Difference between revisions of "David's Counting of the Nation/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
<category>Counted Heads | <category>Counted Heads | ||
<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>,<fn>Ralbag combines this with the next approach suggesting that David both did not count via a ransom and that the census itself betrayed a lack of trust in Hashem.</fn> </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>,<fn>Ralbag combines this with the next approach suggesting that David both did not count via a ransom and that the census itself betrayed a lack of trust in Hashem.</fn> <multilink><a href="VilnaGaonAderetEliyahuShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Vilna Gaon (GR"A)</a><a href="VilnaGaonAderetEliyahuShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Aderet Eliyahu, Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Eliyahu of Vilna (Vilna Gaon – GR" a)"="" data-aht="parshan">About R. Eliyahu of Vilna</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.<fn>They do not, however, all agree that one need donate a half shekel specifically.  For elaboration on the various opinions, see <a href="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle" data-aht="page">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</a></fn>  David's direct count therefore constituted a sin and led to plague.</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.  For elaboration on the various opinions, see <a href="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle" data-aht="page">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</a></fn>  David's direct count therefore constituted a sin and led to plague.</point> | ||
<point><b>How could David err?</b><ul> | <point><b>How could David err?</b><ul> | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
<point><b>David spared</b> – As proof of David's innocence, R. Saadia points to the fact that David was spared the punishment that plagued the nation.  If he had been the culpable party, this would be unfair.</point> | <point><b>David spared</b> – As proof of David's innocence, R. Saadia points to the fact that David was spared the punishment that plagued the nation.  If he had been the culpable party, this would be unfair.</point> | ||
<point><b>Why were the people plagued?</b> The nation was punished for its own sin, their participation in the rebellion of Avshalom.</point> | <point><b>Why were the people plagued?</b> The nation was punished for its own sin, their participation in the rebellion of Avshalom.</point> | ||
| − | <point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל י"י חָטָאתִי מְאֹד"</b> – R. Saadia explains that David says "I sinned" despite his innocence, because he thought he must have erred.  This could work with the version of the story in Divrei HaYamim in which David's words follow the statement, "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל".  If David saw that some harm had befallen Israel right after the census he had reason to assume that maybe he had somehow erred.  However, according to the version in Shemuel, it is not clear why David would have thought that he sinned if no punishment had yet arrived and he had not transgressed any commandments. | + | <point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל י"י חָטָאתִי מְאֹד"</b> – R. Saadia explains that David says "I sinned" despite his innocence, because he thought he must have erred.  This could work with the version of the story in Divrei HaYamim in which David's words follow the statement, "וַיַּךְ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל".  If David saw that some harm had befallen Israel right after the census he had reason to assume that maybe he had somehow erred.  However, according to the version in Shemuel, it is not clear why David would have thought that he sinned if no punishment had yet arrived and he had not transgressed any commandments.</point> |
<point><b>Yoav's reluctance</b> – R. Saadia does not explain why Yoav would have been reluctant to count the nation if doing so was not problematic.  Perhaps he misunderstood the commandment regarding half shekels and assumed that there is always an obligation to count via a redemptive object.  Alternatively he was concerned not about  a legal transgression, but simply regarding the effects of the evil eye which the masses associated with counting individuals.</point> | <point><b>Yoav's reluctance</b> – R. Saadia does not explain why Yoav would have been reluctant to count the nation if doing so was not problematic.  Perhaps he misunderstood the commandment regarding half shekels and assumed that there is always an obligation to count via a redemptive object.  Alternatively he was concerned not about  a legal transgression, but simply regarding the effects of the evil eye which the masses associated with counting individuals.</point> | ||
<point><b>"וַיֵּרַע בְּעֵינֵי הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה"</b> – R. Saadia claims that "הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה" refers not to David's sin, but that of the people.  However, the placement of the verse right after David's census, when no sin of the people has yet been mentioned, makes this a somewhat difficult read.</point> | <point><b>"וַיֵּרַע בְּעֵינֵי הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה"</b> – R. Saadia claims that "הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה" refers not to David's sin, but that of the people.  However, the placement of the verse right after David's census, when no sin of the people has yet been mentioned, makes this a somewhat difficult read.</point> | ||
| − | <point><b>David's choice of punishment</b> – R. Saadia could explain, as does Abarbanel above, that David is given the option to choose the punishment since it was his right to punish those who rebelled against him.<fn>Though one might assume that the punishment of fleeing from an enemy [שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים נֻסְךָ לִפְנֵי צָרֶיךָ] refers to David alone, and as such could not be viewed as potential punishment for the nation, R. Saadia explains that this must refer to enemies attacking the guilty people, perhaps in the context of war.  According to the other approaches as well, it is likely that "צָרֶיךָ" is understood as a national enemy, for if not, David should definitely have opted for a punishment that affected him alone.  Otherwise his later words, "אָנֹכִי חָטָאתִי וְאָנֹכִי הֶעֱוֵיתִי וְאֵלֶּה הַצֹּאן מֶה עָשׂוּ" would be hypocritical.</fn> | + | <point><b>David's choice of punishment</b> – R. Saadia could explain, as does Abarbanel above, that David is given the option to choose the punishment since it was his right to punish those who rebelled against him.<fn>Though one might assume that the punishment of fleeing from an enemy [שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים נֻסְךָ לִפְנֵי צָרֶיךָ] refers to David alone, and as such could not be viewed as potential punishment for the nation, R. Saadia explains that this must refer to enemies attacking the guilty people, perhaps in the context of war.  According to the other approaches as well, it is likely that "צָרֶיךָ" is understood as a national enemy, for if not, David should definitely have opted for a punishment that affected him alone.  Otherwise his later words, "אָנֹכִי חָטָאתִי וְאָנֹכִי הֶעֱוֵיתִי וְאֵלֶּה הַצֹּאן מֶה עָשׂוּ" would be hypocritical.</fn></point> |
<point><b>"וְאֵלֶּה הַצֹּאן מֶה עָשׂוּ"</b> – R. Saadia suggests that in these words David recognizes that the people must have sinned and he asks Hashem what was their crime that caused them to suffer.  The surrounding words "אָנֹכִי חָטָאתִי וְאָנֹכִי הֶעֱוֵיתִי" and "תְּהִי נָא יָדְךָ בִּי וּבְבֵית אָבִי", however, suggest that David still viewed himself as culpable.</point> | <point><b>"וְאֵלֶּה הַצֹּאן מֶה עָשׂוּ"</b> – R. Saadia suggests that in these words David recognizes that the people must have sinned and he asks Hashem what was their crime that caused them to suffer.  The surrounding words "אָנֹכִי חָטָאתִי וְאָנֹכִי הֶעֱוֵיתִי" and "תְּהִי נָא יָדְךָ בִּי וּבְבֵית אָבִי", however, suggest that David still viewed himself as culpable.</point> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Version as of 00:37, 4 April 2017
Fatal 41: Specification mandates value for attribute a
11: <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>,<fn>Ralbag combines this with the next approach suggesting that David both did not count via a ransom and that the census itself betrayed a lack of trust in Hashem.</fn> <multilink><a href="VilnaGaonAderetEliyahuShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Vilna Gaon (GR"A)</a><a href="VilnaGaonAderetEliyahuShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Aderet Eliyahu, Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Eliyahu of Vilna (Vilna Gaon – GR" a)"="" data-aht="parshan">About R. Eliyahu of Vilna</a></multilink></mekorot>