Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Miracles/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
<li><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilam's entire encounter with the donkey and angel only took place in a prophetic dream, so here, too, no animal spoke.</li> | <li><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilam's entire encounter with the donkey and angel only took place in a prophetic dream, so here, too, no animal spoke.</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Lot's wife</b> – Ralbag asserts that the phrase "וַתְּהִי נְצִיב מֶלַח" refers not to Lot's wife but to the land which she witnessed turn into a mound of salt. [For full discussion, see <a href="Lot's Wife and Her Fate" data-aht="page">Lot's Wife and Her Fate</a>.]</point> | ||
<point><b>The sun standing still</b> – According to this position, the the celestial bodies did not actually stop in their tracks.  The verse which implies that they did is explained in one of two ways:<br/> | <point><b>The sun standing still</b> – According to this position, the the celestial bodies did not actually stop in their tracks.  The verse which implies that they did is explained in one of two ways:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>People's perspective</b> - <multilink><a href="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 10:12-13</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimIToalot18-37" data-aht="source">Melakhim I Toalot 18:37</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink><fn>See also Rambam as understood by Efodi and R. Moshe of Narbonne.</fn> maintains that due to the speed of the nation's victory over their enemies, there was a perception that time stood still | + | <li><b>People's perspective</b> - <multilink><a href="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 10:12-13</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimIToalot18-37" data-aht="source">Melakhim I Toalot 18:37</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink><fn>See also Rambam as understood by Efodi and R. Moshe of Narbonne.</fn> maintains that due to the speed of the nation's victory over their enemies, there was a perception that time stood still and that the day had been lengthened.</li> |
<li><b>Metaphoric language</b> - R. Walfish<fn>See R. Walfish, "עיון בפרשת עצירת השמש בגבעון", Megadim 38 (2003):43-52.</fn> suggests that the description of the sun's standing still is simply a metaphoric way of expressing how the forces of nature aided Israel in battle.<fn>She compares it to Devorah's statement, "מִן שָׁמַיִם נִלְחָמוּ הַכּוֹכָבִים מִמְּסִלּוֹתָם נִלְחֲמוּ עִם סִיסְרָא" in Shofetim 5:20. Just as this verse is not read literally to mean that the stars actually fought with Sisera, so, too, Yehoshua did not mean that the sun actually stopped in its tracks. Both are merely poetic flourishes.</fn>  [For elaboration on both of these positions, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.]</li> | <li><b>Metaphoric language</b> - R. Walfish<fn>See R. Walfish, "עיון בפרשת עצירת השמש בגבעון", Megadim 38 (2003):43-52.</fn> suggests that the description of the sun's standing still is simply a metaphoric way of expressing how the forces of nature aided Israel in battle.<fn>She compares it to Devorah's statement, "מִן שָׁמַיִם נִלְחָמוּ הַכּוֹכָבִים מִמְּסִלּוֹתָם נִלְחֲמוּ עִם סִיסְרָא" in Shofetim 5:20. Just as this verse is not read literally to mean that the stars actually fought with Sisera, so, too, Yehoshua did not mean that the sun actually stopped in its tracks. Both are merely poetic flourishes.</fn>  [For elaboration on both of these positions, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.]</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Reviving the "dead"</b> – According to one opinion in <multilink><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:17</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, the boy that Eliyahu revived had never died, but was only unconscious.  He was so sick, and his pulse and breathing were so faint (or non-existent) that his mother thought him dead.<fn>He suggests that the language "עַד אֲשֶׁר לֹא נוֹתְרָה בּוֹ נְשָׁמָה" does not mean that the boy died. He compares it to the similar metaphoric language in Daniel 10:17, "וַאֲנִי מֵעַתָּה לֹא יַעֲמׇד בִּי כֹחַ וּנְשָׁמָה לֹא נִשְׁאֲרָה בִי", where it is clear that Daniel is not trying to say that he had literally died.</fn>  Eliyahu, thus, did not miraculously bring him back from the dead but rather resuscitated him.</point> | + | <point><b>Reviving the "dead"</b> – According to one opinion in <multilink><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:17</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, the boy that Eliyahu revived had never died, but was only unconscious.  He was so sick, and his pulse and breathing were so faint (or non-existent) that his mother thought him dead.<fn>He suggests that the language "עַד אֲשֶׁר לֹא נוֹתְרָה בּוֹ נְשָׁמָה" does not mean that the boy died. He compares it to the similar metaphoric language in Daniel 10:17, "וַאֲנִי מֵעַתָּה לֹא יַעֲמׇד בִּי כֹחַ וּנְשָׁמָה לֹא נִשְׁאֲרָה בִי", where it is clear that Daniel is not trying to say that he had literally died.</fn>  Eliyahu, thus, did not miraculously bring him back from the dead but rather resuscitated him.<fn>It is possible that the same idea is not suggested by the boy revived by Elisha since in that story the verse explicitly states, "וַיָּמֹת" .  Even if this was taken to refer only to lack of breath, since significant time passes between the boy's death and the arrival of Elisha, CPR would have no longer been effective regardless. See, though, Rambam Moreh Nevukhim 1:42, who suggest sthat the verb "וַיָּמֹת" might also refer to a severe sickness adn not actual death, in which case this story , too, can be explained as Elisha curing the boy rather than reviving him from the dead. [It should be noted, however, that Rambam himself does not say this.]</fn></point> |
<point><b>The End of Days</b> – According to Rambam, the prophecies regarding changes in nature in the end of days, such as Yeshayahu 11:6, should be understood allegorically as referring to world peace, and not actual changes in the behavior of animals.<fn>See similarly Shadal on Yeshayahu 40:3 and Radak on 49:11.</fn></point> | <point><b>The End of Days</b> – According to Rambam, the prophecies regarding changes in nature in the end of days, such as Yeshayahu 11:6, should be understood allegorically as referring to world peace, and not actual changes in the behavior of animals.<fn>See similarly Shadal on Yeshayahu 40:3 and Radak on 49:11.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>The Plagues, Splitting of the Sea</b></point> | <point><b>The Plagues, Splitting of the Sea</b></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Angels</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Mutable Nature</b> – According to Rambam, nature is immutable, and therefore Hashem does not perform miracles (since this would violate nature's immutability), and will not perform world-changing miracles even in the end of days.</point> | <point><b>Mutable Nature</b> – According to Rambam, nature is immutable, and therefore Hashem does not perform miracles (since this would violate nature's immutability), and will not perform world-changing miracles even in the end of days.</point> | ||
<point><b>Divine providence</b></point> | <point><b>Divine providence</b></point> |
Version as of 12:58, 3 December 2018
Miracles
Exegetical Approaches
Minimized Miracles
There is an attempt to minimize miracles in Tanakh, either by suggesting that certain seemingly supernatural phenomenon did not occur at all, or by suggesting that the events did not contravene the laws of nature.
Reduce Number of Miracles
Certain verses in Tanakh which appear to describe a violation of the laws of nature are reinterpreted and understood not to have happened in reality.
- The Snake in Eden – Philo and Ralbag understand the story of the Garden of Eden to be an allegory,1 with the snake acting only as a symbol.2 As such, the serpent never talked.
- Bilam's donkey – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilam's entire encounter with the donkey and angel only took place in a prophetic dream, so here, too, no animal spoke.
- People's perspective - Ralbag3 maintains that due to the speed of the nation's victory over their enemies, there was a perception that time stood still and that the day had been lengthened.
- Metaphoric language - R. Walfish4 suggests that the description of the sun's standing still is simply a metaphoric way of expressing how the forces of nature aided Israel in battle.5 [For elaboration on both of these positions, see Stopping of the Sun at Givon.]
Using Nature
Stories which mentions wondrous, seemingly unnatural events, happened in reality, but never violated the laws of nature. Divine intervention is noticeable only in the timing or extent of the phenomena.
- According to certain explanations of Rambam, the magnitude of the victory caused the day to seem to be longer than usual in the Israelite perception, despite no celestial changes having occurred.
- Similarly, according to Ralbag, the day did not change, but rather the victory was so fast that it is described metaphorically as the sun standing still.
- Various modern scholars give other natural explanations for the miracle, such as the sun's position blinding the enemy,11 or a solar eclipse.12
- Radak cites R. Shemuel b. Chofni who states that the witch of Ein Dor pretended to be Shemuel, and gives a natural explanation for how she was able to give an accurate "prophecy".
- Shadal gives a natural explanation for Paroh's mages turning their staves into snakes.
Supernatural Miracles
Stories of miracles should be understood literally as historical accounts of what happened.
Miracles are Momentary Divine Interventions
When a miracle is needed, Hashem directly intervenes in nature, momentarily violating or suspending the laws of nature.
- Ramban views miracles as proof that nature is not unchanging, and therefore that the belief in the eternity of the world is falsse.
- All miracles were preordained during creation, and the laws of nature contain specific exceptions for each and every miracle.
- According to Rambam, Avraham's did not receive any guests in reality, but rather the whole story happened in a prophetic vision. Ibn Kaspi and Abarbanel elaborate on this, explaining the angels' appearance to Lot in the following chapter as either a continuation of Avraham's vision, or a separate dream of Lot. For further detail, see the Divine Prophecy approach of Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men?
- According to Rambam, Yaakov's various encounters with angels all happened in a dream.16
Miracles are Preprogrammed Divine Interventions
All miracles were preordained during creation, and the laws of nature contain specific exceptions for each and every miracle.