Philosophy:Miracles/2
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
Miracles
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators offer a spectrum of opinions as to how to view Biblical descriptions of supernatural events. These reflect different assumptions about the mutability of nature, the extent of Divine providence, the purpose of miracles, and the line between the natural and supernatural.
Rambam and Ralbag attempt to minimize the supernatural events of Tanakh, suggesting that Hashem attempts to preserve natural order as much as possible. In several instances, they posit that seemingly supernatural events never occurred and that the passages describing them are not meant to be taken literally. In other instances, they claim that the events did indeed take place, but that they did not contravene the laws of nature.
Several Midrashic sources and Ramban, in contrast, prefer to understand the miracles as indeed occurring supernaturally. While Ramban tends to take the verses at face value, many of the Midrashic sources often embellish the descriptions, making them even more miraculous than they originally seem.
Reducing the Supernatural
The number of seemingly supernatural phenomena described in Tanakh is minimized, either by suggesting that the stories should not be read literally, 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 in a non-literal way.
Miracles and nature – This position assumes that, for the most part, the world is run via natural order, and that even when there is Divine intervention, the laws of nature are utilized and not completely suspended.
Immutability of nature – The desire to minimize miracles stems, in part, from a belief in the immutability of the laws of nature.1 If Hashem set the laws of nature, and He is unchanging, then the laws He established must be unchanging as well.2 As He Himself says, "עֹד כׇּל יְמֵי הָאָרֶץ זֶרַע וְקָצִיר וְקֹר וָחֹם וְקַיִץ וָחֹרֶף וְיוֹם וָלַיְלָה לֹא יִשְׁבֹּתוּ" (Bereshit 8:22).3 Moreover, since natural law attests to the perfection of Hashem's Creation, any change in it appears to suggest that either Creation was not perfect or Hashem had not foreseen all that was necessary.4
Limited view of Divine providence – The less one views Hashem as actively involved in controlling the minute details of daily life, the less likely one is to suggest that He constantly intervenes through miracles. Thus, Rambam and Ralbag who posit that, on the whole, the world operates via nature, are more likely to view Biblical events as working through natural order. Moreover, since they view Divine providence to be directly related to a person's righteousness (or how in line they are with the Active Intellect), they will be likely to reinterpret any miracle performed for a seemingly undeserving individual.5
Disproportionate miracles? Abarbanel claims that the magnitude of a miracle is directly proportional to the need which prompts it.6 Thus, if a miracle seems incommensurate with the benefit that it provides, there is a reason to minimize it.7
Impossibility of self-contradictions – Ralbag maintains that self-contradictory situations cannot exist. For instance, it is impossible that an object could be all white and all black simultaneously. Since this is logically impossible, no miracle can accomplish such a feat either.8 As such, any event which appears to do so, would need to be reinterpreted.
Superiority of Moshe – Another factor which might motivate one to reinterpret supernatural events relates only to several specific miracles, and stems from the declaration in Devarim 34:10-11 that Moshe's miracles were unsurpassed by any other prophet. As such, miracles such as the sun standing still, or reviving the dead, which might otherwise rival those of Moshe, need to be re-interpreted. See Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders for elaboration.
Methods used – This approach explains away apparent miracles using several different methods. It reads certain stories as being allegorical or as having occurred only in a dream or in someone's mind. In other cases, it assumes that verses need to be understood metaphorically or reread in another manner. Examples of each category follow below.
Allegorical stories – The miraculous nature of certain events is eliminated by suggesting that the story in which the event occurred is only an allegory. Thus, Philo and Ralbag understand the story of the Garden of Eden to be an allegory,9 with the snake acting only as a symbol.10 This avoids having the serpent actually speak.
Dreams – Other miracles are discounted by assuming that they occurred only in a dream and not in reality:
- Bilam's donkey – According to Rambam and Ralbag, Bilam's entire encounter with the donkey in Bemidbar 22 took place only in a prophetic dream, so the donkey never actively spoke.
- Gidon's signs – Rambam11 asserts that the signs of the wet and dry fleece performed for Gidon in Shofetim 6 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
People's perspective – In several instances, a totally natural event is presented as miraculous only due to the perceptions of the people viewing the event.
- 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 cited (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 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. Similarly, Ralbag suggests that Shemuel was never really brought back to life by the necromancer; this was all simply a figment of Shaul's imagination. 20
Metaphorical language – Understanding certain verses metaphorically, as poetic flourishes rather than literal statements of fact, further reduces the number of miracles in Tanakh:
- Sun standing still – R. Walfish21 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.22 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, rather than to actual changes in animal behavior.23
Rereading: ambiguous syntax or meaning – At times, recognizing the ambiguity of a verse's syntax or noting a secondary meaning of a word, allows for reinterpretations that minimize miracles:
- Lot's wife – According to Ralbag, the referent of the word "וַתְּהִי" in the phrase "וַתְּהִי נְצִיב מֶלַח" is not Lot's wife but rather the land. The verse thus states only that Lot's wife witnessed the land of Sedom becoming a mound of salt. For elaboration, see Lot's Wife and Her Fate.
- "מלאכים" – Ralbag points out that the word "מלאך" merely means a messenger24 and thus need not refer to celestial beings who supernaturally appear in physical form to man. It instead refers to human prophets.25
- "וְהָעֹרְבִים מְבִאִים לוֹ לֶחֶם וּבָשָׂר" – Radak cites an opinion that the word "עֹרְבִים" in Melakhim I 17:4,6 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
Wondrous and seemingly unnatural events happened in reality, but never completely violated the laws of nature. The Divine intervention is manifest only in the timing or extent of the phenomena.
Sources:Artapanus, R. Saadia Gaon in Ibn Ezra,26 Chivi in Ibn Ezra, Radak, R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, Ralbag,27 Shadal, R. David Zvi Hoffmann, U. Cassuto
Miracles and nature – Like the previous approach, this position assumes that, for the most part, the world is run via natural order. Even when there is Divine intervention, the laws of nature are utilized, as Hashem attempts to veer from natural law as little as possible. In other words, even the so-called "supernatural" is at least somewhat natural.
Philosophical motivations – This position is motivated to minimize miracles by the same factors as the first approach: belief in the immutability of nature, a limited view of Divine providence, a desire that miracles be in proportion to their need, the impossibility of self-contradictions, and the need to ensure the supremacy of Moshe's wonders. See the discussion above for details.
Methods used – As opposed to the above approach, which suggested that certain "miraculous" events did not take place at all, this position suggests that in many cases, the event described in Tanakh did actually occur, just that it employed natural means.28 Many examples of how the proponents of this position read nature into the various seemingly supernatural episodes in Tanakh are presented below:
Talking animals – This position assumes that while both the snake in Eden and Bilam's donkey communicated to those around them, they did so by making animal sounds rather than human speech:
- Snake in Eden – An anonymous explanation brought (and rejected) by Ibn Ezra29 suggests that Chavah 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 snake ate from the fruit, and by demonstrating that it ate without suffering any harmful consequences, it expressed the message: "לֹא מוֹת תְּמֻתוּן", despite no actual words being 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.
Rainbow – Ralbag rejects the possibility that the rainbow was a new creation, formed only in the aftermath of the Flood, as the laws of nature would mandate that it had existed from the earliest of time. He, therefore, suggests that Bereshit 9 is saying only that for the first time, after the Deluge, the rainbow was being utilized as a covenantal symbol.31
Mixing up of languages – Ibn Ezra 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.32
Lot's Wife – R"Y Bekhor Shor, Radak, and Abarbanel assert that the verse is not describing the miraculous metamorphosis of Lot's wife into a salt figurine but rather how her tarrying resulted in her being caught up in the destruction of the city.33
The Plagues in Egypt
- Ibn Kaspi and Abarbanel explain that the Ten Plagues were all caused by a simple chain of effects triggered by the initial Plague of Blood. The blood spoiled the waters of the Nile, leading the frogs to invade the country; their deaths, which in turn, invited insects in the form of "כנים", etc.34
- Shadal, R. D"Z Hoffmann, and Cassuto further point out that many of the plagues are known natural phenomenon that occasionally strike Egypt,35 and that the miracle was manifest more in the timing and severity of the plagues. For further elaboration, see The Plagues – Natural or Supernatural?
Splitting of Yam Suf – Rashbam, Ibn Kaspi, Ralbag, and various scholars cited by Shadal and Cassuto all point to the mention of Hashem's bringing an "eastern wind" (Shemot 14:21) as evidence that this miracle was brought through natural means. The opinions in Shadal and Cassuto suggest that Sea split as a natural result of the wind's role in the lowering and raising of the tide.36 For further elaboration, see Yam Suf – Natural or Supernatural?
Victory over Amalek – Rashbam maintains that Moshe's uplifted hands did not miraculously lead to victory, but rather served to boost the morale of the army. He compares it to soldiers who are encouraged by viewing their standard-bearer.
Wilderness miracles
- Manna – As early as Josephus, there have been attempts to identify the manna that fell in the Wilderness with various natural phenomena. 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 Biblical manna and the "manna" collected by Beduins from the Tamarisk tree.37
- 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.38 Some modern scholars39 further attempt to explain the deaths in Bemidbar 11 of those who gorged themselves on the quail, as also being (at least partially) a natural consequence of their actions. 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.40 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.
"וְאִם בְּרִיאָה יִבְרָא ה'" – 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, or a sinkhole. 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.
Splitting the Jordan – Y. Braslavi41 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.
Stopping of the Sun at Givon – R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla posits that though the sun set, Hashem ensured that its light continued to reflect and provide illumination. Some modern scholars understand the verses to refer either to a solar eclipse,42 or to the sun's positioning blinding the enemy.43 For further elaboration, see Stopping of the Sun at Givon.
Angels – This position might suggest that the ability of angels to take on a corporeal body and be seen by humans is a totally natural phenomenon, being the manner in which they were created.44
Existence of Magic – According to this approach, mentions of humanly operated magic in Tanakh should be understood as chicanery committed by charlatans. If Hashem rarely overrides nature, it is absurd to think that humans have the ability to do so via "magic". For example:
- Ibn Ezra claims that Paroh's magicians turned their staffs into snakes only via an illusion. See Shadal as well.
- Radak cites R. Shemuel b. Chofni who states that the sorceress of Ein Dor only pretended to be Shemuel. He gives a natural explanation for how she was able to give an accurate "prophecy".
Preserving the Supernatural
Stories of miracles should be understood as historical accounts of what literally transpired.
Literal Readings
Miracles in Tanakh occurred as literally described, but without any additional embellishments not mentioned in the text.
Sources:Mishna Avot, Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, Sifre Devarim, Bereshit Rabbah, R. Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, Radak, Ramban, Malbim
Mutability of nature – These sources divide on the question of whether or not nature is unchanging:
- Mutable – According to 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.45 In fact, it is the very existence of miracles which attests to Hashem's role as Creator.46
- Immutable – R. Yochanan in Bereshit Rabbah,47 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.
Divine providence
- Total – Ramban's view on Divine providence, as expressed in his comments to Shemot 13, is very expansive.48 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 accordance 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."49
- 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.
Miracles and nature – This approach offers two ways of looking at the relationship between the natural and supernatural:
- 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 pre-programmed 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. This, though, is possible because nature is malleable and Hashem can mold it to His desires.
Disproportionate miracles
- Ramban, who blurs the line between the natural and supernatural, would not be bothered by miracles which seem unnecessary. If everything in the world is equally a product of Divine intervention, there is no difference between splitting a sea and bringing rain.
- 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.50
The Snake in the Garden of Eden – R. Saadia Gaon gives an extensive explanation of how Hashem took a regular snake, and miraculously changed its nature to be humanoid, with human intelligence, understanding of morality, and the ability to speak.
Stories of Angels – According to this approach, there is nothing wrong with physical manifestation of angels.51
The Plagues in Egypt – 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 the possibility of such a reading.
Bilam's Donkey – According to Ibn Ezra, Bilam's donkey actually spoke, and Hashem miraculously intervened to allow this.
Magic – 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.
Embellished Accounts
Many of the miracles described in Tanakh are embellished and described as even more miraculous than they originally seem.
Mutable nature – 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.
Divine providence – 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.
Disproportionate miracles – This position is not troubled by seemingly "disproportionate miracles" because it views all miracles as offering tremendous benefit to their audiences, unrelated to the specific need which might have promoted them. Every miracle serves as proof of Hashem's existence, role as Creator, and His continuous providence.
The Plagues
- Though Sefer Shemot does not say that the nation of Israel was unaffected by the plague of blood,52 Shemot Rabbah not only claims that there was differentiation, but that if an Egyptian and Israelite shared a cup, it would contain blood for the Egyptians but water for the Israelites.
- Shemot Rabbah understands the phrase "וְלֹא קָמוּ אִישׁ מִתַּחְתָּיו שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים" to mean that the Egyptians were frozen in place during the plague; one who was standing did not sit and vice versa. [The simple understanding would seem to be that they simply did not leave their homes.]
Splitting the Sea – 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.
Manna – Though Shemot and Bemidbar describe the manna as having the taste of honey or fat, R. Yehoshua in Mekhilta DeRashbi posits that it could take on all the tastes in the world.
The tablets – R. Chisda in Bavli Shabbat posits that the words on the Tablets were chiseled in such a manner that, though the chiseling extended through to the other side of the stone, nonetheless the words on both sides could be read properly. This would seem to be impossible, as the letters on one side should have been the mirror image of the other.
Stopping the sun – According to Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, the sun did not stand still for a mere couple of hours but an entire thirty-six hours!
Adding miracles – Various Midrashic sources preserve many stories regarding Hashem's providence over the righteous, which are not mentioned in Tanakh. These include Avraham being saved from the fiery furnace and Yaakov's and Moshe's necks turning into marble so that Esav and Paroh, respectively, could not kill them.
