Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Miracles/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
<li><b>Miracles in the End of Days</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnaAvot5-6" data-aht="source">Commentary on the Mishna Avot 5:6</a><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Melakhim 12:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, the prophecies regarding changes in nature in the end of days, such as <a href="Yeshayahu11-6-7" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 11:6-7</a>, should be understood metaphorically as referring to world peace, and not actual changes in the behavior of animals.<fn>For similar examples, see also <multilink><a href="ShadalYeshayahu40-3" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:11</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:20</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:27</a><a href="ShadalShemot8-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot9-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:4</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:21</a><a href="ShadalShemot14-21-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:21-22</a><a href="ShadalYeshayahu40-3" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:3</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> on <a href="Yeshayahu40-3-5" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:3-5</a> and <multilink><a href="RadakYeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 5:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI16-2" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 16:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI28-24" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:24</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:17</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-21" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:21</a><a href="RadakYeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 49:11</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> on <a href="Yeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 49:11</a>.</fn></li> | <li><b>Miracles in the End of Days</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnaAvot5-6" data-aht="source">Commentary on the Mishna Avot 5:6</a><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Melakhim 12:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, the prophecies regarding changes in nature in the end of days, such as <a href="Yeshayahu11-6-7" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 11:6-7</a>, should be understood metaphorically as referring to world peace, and not actual changes in the behavior of animals.<fn>For similar examples, see also <multilink><a href="ShadalYeshayahu40-3" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:11</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:20</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:27</a><a href="ShadalShemot8-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot9-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:4</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:21</a><a href="ShadalShemot14-21-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:21-22</a><a href="ShadalYeshayahu40-3" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:3</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> on <a href="Yeshayahu40-3-5" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:3-5</a> and <multilink><a href="RadakYeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 5:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI16-2" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 16:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI28-24" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:24</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-17" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:17</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-21" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:21</a><a href="RadakYeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 49:11</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> on <a href="Yeshayahu49-11" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 49:11</a>.</fn></li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Rereading: | + | <point><b>Rereading: ambiguous syntax o rmeaning</b> – At times, noting a secondary meaning of a word, or recognizing the ambiguity of a verse's syntax allows for reinterpretations that minimize miracles:<br/> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><b>Lot's wife</b> – According to Ralbag the referent of the word "וַתְּהִי" in the phrase "וַתְּהִי נְצִיב מֶלַח" is not Lot's wife but the land.  The verse shares how she witnessed the land of Sedom become a mound of salt. For elaboration, see <a href="Lot's Wife and Her Fate" data-aht="page">Lot's Wife and Her Fate</a>.</li> | <li><b>Lot's wife</b> – According to Ralbag the referent of the word "וַתְּהִי" in the phrase "וַתְּהִי נְצִיב מֶלַח" is not Lot's wife but the land.  The verse shares how she witnessed the land of Sedom become a mound of salt. For elaboration, see <a href="Lot's Wife and Her Fate" data-aht="page">Lot's Wife and Her Fate</a>.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>"מלאכים</b>" – Ralbag points out that the word "מלאך" merely means a messenger and thus need not refer to celestial beings | + | <li><b>"מלאכים</b>" – <multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot16-7" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot16-7" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 16:7</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 18:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot21-17" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 21:17</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot32-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 32:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 19:37</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-23-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:23-32</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:21</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimIToalot17-15" data-aht="source">Melakhim I Toalot 17:15</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> points out that the word "מלאך" merely means a messenger and thus need not refer to celestial beings who supernaturally appear in physical form to man, but might instead refer to human prophets.<fn>This is how he explains the "מַלְאַךְ" which appears to Hagar, the three "men/angels" who visit Avraham, the "מַלְאֲכֵי אֱלֹהִים" who Yaakov encounters in Bereshit 32:3 and the "מַלְאַךְ" seen by Manoach and his wife. [He similarly explains the "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" of Bereshit 6 as being human giants and not celestial beings.]  In other cases, though, he suggests that stories which speak of angels really occurred just in a dream [see note above]. It seems that in any given story, when choosing between these two methods of discounting angels,  Ralbag is motivated by specific textual considerations (see, for example his <multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">comments</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 19:37</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> on Bereshit 19), and whether or not the individual seeing the "angel" is worthy of receiving a prophetic dream. [Thus, for example, Hagar, who was not on a level to receive a prophetic dream instead spoke with a prophet.]</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Mutable Nature</b></point> | <point><b>Mutable Nature</b></point> | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
Remove Supernatural Nature | Remove Supernatural Nature | ||
<p>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.</p> | <p>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.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot><multilink><a href="ArtapanusCitedinEusebiusCh27" data-aht="source">Artapanus</a><a href="ArtapanusCitedinEusebiusCh27" data-aht="source">Cited in Eusebius Ch. 27</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="parshan">About Artapanus</a></multilink>, R. Saadia Gaon in <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 3:1</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 3:1</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar22-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:28</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink><fn>The citation of R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra does not match R. Saadia's own commentary</fn>, Chivi in <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary14-27" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary14-27" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 14:27</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit18-2" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 18:2</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 2 35</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 5:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI28-24" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:24</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-21" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:21</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot11-10" data-aht="source">R. Yosef ibn Kaspi</a><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot11-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:10</a><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot14-20-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:20-21</a><a href="R. Yosef ibn Kaspi" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href=" | + | <mekorot><multilink><a href="ArtapanusCitedinEusebiusCh27" data-aht="source">Artapanus</a><a href="ArtapanusCitedinEusebiusCh27" data-aht="source">Cited in Eusebius Ch. 27</a><a href="Artapanus" data-aht="parshan">About Artapanus</a></multilink>, R. Saadia Gaon in <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 3:1</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 3:1</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar22-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:28</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink><fn>The citation of R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra does not match R. Saadia's own commentary</fn>, Chivi in <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary14-27" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary14-27" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 14:27</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit18-2" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 18:2</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">Moreh Nevukhim 2 35</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua5-2" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 5:2</a><a href="RadakShemuelI28-24" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 28:24</a><a href="RadakMelakhimI17-21" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 17:21</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot11-10" data-aht="source">R. Yosef ibn Kaspi</a><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot11-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:10</a><a href="RYosefibnKaspiShemot14-20-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:20-21</a><a href="R. Yosef ibn Kaspi" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShofetim6-36" data-aht="source">Shofetim 6:36</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot3" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 3</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot16-7" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 16:7</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 18:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot21-17" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 21:17</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot32-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 32:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 19:37</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-23-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:23-32</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:21</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua4-20" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 4:20</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 10:12-13</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimIToalot17-15" data-aht="source">Melakhim I Toalot 17:15</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>, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot7-14" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot7-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:14</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:11</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:20</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:27</a><a href="ShadalShemot8-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot9-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:4</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:21</a><a href="ShadalShemot14-21-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:21-22</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot7-18" data-aht="source">R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot7-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:18</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot8-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:2</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot9-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:5</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot9-8-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:8-10</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannShemot10-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:22</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="UCassutoShemot7-17" data-aht="source">U. Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoShemot7-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:17</a><a href="UCassutoShemot7-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:27</a><a href="UCassutoShemot9-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:9</a><a href="UCassutoShemot10-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:14</a><a href="UCassutoShemot14-21-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:21-22</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink></mekorot> |
<point><b>Talking animals</b><ul> | <point><b>Talking animals</b><ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Snake in Eden</b> – An anonymous explanation brought by Ibn Ezra suggests that Chava understood the snake's hissing to mean what the Torah says in his name, but the snake did not actually speak.<fn>According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the snake did not actually speak. Instead, an angel spoke | + | <li><b>Snake in Eden</b> – An anonymous explanation brought by <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary3-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 3:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> suggests that Chava understood the snake's hissing to mean what the Torah says in his name, but that the snake did not actually speak.<fn>According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the snake did not actually speak. Instead, an angel (whom he views as being part of the natural order of the world) spoke on its behalf.</fn></li> |
− | <li><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – Shadal explains the speech of the donkey similarly, suggesting that Bilam understood its brays, not that it used human speech. </li> | + | <li><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-11" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:11</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:20</a><a href="ShadalShemot7-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:27</a><a href="ShadalShemot8-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot9-3" data-aht="source">Shemot 9:3</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:4</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot10-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:21</a><a href="ShadalShemot14-21-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 14:21-22</a><a href="ShadalYeshayahu40-3" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:3</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> explains the speech of the donkey similarly, suggesting that Bilam understood its brays, not that it used human speech. </li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Mixing up of languages</b></point> | + | <point><b>Mixing up of languages</b> – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary11-8" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary11-7" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 11:7</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitSecondCommentary11-8" data-aht="source">Bereshit Second Commentary 11:8</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> suggests that it is likely that the people did not begin speaking in many different languages overnight, but that the process of language development took place over multiple generations in a natural way.</point> |
<point><b>Longevity of early humans</b></point> | <point><b>Longevity of early humans</b></point> | ||
− | <point><b>The Plagues in Egypt</b> | + | <point><b>The Plagues in Egypt</b><ul> |
− | <point><b>Splitting of Yam Suf</b> – | + | <li>Ibn Kaspi and <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot7-14" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot7-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:14</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink> explain the plagues from the plague of frogs forward to have been caused by a simple chain of effects spawned by the plague of blood. The blood spoiled the waters of the Nile, leading the frogs to invade the country; their deaths invited insects in the form of "כנים" and so forth.<fn>For a more modern variation of the idea that the plagues were natural phenomenon, leading from one to another in a domino effect, see Greta Hort, “The Plagues of Egypt,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 69 (1957): 84–103 and ZAW 70 (1958): 48–59.  Her article is summarized in N. Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996): 69-73. See also, Ziony Zevit, “Three Ways to Look at the Ten Plagues,” Bible Review 6:3 (1990): 16-23 and JS Marr and CD Malloy, "An Epidemiologic Analysis of the Ten Plagues of Egypt," Caduceus 12:1 (1996): 7-24.</fn></li> |
− | <point><b>Wilderness miracles</b> – See <a href=" | + | <li>Shadal, R. D"Z Hoffmann, and Cassuto further point out that many of the plagues are known natural phenomenon that occasionally strike Egypt,<fn>Inundations of frogs, lice, or locusts, hailstorms, or diseases such as boils or animal plagues, are not in and of themselves supernatural.  Even the bloodying of the Nile, in the sense of its turning red, has been attested to.</fn> stating that the miracle was simply in the timing and severity of the plagues. For further elaboration, see <a href="The Plagues – Natural or Supernatural" data-aht="page">The Plagues – Natural or Supernatural?</a></li> |
+ | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Splitting of Yam Suf</b> – Rashbam, Ibn Kaspi, and various scholars cited by Shadal and U. Cassuto all point to the mention of Hashem's bringing an "easternly wind" (Shemot 14:21) as evidence that this miracle was brought through naturalistic means. the opinions in Shadal and Cassuto suggest that Yam Suf split as a natural result of the wind's role in the lowering and raising of the tide.<fn>Artapanus as cited by Eusebius and Chivi as cited by Ibn Ezra take this a step further, and state that the entire miracle was just a matter of Moshe knowing the tide schedule.</fn>  For further elaboration, see <a href="Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural" data-aht="page">Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural?</a></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Wilderness miracles</b><ul> | ||
+ | <li><b>Manna</b> – As early as Josephus, there have been attempts to identify the manna that fell in the Wilderness with similar natural phenomena known in contemporary times. See, for example, the opinion of Chivi brought (and rejected by) Ibn Ezra, and R. D"Z Hoffmann's exploration of the points of contact and contrast between the "manna" collected by Beduins from the Tamarisk tree and Biblical manna.<fn>See also the article of "אבינעם דנין, "<a href="https://mikranet.cet.ac.il/pages/printitem.asp?item=1374">המאכילך מן מן המדבר</a>. The miracle of the manna is minimized boy others in a second way, as they suggest that it was not the sole food source in the wilderness, and that it might not have rained down in areas where there were alternative means of acquiring food.  See Rashbam and Minchah Belulah.</fn> </li> | ||
+ | <li><b>Selav</b> – See Ramban, Hoil Moshe and R. D"Z Hoffmann who claim that Hashem employed nature in bringing the "שְׂלָו", with the latter referencing modern accounts of quail migrations.<fn>See Y. Braslavy, נס השליו במדבר in הידעת את הארץ , vol. II:.339-347. See also M. Raanan, ויאספו את השליו, who synthesizes much of the earlier research on the "שְׂלָו" Braslavy also points out aspects of the "שְׂלָו" episodes which do not fit with the natural patterns of quail migrations. These include: the arrival of the "שְׂלָו" in Iyyar, their descent upon the middle of the Sinai desert, the vast quantities which came, and Moshe's ability to predict the exact time of their coming.</fn> Some modern scholars<fn>See the article by Braslavi cited above.</fn> further attempt to explain the deaths of those who gorged on the quail in Bemibar as perhaps being (at least partially) a natural consequence of their actions rather than a miraculous Divine punishment.<fn>undefined</fn>  For discussion, see <a href="Realia:שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl" data-aht="page">שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl</a>.</li> | ||
+ | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Yericho</b> – Radak</point> | <point><b>Yericho</b> – Radak</point> | ||
<point><b>Splitting the Jordan</b> – Y. Braslavy<fn>See יוסף ברסלבי, "נס כריתת הירדן (יהושע א'-ד')", בית מקרא יג, ד (תשכ"ח): 23-38.</fn> suggests that the Jordan split as a result of a rock fall which blocked the water flow.</point> | <point><b>Splitting the Jordan</b> – Y. Braslavy<fn>See יוסף ברסלבי, "נס כריתת הירדן (יהושע א'-ד')", בית מקרא יג, ד (תשכ"ח): 23-38.</fn> suggests that the Jordan split as a result of a rock fall which blocked the water flow.</point> | ||
Line 104: | Line 110: | ||
<opinion>Embellished | <opinion>Embellished | ||
<p>Many of the miracles described n Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.</p> | <p>Many of the miracles described n Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.</p> | ||
− | |||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 02:18, 4 December 2018
Miracles
Exegetical Approaches
Minimized Miracles
There is an attempt to minimize the miracles mentioned 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.
- 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.
- Gidon's signs – Rambam3 asserts that the signs performed for Gidon with the wet and dry fleece took place only in a dream.
- Physical manifestations of angels – According to Rambam and Ralbag, angels are incorporeal beings whose physical manifestation to man, a material being, would be a violation of the laws of nature. As such, they reinterpret many stories which mention angels appearing or speaking as being prophetic dreams.4 See, for instance, Rambam's understanding of the three "angels" which visit Avraham in Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men and Ralbag's explanation of the story of Yaakov's wrestling with the "angel" in Wrestling With Angels and Men.
- Sun standing still – Ralbag5 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, though in reality it had not.6
- Reviving the "dead" - According to one opinion in Radak,7 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.8 Eliyahu, thus, did not miraculously bring him back from the dead but rather resuscitated him.9
- Sun standing still – R. Walfish10 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.11 For elaboration, see Stopping of the Sun at Givon.]
- Miracles in the End of Days – According to Rambam, the prophecies regarding changes in nature in the end of days, such as Yeshayahu 11:6-7, should be understood metaphorically as referring to world peace, and not actual changes in the behavior of animals.12
- Lot's wife – According to Ralbag the referent of the word "וַתְּהִי" in the phrase "וַתְּהִי נְצִיב מֶלַח" is not Lot's wife but the land. The verse shares how she witnessed the land of Sedom become a mound of salt. For elaboration, see Lot's Wife and Her Fate.
- "מלאכים" – Ralbag points out that the word "מלאך" merely means a messenger and thus need not refer to celestial beings who supernaturally appear in physical form to man, but might instead refer to human prophets.13
Remove Supernatural 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.
- Snake in Eden – An anonymous explanation brought by Ibn Ezra suggests that Chava understood the snake's hissing to mean what the Torah says in his name, but that the snake did not actually speak.15
- Bilam's donkey – Shadal explains the speech of the donkey similarly, suggesting that Bilam understood its brays, not that it used human speech.
- Ibn Kaspi and Abarbanel explain the plagues from the plague of frogs forward to have been caused by a simple chain of effects spawned by the plague of blood. The blood spoiled the waters of the Nile, leading the frogs to invade the country; their deaths invited insects in the form of "כנים" and so forth.16
- Shadal, R. D"Z Hoffmann, and Cassuto further point out that many of the plagues are known natural phenomenon that occasionally strike Egypt,17 stating that the miracle was simply in the timing and severity of the plagues. For further elaboration, see The Plagues – Natural or Supernatural?
- Manna – As early as Josephus, there have been attempts to identify the manna that fell in the Wilderness with similar natural phenomena known in contemporary times. See, for example, the opinion of Chivi brought (and rejected by) Ibn Ezra, and R. D"Z Hoffmann's exploration of the points of contact and contrast between the "manna" collected by Beduins from the Tamarisk tree and Biblical manna.19
- Selav – See Ramban, Hoil Moshe and R. D"Z Hoffmann who claim that Hashem employed nature in bringing the "שְׂלָו", with the latter referencing modern accounts of quail migrations.20 Some modern scholars21 further attempt to explain the deaths of those who gorged on the quail in Bemibar as perhaps being (at least partially) a natural consequence of their actions rather than a miraculous Divine punishment.22 For discussion, see שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl.
- R"Y Bekhor Shor and Ralbag understand Avraham's guests to be human prophets, and not divine angels. Thus, they avoid the necessity of a physical manifestation of angels. For more detail, see the Humans approach of Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men?
- Ralbag states that Yaakov fought with an angel only in a dream, but that the dream caused Yaakov's thigh to be sore when he awoke in the morning. Alternatively, one can explain that Yaakov fought with a human assassin sent by Esav. For further elaboration, see Wrestling With Angels and Men.
- R. Saadia, as cited by Ibn Ezra, views angels as a perfectly natural phenomenon, which does not require further explanation to make it match the laws of nature (and can, in fact, be used to rationally explain other stories). In contrast, Ralbag views angels as unnatural, and finds alternative explanations27 to all mentions of such.
- 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.
Face Value
Miracles in Tanakh are understood to have occurred as described.
- Ramban views miracles as proof that nature is not unchanging, and therefore that the belief in the eternity of the world is false.
- All miracles were preordained during creation, and the laws of nature contain specific exceptions for each and every miracle. According to Rambam, nature is immutable, and therefore all miracles must have been set in nature from the day of creation.
- 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.29
Embellished
Many of the miracles described n Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.