Difference between revisions of "Yitro – Religious Identity/2"
m |
|||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
<point><b>Moshe & Zipporah</b> – R. Saadia cites Moshe's marriage to Zipporah as proof that Yitro must have believed in Hashem.<fn>See below for R. Mubashir HaLevi's critique.</fn> Even if Yitro's monotheism were not a necessary condition, it could certainly explain why Moshe would have chosen to marry into his family.</point> | <point><b>Moshe & Zipporah</b> – R. Saadia cites Moshe's marriage to Zipporah as proof that Yitro must have believed in Hashem.<fn>See below for R. Mubashir HaLevi's critique.</fn> Even if Yitro's monotheism were not a necessary condition, it could certainly explain why Moshe would have chosen to marry into his family.</point> | ||
<point><b>Origin of Yitro's belief</b> – See <multilink><a href="Demetrius" data-aht="source">Demetrius the Chronographer</a><a href="Demetrius" data-aht="source">Cited by Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9:29</a><a href="Demetrius the Chronographer" data-aht="parshan">About Demetrius</a></multilink><fn>See the discussion of Demetrius and related sources in <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>.</fn> and <multilink><a href="RAvrahamShemot2-20" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahamShemot2-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:20</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink> who highlight Yitro's Abrahamic lineage. This might possibly account for his monotheism.</point> | <point><b>Origin of Yitro's belief</b> – See <multilink><a href="Demetrius" data-aht="source">Demetrius the Chronographer</a><a href="Demetrius" data-aht="source">Cited by Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9:29</a><a href="Demetrius the Chronographer" data-aht="parshan">About Demetrius</a></multilink><fn>See the discussion of Demetrius and related sources in <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>.</fn> and <multilink><a href="RAvrahamShemot2-20" data-aht="source">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</a><a href="RAvrahamShemot2-20" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:20</a><a href="R. Avraham Maimonides" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Maimonides</a></multilink> who highlight Yitro's Abrahamic lineage. This might possibly account for his monotheism.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Purpose of Yitro's visit in Shemot 18</b> – According to this option, Yitro may have come to be a part of the revelation at Sinai (see below and Chronology | + | <point><b>Purpose of Yitro's visit in Shemot 18</b> – According to this option, Yitro may have come to be a part of the revelation at Sinai (see below and <a href="Chronology – Shemot 18" data-aht="page">Chronology – Shemot 18</a>). However, according to Ibn Ezra himself, Yitro came only in the second year after the Decalogue.</point> |
<point><b>Recognition of Hashem</b> – R. Saadia explains that Yitro's declaration "Now I know that Hashem is greater than all gods" in 18:11 does not mean that only now did he start to believe in Hashem, but rather that only now did he learn that Hashem punishes measure for measure (as per the continuation of the verse).<fn>Cf. Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Yitro Amalek 1.</fn></point> | <point><b>Recognition of Hashem</b> – R. Saadia explains that Yitro's declaration "Now I know that Hashem is greater than all gods" in 18:11 does not mean that only now did he start to believe in Hashem, but rather that only now did he learn that Hashem punishes measure for measure (as per the continuation of the verse).<fn>Cf. Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Yitro Amalek 1.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Yitro's departure in Shemot 18 and the Keinites and Reikhavites</b> – This approach could easily maintain that Yitro returned a second time – see <a href="Yitro's Life After Shemot 18/2" data-aht="page">Did Yitro Ever Return</a>. If so, it is understandable that his descendants would be living among the Children of Israel. Ibn Ezra, though, asserts that Yitro departed and never returned, but that his descendants later lived with the Israelites (see Ibn Ezra Long Commentary 18:1). His position raises the question that if Yitro was a long time monotheist, why he would have turned down the opportunity to join the Children of Israel (and why would his descendants nonetheless be living in Israel)?</point> | <point><b>Yitro's departure in Shemot 18 and the Keinites and Reikhavites</b> – This approach could easily maintain that Yitro returned a second time – see <a href="Yitro's Life After Shemot 18/2" data-aht="page">Did Yitro Ever Return</a>. If so, it is understandable that his descendants would be living among the Children of Israel. Ibn Ezra, though, asserts that Yitro departed and never returned, but that his descendants later lived with the Israelites (see Ibn Ezra Long Commentary 18:1). His position raises the question that if Yitro was a long time monotheist, why he would have turned down the opportunity to join the Children of Israel (and why would his descendants nonetheless be living in Israel)?</point> | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>A priest – Shemot Rabbah. <multilink><a href="Mizrachi2-16" data-aht="source">R"E Mizrachi</a><a href="Mizrachi2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="R. Eliyahu Mizrachi" data-aht="parshan">About R"E Mizrachi</a></multilink> points out that this would appear to be the simplest option, but that it does not account for why the Torah continues to call Yitro a priest even long after he abandoned idolatry.<fn>This would be counter to the prohibition of reminding a convert of his previous behavior in Sifra Behar 4 and Bavli Bava Mezia 58b.</fn></li> | <li>A priest – Shemot Rabbah. <multilink><a href="Mizrachi2-16" data-aht="source">R"E Mizrachi</a><a href="Mizrachi2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="R. Eliyahu Mizrachi" data-aht="parshan">About R"E Mizrachi</a></multilink> points out that this would appear to be the simplest option, but that it does not account for why the Torah continues to call Yitro a priest even long after he abandoned idolatry.<fn>This would be counter to the prohibition of reminding a convert of his previous behavior in Sifra Behar 4 and Bavli Bava Mezia 58b.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li>A political leader – <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit47-22" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit47-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 47:22</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashi</a><a href="Rashi2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="RashiIyyov12-19" data-aht="source">Iyyov 12:19</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashi</a></multilink>. In his rendering of <i>kohen</i>, Rashi is preceded by a host of classical sources – see below. However, Rashi (like the Tanchuma) synthesizes this interpretation with the midrashic motif that Yitro was a recently reformed idol | + | <li>A political leader – <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit47-22" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit47-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 47:22</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashi</a><a href="Rashi2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="RashiIyyov12-19" data-aht="source">Iyyov 12:19</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashi</a></multilink>. In his rendering of <i>kohen</i>, Rashi is preceded by a host of classical sources – see below. However, Rashi (like the Tanchuma) synthesizes this interpretation with the midrashic motif that Yitro was a recently reformed idol worshiper. Rashi's supercommentaries attempt to explain the apparent exegetical overkill. R"E Mizrachi (see above) explains that the motif of Yitro the reformed idolater explains how the shepherds dared to harass the seven daughters, while the understanding of <i>kohen</i> as political obviates the problem of why the Torah continues to use the title even after Yitro became a monotheist. [According to this, one would need to assume either that Yitro remained the political ruler even after his excommunication, or that the Torah continues to refer to him by his former title.]<fn>Rashi HaShalem (Shemot 2:16, note 43) offers a completely different approach to Rashi's translation based on Rashi's comment to Shemot 29:30 that <i>kohen</i> when used in its religious sense, is always a verb meaning to serve and would thus need to be accompanied by the name of the deity being served (for e.g. <i>kohanei Yisrael</i> is not found in Tanakh, only <i>kohanei Hashem</i>). Thus, since in our case, Yitro is called the <i>kohen</i> of Midyan (and not of the gods of Midyan), <i>kohen</i> cannot be a religious functionary and must be a political one. It is unclear, though, why Rashi thinks that kohen can be a noun only when used in its political sense.</fn></li> |
<li>Both a priest and a political leader – Tanchuma Shemot 11.<fn>Perhaps also Midrash Aggadah (Buber), and see also Tanchuma Yitro 2. The combination option of priest and ruler is first found in a drama of Ezekiel the Tragedian cited by Eusebius; see also Sefer VeHizhir Shemot 18:1 (p. 68).</fn> <multilink><a href="RDZHoffmann2-16" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDZHoffmann2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. D"Z Hoffmann</a></multilink> suggests that there was no concept of separation of church and state, and tribal leaders combined religious and political authority. The Tanchuma, though, seems to be an amalgam of two different approaches for explaining how Moshe landed in the house of an idolater. The priest motif solves the problem by turning Yitro into a former idolater, while the political governor motif (which has more ancient roots) is able to skirt the idolatry issue entirely.<fn>See R"E Mizrachi above for a possible motivation to conflate the two motifs.</fn></li> | <li>Both a priest and a political leader – Tanchuma Shemot 11.<fn>Perhaps also Midrash Aggadah (Buber), and see also Tanchuma Yitro 2. The combination option of priest and ruler is first found in a drama of Ezekiel the Tragedian cited by Eusebius; see also Sefer VeHizhir Shemot 18:1 (p. 68).</fn> <multilink><a href="RDZHoffmann2-16" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDZHoffmann2-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:16</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. D"Z Hoffmann</a></multilink> suggests that there was no concept of separation of church and state, and tribal leaders combined religious and political authority. The Tanchuma, though, seems to be an amalgam of two different approaches for explaining how Moshe landed in the house of an idolater. The priest motif solves the problem by turning Yitro into a former idolater, while the political governor motif (which has more ancient roots) is able to skirt the idolatry issue entirely.<fn>See R"E Mizrachi above for a possible motivation to conflate the two motifs.</fn></li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
<point><b>Recognition of Hashem</b> – Cassuto explains that Yitro's declaration "Now I know that Hashem is greater than all gods" does not mean that he became monotheistic and ceased to believe in all other gods, but merely that Yitro acknowledged that Hashem was the most powerful of the many different gods which he continued to believe in.<fn>See Cassuto 18:19 where he explains that Yitro's understanding of Moshe's answer reflected his idolatrous background.</fn></point> | <point><b>Recognition of Hashem</b> – Cassuto explains that Yitro's declaration "Now I know that Hashem is greater than all gods" does not mean that he became monotheistic and ceased to believe in all other gods, but merely that Yitro acknowledged that Hashem was the most powerful of the many different gods which he continued to believe in.<fn>See Cassuto 18:19 where he explains that Yitro's understanding of Moshe's answer reflected his idolatrous background.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Yitro's Sacrifices</b> – Ramban 18:13 notes that Yitro's sacrifice in 18:12 is a rare instance of a sacrifice offered to God using the generic <i>elohim</i> ("א-להים") and not the name Hashem.<fn>Shimon b. Azzai in Sifre Bemidbar 143 actually says that the name Hashem is used with regard to all of the sacrifices in the Torah.</fn> Cassuto suggests that this comes to emphasize that Yitro didn't arrive at a complete belief in Hashem (click here for a discussion of the usages of <i>elohim</i> and Hashem).<fn>Cf. Ramban 18:13 who writes that Yitro still didn't know the name of Hashem, and the Biur who explains that Ramban refers not to the technical name (as Yitro uses the name of Hashem in 18:11), but rather to the extent of Hashem's power. R. D"Z Hoffmann offers the alternative proposal that this was not a standard sacrifice but rather a covenantal ceremony – see <a href="Yitro's Sacrifices and Eating Bread Before God/2" data-aht="page">Yitro's Sacrifices</a>.</fn></point> | <point><b>Yitro's Sacrifices</b> – Ramban 18:13 notes that Yitro's sacrifice in 18:12 is a rare instance of a sacrifice offered to God using the generic <i>elohim</i> ("א-להים") and not the name Hashem.<fn>Shimon b. Azzai in Sifre Bemidbar 143 actually says that the name Hashem is used with regard to all of the sacrifices in the Torah.</fn> Cassuto suggests that this comes to emphasize that Yitro didn't arrive at a complete belief in Hashem (click here for a discussion of the usages of <i>elohim</i> and Hashem).<fn>Cf. Ramban 18:13 who writes that Yitro still didn't know the name of Hashem, and the Biur who explains that Ramban refers not to the technical name (as Yitro uses the name of Hashem in 18:11), but rather to the extent of Hashem's power. R. D"Z Hoffmann offers the alternative proposal that this was not a standard sacrifice but rather a covenantal ceremony – see <a href="Yitro's Sacrifices and Eating Bread Before God/2" data-aht="page">Yitro's Sacrifices</a>.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Yitro's departure in Shemot 18</b> – An advantage of this position is that it explains why he would leave the nation at the end of Shemot 18. Had Yitro converted, it would not make sense that he would leave. While some maintain that Yitro left to convert his family (see above) and then returns under the name of Chovav (see | + | <point><b>Yitro's departure in Shemot 18</b> – An advantage of this position is that it explains why he would leave the nation at the end of Shemot 18. Had Yitro converted, it would not make sense that he would leave. While some maintain that Yitro left to convert his family (see above) and then returns under the name of Chovav (see <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>), Shadal notes that this would not account for his insistence on departing again in Bemidbar 10:30.</point> |
− | <point><b>Keinites and Reikhavites</b> – Shadal attempts to show that there is no evidence of any of Yitro's descendants being a part of the Children of Israel, and thus this provides no support for the theory that Yitro converted. He argues that had Yitro converted, it is implausible that his descendants, the Keinites, would be on good terms with or living amongst enemies such as the Canaanites (see also Radak Shofetim 1:16), Sisera, and the Amalekites – see Yitro and Amalek. As far as the Reikhavites, Shadal also points out that it is only a Rabbinic conjecture (motivated by a desire to highlight the accomplishments of the descendants of converts) which relates them to Yitro, but not the simple meaning of the Biblical text.</point> | + | <point><b>Keinites and Reikhavites</b> – Shadal attempts to show that there is no evidence of any of Yitro's descendants being a part of the Children of Israel, and thus this provides no support for the theory that Yitro converted. He argues that had Yitro converted, it is implausible that his descendants, the Keinites, would be on good terms with or living amongst enemies such as the Canaanites (see also Radak Shofetim 1:16), Sisera, and the Amalekites – see <a href="Yitro and Amalek" data-aht="page">Yitro & Amalek</a>. As far as the Reikhavites, Shadal also points out that it is only a Rabbinic conjecture (motivated by a desire to highlight the accomplishments of the descendants of converts) which relates them to Yitro, but not the simple meaning of the Biblical text.</point> |
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
<opinion name="Converted After Exodus"> | <opinion name="Converted After Exodus"> |
Version as of 13:48, 2 January 2019
Yitro's Religious Identity
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
We are introduced to Yitro first in Shemot 2-4 when Moshe marries Zipporah and shepherds Yitro's flock, and then again in Shemot 18 when Yitro comes to visit Moshe in the wilderness. At each of these critical points, questions arise as to whether Yitro believes in Hashem, pagan gods, both, or neither. The analysis below will present the spectrum of opinions regarding Yitro's religious character when he first meets Moshe, and subdivide each of these options according to whether Yitro's theological beliefs undergo any transformation during the course of his life.Yitro the Monotheist
According to this approach, Yitro believed in God before he even met Moshe. The three variations of this approach differ over whether this was a longstanding belief of Yitro or a more recent development following a career as an idol worshipper.
Yitro always believed in Hashem
Converted Before Meeting Moshe
Yitro was originally a pagan but had already undergone a religious transformation, rejected idols, and consequently been excommunicated by his neighbors, before Moshe arrived in Midyan.
- A priest – Shemot Rabbah. R"E Mizrachi points out that this would appear to be the simplest option, but that it does not account for why the Torah continues to call Yitro a priest even long after he abandoned idolatry.9
- A political leader – Rashi. In his rendering of kohen, Rashi is preceded by a host of classical sources – see below. However, Rashi (like the Tanchuma) synthesizes this interpretation with the midrashic motif that Yitro was a recently reformed idol worshiper. Rashi's supercommentaries attempt to explain the apparent exegetical overkill. R"E Mizrachi (see above) explains that the motif of Yitro the reformed idolater explains how the shepherds dared to harass the seven daughters, while the understanding of kohen as political obviates the problem of why the Torah continues to use the title even after Yitro became a monotheist. [According to this, one would need to assume either that Yitro remained the political ruler even after his excommunication, or that the Torah continues to refer to him by his former title.]10
- Both a priest and a political leader – Tanchuma Shemot 11.11 R. D"Z Hoffmann suggests that there was no concept of separation of church and state, and tribal leaders combined religious and political authority. The Tanchuma, though, seems to be an amalgam of two different approaches for explaining how Moshe landed in the house of an idolater. The priest motif solves the problem by turning Yitro into a former idolater, while the political governor motif (which has more ancient roots) is able to skirt the idolatry issue entirely.12
Converted Before Moshe Married Zipporah
Yitro was originally a pagan and became a monotheist only after Moshe arrived in Midyan but before Moshe married Zipporah.
Yitro the Idolater
According to this position, Yitro was a heathen when Moshe first met him and married Zipporah. This possibility subdivides regarding whether Yitro ever renounced his pagan gods.
Remained an Idolater
Yitro remained an idolater or at least a polytheist for the rest of his life.
Converted in Shemot 18
Yitro worshipped idols while Moshe was living in his home, but converted to Judaism when he arrived in Shemot 18.
- Yitro came and converted after the Decalogue – R"E HaModai claims that Yitro came after hearing about the revelation at Sinai.
- Yitro came, converted, and departed all before the Decalogue – see Tanchuma Buber Yitro 11 that Yitro was sent away so he would not be present for the revelation, and Ramban 18:1 who asserts that all of Chapter 18 occurred before the Decalogue.
- Yitro came before the Decalogue in order to participate in the revelation and left only afterwards – this is the position of the Minchah Belulah 18:5 and may be the position of Ramban 18:12.
Yitro the Secular Governor
This possibility attempts to chart a middle ground between Yitro the Idolater and Yitro the Monotheist. According to this, Yitro was an atheist when Moshe marries Zipporah, believing neither in idols nor in monotheism.