Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction/2
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction
Exegetical Approaches
All Divinely Commanded
All of the miracles and deeds decreed and performed by a prophet are Divinely commanded. Even if Hashem's instructions are not explicitly mentioned, it can be assumed that they were communicated previously.
Sources:Josephus, Yerushalmi, Vayikra Rabbah, R. Saadia Gaon, R. Yehuda ibn Balaam, Rashbam, Tosafot, Radak #2,1 Ramban #2, R. Yosef ibn Kaspi,2 Netziv
Prophetic autonomy
- According to this approach, prophets do not have the power to change nature on their own, and, thus, any miracle that a prophet decrees is done only at Hashem's bidding.3 Since it would be illogical for a prophet to decree that some phenomenon was to occur unless he knew for certain that it was to happen, it follows that even when the text is silent there must have been Divine communication.
- It is possible to go even further and suggest that, even in the natural realm, prophets do not have the autonomy to make any significant decisions except with Divine guidance.4
Biblical cases – This position attempts to explain away all cases where a prophet seems to be acting on his own:
- Ending plagues5 – Moshe must have been given permission beforehand to tell Paroh to set a time for the plague to end. Though he knew Hashem would agree to end the plague at the requested time, Moshe nonetheless prayed to him as this was necessary for Paroh to recognize God's role.
- Promising meat – These sources could explain, as do R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and R. D"Z Hoffmann that Hashem's command in Shemot 16:12, where He explicitly mentions meat, is achronological and actually preceded Moshe's announcement.6 Thus, Moshe did not on his own decree that Hashem would feed the people meat.7
- Incense test – Many of these sources8 understand Moshe's falling on his face after Korach's initial complaint as a sign of prophetic communication and suggest that at this juncture, Hashem told him how to proceed during the rebellion and directed him to propose the incense test. The test, thus, was not Moshe's own invention.9
- Earth opening – Ramban maintains that Hashem hinted that the earth was to swallow the leaders when He said, "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם," so here, too, Moshe was not declaring a miracle on his own.10
- Moshe and the petition of the 2/12 tribes – Ramban points to the tribes' words "אֵת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י"י אֶל עֲבָדֶיךָ כֵּן נַעֲשֶׂה" at the conclusion of the negotiations as proof that Moshe did not independently decide that they could settle the eastern bank.
- Yehoshua and the sun – These sources could explain that Yehoshua was not decreeing that the sun stand still, but rather praying to Hashem for aid, hoping that He would acquiesce to make a miracle.11 However, the fact that he does so publicly, ("וַיֹּאמֶר לְעֵינֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"), is difficult for he could not be certain that Hashem would agree. Alternatively, they might suggest that this was a unique case, as the verse itself suggests when it declares, "וְלֹא הָיָה כַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לְפָנָיו וְאַחֲרָיו לִשְׁמֹעַ י"י בְּקוֹל אִישׁ".
- Shemuel bringing rain – This approach would likely explain that, despite the text's silence, Shemuel had been told beforehand to bring rain as a sign for the people. He nonetheless prayed that the rain come, not because he doubted it, but to ensure that the people recognized that the rain was indeed coming from Hashem and not coincidental.
- Natan and the Mikdash – In this case, Natan clearly speaks against Hashem's wishes when he permits David to build the Mikdash, so it is impossible to suggest that Natan had been told previously what to say. This approach could suggest that Natan was not acting in the role of prophet when he responded to David, but only as a royal advisor.12
- Eliyahu's Miracles
- Eliyahu's declaration of drought and the Altar on Mt. Carmel – Several sources13 point to Eliyahu's statement on Mt. Carmel that "הַיּוֹם יִוָּדַע כִּי... אֲנִי עַבְדֶּךָ [וּבִדְבָרְךָ] (ובדבריך) עָשִׂיתִי אֵת כׇּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה" as proof that Eliyahu's actions were all done at Hashem's behest.14 It is ambiguous, though, if the words "כׇּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה" refer just to the events on Mt. Carmel, or also to the initial declaration of drought. These sources would likely say that even if it refers only to the former, one can learn from here to the rest of Eliyahu's miracles, that they too were done by the word of God.
- Eliyahu and the pitcher of flour – The text itself states that this miracle occurred by the word of Hashem: "כִּדְבַר י"י אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר בְּיַד אֵלִיָּהוּ".
- Eliyahu reviving the boy – These sources could explain that in this case, Eliyahu was really simply praying to Hashem that the boy revive and did not know in advance, nor necessarily expect, that Hashem would accede to his request.
- Eliyahu and officers of fifty – These sources might suggest that just as the text attests to the fact that an angel told Eliyahu not to kill the third officer and his men, Hashem had previously told him that He would release fire on the others.15
- Elisha's miracles16 – Only by two of Elisha's miracles (the sweetening of waters, and giving of bread) does the text allude to Hashem's having directed that the miracle would occur.17 This approach would suggest that, despite the silence in the text, the other miracles happened in the same manner.
Why is Hashem's command not stated? As seen above, in several cases there is some allusion in the text to a command of Hashem, though not always explicit. Ramban explains that it is the way of Tanakh to be brief in one place and lengthy in another. Instead of tediously repeating both a command and its fulfillment, sometimes the Torah brings one, sometimes the other, and sometimes both. However, the reasoning behind the choice of when to share each component is not always clear.18
"מֵקִים דְּבַר עַבְדּוֹ" – This verse, in context, says nothing about Hashem fulfilling the independent decrees of his prophets. Rather, it refers to Hashem keeping His own promises as expressed via the prophecies of His loyal messengers. Hashem is contrasting the speech of "imposters" ("בַּדִּים") and "diviners" ("קֹסְמִים") whose words are not trustworthy, with that of His prophets, whose predictions are reliable precisely because they speak the word of God.19
"וְתִגְזַר אֹמֶר וְיָקׇם לָךְ" – These words of Elifaz to Iyyov are also unrelated to the concept of Hashem fulfilling the decrees of his prophets and simply mean that Hashem cares for the righteous and helps them succeed in their chosen paths.
Prophetic fallibility – Since a prophet has no autonomy to act on his own, there is no room to err.20
Poetic License – Dunash. b. Labrat1 goes as far as to say that even the words used by the prophet are all chosen by Hashem.
Speaking/ Acting in Hashem's name
Moshe versus other prophets – These sources do not distinguish between Mose and other prophets with regards to the level of autonomy granted to each.
Evaluation of Prophetic ability
Prophet's Own Initiative
A prophet is granted the ability by Hashem to act and perform wonders on his own initiative.
Sources:Seder Eliyahu Rabbah, Ramban #1, Chizkuni, R. Yosef Albo, R. Avraham b. Shelomo,21 Abarbanel,22 Malbim
Prophetic autonomy – According to this position, a prophet has a significant degree of autonomy. He is able not only to determine his own course of action without Hashem's prior approval, but also to invoke supernatural means to do so:
- R. Yosef Albo explains that when someone has reached a certain level of righteousness and belief in Hashem, he is able to control nature through his speech.23 If a miracle is needed, not only need he not first seek Hashem's agreement to act, it is preferable that he perform the deed on his own.24
- R. Avraham b. Shelomo, in contrast, suggests that a prophet can act on his own only because he is so in tune with Hashem's thoughts and will that he can intuit what Hashem would want done. As such, it is as if Hashem has communicated with him.
"מֵקִים דְּבַר עַבְדּוֹ" and "וְתִגְזַר אֹמֶר וְיָקׇם לָךְ" – These two verses serve as proof that whatever a prophet decrees will be fulfilled by Hashem.
Biblical cases – These sources point to the many cases in Tanakh where a prophet acts/ brings miracles without first consulting with Hashem as proof of their position. During Korach's rebellion, Moshe independently decides to make the incense test and declares the miraculous deaths of Datan and Aviram. Yehoshua's stopping of the sun, Shemuel's bringing of rain, Eliyahu and Elisha's many miracles are similarly all done by their word alone and not prefaced by Divine commands.
Why pray? If a prophet can indeed perform supernatural phenomenon, it is not clear why in some of the above cases25 the prophet felt the need to pray to Hashem that He fulfill the decree.
- It is possible that the public nature
"וְלֹא הָיָה כַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לְפָנָיו וְאַחֲרָיו לִשְׁמֹעַ י"י בְּקוֹל אִישׁ" – This verse is problematic for this approach as it suggests that Yehoshua's deed was unique and that it was the only case in which Hashem fulfilled the decree of a prophet.
Prophetic fallibility
- According to R. Avraham b. Shelomo, the only individuals who can independently bring miracles are those who are completely in line with Hashem's thoughts and desires. Thus a prophet can not err or act against Hashem's wishes.
- According to the other sources, however, it would seem that prophetic autonomy leaves room for a prophet to make mistakes. Perhaps, more problematically, it would also seem to allow a prophet "force Hashem's hand" even against His will. In fact Abarbanel claims
Prophetic Prayer
When a prophet independently declares that a miracle is to happen, he is in effect praying that Hashem will fulfill his words and risks the possibility that Hashem will not accede to his request.
Sources: R. Yosef Kara, Ibn Ezra, Rambam, Radak #1, Avvat Nefesh, Ralbag, Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel, Shadal, R. David Zvi Hoffmann
Uniqueness of Moshe