When Did the Ceremony on Mt. Eival Occur/2

When Did the Ceremony on Mt. Eival Occur?

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Before the Conquest

The ceremony at Mt. Eival took place on the same day that the Israelites crossed the Jordan River and entered Israel.

Sources:4QJosh, Tosefta SotahSotah 8:6-7About the Tosefta, R. Yehuda and R. Eliezer in Yerushalmi SotahSotah 7:3About the Yerushalmi, Bavli SotahSotah 35bSotah 36aAbout the Bavli, RashiDevarim 27:2Yehoshua 4:3-9, 20Yehoshua 8:30-33About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, R. Yosef KaraYehoshua 8:30-33About R. Yosef Kara, RadakYehoshua 8:30-35About R. David Kimchi, R. BachyaDevarim 27:1-3About R. Bachya b. Asher, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahDevarim 27:2About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg

Chronology of the chapters – These commentators all maintain that the ceremony at Mt. Eival is not recorded in its chronological place (which would have been in Chapter 4),¹ but do not explain the reason for the achronology.

"בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן" – According to this approach, the word "בַּיּוֹם" is understood literally to refer to the very same day that the nation crossed the Jordan River.  It is this directive (and the statement that Yehoshua acted as commanded by Moshe) which motivates these sources to posit that Yehoshua must not have waited before setting up the ceremony.

How did they get to Mt. Eival? This position must explain how the entire nation (including children)² could have traveled all the way from Gilgal to Mt. Eival (and back) in one day, especially if this was in still unconquered territory.³  The commentators offer two possible solutions:

• Miracle – Tosefta Sotah 8:6 places Mt. Eival near Shekhem,⁴ but asserts that Hashem miraculously brought the nation there.
• Different mountain – R. Eliezer,⁵ in contrast, maintains that the verses refer not to the Mt. Eival and Mt. Gerizim which are near Shekhem, but to two mountains that are close to the Jordan.⁶ As evidence, he points to the Torah's description of the site as being "מוּל הַגִּלְגָּל".‎⁷

Why now? Since the ceremony marked a renewal of the covenant between Hashem and the Nation of Israel,⁸ it was appropriate to do so immediately upon entering the land.  Furthermore, in writing the Torah on the stones, the nation announced their recognition that the imminent conquest was contingent on their observance of the Torah.⁹

Stones for the ceremony – According to most of these sources,¹⁰ the stones that were used for the ceremony had been taken from the Yarden, and are equated with those described in Yehoshua 4:2-3.¹¹  The people carried the twelve rocks to the mountain, and then returned them to Gilgal where they were set up as memorial. Radak points out that the description of the gathering and erecting of the stones in Gilgal concludes with "כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ" (Yehoshua 4:10) which might support the idea that this act was a fulfillment of the commands of Devarim 27.¹²

Why were  Mt. Eival and Gerizim chosen? If the mountains were near the Jordan, that could explain their choice.  If they were more centrally located, however, it is not clear why Hashem would choose a site that required a miracle to reach. In addition, it is strange that Hashem would choose to have the ceremony there rather than in Gilgal itself, considering that they were to disassemble the rocks from the mountain only to re-erect them in Gilgal.¹³

Memorial for crossing – According to Yehoshua 4, the monument in Gilgal was meant to memorialize the miracle of the crossing.  Using the very stones from Mt. Eival for this purpose might be a further expression of the idea that it is only through Torah and observance of God's covenant that the people merit miracles.

Relationship between Devarim 8:1-3 and 8:4-8 – These sources differ in how they explain the doubling:

• Two commandments – According to Rashi the two sets of verses constitute two distinct commandments.  Verses 1-3 refer to the stones that were to be set up in the Jordan River (as described in Yehoshua 4:9), while verses 4-8 refer to the stones which were to be erected on Mt. Eival.¹⁴
• כלל ופרט – R. Bachya, in contrast, asserts that all of the verses speak of the stones used in the ceremony at Mt. Eival.¹⁵  The doubling is simply a "כלל ופרט", a literary technique in which a unit opens with a general statement whose details are then elaborated upon.

Purpose of the writing – Rashi, following the Midrash, asserts that the entire Torah was written upon the stones in seventy languages.¹⁶  This would suggest that the stones were meant to serve as an educational tool, to help spread Torah to all the nations.

Mid-Conquest

The nation went to Mt. Eival after their defeat of the Ai, as the placement of the event in Sefer Yehoshua suggests.

Sources:perhaps RalbagDevarim 27:2-10Yehoshua 8:30-31About R. Levi b. Gershom,¹⁷ AbarbanelDevarim 27:1About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel,

Chronology of the chapters – This position maintains the chronology of the chapters in Sefer Yehoshua, asserting that the ceremony appears in the text exactly when it took place.

Relationship between Devarim 8:1-3 and 8:4-8 – Abarbanel claims that the opening verses of the unit are a description of what the people will desire to do on the day of the crossing of the Jordan, while verses 4ff represent Hashem's command of what they should do instead.¹⁸  The people, in the manner of conquerors everywhere, will naturally be inclined to memorialize the crossing in writing,¹⁹ for their own honor. Hashem therefore tells them that they should build not a monument, but an altar, and write on its stones not the narrative of the crossing but words of Torah.  These stones should be erected specifically on Mt. Eival. As such, the stones will serve to glorify God rather than man.

"בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ" – According to Abarbanel, Hashem had never commanded the people to enact the ceremony on the day that they entered Israel.  The statement "וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן" referred only to what the people on their own would intend to do.  Hashem's directive was more general, "וְהָיָה בְּעׇבְרְכֶם אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן", telling the nation only that they must erect the stones at some point after crossing into Israel.  This meant that Yehoshua had no reason to try to implement Hashem's command immediately.

"כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה עֶבֶד י"י אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" – The verse can state that Yehoshua acted as commanded since he really had not veered from the directive in Devarim.

Where were the mountains? Abarbanel does not definitively determine the location of the mountains, opting instead to bring the opinions of both R. Yehuda (that they were in the central region of the land) and R. Eliezer (that they were near Gilgal, close to the Jordan) without deciding between the two.

Why now?

• Abarbanel asserts that after Yehoshua saw that Akhan had violated the covenant,²⁰ leading to the defeat against the Ai, he decided it was an opportune time to renew the covenant and warn the people of the curses to befall all offenders.
• If the mountain was near Shekhem, it is also possible that this was simply the earliest opportunity to keep Hashem's directive.  It was only after conquering the Ai, that Mt. Eival and Mt Gerizim were accessible to the people.

Purpose of the writing on the stones – Abarbanel offers two possible explanations:

• As mentioned above, the stones were meant to replace the victory monuments of conquering armies, highlighting how Israel perceived victory as stemming from Hashem and observance of His commandments rather than from their own might.
• Alternatively, the stones were a fulfillment of the commandment, "וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל מְזֻזוֹת בֵּיתֶךָ וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ", and served as "mezuzot" at the doorposts to the Land of Israel.

Why were Mt. Eival and Mt Gerizim chosen? If the two mountains were close to the Jordan, and the stones were meant to serve as mezuzot, then it is logical why these might have been chosen.  If, on the other hand, the stones were meant to be a victory monument, a more central location might have been preferred.

Relationship to the stones in Gilgal – Abarbanel claims that the stones mentioned in Yehoshua 4 have nothing to do with those erected on Mt. Eival.  The monument in Gilgal was meant only to commemorate the miracle of the splitting of the Jordan.²¹   Abarbanel explains that the concluding phrase, that Yehoshua spoke the words of Hashem,  "כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ" is unrelated to the commands of Devarim 27.²²  It rather refers to Yehoshua relaying to the nation Hashem's speech of encouragement in Yehoshua 1, which paralleled Moshe's speech of Devarim 11.²³

After the Conquest

The Israelites first performed the ceremony after they finished the Conquest.

Sources:JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 5:1:19About Josephus, R. Yishmael in Midrash Tannaim²⁴

Chronology of the chapters – According to this approach the description of the ceremony at Mt. Eival is not written in its chronological place, appearing earlier than where it actually occurred. It is not clear, however, why the prophet would have chosen to tell the story achronologically, considering that it would not have interrupted the story line to tell of the event in its proper place.

After the conquest or settlement? While R. Yishmael places the ceremony after the 14 years of conquest and settlement, Josephus has it occur earlier, after the final battle but before the land is divided among the tribes.

"וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן" – This position could read the word "בַּיּוֹם" to mean "period of time" rather than "day".²⁵ Hashem had not mandated that the people travel to Mt. Eival on the very day that they entered Israel but during that general period of time.

Where were the mountains? Josephus posits that the mountains were in the vicinity of Shekhem.

Why now? This position would likely explain that Yehoshua waited until the nation was at peace so as to be able to enact the ceremony without fear of potential attack.

Why were Mt. Eival and Mt. Gerizim chosen? The mountains might have been chosen for practical purposes as the acoustics in the area would allow the blessings and curses to be heard by all.²⁶

Relationship to monument and stones in Gilgal – According to this approach there is no connection between the monument in Gilgal and that on Mt. Eival.²⁷

Two Stages

The nation fulfilled Moshe's command in two stages.  Though the first stage took place immediately after entry into Israel, the completed ceremony only occurred later.

Sources:Sanhedrin 44, R. Yishmael in Yerushalmi SotahSotah 7:3About the Yerushalmi, Malbim, R. D"Z HoffmannDevarim 11:29-30Devarim 27About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

The stages – These sources disagree regarding which parts of the commandment were fulfilled immediately and which only later:

• According to R. Yishmael, the stones were erected on the very day of the crossing, but the blessings and curses were only given years later, after the people had inherited their portions.²⁸
• Malbim agrees that the stones were set up immediately, but claims that this occurred in Gilgal rather than Mt. Eival (as described in Yehoshua 4). The rest of the ceremony happened only after the conquest of the Ai (as described in Yehoshua 8).²⁹ At that point, the nation dismantled the stones in Gilgal,³⁰ wrote upon them the Torah, and brought them to Mt. Eival where they built the altar and relayed the blessings and curses.
• R. D"Z Hoffmann, in contrast, asserts that the people began writing on the stones right away, but only set them up in Mt. Eival later.³¹  He points out that writing the entire Torah on the stones was a long process which could not be finished in a day. In addition, Mt. Eival was too distant to reach in such a short time.

Chronology of the chapters – According to Malbim, there is no achronology as Sefer Yehoshua depicts the two stages as they happened.  R. Yishmael and R. D"Z Hoffmann, in contrast, would explain that even though part of the events mentioned in Chapter 8 happened earlier, they are first recorded there so as tell the whole narrative of the ceremony together (איחור להשלים את הענין).

The Doubling in Devarim – These sources differ in how they explain the doubling:

• Two commands – Malbim maintains that the verses refer to two distinct commandments.  Verse 2 speaks of the initial erection of stones in Gilgal, which was to occur on the day of the crossing,³² while the rest of the verses speak of the ceremony on Mt. Eival which was to occur only later, using those same stones ("תָּקִימוּ אֶת הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה").³³ As such, only verse 2 says explicitly "בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ", while in verses 3 and 4 the more general language of "בְּעׇבְרֶךָ" is used.  Similarly, it is only in relationship to the second monument that Mt. Eival is mentioned, allowing for the possibility that the first monument was to be erected elsewhere.
• כלל ופרט – R. Hoffmann, in contrast, assumes that the entire unit is speaking of the ceremony at Mt. Eival and suggests that the first few verses are simply an opening which is then expanded upon as a "כלל ופרט".

"וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן" – Each of these sources reads the word "בַּיּוֹם" literally, but assumes that it only applies to the fulfillment of part of the ceremony.³⁴  R. Hoffmann also raises the possibility that "בַּיּוֹם" can refer to a more general period of time and is equivalent to the later language of "בְּעׇבְרְכֶם אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן".  Both simply mean that the people should fulfill the command soon after crossing the Jordan (but not necessarily on the very same day).

Where were the mountains? All of these sources place the mountains in the area of Shekhem.  Since this a long trek from Gilgal (and would require traveling through enemy territory) both Malbim and R. Hoffmann assert that the stones were first brought there later.  R. Yishmael, on the other hand, (who claims that the stones were erected immediately) might assume that only a handful of Israelites traveled there on the first day.  This would be much more feasible than having the entire nation do so.

Why now? Since the mountains were far from the nation's entry point into the land, Hashem gave the people leeway to fulfill the command when they were able to do so.

Purpose of the ceremony – R. D"Z Hoffmann claims that the rocks contained the entire Torah upon them and as such were meant to publicly testify that the Torah represents the law of the land, and that both king and citizens are subservient to it. .

Why were Mt. Eival and Mt. Gerizim chosen? If the stones were meant to be accessed by the public, a central location might be preferred.  Shadal suggests that there was a symbolic aspect to the choice as well. Since Mt.Gerzim was green and Mt. Eival barren they served as apt metaphors for the blessings and curses.³⁵

¹ See 4QJosh, a copy of Sefer Yehoshua found in Qumran, which actually places the story at the end of Chapter 4, after the narrative regarding the erection of the stones in Gilgal.

² See Yehoshua 8:35, which speaks of the all inclusive nature of the ceremony: "כׇּל קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהַנָּשִׁים וְהַטַּף וְהַגֵּר הַהֹלֵךְ בְּקִרְבָּם".

³ Though it is possible that the area of Shekhem itself had already been in Israel's hands from the Patriarchal period, the rest of the route from Gilgal to Mt. Eival would necessitate going through enemy territory.

⁴ This choice of site is supported by the description of the mountains being "אֵצֶל אֵלוֹנֵי מֹרֶה", which appears to be in the vicinity of Shekhem as Bereshit 12:6 testifies, "וַיַּעֲבֹר אַבְרָם בָּאָרֶץ עַד מְקוֹם שְׁכֶם עַד אֵלוֹן מוֹרֶה."  The fact that Yotam speaks to the people of Shekhem from the top of Mt. Gerizim (see Shofetim 9:7), would further seem to place the mountains in this area.  The problematic marker "מוּל הַגִּלְגָּל" could be explained, as does Shadal , to refer not to the Gilgal of Yehoshua 4, but to a site of the same name in the central region of the land.

⁵ See his opinion in the Sifre and Yerushalmi Sotah 7:3.  See also R. Elazar in the Yerushalmi who similarly says, "שתי גבשושיות עשו וקראו זה הר גריזים וזה הר עיבל".

⁶ This position is likely motivated not only by textual concerns, but by polemical ones as well.  It attempts to rid all basis to the Samaritan's claims regarding the holiness of Mt. Gerizim in the area of Shekhem.  Not only was the altar built on Mt. Eival and not Mt. Gerizim, but the entire ceremony took place in a different geographical location.

⁷ As further support, he points to the phrase, "בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן," explaining that the Torah is saying that the site is close to the Jordan.  It is not clear how he would explain the description of the site as being "אֵצֶל אֵלוֹנֵי מֹרֶה".

⁸ See Abarbanel who points to the many parallels between the covenant at Sinai and the ceremony here.

⁹ See Ibn EzraDevarim 27:3About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RambanDevarim 27:3About R. Moshe b. Nachman who explain that this is the meaning of the phrase "וְכָתַבְתָּ עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת כׇּל דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת בְּעׇבְרֶךָ לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר תָּבֹא אֶל הָאָרֶץ"; only if you remember and observe the Torah will you be able to inherit the land. [Ramban also raises the possibility that the phrase teaches that we came to the land only so as to observe the Torah.]

¹⁰ See, however, Rashi on Devarim 27 where (in contrast to his explanation in Yehoshua) he seems to suggest that there were three sets of stones,  those placed in the Jordan, those erected in Gilgal and those used on Mt Eval. Rashi references Bali Sotah, which does not match his position, leading supercommentaries to question Rashi's comment. See Shadal for a discussion regarding variant manuscripts of Rashi which accord with the Bavli.

¹¹ These, however, were distinct from the stones that were set up in the river itself (Yehoshua 4:9).

¹² Nonetheless, one would have expected some more explicit mention of the connection to the ceremony in Mt. Eival.

¹³ If they had left them on the mountain, one could have suggested that Hashem wanted the monument to be in the central region of the land for easy access by all.  However, once the stones were returned to Gilgal the centrality of Mt. Eival becomes irrelevant.

¹⁴ This is a somewhat difficult read.  First of all, the Jordan is not mentioned at all in the verses and must be assumed. HaKetav VeHaKabbalah further notes that the Torah was not written on the stones set up in the river (as it should have been according to Rashi's read of Devarim).  Finally, verse 4 speaks of the stones of Mt. Eival as being "הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה", apparently equating them with those spoken of earlier.

¹⁵ This is supported by the fact that verse 4 speaks of "הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה", referring back to the stones previously mentioned.

¹⁶ This could only be accomplished in one day if the work was divided among many different people.  See R. D"Z Hoffmann below who suggests that even if they only wrote the Torah one time it could not have been completed on the day of the crossing.

¹⁷ Though Ralbag asserts that the ceremony took place by the time the Conquest was complete, it is not clear exactly when he holds that it happened as he only writes, "עד והארץ שקטה ממלחמה, זכר שכבר בנה יהושע מזבח לה'".

¹⁸ He distinguishes between the language of "וַהֲקֵמֹתָ לְךָ אֲבָנִים" in verse 2 and "תָּקִימוּ אֶת הָאֲבָנִים" in verse 4, suggesting that the former is descriptive while the latter is an imperative.

¹⁹ He claims that the word "בְּעׇבְרֶךָ" in the phrase "וְכָתַבְתָּ עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת כׇּל דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת בְּעׇבְרֶךָ" is not a time marker, but rather refers to the content of the "Torah" that the people will desire to write.  The people will desire to record the miraculous events of the entry into Israel ("עׇבְרֶךָ"), including the events of the Wilderness period, their defeat of Sichon and Og, and finally the splitting of the Jordan.

²⁰ See Hashem's words to Yehoshua in Chapter 7, "חָטָא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגַם עָבְרוּ אֶת בְּרִיתִי".

²¹ Unlike the stones at Mt. Eival, these stones were not written upon, nor made into an altar. 

²² He points out that Devarim 27 was aimed at the nation and not Yehoshua specifically so the phrase "כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ " would not be referring to that directive.

²³ As such, it can be referred to as that which Moshe commanded Yehoshua.

²⁴ This matches the original comment of R. Yishmael in the Yerushalmi, but there his position is emended to suggest that the ceremony took place in two stages.  See below regarding this second possibility.

²⁵ See R. D"Z Hoffmann below.

²⁶ See Prof. Yoel Elitzur, "Parashat Ki Tavo - Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal" who explores this and other explanations for the choice of site.  As evidence of the excellent acoustics he points to both personal accounts and to Tanakh's description of Yotam delivering his speech from the mountain top in Shofetim 9.

²⁷ Interestingly, though, Josephus has Yehoshua make an altar out of the stones in Gilgal, apparently borrowing the motif from Devarim 27/Yehoshua 8 and inserting it back into the story of Yehoshua 4.

²⁸ This distinction between the technical erecting of the stones and the ceremony of the blessings and curses might be supported by the fact that the two parts of the command in Devarim are separated by verses 8-9.  [The parashah markers also divide the unit in the same manner.]

²⁹ Another possibility is to take Malbim's general approach but to suggest that the writing on the stones also took place in Gilgal on the day that the nation crossed the Jordan.

³⁰ One difficulty with this reading is the fact that in Yehoshua 4, yehoshua tells the nation that whne their children question the purpose of the monument they shall respond that it comes to commemorate the miraculous crossing.  Yet, if the stones were moved to Mt. Eival and used for an entirely different purpose, they would no longer serve to memorialize the crossing.

³¹ R. D"Z Hoffmann is not explicit but would likely suggest that this occurred where it is described in Sefer Yehoshua, after the conquest of the Ai.

³² Cf. Rashi above. However, where Rashi assumes that the first few verses refer to the stones set up in the Jordan itself, Malbim has them refer to the stones erected in Gilgal.

³³ According to him, the nation later dismantled the stones and brought them to Mt. Eival.

³⁴ See above that R. Yishmael has it refer to the setting up of the stones but not to the recitation of the blessings/curses.  Malbim claims that it speaks of the setting up of stones in Gilgal and R. Hoffman maintains that it refers to the preparation of the stones (plastering and writing) that were later erected on Mt. Eival.

³⁵ See, however, R. D"Z Hoffmann who brings testimony from travelers to the area that from the vantage point of the valley between the two mountains they are equally barren.  As such, he suggests instead, like Ramban, that the southern mountain represented light and success, while the northern one symbolized destruction as stated in Yirmeyahu 1, "מִצָּפוֹן תִּפָּתַח הָרָעָה" .