Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Miracles/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
<li><b>Clothing</b> – 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.<fn>Ibn Ezra also raises the possibility that the manna caused less sweat than other food, leading to less wear and tear on the clothing.</fn> For further discussion of the degree to which the nation led a miraculous existence throughout the sojourn in the Wilderness, see <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a>.</li> | <li><b>Clothing</b> – 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.<fn>Ibn Ezra also raises the possibility that the manna caused less sweat than other food, leading to less wear and tear on the clothing.</fn> For further discussion of the degree to which the nation led a miraculous existence throughout the sojourn in the Wilderness, see <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a>.</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>"וְאִם בְּרִיאָה יִבְרָא ה"</b> – Moshe's statement would seem to imply that a totally new phenomenon was about to be created, an impossibility according to Ralbag's view of nature. One might explain, however, that here, too, Hashem employed nature, bringing the equivalent of an earthquake or quicksand.  It was a new "creation" only because of the speed in which it was created (Ralbag) or perhaps, because the nation had never before witnessed such a phenomenon.</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 via natural means. The water's overflowing caused trees to uproot and fall into the riverbed, effectively creating a dam which blocked the water flow below.</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 via natural means. The water's overflowing caused trees to uproot and fall into the riverbed, effectively creating a dam which blocked the water flow below.</point> | ||
<point><b>Stopping of the Sun at Givon</b> – R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla posits that though the sun set, Hashem ensured that its light continued to reflect and provide illumination. Some modern scholars, instead, understand the verses to refer to 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> or that the sun's positioning blinded the enemy.<fn>See A. Malamat, "Early Israelite Warfare and the Conquest of Canaan", Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies (1978):19-21.</fn> For further elaboration, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.</point> | <point><b>Stopping of the Sun at Givon</b> – R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla posits that though the sun set, Hashem ensured that its light continued to reflect and provide illumination. Some modern scholars, instead, understand the verses to refer to 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> or that the sun's positioning blinded the enemy.<fn>See A. Malamat, "Early Israelite Warfare and the Conquest of Canaan", Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies (1978):19-21.</fn> For further elaboration, see <a href="Stopping of the Sun at Givon" data-aht="page">Stopping of the Sun at Givon</a>.</point> | ||
Line 106: | Line 107: | ||
Both positions, though, are quite comfortable with taking Biblical accounts of miracles at face value, preserving their supernatural elements. </point> | Both positions, though, are quite comfortable with taking Biblical accounts of miracles at face value, preserving their supernatural elements. </point> | ||
<point><b>Disproportionate miracles</b><ul> | <point><b>Disproportionate miracles</b><ul> | ||
− | <li>Ramban, who blurs the line between the natural and supernatural, viewing both as instances of direct Divine intervention, might not differentiate between the magnitude of various "miracles". As such, the concept of a miracle which is disproportionate to the benefit which it grants does not exist.</li> | + | <li>Ramban, who blurs the line between the natural and supernatural, viewing both as instances of direct Divine intervention, might not differentiate between the magnitude of various "miracles". As such, the concept of a miracle which is disproportionate to the benefit which it grants does not exist. Moreover, since so-called supernatural miracles testify to Hashem's creative abilities, they always provide tremendous benefit to those viewing them. </li> |
<li>Those who view miracles as being a direct response to the needs of the nation, however, might suggest, as does Abarbanel, that the magnitude of a miracle should be in direct proportion to the problem it is coming to fix.<fn>If so, in certain instances one might be motivated to reduce the supernatural element of a miracle to make it more proportionate to the benefit it is granting.</fn></li> | <li>Those who view miracles as being a direct response to the needs of the nation, however, might suggest, as does Abarbanel, that the magnitude of a miracle should be in direct proportion to the problem it is coming to fix.<fn>If so, in certain instances one might be motivated to reduce the supernatural element of a miracle to make it more proportionate to the benefit it is granting.</fn></li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – R. Saadia Gaon gives an extensive explanation of how Hashem took a regular snake, and miraculously changed it's nature to be humanoid, with human intelligence, understanding of morality, and the ability to speak.</point> | <point><b>The Snake in the Garden of Eden</b> – R. Saadia Gaon gives an extensive explanation of how Hashem took a regular snake, and miraculously changed it's nature to be humanoid, with human intelligence, understanding of morality, and the ability to speak.</point> | ||
<point><b>Stories of Angels</b> – According to this approach, there is nothing wrong with physical manifestation of angels.<fn>However, due to other textual considerations, certain stories may be explained in ways that avoid such physical manifestation.See, for example, Radak's explanation of Avraham's guests (in <a href="Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men" data-aht="page">Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men?</a>), where he has no problem positing that angels took on a physical form to interact with Lot and the residents of Sedom, but nonetheless explains that the previous chapter which speaks of the same angels visiting Avraham, only took place in a dream.</fn></point> | <point><b>Stories of Angels</b> – According to this approach, there is nothing wrong with physical manifestation of angels.<fn>However, due to other textual considerations, certain stories may be explained in ways that avoid such physical manifestation.See, for example, Radak's explanation of Avraham's guests (in <a href="Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men" data-aht="page">Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men?</a>), where he has no problem positing that angels took on a physical form to interact with Lot and the residents of Sedom, but nonetheless explains that the previous chapter which speaks of the same angels visiting Avraham, only took place in a dream.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>The Plagues in Egypt</b> – Malbim explicitly states that the plagues were supernatural, | + | <point><b>The Plagues in Egypt</b> – Malbim explicitly states that the plagues were supernatural, attacking Abarbanel for suggesting that they were caused by a natural chain of cause and effect. He attempts to show how certain elements in the story, such as the mention of a seven day break after the initial plague of blood struck,  eliminates his reading.</point> |
<point><b>Bilam's Donkey</b> – According to Ibn Ezra, Bilam's donkey actually spoke, and Hashem miraculously intervened to allow this.</point> | <point><b>Bilam's Donkey</b> – According to Ibn Ezra, Bilam's donkey actually spoke, and Hashem miraculously intervened to allow this.</point> | ||
− | |||
<point><b>Manna and Quail</b></point> | <point><b>Manna and Quail</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Magic</b> – The Mishnah in Avot lists evil spirits (מזיקין) among the objects created during twilight. This would suggest that non-divine magic is considered a part of nature, planned during creation.</point> | <point><b>Magic</b> – The Mishnah in Avot lists evil spirits (מזיקין) among the objects created during twilight. This would suggest that non-divine magic is considered a part of nature, planned during creation.</point> | ||
Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
<p>Many of the miracles described in Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.</p> | <p>Many of the miracles described in Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.</p> | ||
<mekorot>Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer</mekorot> | <mekorot>Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer</mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b> | + | <point><b>Mutable nature</b> – As above, this position views nature as mutable. Since it is Hashem who created the laws to begin with, He can change them as He sees fit.</point> |
− | <point><b> | + | <point><b>Divine providence</b> – This position might view Divine providence as being somewhat limited.  Hashem normally runs the world through nature, only intermittently intervening in response to the people's needs.  It is specifically because Hashem does not always intervene, that this position attempts to make the instances in which He does do so, even more blatant than implied by the simple reading of the text. It might be similarly motivated to not only embellish but even add instances of supernatural phenomenon that are barely alluded to in the text.  In so doing, it highlights that Hashem is still involved in the world, actively caring for His creations.</point> |
+ | <point><b>Disproportionate miracles</b> – This position is not troubled by seemingly "disproportionate miracles" because it views all miracles as offering tremendous benefit to their audiences, unrelated to</point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Stopping the sun</b></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Spliting the Sea</b> – Tanchuma suggests that not only did Hashem split the sea, but it divided into twelve lanes, one for each tribe. Shemot Rabbah further suggests that little trees sprung up in the sea, so that the Israelites could pluck from their fruit as they passed through.</point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 05:20, 6 December 2018
Miracles
Exegetical Approaches
Reducing the Supernatural
There is an attempt to minimize the prevalence of apparently supernatural phenomena described in Tanakh, either by suggesting that certain miraculous phenomena did not occur at all, or by suggesting that the events did not contravene the laws of nature.
Some Miracles Didn't Happen
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 took place only in a prophetic dream, so the donkey never actively spoke.
- Gidon's signs – Rambam11 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 beings12 whose physical manifestation to man, a material being, would be a violation of the laws of nature.13 As such, they reinterpret many stories which mention angels appearing or speaking as being prophetic dreams.14
- Sun standing still – Ralbag15 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.16
- Reviving the "dead" - According to one opinion brought (and rejected) by Radak,17 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.18 Thus, though Eliyahu only resuscitated the boy,19 it was perceived as if he miraculously brought him back from the dead.
- Sun standing still – R. Walfish20 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.21 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.22
- 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 messenger23 and thus need not refer to celestial beings who supernaturally appear in physical form to man, but might instead refer to human prophets.24
- "וְהָעֹרְבִים מְבִאִים לוֹ לֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר" – Radak brings an opinion that suggests that the word "עֹרְבִים" in this verse should be translated as "merchants", pointing to similar usage in Yechezkel 27:28. As such, it was not ravens, but human merchants who provided Eliyahu with food.
No Violation of Natural Order
Stories which mentions wondrous, seemingly unnatural events, happened in reality, but never completely 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 (and rejected) by Ibn Ezra29 suggests that Chavvah understood the snake's hissing to mean what the Torah says in his name, but that the snake did not actually speak.30 Abarbanel explains similarly, suggesting that the snakes' eating of the fruit without suffering any harmful consequences, expressed the message: "לֹא מוֹת תְּמֻתוּן" though no words were spoken.
- Bilam's donkey – Shadal explains the donkey's speech in the same manner, claiming 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.33
- Shadal, R. D"Z Hoffmann, and Cassuto further point out that many of the plagues are known natural phenomenon that occasionally strike Egypt,34 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.36
- 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.37 Some modern scholars38 further attempt to explain the deaths of those who gorged on the quail in Bemidbar as also being (at least partially) a natural consequence of their actions rather than a miraculous Divine punishment. 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.39 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.
Preserving the Supernatural
Stories of miracles should be understood literally as historical accounts of what happened.
Literal Readings
Miracles in Tanakh are understood to have occurred as described.
- Mutable – According Ramban, nature is mutable. Natural law can be utilized, molded, or suspended at Hashem's will. Since it is Hashem who created the laws to begin with, He can change them as He sees fit.44 In fact, it is the very existence of miracles which attests to Hashem's role as Creator.45
- Immutable – R. Yochanan in Bereshit Rabbah,46 in contrast, implies that though nature is immutable, the existence of later supernatural phenomena is nonetheless not problematic because miracles were built into the very laws of nature. In the beginning of time, Hashem already commanded that there were to be certain exceptions to natural law.
- Total – Ramban's view on Divine providence, as expressed in his comments to Shemot 13, is very expansive.47 He points out that belief in a system of reward and punishment mandates belief in continuous providence and intervention. For, if rain, health, or victory in war are contingent on Torah observance, that means that each comes in accord with a person's deeds, and not because of natural order. This leads Ramban to conclude: אין לאדם חלק בתורת משה רבינו עד שנאמין בכל דברינו" ומקרינו שכלם נסים אין בהם טבע ומנהגו של עולם."48
- More limited – This position, however, could also suggest that Divine providence is more limited. Hashem normally lets nature run its course, but when there is either a physical or spiritual threat, He momentarily intervenes and overrides natural law to fill the nation's need.
- Ramban and R. Yochanan blur the line between the two, suggesting either that natural law does not really exist, as all so-called "natural phenomena" are really also manifestations of direct Divine intervention (Ramban) or that the supernatural is preprogrammed and therefore part of nature (R. Yochanan).
- Alternatively, this approach might posit that there is a marked distinction between natural and supernatural phenomena. The latter requires a suspension or overturning of the laws of nature, possible because nature is mutable when Hashem so desires.
- Ramban, who blurs the line between the natural and supernatural, viewing both as instances of direct Divine intervention, might not differentiate between the magnitude of various "miracles". As such, the concept of a miracle which is disproportionate to the benefit which it grants does not exist. Moreover, since so-called supernatural miracles testify to Hashem's creative abilities, they always provide tremendous benefit to those viewing them.
- Those who view miracles as being a direct response to the needs of the nation, however, might suggest, as does Abarbanel, that the magnitude of a miracle should be in direct proportion to the problem it is coming to fix.49
Embellished Accounts
Many of the miracles described in Tanakh are embellished, and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.