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.

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 24:10-11Bemidbar 11:16About 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".‎⁵ Accordingly, one might question why Hashem would have invited the elders to approach if this was to result in their deaths.⁶  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.

"וְאֶל הַזְּקֵנִים אָמַר שְׁבוּ לָנוּ בָזֶה עַד אֲשֶׁר נָשׁוּב אֲלֵיכֶם" – Given the elders' inappropriate behavior it is not surprising that Moshe warns them to stay at the bottom of the mountain, forbidding them from getting any closer to God. Shemot Rabbah, though, suggests that this was a punishment for earlier misdeeds of the elders.  When Moshe had gathered them to accompany him to confront Paroh in Egypt, the cowardly elders had sneaked away, leaving Moshe to face the king on his own.⁷ Now, measure for measure, they are forced to leave Moshe, so that he alone will face the King of Kings, Hashem.

The punishment of Nadav and Avihu – According to this approach, 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.⁸ 
• 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,⁹ 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 Taverah (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, and prompting,  Moshe's crisis.¹⁰
• 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 our episode in Shemot 24.¹¹  It might be this linguistic connection which motivates Tanchuma to suggest that the old "אצילים" / "זקנים" might have died earlier in this chapter specifically.¹²

"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 #2¹³

"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.¹⁴

The elders vs. the nation at Sinai – According to Rambam, who believes that indiscriminate prophecy is impossible, the nation as a whole was neither qualified nor prepared to understand Hashem at Sinai, and thus, not only saw no picture of God, but could not even decipher His words.¹⁵ The elders, in contrast, were at a higher level, and were given the opportunity to achieve a higher level of understanding.¹⁶

"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.¹⁷

"וְאֶל הַזְּקֵנִים אָמַר שְׁבוּ לָנוּ בָזֶה עַד אֲשֶׁר נָשׁוּב אֲלֵיכֶם" – After the encounter, as Moshe is about to ascend the mountain to get the Tablets, he warns the elders "שְׁבוּ לָנוּ בָזֶה". This approach might suggest that he proffered an extra admonition to the elders to stay put since he recognized that they had sought more than their intellect could handle and he wanted to ensure that they did not attempt to once again approach to 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 perceive Hashem, while the זקנים were the older firstborns who were granted the privilege but botched the opportunity.

Sin of the Golden Calf – According to this approach, the sin of the Golden Calf might have been a direct result of this botched encounter.  The elders' perceiving Hashem as a corporeal being might have contributed to the desire to create a concrete image of Hashem.¹⁸ Lekach TovShemot 32:4About R. Toviah b. Eliezer, in fact, suggests that the people chose the form of a calf because this is what the elders had seen at Sinai. Amnon Bazak¹⁹ 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").

Death of the elders – This approach might suggest that the elders met their death with the rest of those who worshiped the calf.²⁰  If they were instrumental in suggesting the creation of the calf, their flawed vision had catastrophic consequences, proving the dangers of misconstruing God as a corporeal Being. In addition, if one assumes that the elders were the firstborns whose task it was to offer sacrifices, then it is likely that they themselves were among the most active worshipers of the calf.

"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 YitzchakShemot Peirush 24About R. Yitzchak Arama 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

Purpose of the episode – This approach views the elders' invitation to view Hashem as an honor associated with Hashem's covenant. Rashbam suggests that though, normally, no mortal can see Hashem directly, Hashem makes exceptions during covenantal ceremonies, honoring the second party by allowing them to see Him²¹ as He appears to seal the covenant.²²

The elders vs. the nation at Sinai – Shadal asserts that in contrast to the masses who saw no picture at all at Sinai, Hashem allowed the elders to see a prophetic image of Him.  This might be compared to a king who shows his face only to a select few of his subjects, highlighting their special stature.

Seeing Hashem – These sources vary regarding the nature of the vision received by the elders,²³ 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.²⁴
• Non-physical sight – Ibn Ezra, in contrast, asserts that the verses are speaking of only a prophetic vision, while R. Avraham b. HaRambam²⁵ 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 commentators²⁶ 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",‎²⁷ 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 go further and claim that the verse points to the high level of the elders' encounter.²⁸ Hashem did not send forth His hand to limit their vision, but allowed them to see more than expected.²⁹

"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 is an expected element of a covenantal ceremony.³⁰
• Celebration – Bavli Berakhot and others³¹ 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, while Ramban, Ibn Kaspi, and Seforno, in contrast, explain that this was a physical meal of celebration for either the elders' personal achievement or the receiving of the Torah.³²

"אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" – Most of these sources identify "אֲצִילֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" with Nadav, Avihu, and the elders and view the title as one of respect. Ramban suggests that the word relates to the root, "אצל", to set aside or reserve, and that the elders are so called because Hashem's spirit was set upon them. Alternatively, the root is related to the Arabic 'asil, meaning "noble" or "of known stock".³³

"וְאֶל הַזְּקֵנִים אָמַר שְׁבוּ לָנוּ בָזֶה עַד אֲשֶׁר נָשׁוּב אֲלֵיכֶם" – According to this approach, Moshe's command is not an admonition, but an honor, indicative of the high stature of the elders. They are charged with helping Aharon and Chur lead the people during Moshe's absence.

Where are the elders in Bemidbar 11?

• Martyred for belief – According to Bemidbar Rabbah, the elders stood up against the nation when they desired to build the calf, attempting to dissuade them. Having actually seen Hashem³⁴ solidified their belief in His exclusivity, obliterating any desire for idolatry. The nation, though, refused to listen and in their frenzy killed them. As such, the elders died as righteous martyrs, not because of any sin.
• Still alive – Alternatively, it is possible that these elders were still alive in Bemidbar 11, but were simply inappropriate for the task. Hashem tells Moshe to choose "שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", implying that there are more than seventy,³⁵ but that Hashem is looking for those with specific character traits, those whom Moshe knows are "שֹׁטְרָיו," officers capable of executing his commands.  It is possible that the original seventy excelled in the spiritual realm (meriting to see God), but were not particularly helpful in the administrative or political sphere.³⁶  Moshe needed people to complement him, not those who shared his elevated spiritual status.

"וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים" – These sources do not distinguish between the terms.

Variation of this approach – A variation of this approach, taken by R. Avraham HeChasidcited by R. Avraham b. HaRambam Shemot 24:10-11About R. Avraham Maimonides, Akeidat YitzchakShemot Peirush 24About R. Yitzchak Arama, and others,³⁷ suggests that the verses speak not of one but of two different groups of people who were privileged to "see Hashem": the elders of verse 9 who attained prophecy and merited to comprehend the Divine at a fairly high level, and the nobility of verse 11 (perhaps the firstborns³⁸ or princes) who were honored, but received only a very low level of cognition or no prophecy at all.

• "וַיִּרְאוּ" vs. "וַיֶּחֱזוּ" – These sources distinguish between the terms "וַיִּרְאוּ" and "וַיֶּחֱזוּ", claiming that a "מחזה" represents a much lower level of prophecy than a "מראה".‎³⁹
• "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" – This highlights the low level of cognition received by the nobility. They did did not lose function over their senses as happens when prophesying, allowing them to immediately resume normal physical activities such as eating.⁴⁰

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. 

³ This is how Rashi appears to understand the verse.

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

⁵ See Shemot 33:20.

⁶ See R. Hirsch who for this reason rejects this approach's evaluation of the elders.

⁷ This is not explicit in the text.  The Midrash reaches this conclusion from the fact that despite Hashem's statement in in Shemot 3:18 that the elders will accompany Moshe, and Moshe's gathering of them in Shemot 4, in Shemot 5 only Moshe and Aharon are said to have confronted Paroh.

⁸ 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.

⁹ Shemot 40:35 records that when Hashem's glory filled the Tabernacle, even Moshe himself could not enter.

¹⁰ According to this theory, their deaths left a leadership vacuum, explaining why it is in this story specifically that Moshe breaks down.

¹¹ 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.

¹² The Midrash understands the phrase "וַתִּבְעַר בָּם אֵשׁ י״י וַתֹּאכַל בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה" to refer to "קצינים" and equates these with "אצילים" of our story. The fact that these two words are synonyms, both meaning "those who are at the side", strengthens the association. [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; though he did not choose his priests from the tribe of Levi, he did take them from the elite of the nation.]

¹³ Ralbag explains the story according to both the opinion that the elders were meritorious and the opinion that they erred.

¹⁴ See Seeing Hashem and Anthropomorphism that Rambam is consistent in reinterpreting cases where someone is said to have seen Hashem to mean that they non-physically apprehended His essence.

¹⁵ For elaboration on his understanding of the revelation to the nation, see The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe.

¹⁶ The fact that they, too, proved insufficiently prepared highlights the enormous dedication needed to attain prophecy.

¹⁷ 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.

¹⁸ This reading assumes that the people were not looking to create an alternative deity, but rather a concrete representation of Hashem.  Their motives, thus, were not negative, and stemmed from a sincere to desire to continue the connection begun at Sinai.  For elaboration on this understanding of the sin, see Sin of the Golden Calf.

¹⁹ See his article, "The Ideological Basis of the Sin of the Golden Calf".

²⁰ Rambam himself does not say this, instead following Tanchuma that they died at Taverah.

²¹ See below that these sources differ in their understanding of the nature of the vision.

²² 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.

²³ For a fuller analysis of the various understandings of what it means to see Hashem, see Seeing Hashem.

²⁴ 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.

²⁵ This is the second possibility that he raises.

²⁶ See Onkelos, Bavli Berakhot, R"Y Bekhor Shor, R. Avraham b. HaRambam (in his first explanation), Ibn Kaspi, and Or HaChayyim.

²⁷ According to Rashbam, though directly seeing Hashem normally results in death, in exceptional circumstances 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.

²⁸ Ibn Kaspi, in contrast, asserts that the term comes to limit the extent of the elders' encounter. 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. See also R"Y Bekhor Shor who understands the phrase to mean that Hashem did not support the elders enough to enable them to be nourished on His glory alone.

²⁹ 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" comes 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.

³⁰ 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

³¹ See Onkelos, Ralbag, and Or HaCahayyim.

³² R. Yehuda HaLevi, Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and R. Avraham b. HaRambam, in contrast,  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.

³³ Ibn Ezra suggests that the elders are given a unique title in the second verse only so as to exclude Mosh, as both the phrases "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" and "וַיֹּאכְלוּ וַיִּשְׁתּוּ" do not apply to him.  While the nobility, not being on such a high level that they could subsist on Hashem's glory alone, needed to eat and drink, Moshe, being on a higher level, did not.  In addition, since it was their first time prophesying, the elders feared that they might not be worthy and thus might be punished necessitating the verse to emphasize "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ".  With regards to Moshe, who had prophesied many times previously, this was obvious.

³⁴ This would be true whether the term is understood metaphorically or literally.

³⁵ In Shemot 24, too, it is implied that there were more than seventy elders for there, too, it states, "וְשִׁבְעִים מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".

³⁶ The new group of seventy, in contrast, might have excelled in administrative tasks but were lacking in the spiritual realm, necessitating Moshe to impart some of his own spirit onto them enabling them to prophesy.

³⁷ See 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

³⁸ R"A Saba suggests that they might be identical to "נַעֲרֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse 5, understood by many to be the firstborns.

³⁹ 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. 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.

⁴⁰ 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.