Revelation to the Elders at Sinai/2

Revelation to the Elders at Sinai

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

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.

Sources:Vayikra Rabbah20:10About Vayikra Rabbah, Pesikta DeRav Kahana26:9About Pesikta DeRav Kahana, TanchumaBehaalotekha 16About the Tanchuma, Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)Shemot 24:9-11About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan), RashiShemot 24:1Shemot 24:10-11About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki

"לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" – These sources understand the phrase to mean that Hashem did not send forth His hand to punish the elders,¹ learning from this that they must have been deserving of death. They were granted a stay of execution only because Hashem did not want to ruin the happiness of the Giving of the Torah with the tragedy of their deaths.²

"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ" – These sources divide regarding whether the eating and drinking of this verse is literal³ or metaphorical,⁴ 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.

Seeing Hashem – 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.⁵  Rashi might respond that Hashem had invited them only to "bow from a distance", yet they took the liberty to also look.

Purpose of the episode – These sources do not explain what was the goal of the episode, but might suggest that Hashem was simply extending to these distinguished individuals the honor of coming closer to God than the rest of the nation. They, unfortunately, proved unworthy.

The punishment of Nadav and Avihu – These sources claim that Nadav and Avihu were finally punished on the eighth day of the Consecration of the Mishkan.

• 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. After seeing Hashem not once but twice, death was unavoidable. [For further discussion of the brothers' sin, see Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed.]

The punishment of the elders – Tanchuma and Rashi state that the elders died at Tavera (Bemidbar 11:1-3), together with the "מִתְאֹנְנִים".  The motivation for this suggestion might be two-fold:

• 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 are present 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 24.⁹  It might be this linguistic connection which motivates these sources to understand the phrase "וַתֹּאכַל בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה" to refer to the "קצינים" and equate these with "אצילים" of our story. The fact that the two words are synonyms, both meaning "those who are at the side",¹⁰ strengthens the association.

"אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "זִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" – Rashi identifies "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" with Nadav and Avihu and the seventy elders of verse 10, suggesting that both verses speak of but one group of people.

"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים" – 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.

Flawed Perception

Due to insufficient preparation, the elders attained a flawed perception of God and thus deserved death.

Sources:RambamMoreh Nevukhim 1:5About R. Moshe b. Maimon, RalbagShemot Beur HaParashah 24:10-11About R. Levi b. Gershom #2¹¹

"לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" – Rambam understands the phrase to mean that Hashem did not send forth His hand to punish the elders, learning from this that they must have been deserving of death. They were granted a stay of execution only because Moshe intervened on their behalf to delay their punishment.

Seeing Hashem – Rambam asserts that the roots "ראה" and "חזה" have more than one meaning and can refer not only to physical vision, but also to mental insight. The verses do not imply that the elders physically saw Hashem, but rather that they attained some level of intellectual perception and comprehension of Hashem's essence.

"וְתַחַת רַגְלָיו כְּמַעֲשֵׂה לִבְנַת הַסַּפִּיר וּכְעֶצֶם הַשָּׁמַיִם לָטֹהַר" – Rambam suggests that this description of the elders' understanding, filled as it is with corporeal imagery,  teaches that their perception was flawed, for they comprehended Hashem as a material being.

"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ" – Ralbag suggests that this points to the elders' improper preparation. Rather than engaging in solitude, they ate and drank. Rambam might similarly suggest that immersing in physicality is what led the elders to perceive Hashem, too, in physical terms.  When it comes to comprehending the Divine, insufficient preparation and overreaching can be fatal.¹²

"וְאֶל הַזְּקֵנִים אָמַר שְׁבוּ לָנוּ בָזֶה עַד אֲשֶׁר נָשׁוּב אֲלֵיכֶם" – These sources might suggest that Moshe proffers an extra admonition to the elders to stay put, since he recognized that they had sought more than their perception could handle.  He wanted to ensure that they recognized their place at the bottom of the mountain and did not attempt to once again approach and see more than they were capable of.

Who constituted the elders? This position might suggest, as does Ibn Ezra, that they were firstborns, perhaps parallel to the "נַעֲרֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" who offered sacrifices in verse 5.  The latter were the younger generation of firstborns, not yet invited to see Hashem, while the former were the older firstborns who were granted the privilege but botched the opportunity.

Sin of the Golden Calf – This approach might suggest that the Sin of the Golden Calf was a direct result of this botched encounter.  Having just perceived Hashem as a corporeal being might have contributed to the desire to similarly create a tangible expression of His presence. Lekach Tov suggests that the people chose the form of a "calf" because this is what they had seen at Sinai. Amnon Bazak supports this idea by noting the parallel between ""מַעֲשֵׂה בְנַת הַסַּפִּיר" seen by the elders and "מַרְאֵה אֶבֶן סַפִּיר" seen by Yechezkel, who describes the four headed creature in his vision as having "the legs of a calf" ("וְכַף רַגְלֵיהֶם כְּכַף רֶגֶל עֵגֶל").

"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים" – As these sources identify the elders with "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" and do not differentiate between the terms "וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" and "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים", they must explain the repetition. They might suggest, as above, that the second verse comes only to explain why the nobles deserved death.

Moshe and Aharon – Akeidat Yitzchak questions this approach, noting that the verses do not differentiate between the cognition achieved by Moshe and Aharon and that achieved by the rest of the elders, ascribing the same vision to all.  As it is evident that Moshe and Aharon were not deserving of punishment for their vision and perception, it is difficult to say that the others were.

Meritorious

The elders' encounter with Hashem at Sinai was a privilege that they had earned.

Sources:Targum OnkelosShemot 24:10-11About Targum Onkelos, Bavli BerakhotBerakhot 17aAbout the Bavli, RashbamShemot 24:10-11About R. Shemuel b. Meir, Ibn EzraShemot First Commentary 24:10-11Shemot Second Commentary 24:10-11About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor ShorShemot 24:10-11About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 24:10-11About R. Avraham Maimonides, RambanShemot 24:10-11About R. Moshe b. Nachman, Daat ZekeinimShemot 24:11About Daat Zekeinim, R. Yosef ibn KaspiShemot 24:9About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, RalbagShemot Beur HaParashah 24:10-11About R. Levi b. Gershom #1, SefornoShemot 24:11About R. Ovadyah Seforno, Or HaChayyimShemot 24:11About R. Chayyim b. Atar, ShadalShemot 24:10-11About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto

Seeing Hashem – These sources vary regarding the nature of the vision received by the elders,¹³ though all agree that it was not only appropriate but should even be considered an honor.

• Direct revelation – According to Rashbam and Daat Zekeinim, the elders merited a direct revelation of Hashem, being given permission to physically see Hashem Himself.¹⁴
• Non-physical sight – Ibn Ezra, in contrast, asserts that the verses are speaking of only a prophetic vision, while R. Avraham b. HaRambam¹⁵ 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 commentators¹⁶ speak of the elders viewing the brilliant light of Hashem's glory.

"לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" – These sources differ in their specific understanding of this phrase, but agree that it does not imply that the elders were deserving of punishment:

• 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",‎¹⁷ 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.¹⁸
• Were not embraced – Ibn Kaspi, in contrast, asserts that the term comes to limit the extent of the elders' encounter.¹⁹  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.

Purpose of the episode

• 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.²⁰

"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ" – All these sources agree that there was nothing problematic about the nobles eating and drinking, but they differ regarding the nature of this activity:

• 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.²¹
• Metaphoric – Several commentators²² 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,²³ 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.

Who are "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"? Most of these sources identify the אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל with Nadav, Avihu, and the elders.²⁴  Ibn Ezra suggests that they are given a unique title in this verse to exclude Moshe; while the nobility ate and drank, Moshe did not.²⁵

"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים" – This approach does not distinguish between the terms.

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.

Sources:R. Avraham HeChasidcited by R. Avraham b. HaRambam Shemot 24:10-11About R. Avraham Maimonides, Akeidat YitzchakShemot Peirush 24About R. Yitzchak Arama, AbarbanelShemot 24:1About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, R. Avraham SabaTzeror HaMor Shemot 24:11About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor), HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 11Shemot 24:11About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg, R. HirschShemot 24:10-11About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, MalbimShemot 24:11About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

Who are "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"? These sources differentiate between Aharon, Nadav, Avihu, and the elders of verse 9 and the nobility of verse 11, suggesting that the latter were a totally different group of people, either the firstborns,²⁶ princes, or another distinguished class of the nation.²⁷

Seeing Hashem: "וַיִּרְאוּ" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ" – This approach distinguishes between the terms "וַיִּרְאוּ" and "וַיֶּחֱזוּ", claiming that a "מחזה" represents a much lower level of prophecy or cognition than a "מראה".  Thus, while the elders received a prophetic vision, apprehending Hashem's essence on a somewhat high level, the nobility only comprehended Hashem in their hearts, in a very general and partial manner.²⁸

"לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" – Drawing off the phrase, "וַתְּהִי עָלָיו יַד י״י", these commentators assert that "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" means that Hashem did not extend his hand to give prophecy to the nobility.

"וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ" – The eating and drinking is mentioned to highlight the low level of cognition received by the nobility.  They did not lose function over their senses as happens when prophesying, allowing them to immediately resume normal physical activities such as eating.  In addition, in contrast to the elders, they were not privy to enough of Hashem's glory to allow them to be nourished by it and subsist on it alone, and thus they needed physical sustenance.

¹ See the note in the Introduction that the phrase "שלח יד" often connotes sending forth one's hand with intent to harm.

² See below that these sources maintain that the elders were killed at Tavera and Nadav and Avihu were killed in the eighth day of the consecration ceremony.  [ It is not clear, however, if the reason for the postponement was the happy nature of the day, why Hashem would choose to kill them on the day of the Consecration of the Mishkan, a similarly festive occasion.  See below, though, that perhaps they sinned similalrly on that day.]

³ This is how Rashi appears to understand the verse.

⁴ See Vayikra Rabbah, Pesikta DeRav Kahana, and Tanchuma.

⁵ See R. Hirsch who for this reason rejects this approach's evaluation of the elders.

⁶ 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.

⁷ Shemot 40:35 records that when Hashem's glory filled the Tabernacle, even Moshe himself could not enter.

⁸ 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.

⁹ The root "אצל" as a noun or verb appears only 7 times in all of Tanakh, three of which are in these two stories.  This, together with the added mention of זקנים, might suggest that Bemidbar is intentionally alluding to the story in Shemot.

¹⁰ See Yeshayahu 41:9, "אֲשֶׁר הֶחֱזַקְתִּיךָ מִקְצוֹת הָאָרֶץ וּמֵאֲצִילֶיהָ קְרָאתִיךָ", where the two roots are parallel. Both אציל  and קצין take on the connotation of chieftain or officer, being both set apart and having the function of supporting another (with side being understood as support). [It is possible that in Melakhim 12:31, when we are told that Yerovam appointed priests "מִקְצוֹת הָעָם", this, too, refers to officers; he chose his priests from the elite, though not specifically from the tribe of Levi.]

¹¹ Ralbag explains the story according to both the opinion that the elders were meritorious and the opinion that they erred.

¹² Cf. Mystery at the Malon for Abarbanel's reading of Moshe's near fatal experience at the lodging place, where he similarly explains that insufficient preparation for prophecy almost cost Moshe his life.

¹³ For a fuller analysis of the various understandings of what it means to see Hashem, see Seeing Hashem.

¹⁴ While Rashbam highlights that, like Moshe in Shemot 33, they saw only Hashem's "back", Daat Zekeinim asserts that they saw even more than Moshe.

¹⁵ This is the second possibility that he raises.

¹⁶ See Onkelos, Bavli Berakhot, R"Y Bekhor Shor, R. Avraham b. HaRambam (in his first explanation), Ibn Kaspi, and Or HaChayyim.

¹⁷ According to Rashbam, though directly seeing Hashem normally results in death, in exceptional circumstances, such as covenantal ceremonies like this one, man might be granted permission to see Hashem without danger. Ralbag, in contrast, assumes that "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" means that no mortal can totally comprehend Hashem's being. This, though, did not preclude the elders from reaching a lower level of cognition.

¹⁸ Daat Zekeinim and Or HaChayyim contrast this episode with Moshe's vision of Hashem from the crook of the rock in Shemot 33.  There, Hashem covered Moshe's eyes to obscure his vision, "וְשַׂכֹּתִי כַפִּי עָלֶיךָ". Here, in contrast, "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" to block the vision. Accordingly, the elders merited to see even more than Moshe himself! [Or HaChayyim nonetheless emphasizes that Moshe still grasped more than the elders.  What they were able to comprehend without cover, Moshe was able to comprehend regularly.]
Seforno, instead, points out that when many prophets begin to prophesy, we are told that "יד י"י" came upon them, removing them from their senses.  Here, in contrast, Hashem did not place his hands upon the elders, allowing them to prophesy while still in full control of their faculties.

¹⁹ See also R"Y Bekhor Shor who understands the phrase to mean that Hashem did not support them enough to enable them to fast.

²⁰ He compares our episode to both Bereshit 16, where Avraham is allowed to see Hashem pass during the Covenant Between the Pieces, and Shemot 33, when Moshe sees Hashem from the rock as Hashem makes a covenant there as well.

²¹ See Treaties in Tanakh and the Ancient Near East for evidence that covenants and treaties in the Ancient Near East often included both the slaughtering of an animal and passing through its parts and/or the sharing of a meal.  In this case, Hashem's portion, the Zevachim, is burned, while the Shelamim were eaten by the nobility

²² See Onkelos, Bavli Berakhot, Ralbag, and Or HaCahayyim.

²³ See the first possibility brought by him in his first commentary.  In his second commentary, he brings this approach in the name of R. Yehuda HaLevi.

²⁴ Ramban suggests that the word relates to the root, "אצל"  to set aside or reserve; they are so called because Hashem's spirit was set upon them.

²⁵ He also suggests that the phrase "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" applied only to the elders and not Moshe.  Only because it was their first time prophesying did they have reason to fear that they might not be worthy and thus might be punished.  Moshe, who had prophesied many times previously had no such fear.

²⁶ R"A Saba suggests that they might be identical to the "נַעֲרֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse 5, understood by many to be the firstborns.

²⁷ R"A Saba also raises the possibility that the "nobility" refers to the elders of verse 9, but not to Moshe, Aharon, Nadav, or Avihu.

²⁸ R. Hirsch also raises the possibility that "ראה" refers to seeing from up close, while "חזה" connotes long distance vision.  The elders, on the mountain, were privileged to see Hashem from up close, while the others saw Him only from a distance.