Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Miracles/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
<li><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-21" 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="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 18:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 19:37</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>, 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 <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-21" 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="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot18-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 18:2</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah19-37" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 19:37</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>, 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>Gidon's signs</b> – <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink><fn>See also Ralbag, though he also raises the possibility that they took place in reality or via a prophet.</fn> asserts that the signs performed for Gidon with the wet and dry fleece took place only in a dream.</li> | <li><b>Gidon's signs</b> – <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink><fn>See also Ralbag, though he also raises the possibility that they took place in reality or via a prophet.</fn> asserts that the signs performed for Gidon with the wet and dry fleece took place only in a dream.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>Physical manifestations of angels</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink> 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.<fn>Though Rambam takes this approach almost across the board, in many cases Ralbag alternatively suggest that the so-called angels are merely prophets; see below. <br/>Interestingly, neither use the "dream" method to explain away any other "miracles". It is possible that in cases where the apparent miracle has some type of concrete outcome, it is difficult to suggest that nothing at all occurred. As such, regarding those situations, they instead minimize the miracle by suggesting that it did not totally contravene the laws of nature. In the case of angels, in contrast the purpose of teh visit is to relay information, a deed which can be accomplished by a prophetic dream or the visit of a human prophet.</fn> | + | <li><b>Physical manifestations of angels</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim142" data-aht="source">1 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim229" data-aht="source">2 29</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim235" data-aht="source">2 35</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim242" data-aht="source">2 42</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim246" data-aht="source">2 46</a><a href="RambamMorehNevukhim317" data-aht="source">3 17</a><a href="Rambam Moreh Nevukhim" data-aht="parshan">About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim</a></multilink> 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.<fn>See, for instance, Rambam's understanding of the three "angels" which visit Avraham in <a href="Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men" data-aht="page">Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men </a>and Ralbag's explanation of the story of Yaakov's wrestling with the "angel" in  <a href="Wrestling With Angels and Men" data-aht="page">Wrestling With Angels and Men</a>. Though Rambam takes this approach almost across the board, in many cases Ralbag alternatively suggest that the so-called angels are merely prophets; see below. <br/>Interestingly, neither use the "dream" method to explain away any other "miracles". It is possible that in cases where the apparent miracle has some type of concrete outcome, it is difficult to suggest that nothing at all occurred. As such, regarding those situations, they instead minimize the miracle by suggesting that it did not totally contravene the laws of nature. In the case of angels, in contrast the purpose of teh visit is to relay information, a deed which can be accomplished by a prophetic dream or the visit of a human prophet.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>People's perspective</b> – In several instances an event is viewed as miraculous only due to the perceptions of the people viewing the event.<br/> | <point><b>People's perspective</b> – In several instances an event is viewed as miraculous only due to the perceptions of the people viewing the event.<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><b>Sun standing still</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, though in reality it had not.<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></li> | <li><b>Sun standing still</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, though in reality it had not.<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></li> | ||
− | <li><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>,<fn>See also the various sources cited by  אברהם ס. אברהם, "הנשמה מלאכותית בתנ"ך?", המעין כח, ג (ירושלים תשמ"ח): 72-76.</fn> 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, | + | <li><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>,<fn>See also the various sources cited by  אברהם ס. אברהם, "הנשמה מלאכותית בתנ"ך?", המעין כח, ג (ירושלים תשמ"ח): 72-76.</fn> 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>  Thus, though Eliyahu only resuscitated the boy,<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> it was perceived as if he miraculously brought him back from the dead.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Metaphorical language</b> – Understanding certain verses metaphorically, as poetic flourishes rather than literal statements of fact, further reduces the number of miracles in Tanakh:<br/> | <point><b>Metaphorical language</b> – Understanding certain verses metaphorically, as poetic flourishes rather than literal statements of fact, further reduces the number of miracles in Tanakh:<br/> |
Version as of 04:16, 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
- 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 Thus, though Eliyahu only resuscitated the boy,9 it was perceived as if he miraculously brought him back from the dead.
- 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 as 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 messenger13 and thus need not refer to celestial beings who supernaturally appear in physical form to man, but might instead refer to human prophets.14
- "וְהָעֹרְבִים מְבִאִים לוֹ לֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר" – Radak brings an opinion that suggests that the word "הָעֹרְבִים" in this verse should be translated as "merchants", pointing to similar usage in Yechezkel 27:28. As such, it was nt ravens, but human merchants who provided Eliyahu with food.
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.19
- 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, then, invited insects in the form of "כנים" and so forth.20
- Shadal, R. D"Z Hoffmann, and Cassuto further point out that many of the plagues are known natural phenomenon that occasionally strike Egypt,21 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.23
- 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.24 Some modern scholars25 further attempt to explain the deaths of those who gorged on the quail in Bemibar as also being (at least partially) a natural consequence of their actions rather than a miraculous Divine punishment.26 For discussion, see שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl.
- Clothing – Ibn Ezra and Shadal suggest that the clothing of the nation lasted for forty years, not due to a miracle, but because they had left with several sets.27 For further discussion of the degree to which the nation led a miraculous existence throughout the sojourn in the Wilderness, see Life in the Wilderness.
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.33
Embellished
Many of the miracles described n Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.