Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Miracles/2"
m |
|||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
<category>Minimized Miracles | <category>Minimized Miracles | ||
− | <opinion> | + | <p>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.</p> |
− | <p> | + | <opinion>Reduce Number of Miracles |
+ | <p>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.</p> | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="PhiloQuestionsandAnswersonGenesisI31" data-aht="source">Philo</a><a href="PhiloQuestionsandAnswersonGenesisI31" data-aht="source">Questions and Answers on Genesis I 31</a><a href="PhiloOntheCreation156-166" data-aht="source">On the Creation 156-166</a><a href="PhiloAllegoricalInterpretationII71-78" data-aht="source">Allegorical Interpretation II 71-78</a><a href="Philo" data-aht="parshan">About Philo</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Rambam</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></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="PhiloQuestionsandAnswersonGenesisI31" data-aht="source">Philo</a><a href="PhiloQuestionsandAnswersonGenesisI31" data-aht="source">Questions and Answers on Genesis I 31</a><a href="PhiloOntheCreation156-166" data-aht="source">On the Creation 156-166</a><a href="PhiloAllegoricalInterpretationII71-78" data-aht="source">Allegorical Interpretation II 71-78</a><a href="Philo" data-aht="parshan">About Philo</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotMelakhim12-1" data-aht="source">Rambam</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></mekorot> | ||
+ | <point><b>Methods used</b> – This approach</point> | ||
<point><b>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – Philo and Ralbag understand the story of the Garden of Eden to be an allegory,<fn>Rambam alludes to this possibility as well. [See Moreh Nevukhim 2:30 and Abarbanel's understanding of the passage.]</fn> with the snake acting only as a symbol.<fn>Accoring to Philo he symbolizes pleasure and vice, while according to Ralbag he represents the "כח הדמיוני".</fn> As such, the serpent never talked.</point> | <point><b>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – Philo and Ralbag understand the story of the Garden of Eden to be an allegory,<fn>Rambam alludes to this possibility as well. [See Moreh Nevukhim 2:30 and Abarbanel's understanding of the passage.]</fn> with the snake acting only as a symbol.<fn>Accoring to Philo he symbolizes pleasure and vice, while according to Ralbag he represents the "כח הדמיוני".</fn> As such, the serpent never talked.</point> | ||
<point><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilaam's entire encounter with the donkey and angel only took place in a prophetic dream, so here, too, no animal spoke.</point> | <point><b>Bilam's donkey</b> – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilaam's entire encounter with the donkey and angel only took place in a prophetic dream, so here, too, no animal spoke.</point> | ||
Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
<point><b>Human agency</b></point> | <point><b>Human agency</b></point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
− | <opinion | + | <opinion>Using Nature |
− | Using Nature | ||
<p>Stories which mentions wondrous, seemingly unnatural events, happened in reality, but never violated the laws of nature. Elements of these stories which appear to violate these laws must be reinterpreted to match the laws of nature.</p> | <p>Stories which mentions wondrous, seemingly unnatural events, happened in reality, but never violated the laws of nature. Elements of these stories which appear to violate these laws must be reinterpreted to match the laws of nature.</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> | + | <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="RalbagYehoshua10-12-13" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 10:12-13</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="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>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the snake did not actually speak. Instead, an angel spoke, and pretended to speak for the snake. Alternatively, 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.</point> | <point><b>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the snake did not actually speak. Instead, an angel spoke, and pretended to speak for the snake. Alternatively, 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.</point> | ||
<point><b>Angels</b></point> | <point><b>Angels</b></point> | ||
Line 38: | Line 39: | ||
<point><b>Splitting of Yam Suf</b> – According to R"Y ibn Kaspi, various scholars cited by Shadal, and U. Cassuto, Yam Suf split as a natural result of the wind mentioned in Shemot 14:21 and the tides. 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. For further elaboration, see <a href="Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural" data-aht="page">Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural?</a></point> | <point><b>Splitting of Yam Suf</b> – According to R"Y ibn Kaspi, various scholars cited by Shadal, and U. Cassuto, Yam Suf split as a natural result of the wind mentioned in Shemot 14:21 and the tides. 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. For further elaboration, see <a href="Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural" data-aht="page">Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural?</a></point> | ||
<point><b>Bilam's Donkey</b> – According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the donkey did not actually speak. Instead, an angel spoke, and pretended to speak for the donkey. Alternatively, one can suggest that Bilam understood the donkey's braying to mean what the Torah says in her name, but the donkey did not actually speak.</point> | <point><b>Bilam's Donkey</b> – According to R. Saadia in Ibn Ezra, the donkey did not actually speak. Instead, an angel spoke, and pretended to speak for the donkey. Alternatively, one can suggest that Bilam understood the donkey's braying to mean what the Torah says in her name, but the donkey did not actually speak.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Splitting the Jordan</b> – Y. Braslavy<fn> | + | <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>Stopping of the Sun at Givon</b> – A number of explanations were given to explain this miracles naturally. For further elaboration, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.<br/> | <point><b>Stopping of the Sun at Givon</b> – A number of explanations were given to explain this miracles naturally. For further elaboration, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>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.</li> | <li>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.</li> | ||
<li>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.</li> | <li>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.</li> | ||
− | <li>Various modern scholars give other natural explanations for the miracle, such as the sun's position blinding the enemy,<fn> | + | <li>Various modern scholars give other natural explanations for the miracle, such as the sun's position blinding the enemy,<fn>See A. Malamat, "Early Israelite Warfare and the Conquest of Canaan", Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies (1978):19-21.</fn> or a solar eclipse.<fn>See חזי יצחק, דניאל ויינשטוב, עוזי אבנר, "'<a href="http://www.adssc.org/sites/default/files/%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%A9%20%D7%91%D7%92%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%9F%2016.pdf">שמש בגבעון דום וירח בעמק אילון – ליקוי חמה טבעתי ב-30 באוקטובר 1207 לפנה"ס?</a>', בית מקרא ס"א (תשע"ו): 196-238.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Eliyahu and Elisha Resuscitating Children</b> – Radak explains that when Eliyahu revived the child, he used natural methods. While Radak himself understood that the children were dead and that the revival was therefore contrary to the laws of nature, certain scholars<fn>< | + | <point><b>Eliyahu and Elisha Resuscitating Children</b> – Radak explains that when Eliyahu revived the child, he used natural methods. While Radak himself understood that the children were dead and that the revival was therefore contrary to the laws of nature, certain scholars<fn>See the various sources cited by אברהם ס. אברהם,<a href="http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/hamaayan/Hamaayan_112.pdf#page=73"> "הנשמה מלאכותית בתנ"ך?"</a>, המעין כח, ג (ירושלים תשמ"ח): 72-76.</fn> have suggested that the children were not actually dead (just unconscious) and Eliyahu and Elisha performed some form of CPR to revive them.</point> |
− | <point><b>Stories of Angels</b> – 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 explanations<fn> | + | <point><b>Stories of Angels</b> – 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 explanations<fn>In some cases, like Avraham's guests, he understands the angels to be human prophets. In other cases, such as the angel which wrestled with Yaakov, he relegates the appearance to a dream or prophetic vision (cf. the Dreams approach above).</fn> to all mentions of such.</point> |
<point><b>Existence of Magic</b> – According to this approach, mentions of non-divine magic in Tanakh should be understood as chicanery committed by charlatans. For example:<br/> | <point><b>Existence of Magic</b> – According to this approach, mentions of non-divine magic in Tanakh should be understood as chicanery committed by charlatans. For example:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> |
Version as of 11:23, 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.
- People's perspective - Ralbag3 maintains that the celestial bodies did not actually stop in their track, but rather that, due to the speed of the nation's victory over their enemies, there was a perception that time stood still. [The great accomplishment made the soldiers feel as if 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
Using Nature
Stories which mentions wondrous, seemingly unnatural events, happened in reality, but never violated the laws of nature. Elements of these stories which appear to violate these laws must be reinterpreted to match the laws of nature.
- 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,8 or a solar eclipse.9
- 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.13
Miracles are Preprogrammed Divine Interventions
All miracles were preordained during creation, and the laws of nature contain specific exceptions for each and every miracle.