Difference between revisions of "Urim VeTummim/2"
m |
|||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
<p>The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).</p> | <p>The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).</p> | ||
<mekorot>several modern scholars<fn>For a list of scholars who view the Urim and Thummim as lots see C.V Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, (Indiana, 1997): 37-36 and notes 121-124 there. For several Hebrew sources, see N. H. Tur Sinai, אורים ותומים, Encylopedia Mikrait I 179-182 and U. Cassuto on Shemot 28:30.  These scholars dsagree as to the nature of the lot, some viewing it as a binary lot and others as more complicated.</fn></mekorot> | <mekorot>several modern scholars<fn>For a list of scholars who view the Urim and Thummim as lots see C.V Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, (Indiana, 1997): 37-36 and notes 121-124 there. For several Hebrew sources, see N. H. Tur Sinai, אורים ותומים, Encylopedia Mikrait I 179-182 and U. Cassuto on Shemot 28:30.  These scholars dsagree as to the nature of the lot, some viewing it as a binary lot and others as more complicated.</fn></mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>Biblical evidence</b> – Cassuto points to <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:38-42</a> as support for this approach. Shaul says, "הָבָה תָמִים", an allusion to the Urim and Tummim,<fn>See <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> who reads it this way. Many traditional commentators, however, appear to assume that the verse might refer to a regular lottery and that Shaul was not asking to bring the Urim and Tummim but requesting of Hashem that the lot he cast be true.</fn> but then the verses appear | + | <point><b>Biblical evidence</b> – Cassuto points to <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:38-42</a> as support for this approach. Shaul says, "הָבָה תָמִים", an allusion to the Urim and Tummim,<fn>See <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> who reads it this way. Many traditional commentators, however, appear to assume that the verse might refer to a regular lottery and that Shaul was not asking to bring the Urim and Tummim but requesting of Hashem that the lot he cast be true.</fn> but then the verses appear to describe a lottery, employing language such as "לכד and "הַפִּילוּ", elsewhere explicitly connected to lots being cast.<fn>See</fn>  Cassuto further notes that a survey of the other verses in which the word of God is sought either via the Urim and Tummim or the Efod<fn>He assumes that in these verses too, one asked via the Urim and Tummim which were on the Efod. See <a href="Bemidbar27-18-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 27:18-21</a>, <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:38-42</a>, <a href="ShemuelI23-9-12" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 23:9-12</a> and <a href="ShemuelI30-7-8" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 30:7-8</a>.</fn> shows that queries were always worded in a way which left only two possible answers,<fn>Questions could be answered with either a "yes" or "no", or a first or second possibility etc. He further notes that only one question could be answered at a time (see <a href="ShemuelI23-9-12" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 23:9-12</a>), presumably also related to the binary nature of the response.</fn> supporting the possibility that the divination involved a binary lottery.</point> |
− | <point><b>Septuagint</b> – Several modern scholars<fn>See above note.</fn> support this approach by turning to the Septuagint's version of <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:41</a>, which expands upon the Masoretic text and reads: "וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל למה לא ענית את עבדך היום אם יש בי או ביונתן בני העון הזה ה' אלהי ישראל הבה אורים ואם ישנו העון הזה בעמך ישראל הָבָה תָמִים. In the Septuagint, Shaul appears to be suggesting that if he and Yonatan are guilty the "ארים" lot should fall to them, whereas if the nation is guilty, the "תמים" lot would instead fall.</point> | + | <point><b>Septuagint</b> – Several modern scholars<fn>See above note.</fn> support this approach by turning to the Septuagint's version of <a href="ShemuelI14-38-42" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:41</a>, which expands upon the Masoretic text and reads: "וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל למה לא ענית את עבדך היום אם יש בי או ביונתן בני העון הזה ה' אלהי ישראל הבה אורים ואם ישנו העון הזה בעמך ישראל הָבָה תָמִים. In the Septuagint, Shaul appears to be suggesting that if he and Yonatan are guilty the "ארים" lot should fall to them, whereas if the nation is guilty, the "תמים" lot would instead fall to them.</point> |
− | <point><b>Meaning of names</b> – In light of the Septuagint text | + | <point><b>Meaning of names</b> – In light of the Septuagint text, Tur SInai and others suggest that "אורים" might relate to the word "ארור" (cursed, connoting guilt or a negative outcome) and "תמים" to innocence, or a positive outcome.</point> |
+ | <point><b>How did it work</b></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>No response?</b></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>anceint near eastern parallels</b></point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 11:29, 30 January 2022
Urim VeTumim
Exegetical Approaches
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.
- 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.3 These, though, appeared simultaneously and 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.4 Abarbanel, instead, suggests that Hashem's name illuminated the letters one by one, so that the message spelled itself.5
- Inspire prophecy – Ralbag, instead, suggests that focusing on the Divine name in the Urim and Tummim helped the priest attain prophecy. It was this prophecy alone which allowed him to answer the question posed. [According to him, nothing on the Choshen was illuminated or protruded.]
- Purpose – Targum Yonatan maintains that the name derives from their function, with Urim, related to אור (light), referring to how they illuminated Israel, telling them how to act, and Tummim, from "תם" (complete), referring to the fact that the predictions made were always fulfilled.
- Technique – 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.
Choshen Stones
The Urim and Tummim are identified with the stones of the Choshen on which were engraved the names of the tribes.
- Haketav VeHaKabbalah8 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.
- 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. 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.
Astrological Signs
The Urim and Tummim referred to forms of various astrological objects, such as the various stars and constellations.
- Ibn Ezra is intentionally obscure but claims that the Urim were made of gold and silver, perhaps implying that one was meant to represent the sun and the other the moon. He further alludes to the twelve constellations,14 perhaps what he thinks the Tummim represented. As such, it seems that according to him, the Urim and Tummin might have functioned as a sort of astrolabe, a model of the celestial spheres.
- Ralbag explains similarly, explicitly suggesting that the Urim refer to images of the stars, while the Tummim refer to forms of other celestial objects and their movers, including their prime mover, Hashem. According to him, then, the latter were presumably alluded to via some type of writing and not via a physical image.
Lottery
The Urim and Tummim functioned as a lottery. This opinion subdivides regarding the lottery dynamics:
Alphabet
The Urim and Tummim consisted of small pieces of wood or metal on which were inscribed the letters of the alphabet. When drawn randomly from the Choshen they would form words.
Binary Lots
The Urim and Tummim were two objects which served as lots, one representing a positive response and the other a negative one (or one representing one possible outcome and the other its alternative).