Difference between revisions of "Shimshon and Shemuel/0"
m |
m |
||
Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
<p>The comparison of Shimshon and Shemuel serves to highlight how Shimshon does not appear to fully accomplish his mission, while Shemuel surpasses him in every respect:</p> | <p>The comparison of Shimshon and Shemuel serves to highlight how Shimshon does not appear to fully accomplish his mission, while Shemuel surpasses him in every respect:</p> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Partial leadership and partial salvation</b> –  Shimshon only "begins" to fight the Philistines ("וְהוּא יָחֵל לְהוֹשִׁיעַ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל"), and never fully leads the people, acting on his own and not in concert with with the nation.  <a href="RadakShofetim13-4" data-aht="source">Radak </a> explains that these two points are connected.  Due to the nation's low spiritual level, they merited only partial salvation.<fn>Note how the story opens, "וַיֹּסִיפוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂוֹת הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי ה' וַיִּתְּנֵם ה' בְּיַד פְּלִשְׁתִּים".  Their sins led them to be oppressed by the Philistines. Unlike the other stories of sefer Shofetim, though, this oppression is not followed by a cry to Hasehm, but merely by the appointment of Shimshon.  This might suggest that here the nation did not first repent, and as such, did not merit full salvation.</fn>  Thus, it was Shimshon's job to periodically smite the Philistines, but not to totally vanquish them.  Since incomplete conquest naturally leads to retaliation, Shimshon needed to act alone so that the Philistine vengeance would be aimed only at him and not the people as a whole.  Thus, Shimshon " | + | <li><b>Partial leadership and partial salvation</b> –  Shimshon only "begins" to fight the Philistines ("וְהוּא יָחֵל לְהוֹשִׁיעַ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל"), and never fully leads the people, acting on his own and not in concert with with the nation.  <a href="RadakShofetim13-4" data-aht="source">Radak </a> explains that these two points are connected.  Due to the nation's low spiritual level, they merited only partial salvation.<fn>Note how the story opens, "וַיֹּסִיפוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂוֹת הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי ה' וַיִּתְּנֵם ה' בְּיַד פְּלִשְׁתִּים".  Their sins led them to be oppressed by the Philistines. Unlike the other stories of sefer Shofetim, though, this oppression is not followed by a cry to Hasehm, but merely by the appointment of Shimshon.  This might suggest that here the nation did not first repent, and as such, did not merit full salvation.</fn>  Thus, it was Shimshon's job to periodically smite the Philistines, but not to totally vanquish them.  Since incomplete conquest naturally leads to retaliation, Shimshon needed to act alone so that the Philistine vengeance would be aimed only at him and not the people as a whole.  Thus, Shimshon "abandoned" his people to marry and live amongst the Philistines, recognizing that his isolation ensured their safety.</li> |
<li><b>Shemuel finishes the job</b> – The numerous parallels between the leaders and their births suggest that Shemuel is a corrective to Shimshon.  Whereas Shimshon strived to only physically save the nation, Shemuel looked to improve their spiritual state.  As such, they could merit full, and not just partial, salvation.</li> | <li><b>Shemuel finishes the job</b> – The numerous parallels between the leaders and their births suggest that Shemuel is a corrective to Shimshon.  Whereas Shimshon strived to only physically save the nation, Shemuel looked to improve their spiritual state.  As such, they could merit full, and not just partial, salvation.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>The mothers</b> – The difference between the leaders might be reflected in their parents as well.  While Mrs. Manoach did not actively seek to improve her situation, Channah turned to Hashem, and on her own offered her son to serve Him.  Channah | + | <li><b>The mothers</b> – The difference between the leaders might be reflected in their parents as well.  While Mrs. Manoach did not actively seek to improve her situation, Channah turned to Hashem, and on her own offered her son to serve Him.  Channah succeeded in bequeathing to Shemuel the notion that success hinges on turning to and serving Hashem, thereby allowing him to steer the nation in a new direction.</li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</page> | </page> | ||
</aht-xml> | </aht-xml> |
Version as of 03:50, 29 May 2015
Shimshon and Shemuel
Introduction
The Shimshon and Shemuel narratives each open with a scene in which the leader's birth and future destiny is promised. The two birth stories contain a significant number of plot similarities, buttressed by some linguistic allusions. The similarities, though, mainly serve to highlight the many contrasts between the narratives and the difference in character between the protagonists.
Content Parallels
Both stories revolve around a barren woman who is promised a child who then grows up to be a leader of the nation. There are many more specific parallels, which are summarized in the following table:
Mrs. Manoach and Channah |
|
Shimshon and Shemuel |
|
Male Figures |
|
Literary Allusions
There are a handful of linguistic parallels as well:
בשורת הולדת שמשון (שופטים יג) | בשורת הולדת שמואל (ספר שמואל א' א-ב) |
(יג:ב) וַיְהִי אִישׁ אֶחָד מִצָּרְעָה מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת הַדָּנִי וּשְׁמוֹ מָנוֹחַ | (א:א) וַיְהִי אִישׁ אֶחָד מִן הָרָמָתַיִם צוֹפִים מֵהַר אֶפְרָיִם וּשְׁמוֹ אֶלְקָנָה |
(יג:ה) וּמוֹרָה לֹא יַעֲלֶה עַל רֹאשׁוֹ כִּי נְזִיר אֱלֹהִים יִהְיֶה הַנַּעַר מִן הַבָּטֶן | (א:יא) וּנְתַתִּיו לַה' כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו וּמוֹרָה לֹא יַעֲלֶה עַל רֹאשׁוֹ |
(יג:כד) וַיִּגְדַּל הַנַּעַר וַיְבָרְכֵהוּ ה' | (ב:כא) וַיִּגְדַּל הַנַּעַר שְׁמוּאֵל עִם ה' |
Analysis
- Degree of similarity – All of the above phrases have a very high level of linguistic similarity.
- Distinctive phrases – Both of the phrases "וּמוֹרָה לֹא יַעֲלֶה עַל רֹאשׁוֹ"2 and "וַיִּגְדַּל הַנַּעַר"3 appear only in these two stories. The exact opening "וַיְהִי אִישׁ אֶחָד מִ... וּשְׁמוֹ" is also unique to these narratives but similar phrasing introduces the stories of the Idol of Michah, Shaul, Esther and Iyyov as well.4
- Content parallels – Though other stories of barren woman share components with each of these events,5 most of the specific parallels mentioned above do not appear in those stories.
Contrasts
Despite the many similarities, there are several important points of contrast between the narratives. These are summarized in the chart below:
Mrs. Manoach and Channah |
|
Shimshon and Shemuel |
|
Implications
The comparison of Shimshon and Shemuel serves to highlight how Shimshon does not appear to fully accomplish his mission, while Shemuel surpasses him in every respect:
- Partial leadership and partial salvation – Shimshon only "begins" to fight the Philistines ("וְהוּא יָחֵל לְהוֹשִׁיעַ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל"), and never fully leads the people, acting on his own and not in concert with with the nation. Radak explains that these two points are connected. Due to the nation's low spiritual level, they merited only partial salvation.6 Thus, it was Shimshon's job to periodically smite the Philistines, but not to totally vanquish them. Since incomplete conquest naturally leads to retaliation, Shimshon needed to act alone so that the Philistine vengeance would be aimed only at him and not the people as a whole. Thus, Shimshon "abandoned" his people to marry and live amongst the Philistines, recognizing that his isolation ensured their safety.
- Shemuel finishes the job – The numerous parallels between the leaders and their births suggest that Shemuel is a corrective to Shimshon. Whereas Shimshon strived to only physically save the nation, Shemuel looked to improve their spiritual state. As such, they could merit full, and not just partial, salvation.
- The mothers – The difference between the leaders might be reflected in their parents as well. While Mrs. Manoach did not actively seek to improve her situation, Channah turned to Hashem, and on her own offered her son to serve Him. Channah succeeded in bequeathing to Shemuel the notion that success hinges on turning to and serving Hashem, thereby allowing him to steer the nation in a new direction.