Difference between revisions of "David's Counting of the Nation/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
m |
|||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
<p>David sinned in directly counting the nation rather than using a redemptive object.</p> | <p>David sinned in directly counting the nation rather than using a redemptive object.</p> | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews7-13" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews7-13" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 7:13</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>,<multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot62b" data-aht="source"> Bavli Berakhot</a><a href="BavliBerakhot62b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 62b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>,<fn>This is Ramban's opinion as expressed in his comments to Shemot 32.  See below that he raises an alternative understanding of the event in his comments to Bemidbar 1.</fn> <multilink><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 30:12</a><a href="RalbagShemotToalot30-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Toalot 30:1-2</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>, Gr"a,  <multilink><a href="MalbimShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1-2</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews7-13" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews7-13" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 7:13</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>,<multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot62b" data-aht="source"> Bavli Berakhot</a><a href="BavliBerakhot62b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 62b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>,<fn>This is Ramban's opinion as expressed in his comments to Shemot 32.  See below that he raises an alternative understanding of the event in his comments to Bemidbar 1.</fn> <multilink><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 30:12</a><a href="RalbagShemotToalot30-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Toalot 30:1-2</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>, Gr"a,  <multilink><a href="MalbimShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1-2</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink></mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא אֶת רֹאשׁ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְנָתְנוּ אִישׁ כֹּפֶר נַפְשׁוֹ"</b> – According to all these sources, a direct headcount is prohibited by the Torah.  The directive to count via a redemptive object (כופר נפש) is an ongoing one, relevant for all generations and not just during the first census in the Wilderness.  David's direct count therefore constituted a sin and led to plague.  For elaboration on the directive to donate half shekels, see <a href="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle" data-aht="page">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</a></point> | + | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא אֶת רֹאשׁ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְנָתְנוּ אִישׁ כֹּפֶר נַפְשׁוֹ"</b> – According to all these sources, a direct headcount is prohibited by the Torah.  The directive to count via a redemptive object (כופר נפש) is an ongoing one, relevant for all generations and not just during the first census in the Wilderness.<fn>They do not, however, all agree that one need donate a half shekel specifically. Thus, Ralbag points out that Shaul had counted via sheep and stones during his cencuses.</fn>  David's direct count therefore constituted a sin and led to plague.  For elaboration on the directive to donate half shekels, see <a href="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle" data-aht="page">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</a></point> |
<point><b>How could David err?</b><ul> | <point><b>How could David err?</b><ul> | ||
<li>Ramban suggests that since the Torah is not explicit regarding the scope of the obligation to count via shekels, David mistakenly assumed that the command applied only to Moshe's initial census and not to all future generations.<fn>It is not clear, however, what prompted him to realize that he had sinned once the census was taken.  According to the account in Divrei HaYamim, it is possible that immediately after the census Hashem smites the nation, and it was this that clued  David in to his wrongdoing.  There (in contrast to the account in Shemuel), the verse states, "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל" before David's confession, "חָטָאתִי מְאֹד אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה".  However, if the nation was already punished then,  it is not clear why they would be punished again afterwards leading to the alternative possibility that the phrase "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל" is simply a heading referring to what follows.</fn></li> | <li>Ramban suggests that since the Torah is not explicit regarding the scope of the obligation to count via shekels, David mistakenly assumed that the command applied only to Moshe's initial census and not to all future generations.<fn>It is not clear, however, what prompted him to realize that he had sinned once the census was taken.  According to the account in Divrei HaYamim, it is possible that immediately after the census Hashem smites the nation, and it was this that clued  David in to his wrongdoing.  There (in contrast to the account in Shemuel), the verse states, "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל" before David's confession, "חָטָאתִי מְאֹד אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה".  However, if the nation was already punished then,  it is not clear why they would be punished again afterwards leading to the alternative possibility that the phrase "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל" is simply a heading referring to what follows.</fn></li> | ||
<li>According to Chizkuni, the original half shekel donations to the Tabernacle afforded protection from plague not just during the act of giving but for the entire period in which the silver lasted. By David's census, however, the silver was no longer around and new donations were needed.  Since censuses had not required new shekels in centuries, it is not surprising that David might have erred.</li> | <li>According to Chizkuni, the original half shekel donations to the Tabernacle afforded protection from plague not just during the act of giving but for the entire period in which the silver lasted. By David's census, however, the silver was no longer around and new donations were needed.  Since censuses had not required new shekels in centuries, it is not surprising that David might have erred.</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Yoav's reluctance</b> – Yoav's reluctance to count the nation and his question, "לָמָּה יִהְיֶה לְאַשְׁמָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל" stemmed from his realization that David was transgressing a prohibition which might result in a catastrophe for the nation.  It is unclear, according to this approach, however, why Yoav himself did not simply collect half shekels from the nation as a redemption so as to avert the sin and its consequence.</point> | + | <point><b>Yoav's reluctance</b> – Yoav's reluctance to count the nation and his question, "לָמָּה יִהְיֶה לְאַשְׁמָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל" stemmed from his realization that David was transgressing a prohibition which might result in a catastrophe for the nation.  It is unclear, according to this approach, however, why Yoav himself did not simply collect half shekels from the nation as a redemption so as to avert the sin and its consequence.<fn>See Ramban on Bemidbar 2 who raises this point as he brings an alternative explanation of the story.</fn></point> |
− | <point><b>"וַיָּסֶת אֶת דָּוִד"</b> – Ralbag explains that the verse does not mean to suggest that Hashem forced David to sin,<fn>For a discussion of other instances where God appears to take away people's free will and force them into misdeeds, see <a href="Hardened Hearts" data-aht="page">Hardened Hearts</a>.</fn> as then he should not have been culpable.  Rather, the phrase is an abbreviated way of saying, "וַיָּסֶת [לבו] אֶת דָּוִד".‎<fn>He points to the same phenomenon in the verse, "וַתְּכַל דָּוִד הַמֶּלֶךְ לָצֵאת אֶל אַבְשָׁלוֹם".  This, too, is an abbreviated form, and really means "וַתְּכַל [נפש] דָּוִד".</fn> Alternatively, the action is attributed to Hashem since he is the first cause from which all stems.<fn>Ralbag points to other similar attributions, such as Yosef's words to the brothers, "לֹא אַתֶּם שְׁלַחְתֶּם אֹתִי הֵנָּה כִּי הָאֱלֹהִים" (Bereshit 45:8).  He also raises the possibility that Hashem did play a role in David's sin, by not interfering with David's inclination.  Had the nation not been deserving of sin, Divine Providence might have guarded David, removing the desire to count from him.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>"וַיָּסֶת אֶת דָּוִד"</b> – Ralbag explains that the verse does not mean to suggest that Hashem forced David to sin,<fn>For a discussion of other instances where God appears to take away people's free will and force them into misdeeds, see <a href="Hardened Hearts" data-aht="page">Hardened Hearts</a>.</fn> as then he should not have been culpable.  Rather, the phrase is an abbreviated way of saying, "וַיָּסֶת [לבו] אֶת דָּוִד".‎<fn>He points to the same phenomenon in the verse, "וַתְּכַל דָּוִד הַמֶּלֶךְ לָצֵאת אֶל אַבְשָׁלוֹם".  This, too, is an abbreviated form, and really means "וַתְּכַל [נפש] דָּוִד".</fn> Alternatively, he suggests that the action is attributed to Hashem since he is the first cause from which all stems.<fn>Ralbag points to other similar attributions, such as Yosef's words to the brothers, "לֹא אַתֶּם שְׁלַחְתֶּם אֹתִי הֵנָּה כִּי הָאֱלֹהִים" (Bereshit 45:8).  He also raises the possibility that Hashem did play a role in David's sin, by not interfering with David's inclination.  Had the nation not been deserving of sin, Divine Providence might have guarded David, removing the desire to count from him.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Choice of punishment</b></point> | <point><b>Choice of punishment</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Why is the nation punished and David spared?</b><ul> | <point><b>Why is the nation punished and David spared?</b><ul> | ||
− | <li>Natural consequence</li> | + | <li>Natural consequence – Rashi and Ralbag suggest that plague is simply a natural consequence of a direct headcount as it invites the evil eye. Ralbag explains that the evil eye affects individuals differently depending on their constitutions.  Thus, it is possible that David was spared while others were punished due to their natural differences.<fn>See his similar understanding of the sparing of Akhan, while 36 soldiers died for his sin in <a href="Collective Punishment for Akhan's Sin" data-aht="page">Collective Punishment for Akhan's Sin</a>.</fn></li> |
− | <li>Guilty of a different crime</li> | + | <li>Guilty of a different crime – Ramban, in contrast, suggests that the nation was punished for their own individual sins, as evidenced by the opening of the story, "וַיֹּסֶף אַף י"י לַחֲרוֹת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל".  Even before David acts, we are told that Hashem was angry at the nation.  Ramban faults them for their laxness in building the Mikdash.</li> |
− | <li> –</li> | + | <li>–</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 06:37, 29 March 2017
David's Counting of the Nation
Exegetical Approaches
Counted Heads
David sinned in directly counting the nation rather than using a redemptive object.
"כִּי תִשָּׂא אֶת רֹאשׁ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְנָתְנוּ אִישׁ כֹּפֶר נַפְשׁוֹ" – According to all these sources, a direct headcount is prohibited by the Torah. The directive to count via a redemptive object (כופר נפש) is an ongoing one, relevant for all generations and not just during the first census in the Wilderness.2 David's direct count therefore constituted a sin and led to plague. For elaboration on the directive to donate half shekels, see Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?
How could David err?
- Ramban suggests that since the Torah is not explicit regarding the scope of the obligation to count via shekels, David mistakenly assumed that the command applied only to Moshe's initial census and not to all future generations.3
- According to Chizkuni, the original half shekel donations to the Tabernacle afforded protection from plague not just during the act of giving but for the entire period in which the silver lasted. By David's census, however, the silver was no longer around and new donations were needed. Since censuses had not required new shekels in centuries, it is not surprising that David might have erred.
Yoav's reluctance – Yoav's reluctance to count the nation and his question, "לָמָּה יִהְיֶה לְאַשְׁמָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל" stemmed from his realization that David was transgressing a prohibition which might result in a catastrophe for the nation. It is unclear, according to this approach, however, why Yoav himself did not simply collect half shekels from the nation as a redemption so as to avert the sin and its consequence.4
"וַיָּסֶת אֶת דָּוִד" – Ralbag explains that the verse does not mean to suggest that Hashem forced David to sin,5 as then he should not have been culpable. Rather, the phrase is an abbreviated way of saying, "וַיָּסֶת [לבו] אֶת דָּוִד".6 Alternatively, he suggests that the action is attributed to Hashem since he is the first cause from which all stems.7
Choice of punishment
Why is the nation punished and David spared?
- Natural consequence – Rashi and Ralbag suggest that plague is simply a natural consequence of a direct headcount as it invites the evil eye. Ralbag explains that the evil eye affects individuals differently depending on their constitutions. Thus, it is possible that David was spared while others were punished due to their natural differences.8
- Guilty of a different crime – Ramban, in contrast, suggests that the nation was punished for their own individual sins, as evidenced by the opening of the story, "וַיֹּסֶף אַף י"י לַחֲרוֹת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל". Even before David acts, we are told that Hashem was angry at the nation. Ramban faults them for their laxness in building the Mikdash.
- –
Unnecessary Census
The plague resulted from the fact that the census was unnese
Sources:Bemidbar Rabbah, Tanchuma, Radak, Rid, Ramban, Ralbag, Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel, Shadal, Hoil Moshe
No Sin of David
David did not sin in counting the nation. The plague resulted from the sins of the people, to punish them for their role in joining Avshalom's rebellion.
Sources:R. Saadia