Seeing Hashem/2

Seeing Hashem

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Commentators struggle to understand how Hashem reveals Himself to mankind and what the text implies when it states that an individual "saw Hashem". Some commentators assume that man really may see some manifestation of Hashem, either directly or prophetically. Rashbam, thus, allows for direct revelation, claiming that in rare instances, when Hashem makes a covenantal relationship, He might grant the second party the honor of viewing Him without fear of mortal peril. Ibn Ezra, instead, claims that any visions of Hashem in Tanakh must be understood to have taken place in a prophetic dream.  In such a dream, man might imagine Hashem even in human form. Physically seeing Hashem, though, is impossible.

Others suggest that all verses which speak of "seeing Hashem" need to be reinterpreted and explained non-literally.  Rambam claims that the word "see" can refer to comprehension rather than physical sight and that such verses describe attaining a level of cognition of the Divine. A final approach suggests that verses which speak of Hashem's revelation really refer only to the manifestation of Hashem's glory (a brilliant created light) or to an angel.  Each is referred to as "Hashem" after the One who sent or created it. Many commentators combine these approaches, explaining the various revelations on a case by case basis.

Physical Perception of Hashem

At times, Hashem directly reveals Himself, allowing humans to glimpse God Himself.

Sources:RashiShemot 19:9-10Shemot 24:10-11Shemot 33:18-23Vayikra 16:2Bemidbar 12:8Bemidbar 14:10Bemidbar 16:19Devarim 5:19Devarim 34:10Yechezkel 1:1About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RashbamBereshit 18:1Bereshit 48:8Shemot 13:21Shemot 16:7Shemot 19:9Shemot 19:11Shemot 19:23Shemot 24:10-11Shemot 33:18Shemot 33:23Shemot 34:8Vayikra 9:23Vayikra 16:2About R. Shemuel b. Meir, Daat ZekeinimShemot 24About Daat Zekeinim

"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – This approach assumes that humans are physically capable of receiving a direct revelation of Hashem, yet doing so generally results in death. There are, however, certain exceptions: 

• Stay of execution – Rashi maintains that though in all cases in which humans directly see Hashem they will die, in exceptional circumstances this death can be delayed. Thus, though Nadav and Avihu and the elders saw Hashem at Sinai (Shemot 24), Hashem pushed off their deaths so as not to mar the happiness of receiving the Torah.
• No death – Rashbam, in contrast, asserts that in some situations, seeing Hashem is a privilege granted by Hashem, not deserving of death at all. When making a covenant, Hashem might honor the second party by allowing them to see Hashem as He passes by.¹ Thus, Avraham merited to see Hashem pass (Bereshit 15:17-18) at the Covenant Between the Pieces, the elders qualified to see Hashem (Shemot 24:10-11) at the covenant at Sinai, and Moshe was able to see Hashem (Shemot 33:23 and Shemot 34:6) in the context of the covenant in Shemot 34:10.

Revelation at Sinai – This approach might suggest that the revelation at Sinai, similarly being a covenantal ceremony, was a direct revelation as well, and the people were granted permission to see some manifestation of Hashem.²  This would match the description of the event being a "face to face" encounter, but would appear to contradict Moshe's statement, "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם". The seeming contradiction might be resolved in a number of ways: 

• It is possible that Hashem granted the nation permission to look, but only from afar, at which distance the nation could not truly make out Hashem's form.³  As such, they saw no "picture", though they did watch Hashem's descent, as per the literal understanding of "יֵרֵד י״י לְעֵינֵי כׇל הָעָם".‎ The encounter was "face to face" in the sense that nothing concrete obscured the vision, only distance.
• It is also possible that the people really were privileged to see Hashem, but that Hashem does not have a form that can in any way be called a "תְּמוּנָה", and this is what Moshe emphasizes in Sefer Devarim.

"וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" – What did they see? Neither Rashi nor Rashbam elaborate on what it means to see Hashem directly or detail what it was that the people who merited to do so saw.  Rashbam, though, implies that even in cases of direct physical revelation, the vision is veiled or incomplete.  By Moshe, the verse states explicitly that Moshe only saw Hashem's "back" and Rashbam claims that this is what the elders in Shemot 24 saw as well. By Avraham, the verses describe a pillar of smoke and fire passing by, suggesting that there, too, the vision was obscured to some degree.

Corporeality of Hashem – It is unclear whether Rashi and Rashbam believed that Hashem might take on a corporeal form.⁴  If this position were to maintain, as R. Moshe TakuKetav Tamim (printed in Otzar Nechmad) is often understood to believe,⁵ that Hashem does adopt a corporeal form at times, then the Biblical characters who "saw Hashem" could actually have seen a physical manifestation of Hashem's corporeal form and phrases such as "וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" might be understood literally.

Revelation at Sinai: וְהַר סִינַי עָשַׁן כֻּלּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֲשֶׁר יָרַד עָלָיו י״י 

• These sources might suggest that at Sinai Hashem literally descended on the mountain, revealing Himself, but obscured the vision in smoke and fire so that none would be harmed. As such, Moshe says "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם".  The episode can simultaneously be considered a "face to face" encounter, despite the lack of a clear image, both because it was Hashem Himself, rather than His glory or an angel, which descended, and because the people heard Hashem directly.
• Alternatively, one might suggest that as this, too, was a covenantal ceremony, the people were granted permission to physically see Hashem without fear of death.  This would explain

"הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן" – Rashbam explains that Hashem spoke to Moshe "in the thickness of the cloud" to prevent Moshe from seeing Hashem.  This is consistent with the notion that Hashem might literally manifest Himself, necessitating cover to protect human observers.

"וְלֹא יָמוּת כִּי בֶּעָנָן אֵרָאֶה עַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת" – This position might understand that Hashem is literally revealed on the kapporet and therefore any who enter the Inner Sanctum and see Him will die. Rashbam explains that for this reason, before entering the Inner Sanctum on Yom HaKippurim, the priest must first make a cloud of incense whereby the House is darkened and the vision is blocked.

Visions of Hashem by prophets – "רָאִיתִי אֶת י״י יֹשֵׁב" – This position must explain how Mikhaihu, Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, and Daniel are all said to see Hashem, even describing him sitting on a throne, yet do not die:

• Rashi writes that all prophets (excluding Moshe) see through "a non-transparent glass".⁶  It is not clear if Rashi's emphasis is on the lack of clarity in these prophets' visions or on the very fact that they occurred in a prophetic dream rather than being a direct and conscious revelation.⁷  Either way, this opaque or non-physical  viewing is what allowed them to survive the revelation.
• Rashbam speaks explicitly only of Mikhaihu's vision of Hashem, but appears to concur with the first understanding of Rashi.  He states that the vision was fuzzy, like someone who can make out the outline of a friend but not see His face. 

Revelation to Avot – "...וַיֵּרָא י״י אֶל" – Neither Rashi nor Rashbam explicitly address the nature of most of these revelations:

• Prophetic vision & veiled encounter – They could explain them in the same manner as they do the explicit visions of Hashem described by Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, and Mikhaihu discussed above, that these were either prophetic visions or otherwise unclear revelations.
• Hashem = an angel – Alternatively, they might suggest that, at least in some of these cases, the term Hashem refers not to Hashem Himself, but to his messenger, an angel who is called after the One who sent him.  This is how Rashbam explains the appearance of "Hashem" to Avraham in Bereshit 18:1 and to Moshe by the Burning Bush.⁸

"'כְּבוֹד ה" – Neither Rashi nor Rashbam explicitly define the term, but might suggest that it refers to either some aspect of Hashem Himself, a created entity that signifies His presence, or His deeds which testify to His glory:

• Cloaked manifestation – In many of the cases in which "כְּבוֹד י"י" is mentioned, the verse also mentions the presence of Hashem's cloud.⁹  As such, if the "כבוד" does refer to some manifestation of Hashem Himself, it seems that this is always cloaked in the pillar of cloud so as to obscure the vision to all who looked at it, protecting them from death.¹⁰
• Cloud of glory - Alternatively, it is possible that the "glory" refers to the cloud itself,¹¹ and is meant to signify Hashem, but does not actually contain Hashem's presence. As such, it is not dangerous to gaze upon it.
• Hashem's deeds – Rashbam maintains that in some of the cases where the term appears, it does not refer to Hashem at all but rather to His miraculous deeds. For example, by the manna, when Moshe and Aharon tell the nation, "וּבֹקֶר וּרְאִיתֶם אֶת כְּבוֹד י״י" (Shemot 16:7), they are referring to the miracle of the manna itself.¹²

Does Moshe see more than others?

• Rashi suggests that Moshe did see more than others.  Drawing off Bavli Yevamot 49bYevamot 49bAbout the Bavli, he claims that while others could only see Hashem through an "opaque glass", Moshe perceived him through a transparent one.  Nonetheless, he points out that even Moshe only saw "מראה אחוריים" and not "מראה שכינה" for even Moshe cannot see the Shechinah and live.‎¹³       
• Rashbam, in contrast, implies that Moshe did not necessarily see any more than others who similarly merited to receive a direct revelation during a covenantal ceremony.  If so, Moshe's uniqueness as a prophet might instead lay in his constant communication with Hashem and his fuller comprehension of the Divine message.¹⁴

Nonphysical Apprehension of Hashem

Humans cannot physically see Hashem. When Torah speaks of Divine revelation, it refers either to a prophetic dream or to a cognitive experience, man's comprehending of some aspect of Hashem's nature.

Sources:R. Saadia GaonHaEmunot VeHaDeiot 2:9HaEmunot VeHaDeiot 2:10About R. Saadia Gaon, Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 12:7Shemot First Commentary 13:21Shemot First Commentary 16:7Shemot First Commentary 24:10-11Shemot First Commentary 33:18Shemot Second Commentary 13:21Shemot Second Commentary 16:6Shemot Second Commentary 24:10-11Vayikra 16:2Devarim 5:4Yeshayahu 6:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. ChananelBerakhot 6aAbout R. Chananel b. Chushiel, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBereshit 1:26Bereshit 32:31Shemot 13:21Shemot 24:8-11Shemot 33:18-23Vayikra 16:2About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambamHilkhot Yesodei HaTorah 1:8-12Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah 2:4Moreh Nevukhim 1:4Moreh Nevukhim 1:5Moreh Nevukhim 1:54Moreh Nevukhim 2:41About R. Moshe b. Maimon, RadakBereshit 32:31Yeshayahu 6:1Yeshayahu 6:5About R. David Kimchi, R. Avraham b. HaRambamBereshit 26:24Shemot 16:7Shemot 16:9-10Shemot 19:11Shemot 24:10-11Shemot 33:12-23About R. Avraham Maimonides, RalbagVayikra 16:1Bemidbar 12:7-8Shemot Beur HaMilot 13:21Shemot Beur HaMilot 16:7Shemot Beur HaMilot 16:10Shemot Beur HaMilot 19:20Bereshit Beur HaParashah 12:7Shemot Beur HaParashah 24:10-11Shemot Beur HaParashah 33:18-23About R. Levi b. Gershom, R"Y Albo2:283:17About R. Yosef Albo, SefornoShemot 19:9Shemot 19:11Shemot 24:11Shemot 33:11Shemot 33:18-23Vayikra 9:6Bemidbar 12:6-8Devarim 5:4Devarim 34:10About R. Ovadyah Seforno, ShadalShemot 13:21Shemot 19:11Shemot 20:3Shemot 24:10-11Shemot 33:18Shemot 33:20Yeshayahu 6:1Yeshayahu 6:5HaMishtadel Shemot 33:18About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, MalbimBereshit 12:7Shemot 33:18-23Yeshayahu Beur HaInyan 6:1Yeshayahu Beur HaMilot 6:1About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 12:7Shemot 16:7Shemot 16:10Vayikra 9:23Vayikra 16:2About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

Corporeality of Hashem – These sources deny the corporeality of Hashem and, thus, the possibility that someone might physically see Hashem in any tangible form. Anthropomorphic language is understood metaphorically and is viewed as an attempt to speak in terms that humans can understand. Cases where individuals are said to see Hashem are understood as either prophetic visions or insight into Hashem's essence.

The roots ראה, הביט, חזה – Rambam asserts that each of these words have more than one meaning and can refer not only to physical vision, but also to mental insight. As such, the phrases "רָאִיתִי אֶת י"י" or  "וָאֶרְאֶה אֶת י"י'" by Mikhaihu and Yeshayahu, "וּתְמֻנַת י"י יַבִּיט" with regards to Moshe, or "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱ-לֹהִים" by the nobility at Sinai might all refer to intellectual perception and do not mean that any of these individuals physically saw Hashem.

Revelation to Avot – "...וַיֵּרָא י״י אֶל" – Malbim and R. D"Z Hoffmann¹⁵ claim that this formulation (as opposed to the language of "...וַיֹּאמֶר י"י אֶל") refers to a unique type of prophecy in which Hashem not only speaks to a prophet but also appears to them in some visual image.

What do prophets see? R. Chananel, R"Y Bekhor Shor, Rambam and R. Avraham b. HaRambam all imply that every prophet might receive a different prophetic image, with some envisioning Hashem as a king on a throne and others seeing Him as a hero in war or as an elderly man wrapped in a prayer shawl. Sometimes, too, Hashem does not provide an image with a human shape at all, but rather signals His revelation via a glowing light¹⁶ or other created image.¹⁷  Finally, it is also possible that a prophet will see nothing at all, and the entire experience will be a purely cognitive one.

"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – These sources offer various explanations of the apparent contradiction between Hashem's assertion that "no man can see Me and live" and the many verses in which the simple sense of the text implies that man did in fact see Hashem:

• Physical vs. prophetic seeing – R. Chananel distinguishes between physically seeing Hashem, which is impossible, and prophets receiving an image in a dream or vision, which is possible.¹⁸
• Full understanding vs. prophetic image – Rambam, in contrast, asserts that the verse "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" refers not to the inability of mortals to see God, but to their inability to attain a deep, complete understanding of His essence. Other verses which speak of seeing God refer to prophetic visions or to a lower level of cognition, both of which can be safely achieved with proper preparation.
• Different levels of prophecy – R. Yosef Albo claims that Moshe, being on the highest level of prophecy, could never see Hashem even in a prophetic vision since his prophecies were unaffected by the imagination.¹⁹ Other prophets, though, could see images representing Hashem in their prophetic dreams.²⁰

"לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם" – Shadal asserts that Moshe's wording, "you did not see a "תְּמוּנָה" (a likeness) of Hashem", teaches not only that the masses did not physically see Hashem at Sinai,²¹ but that they did not see even a prophetic visualization of Him.²²

"Face to face" revelation at Sinai – Given both that these sources understand that Hashem does not have a face and that Devarim 4:15 explicitly states, "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם", all these sources interpret the phrase "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" non literally:

• Unmediated and/or conscious revelation – Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and R. Hoffmann assert that the description teaches that the nation apprehended Hashem without the mediation of Moshe, while Rambam claims that they uniquely heard His voice without the intervention of an angel.²³  Seforno adds a third possibility, that  "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" means that the nation received prophecy while fully in control of their senses. The phrase, thus, says nothing about actually seeing the face or any image of Hashem.
• Prophetic image – R. Bachya, following the Midrash²⁴ (and in contrast to Shadal above), suggests that the words "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" refers to the many images via which Hashem appeared to the different members of the nation during the revelation at Sinai. These refer to prophetic images, while the verse "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה" refers to the nation not having physically seen a picture of Hashem Himself.

יֵרֵד י״י לְעֵינֵי כׇל הָעָם

The elders at Sinai (Shemot 24) – These sources differ regarding both what the elders saw and whether or not they were deserving of death for so doing:

• Prophetic vision – According to many of these sources²⁵ the elders did not literally see Hashem, but received a prophetic vision in which they imagined Hashem as described. Shadal explains that this was a special honor since the masses had only heard Hashem's voice at Sinai²⁶ and were not privileged to also prophetically see any created image.²⁷
• Cognitive experience – Rambam and Ralbag, in contrast, assert that the verses speak of the elder's attempt to understand Hashem's essence. Rambam claims that due to insufficient preparation, they attained a flawed perception of God, and were, thus, deserving of death,²⁸ while Ralbag raises the possibility that their understanding was a praiseworthy achievement.²⁹

"כְּבוֹד י"י" – These sources suggest that, depending on the context, this term can refer to Hashem's nature, a created light or fire meant to signify His presence (and generally clothed in a cloud to protect viewers from its brilliance) or to Hashem's miracles. According to all these possibilities, in none of the verses in which someone is said to have seen "כְּבוֹד י"י" does it mean that they physically saw Hashem Himself.

Moshe's request: "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" – These sources divide in their understanding of what Moshe requested when he asked, "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" and in the meaning of Hashem's response, "לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי."

• Hashem's glory – Shadal³⁰ asserts that Moshe requested to see the created light of Hashem's glory, not in a prophetic dream but while awake.³¹ Hashem responded that it is impossible to view it frontally, but allowed him to do so in passing.³²
• Comprehension of the Divine – According to Rambam, R. Avraham b. HaRambam,³³ Seforno, and Malbim, Moshe was asking to understand some aspect of Hashem's being and existence. Hashem replied that a complete understanding was impossible, but Moshe could attain partial comprehension.³⁴

Uniqueness of Moshe – These commentators suggest that it was not the ability to receive a prophetic image of Hashem which elevated Moshe over others, as this was not unique (and might even be interpreted as signifying a prophetic deficiency).³⁵ Rather, it was the level and manner in which he received his prophecies which differentiated him. Moshe was capable of prophesying when awake³⁶ and could do so whenever he desired.³⁷ Moreover, Hashem communicated with him directly and not via an angel³⁸ so that he received clear messages, and not analogies and riddles.³⁹

Revelation of Hashem's Glory

Verses which speak of Hashem appearing to man must be reinterpreted to mean either that Hashem's glory (in the form of a created light, fire or cloud) was revealed, or that there was mediation of an angel.

Sources:OnkelosShemot 24:10-11About Targum Onkelos, R. Saadia Gaonin Otzar HaGeonim Berakhot 6bHaEmunot VeHaDeiot 2:10HaEmunot VeHaDeiot 2:12HaEmunot VeHaDeiot 3:5About R. Saadia Gaon, R"Y Albo2:28About R. Yosef Albo,

Corporeality of Hashem – This position denies the possibility that Hashem might take on bodily form, necessitating one to reinterpret any verses which imply that Hashem can be seen.  It does so by suggesting that the word Hashem in such verses is either short for "the glory of Hashem" or refers to an angel.  In other words, when Hashem is said to have appeared to a prophet⁴⁰ this either means that an angel spoke with the prophet or that Hashem's "glory" (rather than Hashem Himself) was revealed.

Nature of Hashem's glory and angels – R. Saadia understands Hashem's glory to be some brilliant visual sign created by Hashem to signify that it is He who is speaking to His prophets. He appears to understand angels in a similar way, considering them a lower, less radiant form of this created light. One, though, could also suggest that the two are not similar and that while Hashem's glory is created just for the moment, angels exist outside of their role in mediating Divine communication.

Why refer to an angel or Hashem's glory as Hashem? Ibn EzraShemot Second Commentary 14:24Shemot Second Commentary 24:10-11Shemot Second Commentary 33:20-21Vayikra 16:2Devarim 5:4Yeshayahu 6:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezra explains that a messenger is like the one who sends him since he is simply doing his bidding; as such he might take on his name.⁴¹ So, too, an angel fulfilling Hashem's will might be called by the name of Hashem.  R"Y Albo adds that when something belongs to or emanates from another, especially when it serves to represent the other, it might be called by its name. Hence, if Hashem creates a cloud or light to signify Himself, it might be called after Hashem.

"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – This approach might understand this statement in either of the following ways:

• R. Saadia asserts that it refers not to the inability to see Hashem's bodily form, as He has none,⁴² but the inability to see even His glory. The created light of Hashem's glory is so bright and powerful that no mortal can actually look at it directly and live. As such, even verses which are reinterpreted to refer to seeing just this glory must be further restricted to refer to only an indirect or veiled vision thereof.⁴³
• One could alternatively suggest that this verse refers to the impossibility of totally comprehending Hashem.  This, though, does not preclude those worthy of seeing  Hashem's glory from doing so even directly.

Face to face encounter at Sinai – According to this approach, the episode is described as a "face to face" encounter not because the people saw Hashem directly, but because they heard Him directly.⁴⁴ All they saw at Sinai was the brilliance of His glory which had descended on the mountain, itself shrouded in fire and smoke,⁴⁵ not Hashem Himself.

Elders at Sinai – R. Saadia and R"Y Albo assert that when the verse states, "וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱ-לֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל / וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱ-לֹהִים", this, too, refers to the glory of Hashem rather than Hashem Himself.⁴⁶  One might question, though, what was so unique about the vision, considering that the nation had also seen Hashem's glory on the mountain. They might answer that the nation saw this created light only from a far distance and while it was heavily veiled.⁴⁷ The elders, on the other hand, merited to view it from much closer and while less obscured.⁴⁸

The nation's viewing of  כְבוֹד י״י – According to R. Saadia, the cloud or fire which periodically appears to the people in the Wilderness is also referred to as "כְּבוֹד י"י" as it, too, serves to verify that Hashem is speaking to the nation's leaders. R. Saadia is not explicit but likely maintains that the cloud and fire are not themselves manifestations of Hashem's glory⁴⁹ but rather house Hashem's light within them, obscuring it enough to allow even the masses to look.⁵⁰ 

Moshe's request: "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" – R. Saadia maintains that Moshe requested that despite the general inability of humans to directly view Hashem's glory, that Hashem, nonetheless, give him the power to do so. Hashem replied that Moshe would not be able to see the light in its introductory phase ("לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי") when it is at it strongest, but Hashem would cover his eyes until that passed, and then Moshe would be able to see the final, less powerful rays ("וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי").‎⁵¹

Mediating role of angels – Both R. Saadia and R"Y Albo assume that, with the exception of Moshe, prophets never receive prophecies directly from Hashem, but rather via an angel.  This, then, is a second motivating factor to reinterpret any verses which speak of a prophet speaking to or seeing "Hashem" to refer to an angel.⁵²

Can man see angels? It is not clear whether R. Saadia thinks that angels can only be seen prophetically or also physically. As he implies that they are created images, but less radiant than Hashem's glory, it is possible that a prophet sees them directly.

Uniqueness of Moshe – This approach appears to suggest that though all, at times, might see some manifestation of Hashem's glory, the difference in level between prophets relates to the degree of brilliance which they are directly exposed to, with Moshe being permitted to see more than others. Moreover, while other prophets prophesy only via an angel, Moshe does so without mediation.

¹ Rashbam points to the treaties in Bereshit 15 and Yirmeyahu 34 as proof that one of the components of Biblical covenants is that the participants cut an animal and pass through its pieces.  [In light of Ancient Near Eastern treaties, it seems that this was meant to send a message that violation of the covenant would result in punishment and slaughter. See Treaties in Tanakh and the Ancient Near East for elaboration.]  Rashbam appears to be suggesting that as part of the covenantal process, Hashem allows the other party to see Him as he passes.

² Both Rashi and Rashbam touch on the issue, suggesting that either the nation or Moshe raised the possibility of the people seeing Hashem during revelation.  However, it is unclear what they think Hashem responded. In his comments to Shemot 19:9, Rashi has Moshe tell Hashem that the people desire direct communication with Him:, "רצוננו לראות את מלכנו".  The Leipzig 1 manuscript of Rashi then contains a later addition of R. Shemaya (see Rashi's comments to Shemot 19:10 and similarly Devarim 5:19Shemot 19:9-10Devarim 5:19About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki) which appears to present Hashem as agreeing only to direct verbal communication (לסבול כובד תוקף להבות פיו), but not a visual revelation.
Rashbam presents Moshe as asking Hashem if the reason He gave additional warnings about ascending the mountain was because He did not want the nation to even watch from afar ("שמא אתה מוסיף שאפילו להתקרב מעט כדי להסתכל ולראות אפילו רחוק מן ההר אסור?"). Due to a discrepancy between the Breslau manuscript of Rashbam's commentary and the Munich 252 and Oxford Marsh 225 manuscripts, it is unclear what Rashbam presents Hashem as answering. The former reads, "גם עתה לא אמרתי לראות, בלא עלייה לא אמרתי לך" (presenting Hashem as forbidding seeing) whereas the latter reads, "גם עתה לא אסרתי לראות, בלא עלייה לא אמרתי לך" (presenting Hashem as permitting seeing,  but from a distance). However, if Rashbam does maintain that the people here received a direct visual revelation, it is somewhat surprising that he does not include the event within his examples of covenantal ceremonies in which people were granted such a privilege.

³ See Rashbam's comments to Bereshit 48:8 where he asserts that at times one can see an image of another but not make out their face and that one may see Hashem in this manner and not be deserving of death.

⁴ See, for example, discussions in N. Slifkin, Was Rashi a Corporealist?, Hakirah 7 (2009): 81-205, and M. Zucker, No, Rashi Was Not a Corporealist, Hakirah 9 (2010): 15-43. For more general discussions of Jewish attitudes towards anthropomorphism and Hashem's corporeality, see Y. Lorberbaum, "על דעתם של חכמים ז"ל לא עלתה הגשמה מעולם - אנתרופומורפיות בספרות חז"ל - סקירת מחקר ביקורתית", Jewish Studies 40 (2000): 3-54, and S. Friedman, "צלם, דמות ותבנית", Sidra 22 (2007): 89-152.
Commentators who hailed from Moslem lands, such as R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel, and Rambam, tended to vehemently oppose the concept of a corporeal God, declaring such stance heretical.  They were likely influenced by Muslim doctrines of incorporeality.  Commentators living in Christian countries, in contrast, where the concept of a corporeal God was widely accepted, might not have found the idea so troubling and might have been been more willing to accept anthropomorphic language in both Tanakh and Aggadah as being literal and signifying that Hashem has a body.

⁵ However, for an opposing position, see Joseph Dan, "Ashkenazi Hasidism and the Maimonidean Controversy", Maimonidean Studies Vol. 3 (1995): 42-43, who argues that Taku "most probably... did not" believe in an anthropomorphic God.

⁶ See Bavli Yevamot 49b.  Rashi notes that this is why Yechezkel's vision of Hashem is referred to as "מראות אלהים", being dream-like in nature.

⁷ In Rashi's comments to Bemidbar 12:6 he writes that such prophets see "בחלום וחזיון", while on Bavli Sukkah 45b he explains that "a non-transparent glass" refers to one through which "אין יכולין לראות ממש".

⁸ In both of these cases the verses themselves contain ambiguity regarding who is appearing to the Avot as both mention not only Hashem but also explicitly refer to angels.

⁹ See, for example, Shemot 16:10, Shemot 24:16 andBemidbar 17:7. In his comments to Bemidbar 14:10 and 16:9, where the cloud is not mentioned, Rashi clarifies that here, too, Hashem's glory came in the cloud.

¹⁰ See above point, that Rashbam explains that Hashem appeared to Moshe in a cloud for this very reason.

¹¹ See Rashi on Bemidbar 14:10, "וכבוד י״י – הענן ירד שם".

¹² Similarly, when Vayikra 9:23 states that on the eighth day of the Tabernacle's consecration "Hashem's glory appeared", Rashbam explains that it refers to the miraculous fire than came to consume the offerings.

¹³ Rashi asserts that although Bemidbar 12:7 states that Hashem reveals himself to Moshe "במראה" and "וּתְמֻנַת י״י יַבִּיט", this does not mean that Moshe saw "מראה שכינה", but only "מראה אחוריים".

¹⁴ See the related topic of Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders.

¹⁵ See also Keli YekarBereshit 12:7About R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz.

¹⁶ See Yechezkel's description, "כְּמַרְאֵה הַקֶּשֶׁת אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בֶעָנָן בְּיוֹם הַגֶּשֶׁם כֵּן מַרְאֵה הַנֹּגַהּ סָבִיב הוּא מַרְאֵה דְּמוּת כְּבוֹד י״י".

¹⁷ Shadal suggests that there is perhaps a two step process. The prophet sees a "created image" which then awakens his heart to imagine Hashem.

¹⁸ As support he points to Hoshea's words, "וּבְיַד הַנְּבִיאִים אֲדַמֶּה" (Hoshea 12:11).

¹⁹ He is preceded in this by the Rambam who emphasizes that Moshe made no use of the "כח המדמה" while prophesying; he received the Divine message through pure intellect, without metaphor or visions. Rambam, though, does not suggest that this is the meaning of "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי".

²⁰ One might question this reading as the language of "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" appears to be a general statement referring to all men and not only Moshe.

²¹ According to him, had the verse read "לֹא רְאִיתֶם את ה" one could suggest that only a physical seeing of Hashem was precluded.  The addition of the word "תמונה" implies that even a created image of Hashem was not seen. See, however, the point below, that not everyone agrees.

²² In this Shadal follows the RanDerashot HaRan 9About R. Nissim Gerondi who similarly points out that though Hashem created a voice for the nation to hear, He intentionally did not create a visual for them to see lest they come to make images of Hashem.

²³ According to Rambam, at Sinai the nation only overheard Hashem's voice speaking to Moshe, and did not even comprehend His words. Yet, this voice was heard directly and not via an angel, and as such, can be termed a "face to face" encounter. See The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe for more.

²⁴ See Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot 15:215:219:11About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot and 19:1115:219:11About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot.

²⁵ See Ibn Ezra, R. Avraham b. HaRambam (in his first explanation of the term), R"Y Albo, Seforno, and Shadal.

²⁶ See his explanation of the phrase "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם" above

²⁷ As others were not meant to see such an image, one might have thought that the elders would be hurt for having done so. As such, the text shares that Hashem "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ"; they were unscathed.

²⁸ The verse's statement "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" teaches that they were deserving of punishment, and only due to Moshes intervention was it delayed.

²⁹ The verse's statement "לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ" teaches that they were deserving of punishment, and only due to Moshes intervention was it delayed. For elaboration on these varying evaluations of the elders, see Revelation to the Elders at Sinai.

³⁰ See also R. Saadia and R"Y Albo below and R"Y Bekhor Shor and R. Avraham b. HaRambam (in his first approach) here.

³¹ This, however, does not sufficiently explain what would have been unique about the encounter, given that many verses imply that the nation saw Hashem's glory non-prophetically all the time. Perhaps, Moshe was asking to see Hashem's glory unveiled (i.e. not from within the cloud or fire).

³² R"Y Bekhor Shor, in contrast, suggests that Moshe did not see the actual glory at all, but only its remnants after Hashem passed, much as one might see rays from the sun after it has set.

³³ See the second approach that he offers.

³⁴ Hashem, thus, told Moshe that though he could not comprehend Hashem's "face," he would be able to comprehend His "back" ("וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי").

³⁵ See above that according to Rambam and R"Y Albo, Moshe's uniqueness lay precisely in the fact that he did not receive such an image and made no use of his imaginative faculties when prophesying.

³⁶ See Ibn Ezra, Rambam, Seforno.

³⁷ See Ibn Ezra, Rambam.

³⁸ This is what is meant when the verses say, "אֲשֶׁר יְדָעוֹ י״י פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים". See Ibn Ezra, Rambam, and Abarbanel.

³⁹ See Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, Rambam, and Seforno.  R"Y Bekhor Shor is explicitly polemical, pointing out that the fact that Moshe received clear prophecies without analogies refutes the claims of "other nations" that the Torah is allegorical.  R"Y Bekhor Shor is likely referring to the typology of Christianity, which claims that many incidents or characters in Torah prefigure events in the life of Jesus.

⁴⁰ This applies equally to cases where a prophet claims to have seen Hashem.

⁴¹ See his formulation, "כי השליח יקרא בשם השולח, כי אחר שצוהו לעשות כן הוא עושה".

⁴² As such, it is not logical that Moshe would have requested to see it.

⁴³ For example, R. Saadia appears to maintain that prophets who see Hashem's "כבוד" do so only in a prophetic dream.

⁴⁴ According to R. Saadia, Hashem's words were directed at Moshe and the nation overheard them. Though at first glance it would be difficult to refer to this as "face to face", it is possible that R. Saadia thinks that as opposed to most prophecies, this one was not mediated by an angel, and in that sense it was direct.

⁴⁵ See Shemot 19:18, "וְהַר סִינַי עָשַׁן כֻּלּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֲשֶׁר יָרַד עָלָיו י״י בָּאֵשׁ וַיַּעַל עֲשָׁנוֹ כְּעֶשֶׁן הַכִּבְשָׁן".

⁴⁶ See also Targum Onkelos who writes, "וַחֲזוֹ יָת יְקָר אֱלָהָא דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל".

⁴⁷ As mentioned, the mountain was covered by a thick cloud and dense smoke when the glory descended.

⁴⁸ If one does not agree with R. Saadia that Hashem's glory can never be seen directly, then it is possible that, in contrast to the nation whose vision was clouded, the elders merited to see the light clearly.  .

⁴⁹ If they were, it would be difficult to understand why the masses are able to view them, but Moshe was not given permission to do so.

⁵⁰ Alternatively, he might maintain that the cloud and fire do not even house Hashem's light, and are their own distinct entities, referred to as "כבוד י"י" only because they take on the same function as the created glory of Hashem.

⁵¹ See R"Y Bekhor Shor similarly.

⁵² R"Y Albo asserts that in the beginning of Moshe's career, he, too, received prophecy via the mediation of an angel; only later did he merit "face to face" encounters.