Difference between revisions of "Revelation to the Elders at Sinai/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
<point><b>"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ"</b> – These sources divide regarding whether the eating and drinking of this verse is literal<fn>This is how Rashi appears to understand the verse.</fn> or metaphorical,<fn>See Vayikra Rabbah, Pesikta DeRav Kahana, and Tanchuma.</fn> but all agree that it signified that the people did not have proper respect for the encounter with God. They either approached the revelation amidst literal food and drink, or as if engaged in food and drink, belittling the gravity of the experience and treating Hashem as a friend before whom you are comfortable eating.</point> | <point><b>"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ"</b> – These sources divide regarding whether the eating and drinking of this verse is literal<fn>This is how Rashi appears to understand the verse.</fn> or metaphorical,<fn>See Vayikra Rabbah, Pesikta DeRav Kahana, and Tanchuma.</fn> but all agree that it signified that the people did not have proper respect for the encounter with God. They either approached the revelation amidst literal food and drink, or as if engaged in food and drink, belittling the gravity of the experience and treating Hashem as a friend before whom you are comfortable eating.</point> | ||
<point><b>Seeing Hashem</b> – Rashi suggests that the elders physically saw Hashem directly.  As such, this action alone, regardless of their accompanying behavior, made them liable for death, as Hashem says, "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי". Accordingly, one might question why Hashem would have invited the elders to approach if this was to result in their deaths.<fn>See R. Hirsch who for this reason rejects this approach's evaluation of the elders.</fn>  Rashi might respond that Hashem had invited them only to "bow from a distance", yet they took the liberty to also look.</point> | <point><b>Seeing Hashem</b> – Rashi suggests that the elders physically saw Hashem directly.  As such, this action alone, regardless of their accompanying behavior, made them liable for death, as Hashem says, "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי". Accordingly, one might question why Hashem would have invited the elders to approach if this was to result in their deaths.<fn>See R. Hirsch who for this reason rejects this approach's evaluation of the elders.</fn>  Rashi might respond that Hashem had invited them only to "bow from a distance", yet they took the liberty to also look.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>The punishment of Nadav and Avihu</b> – These sources claim that Nadav and Avihu were finally punished on the eighth day of the Consecration of the Mishkan. Rashi | + | <point><b>The punishment of Nadav and Avihu</b> – These sources claim that Nadav and Avihu were finally punished on the eighth day of the Consecration of the Mishkan. <br/> |
− | <point><b>The punishment of the elders</b></point> | + | <ul> |
+ | <li>Rashi brings the opinion of R. Yishmael that they entered the Mishkan while drunk.  According to him, then, this day might have been chosen for their ultimate punishment because they proved themselves repeat offenders, once again approaching Hashem with disrespect, from drink.<fn>This would explain why even though the Days of Consecration were also a festive occasion, Hashem nonetheless let tragedy mar it. One may get a stay of execution once, but a repeat offender is no longer granted that mercy.</fn> </li> | ||
+ | <li>It is alternatively possible that they erred in once again in seeing God Himself.  On the eighth day, Hashem's presence had descended and filled the entire Tabernacle,<fn>Shemot 40:35 records that when Hashem's glory filled the Tabernacle, even Moshe himself could not enter.</fn> and it is possible that the brothers encountered it upon their entry. If seeing God once is supposed to be fatal, seeing Him twice cannot but result in death. [For further discussion of the brothers' sin, see <a href="Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed" data-aht="page">Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed</a>.]</li> | ||
+ | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>The punishment of the elders</b> – Tanchuma and Rashi state that the elders died at Tavera (<a href="Bemidbar11-1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 11:1-3</a>), together with the "מִתְאֹנְנִים".  The motivation for this suggestion might be two-fold: <br/> | ||
+ | <ul> | ||
+ | <li>Later in Bemidbar 11, Hashem tells Moshe to gather 70 elders to aid him in leading the nation, implying that no such elders existed.  As the elders survive in our story, Tanchuma concludes that they must have died in the interim, perhaps immediately before Moshe's crisis.<fn>According to this theory, their deaths might have in fact helped create the crisis and explain why it is in this story specifically that Moshe breaks down.</fn></li> | ||
+ | <li>When describing the initiation of the new elders, Bemidbar 11 shares, "<b>וַיָּאצֶל</b> מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו וַיִּתֵּן עַל <b>שִׁבְעִים</b> אִישׁ <b>הַזְּקֵנִים</b>", making use of both the roots "אצל" and "זקן", recalling Shemot 24.  It might be this linguistic connection which motivates the sources to understand the phrase "וַוַתִּבְעַר בָּם אֵשׁ י״י וַתֹּאכַל<b> בִּקְצֵה</b> הַמַּחֲנֶה" to refer to the "קצינים" and equatethese "' with the a word which might be synonymous with the "אצילים" of Shemot 24. Both mean "those who are at the side",<fn>See Yeshayahu 41:9, "אֲשֶׁר הֶחֱזַקְתִּיךָ <b>מִקְצוֹת</b> הָאָרֶץ <b>וּמֵאֲצִילֶיהָ</b> קְרָאתִיךָ", where the two roots are parallel.</fn> referring to chieftains who support the people. The fact that the chapter later uses this very root in connection with the new elders: "<b>וַיָּאצֶל</b> מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו וַיִּתֵּן עַל <b>שִׁבְעִים</b> אִישׁ <b>הַזְּקֵנִים</b>", further strengthens the connection between the two stories.</li> | ||
+ | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Who are "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"?</b> Rashi identifies this group with Nadav and Avihu and the seventy elders of verse 10, suggesting that both verses speak of but one group of people.</point> | <point><b>Who are "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"?</b> Rashi identifies this group with Nadav and Avihu and the seventy elders of verse 10, suggesting that both verses speak of but one group of people.</point> | ||
<point><b>"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים"</b> – This approach does not differentiate between the terms, assuming that both verses 10 and 11 speak of the same vision. It might suggest that the fact is repeated only so as to explain where the elders erred and what was problematic about their action, that they did not only see, but did so with food and drink.</point> | <point><b>"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים"</b> – This approach does not differentiate between the terms, assuming that both verses 10 and 11 speak of the same vision. It might suggest that the fact is repeated only so as to explain where the elders erred and what was problematic about their action, that they did not only see, but did so with food and drink.</point> |
Version as of 01:55, 24 February 2020
Revelation to the Elders at Sinai
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators differ in their evaluation of the Elders' encounter with Hashem at Sinai, with some finding them blameworthy and others viewing them as meritorious. Many Midrashim maintain that the elders did not treat the encounter with the proper respect and thus were deserving of punishment. Rambam, instead, asserts that the elders did not sufficiently prepare themselves, leading them to an inappropriate comprehension of Hashem's essence.
In contrast, Rashbam and others assume that there was nothing at all problematic about the elders' actions. The encounter was an honor in which they were privileged to see Hashem on a higher level than most of the nation. A final approach takes a middle position, assuming that the verses speak of two different groups of people. Some merited to prophesy and gained a fairly high level of cognition of Hashem's essence, while others did not prophesy at all.
Blameworthy
Though they were granted a temporary stay of punishment, the elders at Sinai were deserving of death. This position differs regarding why:
Inappropriate Behavior
The elders were deserving of death either because they lacked the proper respect when granted the privilege of seeing Hashem or for the very act itself of seeing Hashem.
- Rashi brings the opinion of R. Yishmael that they entered the Mishkan while drunk. According to him, then, this day might have been chosen for their ultimate punishment because they proved themselves repeat offenders, once again approaching Hashem with disrespect, from drink.6
- It is alternatively possible that they erred in once again in seeing God Himself. On the eighth day, Hashem's presence had descended and filled the entire Tabernacle,7 and it is possible that the brothers encountered it upon their entry. If seeing God once is supposed to be fatal, seeing Him twice cannot but result in death. [For further discussion of the brothers' sin, see Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed.]
- Later in Bemidbar 11, Hashem tells Moshe to gather 70 elders to aid him in leading the nation, implying that no such elders existed. As the elders survive in our story, Tanchuma concludes that they must have died in the interim, perhaps immediately before Moshe's crisis.8
- When describing the initiation of the new elders, Bemidbar 11 shares, "וַיָּאצֶל מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו וַיִּתֵּן עַל שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ הַזְּקֵנִים", making use of both the roots "אצל" and "זקן", recalling Shemot 24. It might be this linguistic connection which motivates the sources to understand the phrase "וַוַתִּבְעַר בָּם אֵשׁ י״י וַתֹּאכַל בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה" to refer to the "קצינים" and equatethese "' with the a word which might be synonymous with the "אצילים" of Shemot 24. Both mean "those who are at the side",9 referring to chieftains who support the people. The fact that the chapter later uses this very root in connection with the new elders: "וַיָּאצֶל מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו וַיִּתֵּן עַל שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ הַזְּקֵנִים", further strengthens the connection between the two stories.
Flawed Perception
Due to insufficient preparation, the elders attained a flawed perception of God and thus deserved death.
Meritorious
The elders' encounter with Hashem at Sinai was a privilege that they had earned.
- Direct revelation – According to Rashbam and Daat Zekeinim, the elders merited a direct revelation of Hashem, being given permission to physically see Hashem Himself.13
- Non-physical sight – Ibn Ezra, in contrast, asserts that the verses are speaking of only a prophetic vision, while R. Avraham b. HaRambam14 and Ralbag maintain that the text speaks of a cognitive experience, the elders' partial apprehension of Hashem's essence.
- Viewed Hashem's glory – Most other commentators15 speak of the elders viewing the brilliant light of Hashem's glory.
- Were not harmed – Most of these sources assume that the verse is stating that, in contrast to what one might have expected given Hashem's statement, "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי",16 the elders' were not harmed by their encounter with Hashem as they were worthy of seeing what they saw.
- Vision was not blocked – Daat Zekeinim, Seforno, and Or HaChayyim claim that the verse points to the high level of the elders' encounter; Hashem did not send forth His hand to limit their vision, but allowed them to see more than expected.17
- Were not embraced – Ibn Kaspi, in contrast, asserts that the term comes to limit the extent of the elders' encounter.18 Though they were honored with seeing Hashem's glory, Hashem did not extend them His hand to either invite them forward, strengthen, or "embrace" them in any manner.
- Honor – Most of these sources imply that the purpose of the vision was to honor the elders. Shadal suggests that just like a king might show his face only to a select few, so too Hashem allowed just these chosen few to see a prophetic image of Him, while the masses saw no picture at all at Sinai.
- Covenantal ceremony – Rashbam suggests that the elite's seeing of Hashem was part of a covenantal ceremony. Though, normally, no mortal can see Hashem directly, Hashem makes exceptions during covenantal ceremonies, honoring the second party by allowing them to see Him as He appears to seal the covenant.19
- Covenant – According to Rashbam, the eating refers to partaking from the sacrifices mentioned earlier in the chapter and was simply one of the usual elements of a covenantal ceremony.20
- Metaphoric – Several commentators21 maintain that "eating" is a metaphoric way of saying that the elders basked in and enjoyed Hashem's glory and their insight into His essence.
- Celebration – Ramban, Ibn Kaspi, and Seforno explain that this was a meal of celebration for either the elders' personal achievement or the receiving of the Torah.
- Necessity – Ibn Ezra,22 R"Y Bekhor Shor, and R. Avraham b. HaRambam assert that this verse serves to contrast the elite and Moshe. While Moshe's seeing of Hashem enabled him to fast for forty days, these individuals still needed to eat.
Differing Levels
The verses differentiate between two groups, one of which attained prophecy and merited to comprehend the Divine at a fairly high level, while the other received only a very low level of cognition or no prophecy at all.