Difference between revisions of "Urim VeTummim/2"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 10: Line 10:
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="אוצרהגאוניםברכותהתשובותו" data-aht="source">Rav Shrira Gaon</a><a href="אוצרהגאוניםברכותהתשובותו" data-aht="source">אוצר הגאונים ברכות התשובות ו'</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary28-6" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 29:15</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotBeitHaBechirah4-1_2" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamHilkhotBeitHaBechirah4-1_2" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Beit HaBechirah 4:1</a><a href="RambamHilkhotKeleiHaMikdash10-10-13" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 10:10-13</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>,<fn>Rambam is not explicit, but this is how he has been understood by later commentators.&#160; See, for example, <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">HaKetav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink>.</fn> <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink></mekorot>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="אוצרהגאוניםברכותהתשובותו" data-aht="source">Rav Shrira Gaon</a><a href="אוצרהגאוניםברכותהתשובותו" data-aht="source">אוצר הגאונים ברכות התשובות ו'</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary28-6" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 29:15</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotBeitHaBechirah4-1_2" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamHilkhotBeitHaBechirah4-1_2" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Beit HaBechirah 4:1</a><a href="RambamHilkhotKeleiHaMikdash10-10-13" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 10:10-13</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>,<fn>Rambam is not explicit, but this is how he has been understood by later commentators.&#160; See, for example, <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">HaKetav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink>.</fn> <multilink><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahambHaRambamShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink></mekorot>
 
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28?</b> The lack of description of the Urim and Tummim might be one of the factors motivating this approach.&#160; If the Urim and Tummin are identical with the stones of the Choshen which are described at length, there is no need to describe them separately.</point>
 
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28?</b> The lack of description of the Urim and Tummim might be one of the factors motivating this approach.&#160; If the Urim and Tummin are identical with the stones of the Choshen which are described at length, there is no need to describe them separately.</point>
<point><b>No mention in Shemot 39?</b> For this same reason, there is no distinct description of the Urim and Tummim being created in Shemot 39. Their creation is included in the chapter's detailing of the making of the Choshen stones, engraving upon them the names of the tribes, and embedding them in their golden frame.</point>
+
<point><b>No mention in Shemot 39?</b> For this same reason, there is no distinct description of the Urim and Tummim being created in Shemot 39. Their creation is included in the chapter's detailing of the making of the Choshen stones.</point>
<point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b> – This approach might additionally be motivated by the similarity in language between 28:29 and 28:30. It assumes that both verses speak of the same object but highlight two different goals of the Urim and Tummim.&#160; The names on the stones were meant to ensure that the tribes were constantly remembered, while the framework as a whole allowed Aharon to determine the answers to their questions.<fn>The Choshen is known as "the breastplate of judgment" because via it Aharon was able to determine "מִשְׁפַּט בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", how they should act and what they should do.</fn></point>
+
<point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b> – This approach might additionally be motivated by the similarity in language between 28:29 and 28:30. It assumes that both verses speak of the same object but highlight two different roles of the Urim and Tummim.&#160; The stones were meant to both ensure that the tribes were constantly remembered and to enable Aharon to determine the answers to their questions.<fn>The Choshen is known as "the breastplate of judgment" because via it Aharon was able to determine "מִשְׁפַּט בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", how they should act and what they should do.</fn></point>
<point><b>Why are they called Urim and Tumim?</b> <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Haketav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink><fn>He brings this as a second possible reason, first noting the reasoning given by Lekach Tov that the name relates to the stones' function.</fn> suggests that the name might relate to the stones' physical properties.&#160; They were lustrous (full of "אור") and being unhewn, complete and perfect ("תם"). Lekach Tov, instead, suggests that the name reflects the divining function of the stones. Urim stems from the word "אור",&#160; for they enlightened Israel when they had a question. Tummim relates to the word "תם", completeness or integrity, for their determinations always came true.</point>
+
<point><b>Why are they called Urim and Tumim?</b> <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Haketav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink><fn>He brings this as a second possible reason, first noting the reasoning given by Lekach Tov that the name relates to the stones' function.</fn> suggests that the name might relate to the stones' physical properties.&#160; They were lustrous (full of "אור") and being unhewn, were complete and perfect ("תם"). Lekach Tov, instead, suggests that the name reflects the divining function of the stones. Urim stems from the word "אור",&#160; for they enlightened Israel when they had a question. Tummim relates to the word "תם", completeness or integrity, for their determinations always came true.</point>
 
<point><b>Why two names?</b> This position must explain why the same object is given two distinct names:<br/>
 
<point><b>Why two names?</b> This position must explain why the same object is given two distinct names:<br/>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
Line 18: Line 18:
 
<li>It is also possible that the Urim and Tummim is the name given to the entire framework of twelve stones in their gold settings.<fn><sup id="reffn2" class="fnRef mceNonEditable"><a class="ahtNonEditable" href="#fn2">2</a></sup></fn> The Choshen, in contrast, referred to the multicolored woven fabric, or perhaps to the fabric together with the framework of stones, while the stones themselves each have individual names.</li>
 
<li>It is also possible that the Urim and Tummim is the name given to the entire framework of twelve stones in their gold settings.<fn><sup id="reffn2" class="fnRef mceNonEditable"><a class="ahtNonEditable" href="#fn2">2</a></sup></fn> The Choshen, in contrast, referred to the multicolored woven fabric, or perhaps to the fabric together with the framework of stones, while the stones themselves each have individual names.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Ralbag<fn>See also Abarbanel.</fn> questions that if the Urim and Tummim are identical with the Choshen stones, how is one to understand the phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל<fn>The phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל" is understood as if written "וַיִּתֵּן על".</fn> הַחֹשֶׁן"<b>,</b> which implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen? Moreover, were not the stones already part of the Choshen, as implied by the phrase "וַיְמַלְאוּ בוֹ אַרְבָּעָה טוּרֵי אָבֶן" (Shemot 39:10). <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">HaKetav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink> answers that 39:10 refers only to the making of hollows in which the stones were to be later set.<fn>He points to Rashi who reads the verse in this way.&#160; According to HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Rashi understands the word "בו" to mean "for it" rather than "in it".</fn> In Vayikra 8:8, Moshe then attaches the entire framework of stones (a distinct object) onto the embroidered square of the Choshen.</point>
+
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Ralbag<fn>See also Abarbanel.</fn> questions that if the Urim and Tummim are identical with the Choshen stones, how is one to understand the phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן"<b>,</b> which implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen? Moreover, were not the stones already part of the Choshen before the days of consecration, as implied by the phrase "וַיְמַלְאוּ בוֹ אַרְבָּעָה טוּרֵי אָבֶן" (Shemot 39:10). <multilink><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">HaKetav VeHaKabbalah</a><a href="HaKetavVeHaKabbalahShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Yaakov Mecklenburg (HaKetav VeHaKabbalah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg</a></multilink> answers that 39:10 refers only to the making of hollows in which the stones were to be later set.<fn>He points to Rashi who reads the verse in this way.&#160; According to HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Rashi understands the word "בו" to mean "for it" rather than "in it".</fn> In Vayikra 8:8, Moshe then attaches the entire framework of stones (a distinct object) onto<fn>The phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל" is understood as if written "וַיִּתֵּן על".</fn> the embroidered square of the Choshen.</point>
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b> According to Rambam (and his son), when asked a question, the priest would get divine inspiration, look at the Choshen, and via prophecy see certain letters from the engraved names protrude to spell a reply. According to him, the letters on the stones themselves did not physically shine or pop out and there was no supernatural component to the Choshen. It merely facilitated prophecy.</point>
+
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b> According to Rambam, when asked a question, the priest would get divine inspiration, look at the Choshen, and via prophecy see certain letters from the engraved names protrude to spell a reply. According to him, the letters on the stones themselves did not physically shine or pop out and there was no supernatural component to the Choshen. It merely facilitated prophecy.</point>
<point><b>Use in Second Temple Period</b> – According to Rambam, though the Urim and Tummim still existed in second temple times, as they were part of the Choshen and necessary to complete the priestly garb, they no longer played a divining role. This resulted from the lesser level of the priests of the time, for only one who had the Divine spirit (רוח הקודש) rest upon them could answer the nation's questions.</point>
+
<point><b>Use in Second Temple Period</b> – According to Rambam, though the Urim and Tummim still existed in second temple times, as they were part of the Choshen and necessary to complete the priestly garb, they no longer played a divining role. This resulted from the lesser level of the priests of the time, for only one who had the Divine spirit (רוח הקודש) rest upon them could attain the Divine inspiration necessary to answer the nation's questions.</point>
 
<point><b>What is the relationship between the Urim and Tumim?</b> This position would suggest that there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. When the Urim is mentioned alone, it is simply an abbreviation.</point>
 
<point><b>What is the relationship between the Urim and Tumim?</b> This position would suggest that there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. When the Urim is mentioned alone, it is simply an abbreviation.</point>
 
<point><b>Definite Article</b> – HaKetav VeHaKabbalah suggests that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article because they indeed refer back to something known, the Choshen stones which have been spoken about previously.</point>
 
<point><b>Definite Article</b> – HaKetav VeHaKabbalah suggests that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article because they indeed refer back to something known, the Choshen stones which have been spoken about previously.</point>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Script
 
<category>Script
<p>The Urim and Tummim consisted of an inscription or writing of some sort.&#160; This position subdivides as to the content of that script</p>
+
<p>The Urim and Tummim consisted of an inscription or writing of some sort.&#160; This position subdivides as to the content of that script:</p>
 
<opinion>Name of Hashem
 
<opinion>Name of Hashem
 
<p>The Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the proper name of Hashem (or perhaps several names of Hashem) inserted into the folds of the Choshen.</p>
 
<p>The Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the proper name of Hashem (or perhaps several names of Hashem) inserted into the folds of the Choshen.</p>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 28:30</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #1, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:6</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink></mekorot>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a><a href="TargumPseudo-JonathanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 28:30</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> #1, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelShemot28-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:6</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink></mekorot>
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot</b> – Ramban explains that since the Urim and Tummim were simply an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of the Israelite donations, there is no command and no description of how they were made. He posits that either Moshe himself wrote the name via Divine secret, or that the inscription was heavenly made.</point>
+
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39</b> – Ramban explains that since the Urim and Tummim were simply an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of the Israelite donations, there is no command and no description of how they were made. He posits that either Moshe himself wrote the name via Divine secret, or that the inscription was heavenly made.</point>
<point><b>Definite article</b> – Ramban points to this as further proof of his position, suggesting that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article as "the" Urim and Tummim due to their holy status or because of their Divine creation.<fn>He compares it to the description of the cherubs who were placed to guard the Garden of Eden who are similarly referred to as "the" cherubs even though they had not been mentioned earlier.</fn></point>
+
<point><b>Definite article</b> – Ramban points to this as further proof of his position, suggesting that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article, as "the" Urim and Tummim, due to their holy status or because of their Divine creation.<fn>He compares it to the description of the cherubs who were placed to guard the Garden of Eden who are similarly referred to as "the" cherubs even though they had not been mentioned earlier.</fn></point>
 
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Abarbanel notes that this verse, too, supports this approach, for it implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen. The fact that the Choshen was folded over to form a pocket<fn>See Rashbam on 28:16.</fn>&#160; further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the above position).</point>
 
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Abarbanel notes that this verse, too, supports this approach, for it implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen. The fact that the Choshen was folded over to form a pocket<fn>See Rashbam on 28:16.</fn>&#160; further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the above position).</point>
 
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b><ul>
 
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b><ul>
 
<li><b>Spell out message</b> – Ramban suggests that when asked a question, the power from the Divine names of the Urim caused certain letters from the names on the Choshen stones to be illuminated.<fn>Cf. R. Yochanan in Yoma 63b that the letters protruded.</fn> These, though, were not in order, and so other Divine names from the Tummim, inspired the priest so he would correctly arrange them to form a word.<fn>One could have alternatively suggested that the letters shone and the priest on his own unscrambled them to form a word,&#160; though this would potentially allow for human error.</fn></li>
 
<li><b>Spell out message</b> – Ramban suggests that when asked a question, the power from the Divine names of the Urim caused certain letters from the names on the Choshen stones to be illuminated.<fn>Cf. R. Yochanan in Yoma 63b that the letters protruded.</fn> These, though, were not in order, and so other Divine names from the Tummim, inspired the priest so he would correctly arrange them to form a word.<fn>One could have alternatively suggested that the letters shone and the priest on his own unscrambled them to form a word,&#160; though this would potentially allow for human error.</fn></li>
<li>I<b>nspire prophecy</b> – Ralbag, instead, suggests that focusing on the Divine name in the Urim and Tummim helped the priest attain prophecy. [According to him, nothing on the Choshen was illuminated or protruded.] </li>
+
<li>I<b>nspire prophecy</b> – Ralbag, instead, suggests that focusing on the Divine name in the Urim and Tummim helped the priest attain prophecy. [According to him, nothing on the Choshen was illuminated or protruded.]</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
 
<point><b>Why are they called Urim and Tummim?</b><ul>
 
<point><b>Why are they called Urim and Tummim?</b><ul>
<li>Targum Yonatan maintains that the name derives from their function, with Urim referring to how they illuminated Israel as to how they should act, and Tummim referring to the fact that the predictions made were always fulfilled.&#160;</li>
+
<li>Targum Yonatan maintains that the name derives from their function, with Urim referring to how they illuminated Israel, telling them how to act, and Tummim referring to the fact that the predictions made were always fulfilled.&#160;</li>
 
<li>Ramban, alternatively, suggests that the name refers to the techniques by which the divination occurred, The Urim relates to the shining of the letters and Tummim to the perfection given to the priest which enabled him to unscramble the letters to form a message.</li>
 
<li>Ramban, alternatively, suggests that the name refers to the techniques by which the divination occurred, The Urim relates to the shining of the letters and Tummim to the perfection given to the priest which enabled him to unscramble the letters to form a message.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
 
<point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b></point>
 
<point><b>Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30</b></point>
 
<point><b>Use in Second Temple Period</b> – Rashi</point>
 
<point><b>Use in Second Temple Period</b> – Rashi</point>
<point><b>Relationship between Urim and Tummim</b> – According to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct, whereas according to Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) and Rashi who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. All these sources, however, would likely suggest that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim"</point>
+
<point><b>Relationship between Urim and Tummim</b> – According to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct, whereas according to Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) and Rashi who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. All these sources, however, would likely suggest that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim" is simply a shortened formulation.</point>
<point><b>Efod</b></point>
+
<point><b>Efod</b> – Raban suggests that the secrets of the Urim and Tummim and its DIvine names might have been passed on to the learned of Israel. Thus others too made Efods with a Choshen and Divine names and used them periodically to consult.</point>
 
</opinion>
 
</opinion>
 
<opinion>Letters of the Alphabet
 
<opinion>Letters of the Alphabet
Line 49: Line 49:
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="ShadalVayikra8-8" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalVayikra8-8" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:8</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="HoilMosheShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Hoil Moshe</a><a href="HoilMosheShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi (Hoil Moshe)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi</a></multilink></mekorot>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="ShadalVayikra8-8" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalVayikra8-8" data-aht="source">Vayikra 8:8</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="HoilMosheShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Hoil Moshe</a><a href="HoilMosheShemot28-30" data-aht="source">Shemot 28:30</a><a href="R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi (Hoil Moshe)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi</a></multilink></mekorot>
 
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot</b> – Since the letter tablets did not need to be crafted specially, and were not made by by Betzalel, there is no desciption of them in the commands of Shemot 28 and no mention of them in the verses detailing the fulfillment of the commands in Shemot 39.</point>
 
<point><b>No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot</b> – Since the letter tablets did not need to be crafted specially, and were not made by by Betzalel, there is no desciption of them in the commands of Shemot 28 and no mention of them in the verses detailing the fulfillment of the commands in Shemot 39.</point>
<point><b>Meaning of Name</b> – Shadal suggests that each of the letters of the alphabet might have been given unique names, with aleph referred to as "אור" (appropriate for the first letter) and taf as "תם" (fitting for the final, letter).&#160; All the letters together, from aleph to taf, were called "Urim and Tummim".</point>
+
<point><b>Meaning of Name</b> – Shadal suggests that each of the letters of the alphabet might have been given unique names, with aleph referred to as "אור" (appropriate for the first letter) and taf as "תם" (fitting for the final letter).&#160; All the letters together, from aleph to taf, were called "Urim and Tummim".</point>
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Shadal suggests that the fact that Moshe first inserted the Urim and Tummim into the pocket of the Choshen during the consecration ceremony implies that they were not a fixed part if it and were meant to be removed periodically The fact that the Choshen was folded to form a pocket further implies that it was meant to serve as a holder. As such, viewing the Urim and Tummim as individual letter blocks matches the description.</point>
+
<point><b>"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8)</b> – Shadal suggests that the fact that Moshe first inserted the Urim and Tummim into the pocket of the Choshen during the consecration ceremony implies that they were not a fixed part if it and were meant to be removed periodically. Moreover, the fact that the Choshen was folded to form a pocket further implies that it was meant to serve as a holder. As such, viewing the Urim and Tummim as individual letter blocks matches the description.</point>
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b> Shadal suggests that the priest would ramdomly take out one letter at a time and Divine providence would thereby provide an appropriate response to whatever question was asked.</point>
+
<point><b>How did the divination work?</b> Shadal suggests that the priest would randomly take out one letter at a time and Divine providence would thereby provide an appropriate response to whatever question was asked.</point>
 +
<point><b>Definite article</b> – If the Urim and Tummin is simply another name for the alphabet, then it was a known entity, explaining the presence of the definite article.</point>
 
</opinion>
 
</opinion>
 
</category>
 
</category>

Version as of 12:50, 29 January 2022

Urim VeTumim

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

The Choshen Stones

The Urim and Tummim are identified with the stones of the Choshen on which were engraved the names of the tribes.

No description in Shemot 28? The lack of description of the Urim and Tummim might be one of the factors motivating this approach.  If the Urim and Tummin are identical with the stones of the Choshen which are described at length, there is no need to describe them separately.
No mention in Shemot 39? For this same reason, there is no distinct description of the Urim and Tummim being created in Shemot 39. Their creation is included in the chapter's detailing of the making of the Choshen stones.
Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30 – This approach might additionally be motivated by the similarity in language between 28:29 and 28:30. It assumes that both verses speak of the same object but highlight two different roles of the Urim and Tummim.  The stones were meant to both ensure that the tribes were constantly remembered and to enable Aharon to determine the answers to their questions.2
Why are they called Urim and Tumim? Haketav VeHaKabbalahShemot 28:30About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg3 suggests that the name might relate to the stones' physical properties.  They were lustrous (full of "אור") and being unhewn, were complete and perfect ("תם"). Lekach Tov, instead, suggests that the name reflects the divining function of the stones. Urim stems from the word "אור",  for they enlightened Israel when they had a question. Tummim relates to the word "תם", completeness or integrity, for their determinations always came true.
Why two names? This position must explain why the same object is given two distinct names:
  • Rav Shrira Gaon suggests that the additional name is simply a sign of praise, highlighting the unique and important nature of the object.
  • It is also possible that the Urim and Tummim is the name given to the entire framework of twelve stones in their gold settings.4 The Choshen, in contrast, referred to the multicolored woven fabric, or perhaps to the fabric together with the framework of stones, while the stones themselves each have individual names.
"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8) – Ralbag5 questions that if the Urim and Tummim are identical with the Choshen stones, how is one to understand the phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן", which implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen? Moreover, were not the stones already part of the Choshen before the days of consecration, as implied by the phrase "וַיְמַלְאוּ בוֹ אַרְבָּעָה טוּרֵי אָבֶן" (Shemot 39:10). HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 28:30About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg answers that 39:10 refers only to the making of hollows in which the stones were to be later set.6 In Vayikra 8:8, Moshe then attaches the entire framework of stones (a distinct object) onto7 the embroidered square of the Choshen.
How did the divination work? According to Rambam, when asked a question, the priest would get divine inspiration, look at the Choshen, and via prophecy see certain letters from the engraved names protrude to spell a reply. According to him, the letters on the stones themselves did not physically shine or pop out and there was no supernatural component to the Choshen. It merely facilitated prophecy.
Use in Second Temple Period – According to Rambam, though the Urim and Tummim still existed in second temple times, as they were part of the Choshen and necessary to complete the priestly garb, they no longer played a divining role. This resulted from the lesser level of the priests of the time, for only one who had the Divine spirit (רוח הקודש) rest upon them could attain the Divine inspiration necessary to answer the nation's questions.
What is the relationship between the Urim and Tumim? This position would suggest that there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. When the Urim is mentioned alone, it is simply an abbreviation.
Definite Article – HaKetav VeHaKabbalah suggests that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article because they indeed refer back to something known, the Choshen stones which have been spoken about previously.

Script

The Urim and Tummim consisted of an inscription or writing of some sort.  This position subdivides as to the content of that script:

Name of Hashem

The Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the proper name of Hashem (or perhaps several names of Hashem) inserted into the folds of the Choshen.

No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39 – Ramban explains that since the Urim and Tummim were simply an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of the Israelite donations, there is no command and no description of how they were made. He posits that either Moshe himself wrote the name via Divine secret, or that the inscription was heavenly made.
Definite article – Ramban points to this as further proof of his position, suggesting that the Urim and Tummim are referred to with a definite article, as "the" Urim and Tummim, due to their holy status or because of their Divine creation.8
"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8) – Abarbanel notes that this verse, too, supports this approach, for it implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen. The fact that the Choshen was folded over to form a pocket9  further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the above position).
How did the divination work?
  • Spell out message – Ramban suggests that when asked a question, the power from the Divine names of the Urim caused certain letters from the names on the Choshen stones to be illuminated.10 These, though, were not in order, and so other Divine names from the Tummim, inspired the priest so he would correctly arrange them to form a word.11
  • Inspire prophecy – Ralbag, instead, suggests that focusing on the Divine name in the Urim and Tummim helped the priest attain prophecy. [According to him, nothing on the Choshen was illuminated or protruded.]
Why are they called Urim and Tummim?
  • Targum Yonatan maintains that the name derives from their function, with Urim referring to how they illuminated Israel, telling them how to act, and Tummim referring to the fact that the predictions made were always fulfilled. 
  • Ramban, alternatively, suggests that the name refers to the techniques by which the divination occurred, The Urim relates to the shining of the letters and Tummim to the perfection given to the priest which enabled him to unscramble the letters to form a message.
Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30
Use in Second Temple Period – Rashi
Relationship between Urim and Tummim – According to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct, whereas according to Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) and Rashi who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim. All these sources, however, would likely suggest that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim" is simply a shortened formulation.
Efod – Raban suggests that the secrets of the Urim and Tummim and its DIvine names might have been passed on to the learned of Israel. Thus others too made Efods with a Choshen and Divine names and used them periodically to consult.

Letters of the Alphabet

The Urim and Tummim consisted of small pieces of wood or metal on which were inscribed the letters of the alphabet.

No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot – Since the letter tablets did not need to be crafted specially, and were not made by by Betzalel, there is no desciption of them in the commands of Shemot 28 and no mention of them in the verses detailing the fulfillment of the commands in Shemot 39.
Meaning of Name – Shadal suggests that each of the letters of the alphabet might have been given unique names, with aleph referred to as "אור" (appropriate for the first letter) and taf as "תם" (fitting for the final letter).  All the letters together, from aleph to taf, were called "Urim and Tummim".
"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8) – Shadal suggests that the fact that Moshe first inserted the Urim and Tummim into the pocket of the Choshen during the consecration ceremony implies that they were not a fixed part if it and were meant to be removed periodically. Moreover, the fact that the Choshen was folded to form a pocket further implies that it was meant to serve as a holder. As such, viewing the Urim and Tummim as individual letter blocks matches the description.
How did the divination work? Shadal suggests that the priest would randomly take out one letter at a time and Divine providence would thereby provide an appropriate response to whatever question was asked.
Definite article – If the Urim and Tummin is simply another name for the alphabet, then it was a known entity, explaining the presence of the definite article.

Astrological Signs

Lottery