Difference between revisions of "Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
<point><b>Identifying the "אִשָּׁה הַכֻּשִׁית"</b> – According to this approach, the "Cushite woman" cannot be Zipporah who hailed from Midyan, but is rather a heretofore unknown wife of Moshe who came from the land of Cush.</point> | <point><b>Identifying the "אִשָּׁה הַכֻּשִׁית"</b> – According to this approach, the "Cushite woman" cannot be Zipporah who hailed from Midyan, but is rather a heretofore unknown wife of Moshe who came from the land of Cush.</point> | ||
<point><b>Meaning of "לָקָח"</b> – The word is understood in its simple sense, as meaning to take in marriage.<fn>See below that Rashbam asserts that "לָקָח" implies only that Moshe married the Cushite woman, but never consummated the marriage. The other commentators do not draw such a distinction.</fn></point> | <point><b>Meaning of "לָקָח"</b> – The word is understood in its simple sense, as meaning to take in marriage.<fn>See below that Rashbam asserts that "לָקָח" implies only that Moshe married the Cushite woman, but never consummated the marriage. The other commentators do not draw such a distinction.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Doubling of "כִּי אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח"</b> – This approach views this as a parenthetical statement | + | <point><b>Doubling of "כִּי אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח"</b> – This approach views this as a parenthetical statement, needed to tell the reader that Moshe had indeed married a Cushite woman, since this fact had not been previously mentioned.</point> |
<point><b>When did the marriage take place, and why is the issue raised now?</b><ul> | <point><b>When did the marriage take place, and why is the issue raised now?</b><ul> | ||
<li><b>In Moshe's youth, before he married Zipporah</b> – Rashbam, basing himself on an obscure Midrashic work, Divrei HaYamim LeMoshe Rabbenu,<fn>On Rashbam's view regarding the reliability of this work, see <a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashbam</a>. See also <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotLong2-22" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotLong2-22" data-aht="source">Shemot Long Commentary 2:22</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> who challenges the authority of the midrash, stating "ואל תסמוך אל דברי הימים של משה, כי הבל כל הכתוב בו".</fn> claims that after Moshe fled from Egypt, he became the king of Cush for forty years,<fn>For other ancient traditions related to this colorful legend, see <multilink><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="source">Artapanus</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="source">Cited by Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9:27</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="parshan">About Artapanus</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="Josephus2-10" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="Josephus2-10" data-aht="source">Antiquities 2:10:1-2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, and Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) below. For analysis of and literature discussing the relationship between these traditions, see A. Shinan, "Moses and the Ethiopian Woman", Scripta Hierosolymitana 27 (1978): 66-78.</fn> and it was during this period that he married the queen of Cush.<fn>Moshe's kingship and marriage are mentioned also by Josephus (and Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)), but not by Artapanus.</fn> For Rashbam, it is difficult to understand why Moshe's siblings are suddenly dredging up an event which occurred many decades before.</li> | <li><b>In Moshe's youth, before he married Zipporah</b> – Rashbam, basing himself on an obscure Midrashic work, Divrei HaYamim LeMoshe Rabbenu,<fn>On Rashbam's view regarding the reliability of this work, see <a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashbam</a>. See also <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotLong2-22" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotLong2-22" data-aht="source">Shemot Long Commentary 2:22</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> who challenges the authority of the midrash, stating "ואל תסמוך אל דברי הימים של משה, כי הבל כל הכתוב בו".</fn> claims that after Moshe fled from Egypt, he became the king of Cush for forty years,<fn>For other ancient traditions related to this colorful legend, see <multilink><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="source">Artapanus</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="source">Cited by Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9:27</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="parshan">About Artapanus</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="Josephus2-10" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="Josephus2-10" data-aht="source">Antiquities 2:10:1-2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, and Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) below. For analysis of and literature discussing the relationship between these traditions, see A. Shinan, "Moses and the Ethiopian Woman", Scripta Hierosolymitana 27 (1978): 66-78.</fn> and it was during this period that he married the queen of Cush.<fn>Moshe's kingship and marriage are mentioned also by Josephus (and Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)), but not by Artapanus.</fn> For Rashbam, it is difficult to understand why Moshe's siblings are suddenly dredging up an event which occurred many decades before.</li> | ||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Why no critique regarding Zipporah?</b><ul> | <point><b>Why no critique regarding Zipporah?</b><ul> | ||
− | + | <li><b>No alternative</b> – R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal explain that the siblings were not bothered by Moshe's marriage to Zipporah, even though she was also a foreigner, since while he was in Midyan, fleeing from Egypt, there were no Israelites to marry.<fn>One might also distinguish between Moshe's actions before and after Matan Torah. Neither of these explanations would work for Rashbam who maintains that the marriage to the Cushite woman also took place while Moshe was fleeing, when he was not among the Israelites.</fn></li> | |
− | + | <li><b>Descendant of Avraham</b> – Rashbam distinguishes between Zipporah, a descendant of Keturah and Avraham, and the Cushite woman who was a descendant of the accursed Cham.</li> | |
− | + | </ul></point> | |
− | <point><b>"וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה עָנָו מְאֹד"</b> – According to R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal, this | + | <point><b>"וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה עָנָו מְאֹד"</b> – According to R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal, this comment is a parenthetical statement in the narrative voice.  It serves as the direct rebuttal to the criticism of Moshe and clarifies to the reader that the siblings' evaluation of Moshe's motives was completely erroneous. Moshe was not motivated by haughtiness, and in fact, is the most modest of men.<fn>Shadal adds a second possibility that due to Moshe's humility he would not have defended himself and so Hashem does so instead.</fn></point> |
− | <point><b>Hashem's response and understanding His verdict</b> – For R"Y Bekhor Shor and Shadal, it is not clear why Hashem's response focuses on Moshe's lofty level of prophecy, rather than | + | <point><b>Hashem's response and understanding His verdict</b> – For R"Y Bekhor Shor and Shadal, it is not clear why Hashem's response focuses on Moshe's lofty level of prophecy, rather than on Moshe's humility. Additionally, as the text provides no explanation for why Moshe married a foreigner, the reader is left to wonder if Miryam and Aharon's criticism was completely without merit.</point> |
<point><b>Punishment of leprosy</b> – This approach would likely adopt the Rabbinic view below that leprosy is the designated punishment for slander.</point> | <point><b>Punishment of leprosy</b> – This approach would likely adopt the Rabbinic view below that leprosy is the designated punishment for slander.</point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
<point><b>Punishment of leprosy</b> – These sources view leprosy as the standard punishment for slander or gossip.<fn>This notion is amplified in Bavli Arakhin 15b-16a and Tanchuma Metzora 1. See also Ramban Devarim 24:9 that the command to remember what happened to Miryam is really an admonition against speaking slander.</fn></point> | <point><b>Punishment of leprosy</b> – These sources view leprosy as the standard punishment for slander or gossip.<fn>This notion is amplified in Bavli Arakhin 15b-16a and Tanchuma Metzora 1. See also Ramban Devarim 24:9 that the command to remember what happened to Miryam is really an admonition against speaking slander.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Doubling of "כִּי אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח"</b> – The doubling of the fact that Moshe had married a Cushite is troubling for all, but even more so for those who maintain that the Cushite is Zipporah, for the reader already knows of this marriage and it is superfluous to share the fact as if it is new.<fn>See Rashbam above who notes that this difficulty lends support to the alternative understanding that the verse is speaking of a woman who is literally a Cushite.</fn> | <point><b>Doubling of "כִּי אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח"</b> – The doubling of the fact that Moshe had married a Cushite is troubling for all, but even more so for those who maintain that the Cushite is Zipporah, for the reader already knows of this marriage and it is superfluous to share the fact as if it is new.<fn>See Rashbam above who notes that this difficulty lends support to the alternative understanding that the verse is speaking of a woman who is literally a Cushite.</fn> | ||
− | + | <ul> | |
− | + | <li><b>Double beauty</b> – Sifre and Rashi suggest that the doubling comes to teach that Zipporah was beautiful (their understanding of "Cushite") both inside and out.</li> | |
− | + | <li><b>Miryam's speech</b> – Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel propose that this is not the narrative voice speaking, but rather the content of Miryam's speech.<fn>Abarbanel suggests that the siblings were raising possibilities as to why Moshe separated from his wife, the first being that perhaps he did not like her since she was dark complexioned like a Cushite. They reject this idea "because he married a Cushite", i.e. already when Moshe took Zipporah as a wife he knew what color her skin was, so why should it now matter to him. Cf. Abarbanel's interpretation of "וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה עָנָו מְאֹד" above.</fn></li> | |
− | + | </ul></point> | |
<point><b>Evaluating Miryam and Aharon</b> – This approach tries to mitigate the wrongdoing of Miryam and Aharon by attributing to them the best of motivations. Their speech stems not from a desire to hurt Moshe, but to help his wife.<fn>R. Hirsch attempts to support this claim from the verse's choice of the language "עַל אֹדוֹת" which he says always refers to someone or something which is being unjustly treated and whom someone wants to aid. As proof, he points to similar usage in Bereshit 21:11 and Shemot 18:8. Thus, he concludes the verse is not saying that the siblings spoke "about" Zipporah, but rather that they spoke "on her behalf".</fn></point> | <point><b>Evaluating Miryam and Aharon</b> – This approach tries to mitigate the wrongdoing of Miryam and Aharon by attributing to them the best of motivations. Their speech stems not from a desire to hurt Moshe, but to help his wife.<fn>R. Hirsch attempts to support this claim from the verse's choice of the language "עַל אֹדוֹת" which he says always refers to someone or something which is being unjustly treated and whom someone wants to aid. As proof, he points to similar usage in Bereshit 21:11 and Shemot 18:8. Thus, he concludes the verse is not saying that the siblings spoke "about" Zipporah, but rather that they spoke "on her behalf".</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Celibacy in Judaism</b> – This approach views celibacy as a necessary precondition for reaching the highest level of spirituality and communication with Hashem.</point> | <point><b>Celibacy in Judaism</b> – This approach views celibacy as a necessary precondition for reaching the highest level of spirituality and communication with Hashem.</point> |
Version as of 05:03, 19 June 2024
Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
There is a spectrum of approaches to understanding the actions and motivations of Miryam and Aharon. Nearly all classical and medieval exegetes (and many modern ones as well), attempt to minimize the infraction and its implications by viewing it as simply idle chatter or poor judgment. The Sifre and related Midrashim are perhaps the most extreme manifestation of this position, as they view Miryam as simply trying to encourage the resumption of normal marital life between Moshe and Zipporah and having no spiteful intent whatsoever.
A middle ground staked out by R"Y Bekhor Shor and Ibn Kaspi view Moshe's siblings' critique of him as stemming from their objection to his taking either a foreign or second wife, but they also view the story as a private familial spat with mistaken (and even understandable) errors of judgment. Finally, several modern exegetes view Miryam and Aharon's statements as a questioning of Moshe's worthiness to lead. According to them, the book of Bemidbar tells the tale of a Moshe besieged by serious challenges to his authority from both within his own family and without.
Defamatory Gossip (לשון הרע)
Miryam and Aharon sinned in speaking negatively about Moshe and criticizing his behavior. The commentators who adopt this approach differ in their understandings of both the specifics of the slander and why it was unjustified:
Intermarriage
Miryam and Aharon disparage Moshe for marrying someone who was not an Israelite.
- In Moshe's youth, before he married Zipporah – Rashbam, basing himself on an obscure Midrashic work, Divrei HaYamim LeMoshe Rabbenu,2 claims that after Moshe fled from Egypt, he became the king of Cush for forty years,3 and it was during this period that he married the queen of Cush.4 For Rashbam, it is difficult to understand why Moshe's siblings are suddenly dredging up an event which occurred many decades before.
- During the Israelite's trek through the wilderness – R"Y Bekhor Shor5 and Shadal, on the other hand, assume that the marriage took place after Moshe was already the leader of the nation,6 and they attribute no royal status to the Cushite woman. According to them, Miryam and Aharon's complaint logically follows this recent event.
- Intermarriage itself – R. Yosef Bekhor Shor maintains that the siblings are bothered by the fact that Moshe married a foreign woman of an uncircumcised nation. The Cushites, in particular, were descendants of Cham, which might be viewed as even more problematic.7
- Hubris – Both R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal suggest that Miryam and Aharon criticized Moshe for being vain and thinking that the women of Israel were not good enough for him.8
- Jealousy – In his HaMishtadel, Shadal raises the possibility that the siblings were hoping that Moshe would marry one of their children,9 and were thus upset when he opted instead for a foreigner.
- Yes – According to R"Y Bekhor Shor and Shadal, there appears to be no Biblical prohibition. Even according to them, though, it would not seem to be a recommended course of action, and no justification is provided for Moshe's taking of a foreign wife given he had the opportunity to marry within his own nation. R. Yosef Bekhor Shor leaves this question unanswered, saying merely: "ואעפ"י שלא נודע למה היתה סיבה זאת של משה, אין גלויין לנו כל הסודות".11
- No – This appears to motivate Rashbam's position (following the Midrash) that Moshe's marriage to the Cushite woman took place long before the Exodus, and that, in addition, Moshe never consummated the marriage.
- No alternative – R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal explain that the siblings were not bothered by Moshe's marriage to Zipporah, even though she was also a foreigner, since while he was in Midyan, fleeing from Egypt, there were no Israelites to marry.12
- Descendant of Avraham – Rashbam distinguishes between Zipporah, a descendant of Keturah and Avraham, and the Cushite woman who was a descendant of the accursed Cham.
Abstinence
Miryam and Aharon criticize Moshe for abstaining from marital relations with his wife.
- Zipporah – Almost all of these commentators identify the Cushite with Moshe's known wife, Zipporah. However, as the Torah clearly states that Zipporah came from Midyan,14 and not Cush, these commentators are forced15 to render the "Cushite" appellation as a figurative term:16
- A woman from Cush – Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) asserts that the verse is referring to the Queen of Cush.19
- According to most of these commentators,24 it was only after the appointment of the elders that the details of Moshe's married life became known to Miryam. When Zipporah lamented the fate of the spouses of the new prophets, she inadvertently revealed her own situation to her sister-in-law.
- Ran, instead, asserts that until this point the siblings had justified Moshe's neglect of his wife, thinking that his all consuming leadership responsibilities left no time for family life. With the appointment of assistants, this excuse was no longer valid.
- Alternatively, it was only recently that Yitro had returned Zipporah to Moshe.25
- Explaining God's intervention – According to Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) and R. Hirsch the statement is clarifying that Moshe himself was not bothered by his siblings' criticism. Since he would never defend himself, Hashem intervened on his behalf.
- Clarifying the complaint – Abarbanel asserts that this statement is not a parenthetical statement made by the text, but is rather a rhetorical question posed by Miryam and Aharon.26 They raise, and reject, the possibility that it is Moshe's extreme humility that led him to abstain from relations.
- Defense of Moshe – R. Hirsch suggests that this statement proves that Moshe's actions could not have been motivated by any feelings of pride or gloating.27
- Defense of Miryam and Aharon – R. Hirsch further proposes that Moshe's extreme modesty is what led the siblings to their error. Due to Moshe's humility, they never knew that there was a difference in the level of Moshe's prophetic status and that he, thus, had a good reason for his separation from Zipporah.
- Double beauty – Sifre and Rashi suggest that the doubling comes to teach that Zipporah was beautiful (their understanding of "Cushite") both inside and out.
- Miryam's speech – Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel propose that this is not the narrative voice speaking, but rather the content of Miryam's speech.32
Polygamy
Moshe's siblings are upset that he veered from the monogamous ideal by taking an additional wife.
Challenge to Moshe's Authority
Miryam and Aharon's fault lies in their contesting of Moshe's leadership and viewing themselves as his equals.
- Pretext to challenge leadership – It is possible that the main issue is stated in verse 2, where the siblings question Moshe's unique status and suggest that they should be his equal in leadership. The complaint about his wife is merely a pretext to find fault with Moshe's character.
- A question of succession – Alternatively, the two remarks are part of the same issue. The siblings question not Moshe's leadership per se, but the potential succession of his children.40 They highlight his marriage to a foreigner to show that his children are tainted and not suitable to be leaders.