chronological and Thematic Order/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<subopinion>Prelude | <subopinion>Prelude | ||
<p>An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and provide necessary background to a later story.</p> | <p>An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and provide necessary background to a later story.</p> | ||
− | <point><b>Birth of Kayin and Hevel (<a href="Bereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 4:1</a>)</b> – According to Rabbi Yoḥanan bar Ḥanina in <a href="BavliSanhedrin38b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin</a>,<fn>See also <multilink><a href="BereshitRabbah22-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Rabbah</a><a href="BereshitRabbah22-2" data-aht="source">22:2</a><a href="Bereshit Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Bereshit Rabbah</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 4:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>.</fn> the birth of Kayin and Hevel took place already in the Garden of Eden, before the expulsion.<fn>The past perfect form, "וְהָאָדָם יָדַע" might be an indicator of achronology.  It is not clear, though, if this grammatical form alone is motivating the suggestion of achronology.  It is possible that there are polemical motivations as well.  As Christians suggest that the sin in the Garden is what led to sexual desire, these sources might want to stress that such desire existed even beforehand.</fn> It is mentioned afterwards, in Chapter 4, only because the fact is necessary to open the Kayin and Hevel story.</point> | + | <point><b>Birth of Kayin and Hevel (<a href="Bereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 4:1</a>)</b> – According to Rabbi Yoḥanan bar Ḥanina in <a href="BavliSanhedrin38b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin</a>,<fn>See also <multilink><a href="BereshitRabbah22-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Rabbah</a><a href="BereshitRabbah22-2" data-aht="source">22:2</a><a href="Bereshit Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Bereshit Rabbah</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit4-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 4:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>.</fn> the birth of Kayin and Hevel took place already in the Garden of Eden, before the expulsion.<fn>The past perfect form, "וְהָאָדָם יָדַע" might be an indicator of achronology.  It is not clear, though, if this grammatical form alone is motivating the suggestion of achronology.  It is possible that there are polemical motivations as well.  As Christians suggest that the sin in the Garden of Eden is what led to sexual desire, these sources might want to stress that such desire existed even beforehand.</fn> It is mentioned afterwards, in Chapter 4, only because the fact is necessary to open the Kayin and Hevel story.</point> |
− | <point><b>Sarah conceives (<a href="Bereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a>)</b> – According to several commentators,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="RashiShemot31-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 31:18</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="TzerorHaMorBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">R. Avraham Saba</a><a href="TzerorHaMorBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Tzeror HaMor Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)</a></multilink>, and <multilink><a href="MalbimBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>. They note that this is hinted to in the text which employs the past perfect form "וַה' <b>פָּקַד</b> אֶת שָׂרָה" rather than the form "ויפקוד ה'".  [None of these commentators, however, offer a literary explanation for the achronology like that suggested here.]</fn> Sarah had conceived before or in the middle of the story of Avimelekh described in Bereshit 20.<fn>These sources suggest that Sarah had conceived enough before the incident with Avimelekh that, when Yitzchak was born, no one could mistake Avimelekh for the father.</fn>  The fact is recorded here, though, so as to introduce the story of Yitzchak's birth and weaning.</point> | + | <point><b>Sarah conceives (<a href="Bereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a>)</b> – According to several commentators,<fn>See, for example, <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="RashiShemot31-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 31:18</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="TzerorHaMorBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">R. Avraham Saba</a><a href="TzerorHaMorBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Tzeror HaMor Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)</a></multilink>, and <multilink><a href="MalbimBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimBereshit21-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:1</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>. They note that this is hinted to in the text which employs the past perfect form "וַה' <b>פָּקַד</b> אֶת שָׂרָה" rather than the form "ויפקוד ה'".  [None of these commentators, however, offer a literary explanation for the achronology like that suggested here.]</fn> Sarah had conceived before or in the middle of the story of Avimelekh described in Bereshit 20.<fn>These sources suggest that Sarah had conceived enough before the incident with Avimelekh that, when Yitzchak was born, no one could mistake Avimelekh for the father.</fn>  The fact is recorded here, though, so as to introduce the story of Yitzchak's birth and weaning.</point> |
− | <point><b>Marriage of Amram and Yocheved (<a href="Shemot2-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:1</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot2-1" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot2-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> maintains that Amram and Yocheved had married before the decree of Paroh discussed in Shemot 1.<fn>Since | + | <point><b>Marriage of Amram and Yocheved (<a href="Shemot2-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:1</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot2-1" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot2-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> maintains that Amram and Yocheved had married before the decree of Paroh discussed in Shemot 1.<fn>Since Shemot 2 speaks only about the attempt to hide Moshe, it seems likely that Aharon and Miriam were born before the decree.</fn> Their marriage is mentioned later so as to properly open the story of Moshe's birth and its aftermath.</point> |
<point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר י״י אֶל מֹשֶׁה עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1-2</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink><fn>See also <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Or HaCHayyim</a><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1</a><a href="R. Chayyim b. Atar (Or HaChayyim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chayyim b. Atar</a></multilink>.</fn> suggests that this statement refers to Hashem's<i> earlier</i> informing of Moshe of the Plague of Firstborns (when en route from Midyan in <a href="Shemot4-20-26" data-aht="source">Shemot 4:23</a>).<fn>According to him, the verse should be read as if written, "And Hashem <i>had</i> said".  See <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> who explains the motivation for positing achronology here; if the verse occurred where written this would mean that Moshe received prophecy while standing before and conversing with Paroh in his (idolatry-filled) palace.</fn>  It is repeated here to introduce Moshe's statement to Paroh "<b>כֹּה אָמַר י״י</b> כַּחֲצֹת הַלַּיְלָה אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם. וּמֵת כׇּל בְּכוֹר" to remind the reader that this plague was indeed already declared by Hashem.</point> | <point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר י״י אֶל מֹשֶׁה עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1-2</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink><fn>See also <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Or HaCHayyim</a><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1</a><a href="R. Chayyim b. Atar (Or HaChayyim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chayyim b. Atar</a></multilink>.</fn> suggests that this statement refers to Hashem's<i> earlier</i> informing of Moshe of the Plague of Firstborns (when en route from Midyan in <a href="Shemot4-20-26" data-aht="source">Shemot 4:23</a>).<fn>According to him, the verse should be read as if written, "And Hashem <i>had</i> said".  See <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> who explains the motivation for positing achronology here; if the verse occurred where written this would mean that Moshe received prophecy while standing before and conversing with Paroh in his (idolatry-filled) palace.</fn>  It is repeated here to introduce Moshe's statement to Paroh "<b>כֹּה אָמַר י״י</b> כַּחֲצֹת הַלַּיְלָה אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם. וּמֵת כׇּל בְּכוֹר" to remind the reader that this plague was indeed already declared by Hashem.</point> | ||
<point><b>Pesach (<a href="Bemidbar9-1-2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink> suggests that the story of the impure who could not participate in the Pesach of the first year is mentioned in the beginning of Bemidbar 9, not because it occurred there, but only to serve as a prelude to the main story of the unit, Pesach Sheni.<fn>In this case the achronology is explicit in the text.  <a href="Bemidbar1-1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1</a> opens in the second month, while <a href="Bemidbar9-1-2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a> speaks of the Pesach in the first month and only afterwards returns to speak of Pesach Sheni in the second month.</fn> Without the background of the events of the first month, the request of the impure would not make sense to the reader.  For elaboration, see <a href="Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10" data-aht="page">Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10</a>.</point> | <point><b>Pesach (<a href="Bemidbar9-1-2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink> suggests that the story of the impure who could not participate in the Pesach of the first year is mentioned in the beginning of Bemidbar 9, not because it occurred there, but only to serve as a prelude to the main story of the unit, Pesach Sheni.<fn>In this case the achronology is explicit in the text.  <a href="Bemidbar1-1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1</a> opens in the second month, while <a href="Bemidbar9-1-2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a> speaks of the Pesach in the first month and only afterwards returns to speak of Pesach Sheni in the second month.</fn> Without the background of the events of the first month, the request of the impure would not make sense to the reader.  For elaboration, see <a href="Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10" data-aht="page">Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10</a>.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Shemuel's death (<a href="ShemuelI28-3-7" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:3</a>)</b> – The death of Shemuel is repeated in the beginning of the story of the Ba'alat Ha'Ov even though it occurred back in <a href="ShemuelI25-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 25</a>, as it provides important background to understand the main story about the revival of the prophet.<fn>The past perfect form, " וַיָּמׇת שְׁמוּאֵל" might | + | <point><b>Shemuel's death (<a href="ShemuelI28-3-7" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:3</a>)</b> – The death of Shemuel is repeated in the beginning of the story of the Ba'alat Ha'Ov even though it occurred back in <a href="ShemuelI25-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 25</a>,<fn>In contrast to most of the other examples brought, in this case the displaced event has already been explicitly mentioned earlier in the text and is repeated here (rather than first being mentioned here).  As such, one might think of this as a "flashback".</fn> as it provides important background to understand the main story about the revival of the prophet.<fn>The past perfect form, " וַיָּמׇת שְׁמוּאֵל" might hint to the reader that the event occurred previously.</fn></point> |
</subopinion> | </subopinion> | ||
<subopinion>Epilogue | <subopinion>Epilogue | ||
<p>A component of a story which is only to occur later is moved earlier to provide closure to the main unit.</p> | <p>A component of a story which is only to occur later is moved earlier to provide closure to the main unit.</p> | ||
− | <point><b>Death notices</b> – The deaths of the various characters in Sefer Bereshit are recorded already when they fade from the scene,<fn>For examples, see the mention of the death of Noach in <a href="Bereshit9-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 9:29</a>, Terach in <a href="Bereshit11-31-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:31-32</a>, Avraham in <a href="Bereshit25-1-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 25:8</a>, and Yitzchak in <a href="Bereshit35-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 35:29</a>.</fn> rather then in the middle of later narratives when they chronologically occurred.<fn>Using the genealogy lists and birth / death notices to calculate the ages of various characters, it becomes apparent that Noach lived for 52 years after Avraham's birth, Terach first died 60 years after the command of "לך-לך", Avraham died when Yaakov and Esav were fifteen, and Yitzchak died | + | <point><b>Death notices</b> – The deaths of the various characters in Sefer Bereshit are recorded already when they fade from the scene,<fn>For examples, see the mention of the death of Noach in <a href="Bereshit9-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 9:29</a>, Terach in <a href="Bereshit11-31-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:31-32</a>, Avraham in <a href="Bereshit25-1-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 25:8</a>, and Yitzchak in <a href="Bereshit35-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit 35:29</a>.</fn> rather then in the middle of later narratives when they chronologically occurred.<fn>Using the genealogy lists and birth / death notices to calculate the ages of various characters, it becomes apparent that Noach lived for 52 years after Avraham's birth, Terach first died 60 years after the command of "לך-לך", Avraham died when Yaakov and Esav were fifteen, and Yitzchak died twelve years after the sale of Yosef. Yet, all of the deaths are recorded before these points.</fn> The achronology is motivated by a desire to provide closure to each protagonist's individual story.<fn>See <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit11-31" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit11-31" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 11:31</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary9-29" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary9-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 9:29</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitAdditionalCommentary11-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit Additional Commentary 11:32</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:32</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> who all note this.</fn></point> |
<point><b>The manna (<a href="Shemot16-32-36" data-aht="source">Shemot 16:32-35</a>)</b> – Shemot 16 tells the story of the manna's initial arrival in the first year in the Wilderness, but it also mentions its later preservation near the Ark<fn>The verse's statement, "וַיַּנִּיחֵהוּ אַהֲרֹן לִפְנֵי הָעֵדֻת לְמִשְׁמָרֶת" suggests that Aharon placed the manna near the Ark (the "testimony"), an act which could have only occurred in the second year, after the Ark was built.</fn> and its being eaten throughout the forty years of wandering. Despite the fact that these added details occur only later, they are placed here to close the unit.<fn>See <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra </a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>and <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1_2" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1_2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> who both point to this as the classic example and prototype of the many cases in Torah where the text appends information which happened only significantly later so as to complete a story.</fn>  [For a spectrum of opinions regarding the specific timing of the events mentioned in the epilogue, see <a href="Epilogue to the Manna Story" data-aht="page">Epilogue to the Manna Story</a>.]</point> | <point><b>The manna (<a href="Shemot16-32-36" data-aht="source">Shemot 16:32-35</a>)</b> – Shemot 16 tells the story of the manna's initial arrival in the first year in the Wilderness, but it also mentions its later preservation near the Ark<fn>The verse's statement, "וַיַּנִּיחֵהוּ אַהֲרֹן לִפְנֵי הָעֵדֻת לְמִשְׁמָרֶת" suggests that Aharon placed the manna near the Ark (the "testimony"), an act which could have only occurred in the second year, after the Ark was built.</fn> and its being eaten throughout the forty years of wandering. Despite the fact that these added details occur only later, they are placed here to close the unit.<fn>See <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra </a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>and <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1_2" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1_2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> who both point to this as the classic example and prototype of the many cases in Torah where the text appends information which happened only significantly later so as to complete a story.</fn>  [For a spectrum of opinions regarding the specific timing of the events mentioned in the epilogue, see <a href="Epilogue to the Manna Story" data-aht="page">Epilogue to the Manna Story</a>.]</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Recording the battle of Amalek (<a href="Shemot17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 17:14</a>)</b> – After the battle of Amalek, Hashem tells Moshe to record the event for posterity in "the book" and to speak to Yehoshua about wiping out Amalek. <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot Short Commentary 17:14</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> posits that this was first commanded in the fortieth year.<fn>He is motivated by the fact that it is only in the fortieth year that it was known that Yehoshua alone was to head the Conquest and only by then was the "book," the Sefer Torah, extant. Cf. <multilink><a href="RashiShemot17-14" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 17:14</a><a href="RashiShemot31-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 31:18</a><a href="RashiVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 7:1</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiShofetim11-26" data-aht="source">Shofetim 11:26</a><a href="RashiShofetim17-1" data-aht="source">Shofetim 17:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> who disagrees and maintains chronological order, asserting that already here, Hashem hinted to Moshe that he was not to enter the land and that Yehoshua was to lead after his death.  Alternatively,one might suggest that Yehoshua is mentioned due to the role he played in the present battle, and not because of his future position of leadership.</fn>  In order to finish the story, however, the directive is recorded here.</point> | + | <point><b>Recording the battle of Amalek (<a href="Shemot17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 17:14</a>)</b> – After the battle of Amalek, Hashem tells Moshe to record the event for posterity in "the book" and to speak to Yehoshua about wiping out Amalek. <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot Short Commentary 17:14</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> posits that this was first commanded in the fortieth year.<fn>He is motivated by the fact that it is only in the fortieth year that it was known that Yehoshua alone was to head the Conquest and only by then was the "book," the Sefer Torah, extant. Cf. <multilink><a href="RashiShemot17-14" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 17:14</a><a href="RashiShemot31-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 31:18</a><a href="RashiVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 7:1</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiShofetim11-26" data-aht="source">Shofetim 11:26</a><a href="RashiShofetim17-1" data-aht="source">Shofetim 17:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> who disagrees and maintains chronological order, asserting that already here, Hashem hinted to Moshe that he was not to enter the land and that Yehoshua was to lead after his death.  Alternatively, one might suggest that Yehoshua is mentioned due to the role he played in the present battle, and not because of his future position of leadership.</fn>  In order to finish the story, however, the directive is recorded here.</point> |
<point><b>Yitro's departure (<a href="Shemot18" data-aht="source">Shemot 18:27</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:32</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar8-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 8:7</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar20-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink><fn>This is one of two possible reading of the story raised by Shadal.</fn> posits that the story of Yitro's arrival, advice, and its implementation all occurred where found, in Shemot 18 before the Revelation at Sinai, but that Yitro's departure took place only later. Though Yitro first left in the second year, the fact is recorded already in Shemot to "complete the story".<fn>Shadal identifies "חֹבָב בֶּן רְעוּאֵל הַמִּדְיָנִי חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" mentioned in Bemidbar 10 with Yitro (see <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>), and assumes that his departure there is what is mentioned briefly at the end of Shemot 18. [In Shemot the text quickly mentions the fact to close the story, but leaves the details for Bemidbar when the departure actually took place.]</fn>  [See <a href="Chronology – Shemot 18" data-aht="page">Chronology – Shemot 18</a> for elaboration and for those who maintain that other parts of the story, too, might only be mentioned here to "finish the narrative".]</point> | <point><b>Yitro's departure (<a href="Shemot18" data-aht="source">Shemot 18:27</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:32</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar8-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 8:7</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar20-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink><fn>This is one of two possible reading of the story raised by Shadal.</fn> posits that the story of Yitro's arrival, advice, and its implementation all occurred where found, in Shemot 18 before the Revelation at Sinai, but that Yitro's departure took place only later. Though Yitro first left in the second year, the fact is recorded already in Shemot to "complete the story".<fn>Shadal identifies "חֹבָב בֶּן רְעוּאֵל הַמִּדְיָנִי חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" mentioned in Bemidbar 10 with Yitro (see <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>), and assumes that his departure there is what is mentioned briefly at the end of Shemot 18. [In Shemot the text quickly mentions the fact to close the story, but leaves the details for Bemidbar when the departure actually took place.]</fn>  [See <a href="Chronology – Shemot 18" data-aht="page">Chronology – Shemot 18</a> for elaboration and for those who maintain that other parts of the story, too, might only be mentioned here to "finish the narrative".]</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Incense altar  (<a href="Shemot30-1-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:1-10</a>)</b> – See the discussion in <a href="Purpose and Placement of the Incense Altar" data-aht="page">Purpose and Placement of the Incense Altar</a><fn>See also R"M Speigelman's article, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%94%D7%9C-%D7%A9%D7%A7%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%9F-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8-%D7%97%D7%98%D7%90-%D7%94%D7%A2%D7%92%D7%9C">פרשת ויקהל (שקלים) - המשכן לאחר חטא העגל"</a>.</fn> for the possibility that the directive to build the Mishkan preceded the Sin of the Golden Calf, but that the Incense Altar was commanded only in its aftermath.  If so, the proper placement of the command should be after the sin in Shemot 34, but it is mentioned earlier to close the unit on the vessels of the Mishkan.<fn>However, to highlight that the Incense Altar was not part of the original command, the directive appears after the unit's concluding verses.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>Incense altar  (<a href="Shemot30-1-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:1-10</a>)</b> – See the discussion in <a href="Purpose and Placement of the Incense Altar" data-aht="page">Purpose and Placement of the Incense Altar</a><fn>See also R"M Speigelman's article, "<a href="https://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%95%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%94%D7%9C-%D7%A9%D7%A7%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%9F-%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%A8-%D7%97%D7%98%D7%90-%D7%94%D7%A2%D7%92%D7%9C">פרשת ויקהל (שקלים) - המשכן לאחר חטא העגל"</a>.</fn> for the possibility that the directive to build the Mishkan preceded the Sin of the Golden Calf, but that the Incense Altar was commanded only in its aftermath.<fn>This position views the Incense Altar as playing an important role in atonement, and suggests that it was first commanded only when Yom HaKippurim was instituted, in the aftermath of the sin.</fn>  If so, the proper placement of the command should be after the sin in Shemot 34, but it is mentioned earlier to close the unit on the vessels of the Mishkan.<fn>However, to highlight that the Incense Altar was not part of the original command, the directive appears after the unit's concluding verses.</fn></point> |
− | <point><b>Erecting the Tabernacle (<a href="Shemot40-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 40</a>)</b> – According to those who maintain that the Days of Consecration of the Mishkan (described in Vayikra 8-9) began on the 23rd of Adar,<fn>See <multilink><a href="SifreBemidbar7" data-aht="source">Sifre Bemidbar</a><a href="SifreBemidbar7" data-aht="source">7</a><a href="Sifre Bemidbar" data-aht="parshan">About Sifre Bemidbar</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 7:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiShofetim11-26" data-aht="source">Shofetim 11:26</a><a href="RashiShofetim17-1" data-aht="source">Shofetim 17:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> in its wake.</fn> the description of the erection of the Mishkan on the first of Nissan (described in Shemot 40) is out of place. One might suggest that it is mentioned here only to serve as an epilogue to the unit of chapters discussing the building of the Mishkan. | + | <point><b>Erecting the Tabernacle (<a href="Shemot40-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 40</a>)</b> – According to those who maintain that the Days of Consecration of the Mishkan (described in Vayikra 8-9) began on the 23rd of Adar,<fn>See <multilink><a href="SifreBemidbar7" data-aht="source">Sifre Bemidbar</a><a href="SifreBemidbar7" data-aht="source">7</a><a href="Sifre Bemidbar" data-aht="parshan">About Sifre Bemidbar</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="RashiBemidbar7-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 7:1</a><a href="RashiYehoshua8-30" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:30</a><a href="RashiShofetim11-26" data-aht="source">Shofetim 11:26</a><a href="RashiShofetim17-1" data-aht="source">Shofetim 17:1</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu1-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit11-32" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanVayikra8-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:2</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> in its wake.  This suggestion is partially motivated by the desire not to have the Days of Consecration overlap with the Dedication of the Altar which, according to a simple reading of Bemidbar 7:1 (וַיְהִי בְּיוֹם כַּלּוֹת מֹשֶׁה לְהָקִים אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן) began on the first of Nisan.</fn> the description of the erection of the Mishkan on the first of Nissan (described in Shemot 40) is out of place. One might suggest that it is mentioned here only to serve as an epilogue to the unit of chapters discussing the building of the Mishkan.</point> |
<point><b>Clouds on the Mishkan (<a href="Shemot40-34-38" data-aht="source">Shemot 40:36-38</a>)</b> – After discussing the erection of the Tabernacle in Shemot 40, the final verses of the chapter speak of the role to be played by the cloud as an indicator of when to travel, adding that this was a constant throughout their journeys in the Wilderness (ie. throughout the forty years). Though this refers to what is to occur in the future, it is mentioned here as a conclusion to the discussion regarding the cloud of glory.</point> | <point><b>Clouds on the Mishkan (<a href="Shemot40-34-38" data-aht="source">Shemot 40:36-38</a>)</b> – After discussing the erection of the Tabernacle in Shemot 40, the final verses of the chapter speak of the role to be played by the cloud as an indicator of when to travel, adding that this was a constant throughout their journeys in the Wilderness (ie. throughout the forty years). Though this refers to what is to occur in the future, it is mentioned here as a conclusion to the discussion regarding the cloud of glory.</point> | ||
<point><b>Conquest of Canaanite cities (<a href="Bemidbar21-1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:3</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> suggests that the conquest of the Canaanite cities mentioned here occurred first in <a href="Shofetim1-16-17" data-aht="source">Shofetim 1:16-17</a>.<fn>As both verses speak of conquering the Canaanites and calling the conquered place "חרמה" it seems that they are speaking of the same event.</fn>  It is mentioned already here, though, to complete the story, telling the reader how the nation's vow was fulfilled.</point> | <point><b>Conquest of Canaanite cities (<a href="Bemidbar21-1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:3</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> suggests that the conquest of the Canaanite cities mentioned here occurred first in <a href="Shofetim1-16-17" data-aht="source">Shofetim 1:16-17</a>.<fn>As both verses speak of conquering the Canaanites and calling the conquered place "חרמה" it seems that they are speaking of the same event.</fn>  It is mentioned already here, though, to complete the story, telling the reader how the nation's vow was fulfilled.</point> | ||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
<subopinion>Headings | <subopinion>Headings | ||
<p>An event which is soon to be discussed in the text is mentioned already in the heading of the unit, not because it takes place then, but to let the reader know what is to come.  This phenomenon might appear as a"כלל ופרט", a general formulation followed by details.</p> | <p>An event which is soon to be discussed in the text is mentioned already in the heading of the unit, not because it takes place then, but to let the reader know what is to come.  This phenomenon might appear as a"כלל ופרט", a general formulation followed by details.</p> | ||
− | <point><b>"וַיָּרׇץ לָבָן אֶל הָאִישׁ" (<a href="Bereshit24-29-30" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:29-30</a>)</b> – | + | <point><b>"וַיָּרׇץ לָבָן אֶל הָאִישׁ" (<a href="Bereshit24-29-30" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:29-30</a>)</b> – Bereshit 24:29-30 reads, "וַיָּרׇץ לָבָן אֶל הָאִישׁ... וַיְהִי כִּרְאֹת אֶת הַנֶּזֶם וְאֶת הַצְּמִדִים...  וַיָּבֹא אֶל הָאִישׁ".  <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit24-29" data-aht="source">R. Saadia</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit24-29" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 24:29</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink> and others claim that, despite the order of the verses,  Lavan only ran after seeing the jewelry on Rivka. <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit24-30" data-aht="source">Shadal </a><a href="ShadalBereshit24-30" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:30</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>explains that the verses are not really achronological, but rather verse 29 is a general statement which is explained by verse 30.<fn>The words "וַיָּבֹא אֶל הָאִישׁ" are basically equivalent to "וַיָּרׇץ לָבָן אֶל הָאִישׁ" in the first verse.</fn></point> |
<point><b>"וַיֵּלֶךְ חָרָנָה" (<a href="Bereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a>)</b> – Even though Yaakov does not arrive in Charan until Bereshit 29, already in Bereshit 28:10 the reader is told "וַיֵּלֶךְ חָרָנָה". <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink><fn>See also <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RadakBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> who explain similarly but without the formulation of a "כלל ופרט".</fn> explains that this is a "כלל ופרט"; the story opens with a general heading that Yaakov went from Beer Sheva to Charan, then steps back to explain what happened along the way.<fn>Cf. <a href="BavliSanhedrin95b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin 95b</a> which chooses not to read these words as a heading and instead suggest that Yaakov had indeed gone all the way to Charan and then returned to pray at Beit El.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וַיֵּלֶךְ חָרָנָה" (<a href="Bereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a>)</b> – Even though Yaakov does not arrive in Charan until Bereshit 29, already in Bereshit 28:10 the reader is told "וַיֵּלֶךְ חָרָנָה". <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink><fn>See also <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RadakBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakBereshit28-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:10</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> who explain similarly but without the formulation of a "כלל ופרט".</fn> explains that this is a "כלל ופרט"; the story opens with a general heading that Yaakov went from Beer Sheva to Charan, then steps back to explain what happened along the way.<fn>Cf. <a href="BavliSanhedrin95b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin 95b</a> which chooses not to read these words as a heading and instead suggest that Yaakov had indeed gone all the way to Charan and then returned to pray at Beit El.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"וַיָּשֶׁב מֹשֶׁה אֶת דִּבְרֵי הָעָם אֶל י״י" (<a href="Shemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:8-9</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:8-9</a><a href="RashbamVayikra10-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> suggests that the repetition in these two verses of the fact that Moshe relayed the nation's words to Hashem  is an example of the Torah being "כולל ואחר כך מפרש".  Moshe did not relay the nation's words in verse 8, but only the next day after Hashem spoke to him about the upcoming revelation.</point> | <point><b>"וַיָּשֶׁב מֹשֶׁה אֶת דִּבְרֵי הָעָם אֶל י״י" (<a href="Shemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:8-9</a>)</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot19-8-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:8-9</a><a href="RashbamVayikra10-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> suggests that the repetition in these two verses of the fact that Moshe relayed the nation's words to Hashem  is an example of the Torah being "כולל ואחר כך מפרש".  Moshe did not relay the nation's words in verse 8, but only the next day after Hashem spoke to him about the upcoming revelation.</point> |
Version as of 23:40, 26 November 2019
Chronological and Thematic Order
Exegetical Approaches
Technical Displacement: Minor Details
At times, achronology in the text is a result of technical literary issues. In many cases, the majority and core of a given story is recorded in its proper chronological place and it is just one or two secondary components which are displaced. The displaced unit might be moved from elsewhere to join and thereby complete the central story ("להשלים את הענין") or it might be separated from the main narrative so as not to interrupt the story line ("לא להפסיק את הענין").
Preludes and Epilogues: "להשלים את הענין"
A subordinate component of a story might be moved from its proper chronological place so as to complete a central narrative. This might take the form of a prelude or heading before the main story or an epilogue or summation at the end.
Prelude
An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and provide necessary background to a later story.
Epilogue
A component of a story which is only to occur later is moved earlier to provide closure to the main unit.
Headings
An event which is soon to be discussed in the text is mentioned already in the heading of the unit, not because it takes place then, but to let the reader know what is to come. This phenomenon might appear as a"כלל ופרט", a general formulation followed by details.
Summaries
An episode which occurred and was explicitly mentioned earlier in Tanakh is repeated in order to serve as a summary to a unit.
Prologues and Appendices: "לא להפסיק את הענין"
Secondary narrative components might be moved to form a prologue at the very beginning of a unit or an appendix at the end because setting them in their proper chronological place in the middle of the central unit would otherwise break the flow of the main narrative . The episode or topic which is displaced is either irrelevant to the main theme or message of the unit, of lesser import, or of a different literary character.
Prologues
An event is moved from its correct chronological place later in the text and placed at the very beginning of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.
Appendices
An episode is moved from its correct chronological place earlier in the narrative and placed at the very end of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.
Thematic Arrangement: Parallel Units
Tanakh will often prefer thematic ordering over strict chronology, juxtaposing related material even if this means not adhering to a historical timeline.
Overlapping Stories
A preference for thematic ordering is often evident when components of two independent stories overlap in time. Tanakh will focus on each story individually rather than constantly switching back and forth between the two. As such, the same overall time period might be discussed from different vantage points in the textual equivalent of a split screen, with material grouped by varying protagonists, perspectives, literary genre or other factors.
Figures
Tanakh will often focus on one individual protagonist at a time, even if this means compromising on chronological order.
Realms of Life
When a protagonist's interactions in two realms of his life (such as the personal / familial realm vs. the political /national realm) overlap, Tanakh will often separate the two strands of the story rather than constantly switching back and forth.
Individual vs. Universal
When an incident has both a universal and individual aspect to it, Tanakh will focus on one at a time.
Literary Genre
Torah often separates material of different genres. Thus, even if a unit of laws was relayed over a period of time and other events occurred simultaneously, Torah might group the legal and narrative material separately. Similarly, when a book contains both prophecies and history, each might be grouped alone even if this creates achronology.
Speech vs. Action
When an action occurs in the middle of a conversation, or an extended conversation occurs in the midst of a list of several actions, Tanakh might distinguish between the two.
Non-overlapping Stories
Even when two stories do not overlap in time, Tanakh might prefer thematic unity over a strict chronological recounting.
Related Topics
At times, closely related events, even if they took place at different times, might be grouped together.59
"לדורות" / "לשעה"
Tanakh might group laws which are relevant only for a specific time period (לשעה) separately from those which are relevant for all future generations (לדורות).
Two Authors
If a book has multiple authors, each author's material might be grouped separately even if this means that some content is relayed achronologically.
Simultaneous Actions
When a unit contains but one element, the entire unit might not just overlap with but actually occur totally simultaneously with another event. In such cases, Tanakh does not have a choice but to tell one event before the other, even though this does not represent the reality.
Homiletical
Achronology might stem from a desire to relay a message through the juxtaposition of two stories which otherwise would not follow one another. The message might be a lesson in proper behavior, a showcasing of Hashem's attributes, or a means of highlighting a character's strengths or faults.