Difference between revisions of "Hardened Hearts/2/he"
m |
m |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
<point><b>Purpose of the Plagues</b> – This approach maintains that the primary purpose of the Plagues was retributive.</point> | <point><b>Purpose of the Plagues</b> – This approach maintains that the primary purpose of the Plagues was retributive.</point> | ||
<point><b>Why the charade and drawn-out process?</b> Rambam grapples with the question of why Hashem would bother to repeatedly send Moshe to Paroh, given that Paroh's hands were tied and was simply incapable of letting the people go. Rambam explains that by doing so Hashem demonstrated His ability to hijack Paroh's mind and cause him to act both irrationally and against his own will,<fn>Rambam thereby addresses the additional issue of why the Torah needs to inform the reader that Hashem had taken control of Paroh's psyche. Cf. Nahum Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996): 65 who suggests that the Torah is mocking Paroh's claims to divinity by demonstrating that he cannot even control his own heart (believed to be the seat of his divinity), and see Ramban Shemot 10:1-2 "כי אני מצחק בו". For recent discussions of the Egyptian context of our story and the possible allusion in "כָּבֵד לֵב פַּרְעֹה" to the Egyptian belief in the weighing of the heart after death, see N. Shupak, "Hzq, Kbd, Qsh Leb, the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Exodus 4-15:21: Seen Negatively in the Bible but Favorably in Egyptian Sources", Egypt, Israel and the Mediterranean Worlds: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, eds. G.N. Knoppers and A. Hirsch, (Leiden, 2004): 389-403 and D. Cox, "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart In Its Literary And Cultural Contexts," Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): 292-311. | <point><b>Why the charade and drawn-out process?</b> Rambam grapples with the question of why Hashem would bother to repeatedly send Moshe to Paroh, given that Paroh's hands were tied and was simply incapable of letting the people go. Rambam explains that by doing so Hashem demonstrated His ability to hijack Paroh's mind and cause him to act both irrationally and against his own will,<fn>Rambam thereby addresses the additional issue of why the Torah needs to inform the reader that Hashem had taken control of Paroh's psyche. Cf. Nahum Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996): 65 who suggests that the Torah is mocking Paroh's claims to divinity by demonstrating that he cannot even control his own heart (believed to be the seat of his divinity), and see Ramban Shemot 10:1-2 "כי אני מצחק בו". For recent discussions of the Egyptian context of our story and the possible allusion in "כָּבֵד לֵב פַּרְעֹה" to the Egyptian belief in the weighing of the heart after death, see N. Shupak, "Hzq, Kbd, Qsh Leb, the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Exodus 4-15:21: Seen Negatively in the Bible but Favorably in Egyptian Sources", Egypt, Israel and the Mediterranean Worlds: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, eds. G.N. Knoppers and A. Hirsch, (Leiden, 2004): 389-403 and D. Cox, "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart In Its Literary And Cultural Contexts," Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): 292-311. | ||
− | <p>Regarding Hashem's informing of Moshe in advance, see Ramban Shemot 4:21 who suggests that there was a need to reassure Moshe "ואני אחזק את לבו – ואל תתיאש אתה".</p></fn> | + | <p>Regarding Hashem's informing of Moshe in advance, see Ramban Shemot 4:21 who suggests that there was a need to reassure Moshe "ואני אחזק את לבו – ואל תתיאש אתה".</p></fn> and that this was a great miracle which proclaimed to all Hashem's mastery over the world.<fn>See also Ralbag in <a href="RalbagMilchamot4-6" data-aht="source">Milchamot HaShem 4:6</a> that seeing the hardening of Paroh's heart and his repeated punishment helped instill a belief in Hashem in the minds of the Israelites, and cf. <multilink><a href="OhrHashem3" data-aht="source">R. Chasdai Crescas</a><a href="OhrHashem3" data-aht="source">Ohr Hashem 3:2:2:2</a><a href="R. Chasdai Crescas" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chasdai Crescas's</a></multilink> interpretation of <a href="Shemot9-34" data-aht="source">Shemot 10:1-2</a>.</fn> Hashem's choice to exact retribution in this way was thus designed to maximize its impact.</point> |
− | |||
<point><b>Suspending free will - merely a means or an end unto itself?</b> While Shemot Rabbah views the suppression of freedom of choice as a means to exact a full measure of punishment from Paroh, Rambam and Ralbag see it as a means to inculcate belief in God. Alternatively, Rambam may understand it to be an integral part of the sinner's punishment in that he loses control over his own mind and actions.<fn>When the Rambam speaks here of the loss of the capability to do "תשובה", it is unclear whether he refers simply to a technical powerlessness to reverse course and avoid punishment or to a more profound removal of the ability of undergoing a religious transformation of one's behavior and persona (cf. Rashi and Abarbanel below). The latter would have consequences also for the World to Come (cf. Midrash Vayosha below), but Rambam explicitly addresses only the impact of the inability to repent on punishment in this world.</fn></point> | <point><b>Suspending free will - merely a means or an end unto itself?</b> While Shemot Rabbah views the suppression of freedom of choice as a means to exact a full measure of punishment from Paroh, Rambam and Ralbag see it as a means to inculcate belief in God. Alternatively, Rambam may understand it to be an integral part of the sinner's punishment in that he loses control over his own mind and actions.<fn>When the Rambam speaks here of the loss of the capability to do "תשובה", it is unclear whether he refers simply to a technical powerlessness to reverse course and avoid punishment or to a more profound removal of the ability of undergoing a religious transformation of one's behavior and persona (cf. Rashi and Abarbanel below). The latter would have consequences also for the World to Come (cf. Midrash Vayosha below), but Rambam explicitly addresses only the impact of the inability to repent on punishment in this world.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>How were the hearts hardened?</b> According to this approach, the hearts were hardened through supernatural Divine intervention.<fn>See Ramban Shemot 14:4 "וזה באמת שגעון להם, אבל סכל עצתם". Cf. Pseudo Philo in Biblical Antiquities 10:6 "And God hardened their mind, and they knew not that they were entering into the sea." See, however, the discussion of the position of the Ran in <a href="A Three Day Journey" data-aht="page">A Three Day Journey</a> for the alternative that Hashem hardened Paroh's heart via natural means.</fn></point> | <point><b>How were the hearts hardened?</b> According to this approach, the hearts were hardened through supernatural Divine intervention.<fn>See Ramban Shemot 14:4 "וזה באמת שגעון להם, אבל סכל עצתם". Cf. Pseudo Philo in Biblical Antiquities 10:6 "And God hardened their mind, and they knew not that they were entering into the sea." See, however, the discussion of the position of the Ran in <a href="A Three Day Journey" data-aht="page">A Three Day Journey</a> for the alternative that Hashem hardened Paroh's heart via natural means.</fn></point> | ||
Line 52: | Line 51: | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Yonah and the repentance of Nineveh</b><ul> | <point><b>Yonah and the repentance of Nineveh</b><ul> | ||
− | + | <li>The repentance of the Assyrians in Nineveh ostensibly contradicts Abarbanel's thesis by demonstrating that non-Jews can and do repent.<fn>See the formulation of the <multilink><a href="MekhiltaPischa1" data-aht="source">Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael</a><a href="MekhiltaPischa1" data-aht="source">Bo Pischa 1</a><a href="Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael" data-aht="parshan">About the Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael</a></multilink> cited by <multilink><a href="RashiYonah1-3" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiYonah1-3" data-aht="source">Yonah 1:3</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About Rashi</a></multilink> "שהגוים קרובי תשובה הן".</fn> Abarbanel struggles to respond that the Assyrians were an exception because Hashem had designated them to be his tool to destroy the Northern Israelite Kingdom.<fn>See Abarbanel's elaboration in his commentary on Yonah 1,3.</fn> Alternatively, he could have answered that the people of Nineveh abandoned their idols for monotheism, and thus became capable of repenting.<fn>See Yonah 3:5 and Radak there. Abarbanel adopts this approach in explaining the verses in <a href="Yirmeyahu18-7" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 18:7-8</a>.</fn></li> | |
− | + | <li>For Rashi, though, it poses less of a problem as Nineveh's repentance may not have been sincere.<fn>Cf. <multilink><a href="PirkeiDRE42" data-aht="source">Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer</a><a href="PirkeiDRE42" data-aht="source">42</a><a href="Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer" data-aht="parshan">About Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer</a></multilink> that the Assyrians ultimately returned to their evil deeds and acted even worse.</fn></li> | |
− | + | </ul></point> | |
<point><b>Sons of Eli and the Children of Israel in the time of Eliyahu and Yeshayahu</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RalbagShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">רלב"ג</a><a href="RalbagShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">שמואל א' ב':כ"ה</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershon (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">אודות ר' לוי בן גרשון</a></multilink> the sons of Eli were guilty of idolatry, and this could explain why they were ineligible to repent.<fn>This would be true also for the Baal worshippers in the time of Eliyahu, and perhaps for the nation in the time of Yeshayahu.</fn> <multilink><a href="RashiShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">רש"י</a><a href="RashiShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">שמואל א' ב':כ"ה</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">אודות ר' שלמה יצחקי</a></multilink>, though, says that they did receive opportunities to repent.</point> | <point><b>Sons of Eli and the Children of Israel in the time of Eliyahu and Yeshayahu</b> – According to <multilink><a href="RalbagShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">רלב"ג</a><a href="RalbagShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">שמואל א' ב':כ"ה</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershon (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">אודות ר' לוי בן גרשון</a></multilink> the sons of Eli were guilty of idolatry, and this could explain why they were ineligible to repent.<fn>This would be true also for the Baal worshippers in the time of Eliyahu, and perhaps for the nation in the time of Yeshayahu.</fn> <multilink><a href="RashiShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">רש"י</a><a href="RashiShemuelI2-25" data-aht="source">שמואל א' ב':כ"ה</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">אודות ר' שלמה יצחקי</a></multilink>, though, says that they did receive opportunities to repent.</point> | ||
<point><b>Outstretched arms toward penitents</b> – This position can explain that the verses which speak of an eternal option to repent are speaking only of Jews or non-idolaters.<fn>See above that this is how Abarbanel interprets Yirmeyahu 18:7-8.</fn></point> | <point><b>Outstretched arms toward penitents</b> – This position can explain that the verses which speak of an eternal option to repent are speaking only of Jews or non-idolaters.<fn>See above that this is how Abarbanel interprets Yirmeyahu 18:7-8.</fn></point> |
Version as of 03:27, 1 January 2015
הקשיית לב
גישות פרשניות
The commentators offer a spectrum of options in explaining the meaning of Hashem's hardening the hearts of Paroh and other Biblical characters and the effect this had on their free will:
Suppressed Free Will
Hashem's hardening of these characters' hearts prevented them from exercising their free will and reversing course to evade punishment. All variations of this approach must explain why these people did not deserve an opportunity to change their ways and why Hashem could not have arranged to punish them without needing to suspend their free choice.1
Severe Sins
Due to the nature and enormity of the sins these characters committed, punishment was a foregone conclusion from the very outset and would have been necessary even if those involved had elected to change their behavior and repent.2 Thus, disabling their free will (and the ensuing obstinacy) did not cause them to sustain any additional penalties, but rather merely facilitated the punishment for their original sins.3
- Persecution of the Israelites – Rambam and Abarbanel explain that Paroh's terrible treatment of the Children of Israel5 is what sealed his fate. Abarbanel further clarifies that repentance can only atone for sins between man and God but cannot avert the mandated punishment for murder6 and other severe sins committed by a man against his fellow man.
- Licentious society – Based on ויקרא י"ח:ג', Ralbag asserts that even if Paroh had immediately consented to free the Israelites, he and the Egyptians would still have been deserving of punishment due to their depraved sexual behaviors.
Squandered Chances
A sinner is granted only a limited number of chances to change course before the Gates of Repentance are closed and their fate is sealed. These sinners exhausted all of their opportunities, and once they had done so, Hashem took away their free will and ability to repent.
Idolaters Cannot Repent Sincerely
Repentance is a special Divine gift which is reserved for believers in God. Since these sinners were idolaters and could not have repented, there was no moral barrier to removing their free will.
- Abarbanel defines repentance as returning to Hashem, and thus, by definition, only someone who believes in God can repent. This thesis is limited to idolaters.
- However, Rashi, like the תנחומא, seems to be making an empirical observation that the repentance of the nations of the world is insincere and lasts only while the punishment is still in effect. The Tanchuma and Rashi27 speak of non-Jews in general, and not just of idolaters.
- According to Abarbanel's position, Paroh, as an idolater, never had an option of repentance. Paroh's initial hardening of his own heart thus poses a difficulty, as it implies that he could have repented.28
- Rashi, on the other hand, contends that Paroh was given an opportunity to repent during the first five plagues, despite Hashem's knowledge that any penitence of his would at best be insincere. This allows Rashi to harmonize Hashem's announcement from the outset that He will harden Paroh's heart, with the verses during the first five plagues which speak of Paroh hardening his own heart.29
- The repentance of the Assyrians in Nineveh ostensibly contradicts Abarbanel's thesis by demonstrating that non-Jews can and do repent.30 Abarbanel struggles to respond that the Assyrians were an exception because Hashem had designated them to be his tool to destroy the Northern Israelite Kingdom.31 Alternatively, he could have answered that the people of Nineveh abandoned their idols for monotheism, and thus became capable of repenting.32
- For Rashi, though, it poses less of a problem as Nineveh's repentance may not have been sincere.33
Didn't Impact on Free Will
Hashem did not impact one way or another on any person's exercise of free will. This possibility subdivides in understanding what Hashem does do and regarding how to (re)interpret the phrase "וַיְחַזֵּק ה' אֶת לֵב":39
Ensured Survival
"וַיְחַזֵּק ה'" means that Hashem physically or mentally strengthened sinners to enable them to survive long enough to receive their full punishment, and not that he made them stubborn.40
- "וְאַתָּה הֲסִבֹּתָ אֶת לִבָּם אֲחֹרַנִּית" – R. Saadia renders the words as Eliyahu asking Hashem to transform the backwards condition of the nation's heart.47
- "הַשְׁמֵן לֵב הָעָם הַזֶּה" – R. Saadia interprets the command as to make the nation oblivious to the events going on around them.
- "לָמָּה תַתְעֵנוּ ה' מִדְּרָכֶיךָ תַּקְשִׁיחַ לִבֵּנוּ מִיִּרְאָתֶךָ" – R. Saadia explains here that Yeshayahu is asking that Hashem not view the nation as disobedient.
Merely Natural Order
Hashem did nothing out of the ordinary to cause sinners to lose their free will, but the natural way He runs the world was sometimes the indirect cause of people continuing to sin.
- R. Eliezer Ashkenazi explains that this is simply the way Hashem always runs the world, gently administering warnings at first rather than immediately wiping out the sinner.
- R. Yitzchak Arama and R. Moshe Ashkenazi suggest that while the lengthy punitive process may have misled Paroh, it had the opposite beneficial effect on the rest of the world,51 bringing them to a far greater recognition of the power of Hashem than a one-time punishment.
Only a Figure of Speech
The characters hardened their own hearts, but the action is attributed to Hashem because He is the Prime Mover and ultimate source of everything in the world.54
- Many of these commentators explain that Hashem created man, endowed him with free choice, and generated the various options to choose from. This reason, though, does not account for why only a small fraction of actions in the Torah are attributed to Hashem.
- Shadal suggests that specifically strange events57 are assigned to the hand of God,58 as they are incomprehensible without postulating Hashem's intervention.59 The הואיל משה, though, points out that not only the narrative voice ascribes the hardening of hearts to God, but also Hashem himself.
- The Meiri cites an opinion which expands on a position of R. Saadia and suggests that the hardening is attributed to Hashem because He is the one who displayed Paroh's obstinacy for the entire world to see.60
Bolstered Free Will
Hashem strengthened the sinners' resolve in order to counterbalance their overwhelming fear of punishment or death. By doing so Hashem ensured that they would retain their free will and be able to repent sincerely rather than capitulating simply out of fear.62
- R. Yosef Albo presents the strengthening of the sinners' hearts as a litmus test of the sincerity of their intentions64 and a means to prevent fraudulent repentance.
- In contrast, R. Yosef ibn Shushan views the entire process as a manifestation of Hashem's "kindness and mercy" in directing evildoers to genuine repentance.65
- Seforno charts somewhat of a middle ground in contending that although strengthening Paroh's heart insured his continued freedom of choice, the primary goal and hope was that at least the Egyptian people would repent sincerely.66
- R. Yosef ibn Shushan emphasizes that the entire process was intended to be educational and rehabilitative rather than vengeful.72
- ספורנו distinguishes between the first nine plagues which were intended to motivate repentance and the Plague of the Firstborn and the drowning in Yam Suf which were punitive and "measure for measure."73
- Seforno attempts to address this question by positing that it was not really Paroh but the Egyptians who were the main focus of the educational process of the plagues. According to Seforno, even the drowning of the Egyptian army at Yam Suf was intended to motivate the repentance of the remainder of the Egyptian nation who remained in Egypt.
- פרקי דרבי אליעזר goes a great distance further and presents Paroh himself as a paradigm of repentance and as a proof for all-time of its redemptive powers ("תדע לך כח התשובה – בא וראה מפרעה מלך מצרים"). Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer presents a fantastic account of Paroh surviving the drowning of his army at Yam Suf,74 becoming the king of Nineveh, and leading its ba'al teshuvah movement in the time of Yonah centuries later.75
- Parallel to Paroh - R. Yosef Albo says that Hashem's command to Moshe to avoid clashes with the neighboring nations of Edom, Moav, and Ammon misled Sichon76 into believing that the Israelites were too weak to withstand his army.77 He further explains that this tactic was needed as a counterweight to the news of Hashem's miracles which had frightened Sichon. Thus, similar to the case of Paroh, Hashem's strengthening of Sichon's heart balanced the scales and provided him with freedom of choice.78 As the Torah, though, states explicitly that the goal of the strengthening was to enable Sichon's destruction,79 R. Albo adds that had Sichon not attacked, it would have taken much longer to conquer his land.80
- Contrast to Paroh - R. Yosef ibn Shushan contends that Sichon and Og were deserving of death as they were part of the seven Canaanite nations,81 and not because of their actions toward the Israelites. Thus, he argues that Hashem's strengthening of his will was merely the means to get Sichon out of his fortified city and facilitate his destruction,82 and is completely disconnected from the objectives of strengthening Paroh's will.