Urim VeTummim/2

Urim VeTumim

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

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.

Sources:Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)Shemot 28:30About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan), RashiShemot 28:30About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RambanShemot 28:30About R. Moshe b. Nachman, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 28:30About R. Levi b. Gershom #1, AbarbanelShemot 28:6About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel

No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39 – Ramban points to these omissions as support for this approach, explaining that since the Urim and Tummim were an inscription of the Divine name and not the work of artisans or the product of the Israelite donations, it is logical that there is no command and no description of their creation. 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 and/or because of their Divine creation.¹

"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" (Vayikra 8:8) – Ralbag and Abarbanel note 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 pocket²  further suggests that it was meant to hold something (and not simply serve as a backing for the Choshen stones, as per the position below).

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.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 caused the letters to be illumintaed 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.]

Why are they called Urim and Tummim?

• 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.

Relationship between Urim and Tummim – According to most of these sources, who posit that the inscription contained just the proper name of Hashem, there is no difference between the Urim and Tummim and it constitutes but one object. However, according to Ramban, who maintains that each of the Urim and Tummim refers to different names of Hashem, the two are distinct. Nonetheless, it seems that even Ramban might agree that in those cases where the text refers only to the "Urim", it  is simply a shortened formulation for "Urim and Tummim" (and does not refer to the Urim alone)..

Relationship between 28:29 and 28:30 – These sources might suggest that each verse is focusing on a different part of the Choshen, as each had a different role. The names on the stones were meant to be a memorial, while the Urim and Tummim were for judgment and determination.

Efod – Ramban suggests that the secrets of the Urim and Tummim and its Divine names might have been passed on to the learned scholars of Israel. Thus, others besides the priest might have made Efods with a Choshen and Divine names similar to that made by Moshe, and used them periodically to consult with God

Use in Second Temple Period – Rashi

Choshen Stones

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

Sources:Rav Shrira Gaonאוצר הגאונים ברכות התשובות ו', Lekach TovShemot 29:15About R. Toviah b. Eliezer, perhaps RambamHilkhot Beit HaBechirah 4:1Hilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 10:10-13About R. Moshe b. Maimon,⁶ R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 28:30About R. Avraham Maimonides

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 execution 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.

Why are they called Urim and Tumim?

• Haketav VeHaKabbalahShemot 28:30About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg⁷ 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. 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" – Ibn Ezra⁸ questions that if the Urim and Tummim are identical with the Choshen stones, how is one to understand the phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן" (Vayikra 8:8), which implies that Moshe placed a distinct object into the Choshen? Moreover, he asks,  were not the stones already put into the Choshen by the artisans 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.⁹ In Vayikra 8:8, Moshe then attaches the entire framework of stones (a distinct object) onto¹⁰ the embroidered square of the Choshen.

How did the divination work? According to Rambam,¹¹ 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.¹² 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.

Philosophical motivations? It is possible that Rambam's rejection of the opinion that the Urim and Tummim consisted of Divine names relates to his discomfort with the masses' belief in and use of magical amulets "empowered" by Divine names (Moreh Nevukhim 1:61Hilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 10:10-13Moreh Nevukhim 1:61About R. Moshe b. Maimon). According to him, the Urim and Tummim are totally removed from any magical component, and work purely via prophecy.

Astrological Signs

The Urim and Tummim referred to forms of various astrological objects, such as the various stars and constellations.

Sources:Ibn EzraShemot First Commentary 28:30Shemot Second Commentary 28:6About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 28:30About R. Levi b. Gershom

What types of astrological signs?

• 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,¹³ 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.

Process of divination – Both Ibn Ezra and Ralbag¹⁴ believed that Hashem gave power to the celestial spheres to control the terrestrial ones. Thus, a proper understanding of the stars can reveal future fate. This, though, is an imperfect science, especially as that fate might be overturned by Hashem.  Ralbag suggests that, as such, focusing on the Urim and Tummim facilitated attaining knowledge of the future and the granting of prophecy.

Difference between the Urim and Tummim – According to Ralbag, since the Urim related only to the stars, even one who was not a prophet could attain knowledge of the future by studying or meditating on them.  This, though, was accurate only for questions related to the immediate future, where time did not allow for one's fate to change.  The knowledge granted by the Tummim, however, relied on full prophecy, as it related to meditating on the Prime Mover, Hashem, who can overturn the decrees of the stars.  He, therefore, suggests that  verses which speak of someone consulting only the Urim imply that the user was not at a high enough level to receive prophecy and could not access the knowledge granted by focusing on the Tummim. He was forced to rely on the astrological data gained from the Urim, which sufficed, but only if the question was of immediate relevance.

Meaning of name – The name Urim, from the word "אור", relates to the fact that these represent various luminaries. Ralbag implies that Tummim relates to perfection and completion, perhaps because the knowledge gained by focusing on it was more complete.

Plural language – Ibn Ezra suggests that the plural language of "הָאוּרִים" and "הַתֻּמִּים" supports his position as it implies that there were multiple objects placed in the Choshen.

"וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים" – Ibn Ezra points to this verse, too, as support, noting that it implies that Moshe inserted distinct objects into the Choshen.

No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39 – Ramban questions this approach, noting that if the objects were made of gold and silver, as claimed by Ibn Ezra, then they required skilled craftsmanship and the manner of their creation should have been described.  Ibn Ezra might respond that the secrets of the celestial spheres were not known to the artisans and thus only Moshe could form the Urim and Tummim. Hence there as no need to describe in the commands to the craftsmen.

Definite article – It is not clear why the Urima nd Tummim are referred to with a definite article.

Color of the robe of the Efod – Ralbag notes that the robe upon which the Efod and Choshen with the Urim and Tummim rested was sky blue, supporting this position that all was supposed to allude to the celestial spheres.

Divining via the Efod – Ibn Ezra suggests that others might have made Efods similar to that made by Moshe and even though they did not include the original Urim and Tummim, if the priest was familiar with the Urim and Tummim made by Moshe, he might imagine it and be able to respond to a questioner.

Second temple times

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.

Sources:ShadalVayikra 8:8About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, Hoil MosheShemot 28:30About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi¹⁵

No description in Shemot 28 and no execution in Shemot 39 – Since the letter tablets did not need to be crafted specially, and were not made by Betzalel, there is no description 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" – 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.

Intricate questions –  

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.

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).

Sources:several modern scholars¹⁶

Biblical evidence – Cassuto points to Shemuel I 14:38-42 as support for this approach. Shaul says, "הָבָה תָמִים", understood to be an allusion to the Urim and Tummim,¹⁷ but then the verses appear to describe a lottery, employing language such as "לכד and "נפל", elsewhere connected to lots being cast.¹⁸ Cassuto further notes that a survey of the other verses in which the Urim and Tummim or the Efod¹⁹ are consulted shows that queries were always worded in a way which left only two possible answers,²⁰ supporting the possibility that the divination involved a binary lottery.

Septuagint – Several modern scholars²¹ support this approach by turning to the Septuagint's version of Shemuel I 14:41, 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.‎²² 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.

Meaning of name – 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.

How did the divination work – According to many, each of the Urim and Tummim was itself a lot and when asked a question, the priest would take one out of the Choshen pocket, providing either a negative or positive response.  Alternatively, it functioned like flipping a coin, with each side standing for a different response.

No response?

Biblical parallels

Ancient near eastern parallels

End of use

¹ 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.

² See Rashbam on 28:16.

³ Cf. R. Yochanan in Bavli Yoma 73 that the letters protruded. One might ask what would happen if the answer necessitate letters which are not found in the names of the tribes (like a "צ" or "ט")? Opinions in the Bavli suggest that in addition to the tribal names, the names of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov and the phrase "שבטי ישורון" were engraved on the stones.

⁴ One could have alternatively suggested that the letters shone and the priest on his own unscrambled them to form a word, though this would potentially allow for human error.

⁵ As such, according to him, there is no difference between the function of the Urim and Tummim. Cf. Reish Lakish in Bavli Yoma 73a-b that the letters on their own joined to form a word.

⁶ Rambam is not explicit, but this is how he has been understood by later commentators.  See, for example, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 28:30About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg.

⁷ He brings this as a second possible reason, first noting the reasoning given by Lekach Tov that the name relates to the stones' function.

⁸ See also Ralbag and Abarbanel.

⁹ He points to Rashi who reads the verse in this way.  According to HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Rashi understands the word "בו" to mean "for it" rather than "in it".

¹⁰ The phrase "וַיִּתֵּן אֶל" is understood as if written "וַיִּתֵּן על".

¹¹ See also the commentary of his son, R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 28:30About R. Avraham Maimonides.

¹² He does not address the question of what would happen if a reply necessitated one of the letters of the alphabet which did not appear in the names of the tribes that were engraved on the stones. See suggestions in Bavli Yoma 73a-b.

¹³ He writes, "והמספר ידוע בראיות גמורות מהעליון והשפל", alluding to the belief that there were twelve constellations, the signs of the zodiac.

¹⁴ See Ibn Ezra Second Commentary Shemot 20:2, 32:32, 33:21, Tehillim 69:29 and elsewhere and Ralbag Milchamot Hashem 5:3.

¹⁵ Several centuries before Shadl and Hoil Moshe, the Christian theologian Hugo of Victor wrote similarly, suggestsing that the Urim and Thummim com[rised a series of signs containing various letters which served as a lottery. When they were cast, a message was spelled. He writes, "On this account, the lots which were cast in antiquity for the indication of truth were called Urim Thummim. They were signs inscribed with different letters. When they were cast, it was shown by a combination of the letters visible from above, by a true indication, what ought to be done or evaded." (Annot. elucid.in Pent. 8 (PL, CLXXV, 72, cited and translated by C.V Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel, (Indiana, 1997): 36.)

¹⁶ 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. The scholars mentioned disagree as to the nature of the lot, some viewing it as a binary lot and others as more complicated. For several 20th century sources who view it as a binary lot, see N. H. Tur Sinai, אורים ותומים, Encylopedia Mikrait I 179-182 and U. Cassuto on Shemot 28:30. 

¹⁷ See R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 28:30About R. Avraham Maimonides 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.

¹⁸ See, for example, Yeshayahu 34:17, Yonah 1:7, Esther 3:7 or Nechemyah 10:35 where the root "נפל" is explicitly related to the noun "גורל". See also Yehoshua 7:14-16 and Shemuel i 10:20-21 where "לכד" is used in the context of a lottery (though the word "גורל" does not appear).

¹⁹ He assumes that in these verses too, one asked via the Urim and Tummim which were on the Efod. See Bemidbar 27:18-21, Shemuel I 23:9-12 and Shemuel I 30:7-8.  In each case, the questioner asks whether or not to go to battle, and whether or not he will be victorious.  All require only a yes or no answer.

²⁰ 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 Shemuel I 23:9-12). This, too, can be explained if one posits that the response was of a binary nature.

²¹ See above note.

²² They assume that the Septuagint preserves a more original form and that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text when a copyist accidentally omitted several words in the middle of the verse, his eye skipping from the word "יִשְׂרָאֵל" in the beginning of the verse to the "יִשְׂרָאֵל" at the end (השמטה על ידי הדומות, haplography). However, even if one does not want to posit that a mistake fell into the Masoretic text, one can turn to the Septuagint as a possible understanding of the intent of our verses.