Elisha and the Son of the Shunamite/2

Elisha and the Son of the Shunamite

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Commentators debate whether our story casts Elisha in a positive or negative light. On one side, many modern scholars suggest that the chapter contains a subtle critique of the prophet.  His unilateral promise of a son betrayed a certain amount of hubris, both in thinking that he was like God to grant life on his own, and in not including the Shunamite (whose life he was to change) in the decision.  Most medieval commentators, in contrast, find no fault with Elisha in any part of the chapter, neither in the way he relates to Hashem nor in his interactions with the Shunamite.  He emerges as an all powerful prophet, capable of granting life and resurrecting the dead.

Praise of Elisha

The story revolves around the greatness of the prophet who both brings life and revives the dead.

Sources:RashiMelakhim II 4:16Melakhim II 4:29About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RadakMelakhim II 4:16Melakhim II 4:29, 34-35About R. David Kimchi, RalbagMelakhim II 4:13, 16, 29, 34-35About R. Levi b. Gershom, Abarbanel, Malbim¹

Context of the story – The story is found in the midst of an entire series of stories which highlight Elisha's miracle-making.  Together, they build a portrait of a prophet of great ability who cares not just for the nation as a whole, but for the individuals within.

Indirect speech – Ralbag and Abarbanel suggest that Elisha does not speak directly to the Shunamite, but rather through Elisha, due to his great modesty. Ralbag lauds the prophet for this and calls on others to emulate the trait.

Geichazi's suggestion: "אֲבָל בֵּן אֵין לָהּ" – Such modesty could also explain why Elisha was unaware of the women's barren state. Since he tried to avoid direct contact with her, he was not cognizant of her plight.

The Shunamite's reaction: אַל תְּכַזֵּב בְּשִׁפְחָתֶךָ – These sources agree that the Shunamite never doubted the ability of Elisha to grant her a son; she feared only that the son might not survive to adulthood. She tells Elisha not to disappoint her, not that he should not lie to her.

No Divine command – Elisha's declaration is given, apparently, without prior consultation with Hashem (as are many of his miracles).  Is a prophet given power to bring life at his own discretion?  Is it not somewhat arrogant to think that one can do so?  Most of these sources do not address the issue.

• It is possible that despite the silence in the text, Elisha had in fact consulted with Hashem before declaring the miracle, and thus there is no hubris at all in his actions. 
• Alternatively, one could suggest that the fact that Elisha did not have to consult with Hashem before declaring a miracle even of this size, simply highlights his stature.

The boy's death – This approach would suggest that the boy died a natural death, the result of heat stroke or the like.  It was not meant as punishment for sin.  Once it happened, though, it provided another opportunity for the prophet to display his power.

"וַי"י הֶעְלִים מִמֶּנִּי" – This position does not view the fact that Hashem kept the death of the boy from Elisha as a sign of Divine disapproval. After all, Hashem does not share every natural occurrence that occurs with his prophets.²

Geichazi's failure

• Rashi, following Tanchuma, places the blame for the failed attempt at revival on Geichazi, suggesting that en route to the Shunamite he repeatedly gloated about the miracle he was to perform, thereby diminishing the dignity of the action. He was punished measure for measure, in not being able to perform the act he prided himself on.
• Malbim, instead, suggests that Elisha had not realized that the boy had actually died, assuming that he had simply fainted.  As such, he thought that Geichazi's powers would suffice. However, since the tragedy was much greater, they did not.³

Biblical parallels – This approach might view the linguistic parallels to the story of the annunciation of the birth of Yitzchak as a means to further highlight the power of the prophet. Our story might purposefully echo the declaration "וַתֵּלֶד שָׂרָה...לַמּוֹעֵד אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים"; changing only the name of the actor, "וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן לַמּוֹעֵד... אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלֶיהָ אֱלִישָׁע" to teach the reader how high high a level Elisha had reached: He could imitate Hashem.

Why so many miracles? The Elisha narratives do not share why "miracle-making" was so important to Elisha's prophetic career.  A hint, though, might be found in Elisha's words regarding Na'aman in Chapter 5. He invites him to be cured so that "he will know that there is a prophet in Israel (וְיֵדַע כִּי יֵשׁ נָבִיא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל)".  As such, it seems that Elisha's wonders were not simply a means to assist those in need, but they also had a religious agenda. His miracles announced his prophetic status, paving the way for people to heed the Word of God. This story specifically, perhaps the greatest of Elisha's miracles, reached the ears of the king (see Melakhim 8), impacting his actions.

Critique of Elisha

The story is filled with implicit criticism of Elisha who overstepped his prophetic authority when he promised the Shunamite a son.

Sources:modern scholars⁴

Elisha's miracles – Elisha's tenure as prophet is marked by extensive miracle-making, with most of the miracles being initiated by Elisha rather than Hashem.  Thus in our story, he neither asks for, nor receives, any Divine directive to grant the Shunamite a son.

Prophetic autonomy – According to these sources, though a prophet may at times invoke miracles on his own,⁵ Elisha betrayed a certain amount of hubris in thinking that he could bring life at his own discretion.⁶

Biblical parallels – R" M Lichtenstein and Dr. Zivan⁷ compare the language used in our story to describe the fulfillment of the prophetic promise with that found in the parallel story of Sarah and the birth of Yitzchak.⁸  By Sarah, we are told, "וַתֵּלֶד שָׂרָה...לַמּוֹעֵד אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים". Our story echoes, "וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן לַמּוֹעֵד... אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלֶיהָ אֱלִישָׁע." The near identical wording highlights the one difference: in our story Elisha replaces Hashem.⁹  The parallel thus reinforces the problematic nature of Elisha's actions, suggesting that he saw himself as God, rather than Hashem's servant.

Geichazi's suggestion: אֲבָל בֵּן אֵין לָהּ – Y. Amit finds fault with the fact that it is Geichazi rather than Elisha who mentions the Shunamite's childless sate.  How could Elisha, a frequent visitor in the Shunamite's home, be unaware of her barrenness? Such a lack of knowledge betrays a flaw in Elisha's interpersonal behavior, suggesting a lack of interest and concern in the welfare of his hostess.¹⁰  This is reinforced by the fact that during the whole conversation regarding repaying her for her hospitality, Elisha does not speak to the Shunamite directly, preferring to use Geichazi as an intermediary.¹¹

The Shunamite's reaction: אַל תְּכַזֵּב בְּשִׁפְחָתֶךָ

• Recognition of prophetic limits – R. Sabato claims that in these words, the Shunamite expresses doubt not in Hashem's omnipotence, but in the abilities of a flesh and blood prophet to grant life.¹²  Though Elisha was oblivious to the problematic nature of his actions, she was properly wary of a prophet who exceeded his authority.
• Fear of disappointment – R. Lichtenstein, following many commentators,¹³  instead suggests that the words reflect the Shunamite's natural fear that the baby not survive.  After numerous years of wishing for a son, hoping and then being disappointed each month, she cannot bear the thought of another shattered dream.¹⁴ In light of this, R. Lichtenstein criticizes Elisha for not consulting with the Shunamite before declaring his miracle.  The prophet should have been sensitive to her fragile state and not made such a unilateral decision regarding her life.

Why allow the baby to be born? If Elisha went too far in his proclamation, why did Hashem fulfill the prophetic decree?

• R. Sabato suggests that had the boy not been born, Elisha might have learned his own limits, but would not have appreciated his dependence on God.  Only through the later death of the child, and Elisha's need to pray to Hashem to revive him, could he learn this lesson.
• It is also possible that Hashem fulfilled the word of Elisha because not doing so would cast doubt on the prophet's abilities, leading people to question his status as a true prophet.¹⁵

Son's death – The son's death was necessary to teach Elisha about the limits of his authority.¹⁶  R. Samet,¹⁷ however, questions whether it is fair to teach Elisha a lesson at the expense of the Shunamite. These sources might respond that since the son was revived there was no lasting harm done to her through the experience.

"וַה' הֶעְלִים מִמֶּנִּי וְלֹא הִגִּיד לִי" – Hashem hides the reason for the Shunamite's distress from Elisha to teach him that he, too, is dependent on God. This is the first time in the story that the name of Hashem is mentioned.¹⁸ Ironically, only when Hashem leaves Elisha does he seem to remember Him.

Geichazi's failure – In sending Geichazi, Elisha proved that he had not yet internalized the lesson and still thought that human effort would be enough to revive the boy.  The failure taught him that any action done by mortals alone would not suffice.¹⁹

"וְאֵין קוֹל וְאֵין קָשֶׁב" – Dr. Zivan suggests that the narrator's description "וְאֵין קוֹל וְאֵין קָשֶׁב" recalls the same phrase used to describe the failure of the Baal prophets on Mt. Carmel.²⁰  The allusion sends the message that belief in the omnipotence of a prophet leads one to view him as a god, and borders on idolatry.

"וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֶל י"י" – The boy is only revived when Elisha prays to Hashem, thereby demonstrating his realization that life and death are in Hashem's hands alone and that his human abilities are, in fact, limited.²¹

"וַיָּשֶׂם פִּיו עַל פִּיו וְעֵינָיו עַל עֵינָיו וְכַפָּיו עַל כַּפָּו" – R. Samet questions that if the prayer was so central to the boy's revival, why is it mentioned only in passing, while the description of the human efforts are detailed?

• Dr. Zivan responds that the text wants to show how even after the prayer, Elisha had to work hard to resuscitate the boy. Mere speech was not to be enough.  He needed to be active, use his full body, give of his own warmth, and even that did not suffice.²²  Only after a second round does the boy begin to revive.
• RadakMelakhim II 4:16Melakhim II 4:29, 34-35About R. David Kimchi suggests that these actions were actually a means for Elisha to focus his prayer on the one for whom he was praying.²³

¹ None of these commentators say explicitly that this is the purpose of the story, but they all view Elisha in a positive light throughout it.

² Malbim suggests that had the death been a punishment, Hashem might have told Elisha in advance so that he could prevent it through prayer or repentance, but since the death resulted from natural causes, He saw no need.

³ Abarbanel opines that from the beginning Elisha had not meant for Geiachzi to revive the boy, but only to run ahead so as to stop the corpse from rotting. Geichazi had not understood Elisha's intent and therefore returns to say "לֹא הֵקִיץ הַנָּעַר".  However, if Geichazi were not meant to resuscitate the boy,  it is not clear why, in response to his actions, the narrator reports: "וְאֵין קוֹל וְאֵין קָשֶׁב".

⁴ See R"M Sabato, "סיפור השונמית", Megadim 15 (1992): 45-52,  R"Y Ariel, "האשה השונמית ומבחנו של הנס - 'חיבוק דוב' ספרותי", Megadim 15 (1992): 89-93, Prof. U. Simon, "אלישע והשונמית - מחולל הנס נזקק להדרכת בעלת הנס" in קריאה ספרותית במקרא: סיפורי נביאים, (Jerusalem, 1997): 279-316,  Y. Amit, "אלישע והאישה הגדולה משונם — נביא במבחן," Zmanim: A Historical Quarterly 77 (2002):4-11, Dr. G. Zivan, "השיעור שנתנה השונמית לאלישע ו…לנו", and R"M Lichtenstein, "איש אלוקים קדוש הוא".

⁵ For different opinions regarding the extent of prophetic autonomy see Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction and Invoking Hashem's Name Without Explicit Divine Sanction.

⁶ See Devarim Rabbah which claims that only Hashem has the "key" to open barren wombs.  Prof. Simon adds that even though the text suggests that the prophet had the ability to bring life, he nonetheless did not have permission to do so.

⁷ Cf. Prof. Simon who makes the same comparison, but draws different conclusions.

⁸ The two stories contain many parallels beyond the simple fact of the women's barrenness and the miraculous birth: Both stories open with a description of the hospitality of the parents, the women's husbands are described as old, they are promised a son in nearly identical language: "כָּעֵת חַיָּה [אַתְּ] חֹבֶקֶת בֵּן/ וּלְשָׂרָה בֵן", and each expresses doubt upon hearing the news.

⁹ R. Sabato points out that in other stories of barren women, as well, there is a recognition, lacking here, that Hashem is needed to bring life. In response to Rachel's desperate plea for children, Yaakov responds " הֲתַחַת אֱלֹהִים אָנֹכִי אֲשֶׁר מָנַע מִמֵּךְ פְּרִי בָטֶן". Similarly, when Eli blesses Channah, he says, " וֵאלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל יִתֵּן אֶת שֵׁלָתֵךְ."

¹⁰ On the other hand, the very fact that he is looking to repay the woman for her kindness would suggest that Elisha at least recognized her hospitality, and had some sort of relationship with her.  R. Sabato, thus, assumes that Elisha must have been aware of the woman's barren state all along but simply did not initially think of performing such a great miracle.  The idea came from Geichazi because he viewed the prophet as all powerful, never doubting that he could bring life.  [See Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael who presents Elisha as having total faith in his mentor's capabilities.  When asked if anyone besides Hashem could possibly bring forth life, he replies, "״אַף רַבִּי מֵמִית וּמְחַיֶּה.]

¹¹ Even when he finally addresses her withe announcement of the upcoming birth, he does so while she stands at a distance, at the entrance to the room.

¹² He contrasts her reaction to the promise of a child with that of Sarah in the same situation.  Where Sarah's laughter casts doubt on Hashem's abilities, and is thus cause for chastisement, the Shunamite only questions the prophet's autonomy, and is thus not criticized.

¹³ See, for example, RashiMelakhim II 4:16Melakhim II 4:29About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki,R. Yosef KaraMelakhim II 4:16About R. Yosef Kara, RadakMelakhim II 4:16Melakhim II 4:29, 34-35About R. David Kimchi, and RalbagMelakhim II 4:13, 16, 29, 34-35About R. Levi b. Gershom.

¹⁴ It is also possible that the woman was not barren at all, but did not have any children simply because none of them survived to adulthood. [This would explain why she is not introduced to the reader as an עקרה.]  If so, being told that she would be granted a child was not what she needed to hear.   She wanted a promise that the baby would grow up. Burying yet another son might be more than she thought she could bear.

¹⁵ This would suggest that prophets have the ability to "force" God's hand against His will. See Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction for elaboration.

¹⁶ R. Ariel suggests that when a prophet independently invokes a miracle, such as this, even when Hashem fulfills the prophetic decree He does so only in a reduced fashion, and the miracle might not be long-lasting.

¹⁷ See his article,"החיבוק הכפול - הסיפור על אלישע והאישה השונמית ופשרו" in Megadim 13 (1991): 73-96. He alternatively suggests that the son died to teach the Shunamite herself a lesson. He criticizes her both for coming to terms with her childless state and not sufficiently desiring a son, and for not appreciating the miracle of her son after he was born.  He claims that the miraculous birth came with the responsibility to raise the child to greatness, which she did not do.
However, each of these assertions is open to question.  R. Lichtenstein points out that a women who is able to move beyond her distress at not bearing a child and find other meaning in life should be lauded, not criticized.  Moreover, there is no evidence in the text that the Shunamite did not still yearn for a son, nor that she did not appreciate him after his birth.  The silence in the text regarding his upbringing is no different than the similar lack of description regarding the raising of Yitzchak, Yaakov, Yosef or Shimshon.

¹⁸ This does not include the word "הָאֱלֹהִים" in the designation "אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים" for the prophet.  Dr. Zivan suggests that the whole story revolves around the balance between the "איש" and the "אֱלֹהִים" in the "אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים".  As a prophet, Elisha is God-like, but he must remember that he is nonetheless human.

¹⁹ Geichazi, too, needed to learn that his mentor was fallible and not all capable.  It is perhaps for this reason that he, rather than Elisha, is the instrument of the initial failure.

²⁰ See Melakhim I 18: "וַיִּתְנַבְּאוּ עַד לַעֲלוֹת הַמִּנְחָה וְאֵין קוֹל וְאֵין עֹנֶה וְאֵין קָשֶׁב".

²¹ R. Sabato suggests that a similar process took place when Eliyahu tried to revive the son of the Tzarfatit.  He too was successful only after recognizing that God is needed to bring life.  [In his case, his initial failed human attempt is, in fact, preceded by a turning to God, but to challenge Him rather than to request help.  Thus, it is only after he explicitly prays that Hashem revive the boy, "וַיֹּאמַר י"י אֱלֹהָי תָּשׇׁב נָא נֶפֶשׁ הַיֶּלֶד הַזֶּה עַל קִרְבּוֹ" that the child come back to life.

²² See Radak and Ralbag who suggest that Elisha's pacing to and fro in the house after the initial attempt refers to a second round of prayer, needed to ensure that his effort bore fruit.  Prof. Simon, in contrast, suggests that they highlight the great effort needed by Elisha.  He had exerted so much energy that he needed a break to rest.

²³ He compares it to Yitzchaks' praying "לְנֹכַח אִשְׁתּוֹ".