Kommentar zu Dewarim 18:21

וכי תאמר בלבבך AND IF THOU SAY IN THINE HEART [HOW SHALL WE KNOW THE WORD WHICH THE LORD HATH NOT SPOKEN]? — you will once ask this — when Hananiah the son of Azur (the false prophet) comes and prophesies (Jeremiah 27:16) “Behold, the vessels of the Lord’s house will now shortly be brought again from Babylon”, whilst Jeremiah (the true prophet) stands and proclaims (Jeremiah 27:19—22) “concerning the pillars, and concerning the laver, and concerning the bases, and concerning the residue of the vessels [which remain in this city which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took not,…]” which did not go into exile to Babylon with Jeconiah, king of Judah, “they shall be carried to Babylon [and there they shall remain]” together with Zedekiah when he will go into exile (Sifrei Devarim 178:2).

V’CHI'(AND WHEN) THOU SAY IN THY HEART: ‘HOW SHALL WE KNOW THE WORD WHICH THE ETERNAL HATH NOT SPOKEN?’ “You are destined to say this when Hananiah the son of Azur [the false prophet] will come and prophesy, Behold, the vessels of the Eternal’s House shall now shortly be brought back from Babylon²¹⁵Jeremiah 27:16. while Jeremiah [the true prophet] stands and proclaims concerning the pillars, and concerning the sea, and concerning the bases, and concerning the residue of the vessels²¹⁶Ibid., Verse 19. which were not exiled with Jeconiah,²¹⁷Eleven years before the destruction of the First Temple, Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, took into captivity Jeconiah, king of Judah, together with some of the vessels of the Temple. In the interim, during the reign of Zedekiah the last king of Judah, the false prophet told the people that shortly the sacred vessels will be brought from Babylon and that, therefore, Zedekiah need not submit politically to Babylon. Jeremiah the true prophet warned that, if they would not submit to Babylon, even the vessels still remaining in the Sanctuary would be carried away. they shall be carried to Babylon²¹⁸Ibid., Verse 22. with the exile of Zedekiah.” This is Rashi’s language from the Sifre.²¹⁹Sifre, Shoftim 178. This interpretation [of the Sifre] is based on the fact that the verse does not state “v’im (and if) thou say in thy heart” [but it states ‘v’chi’ — (and when) thou say in thy heart]. This is as I have mentioned²²⁰Above, 4:25. that the Torah tells future events through allusions. But the purport of the verse is to say, “How shall we know the word which the Eternal hath not spoken, so that we can slay the one who so prophesies?” And he commanded that if the event does not come to pass then he should be killed because the Eternal hath not spoken it.²²¹Verse 22. Do not fear him²²¹Verse 22. because of his wisdom or because of the sign that he gave [even though] the sign or the wonder did come to pass.²²²Above, 13:3. Similarly the people could ask, “How shall we know the word which G-d had spoken, to which we have been obligated to hearken in whatever He shall command?” But this [Verse 22] is the answer to both questions,²²³I.e., how shall we know the word which G-d had not spoken, and how shall we know the word which He had spoken? for, in the case of every prophet we should look ahead to that which he foretold. If it does not come to pass we shall know that he is a false prophet and he is to be killed, and if all that he predicted does come to pass he is established to be a prophet of the Eternal,²⁰⁵I Samuel 3:20. and we are bound to hearken to him in all that he commands in the name of G-d, just as he said, unto him ye shall hearken.²⁰⁹Verse 15. Even to transgress the words of the Torah, [we are required to obey him] provided that it is to meet the particular need of the time, as in the case of Elijah on Mount Carmel²²⁴I Kings 18:23-39. See also Ramban above, 13:4. [who, in his attempt to discredit idolatry, brought offerings to G-d on Mount Carmel despite the fact that it was forbidden to do so outside the Sanctuary Court in Jerusalem]. This is the sense of the expression, [a prophet] like unto me,²⁰⁹Verse 15. [And G-d said, I will raise them up a prophet] like unto thee,²²⁵Verse 18. meaning that he will first be established a prophet of the Eternal either by a sign or wonder, similar to what is said [of Moses], and he did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed,²²⁶Exodus 4:30-31. — or that he foretells some future event and it occurs. And thus the Rabbis have said in Tractate Sanhedrin:²²⁷Sanhedrin 89 a-b. “Whoever disobeys a prophet, is liable to death by the hands of Heaven, as it is written, I will require it of him.”²²⁸Verse 19. And there the Rabbis asked: “And how is one to know that someone is a prophet [and that, for refusing to obey him,] he will be punished? If the prophet gave him a sign. But in the case of Micaiah²²⁹In I Kings 20:35 it is told that, following a decisive battle in which Ahab king of Israel defeated Ben-hadad of Syria, Ahab befriended Ben-hadad instead of killing him as a prophet had commanded him to do. To show G-d’s displeasure with Ahab, Scripture relates, And a certain man of the sons of the prophets said unto his fellow by the word of the Eternal: ‘Smite me, I pray thee.’ And the man refused to smite him. The following verse says that the man was slain by a lion because of his refusal to obey the prophet. The lesson was clear: just as that man was punished, so would Ahab be punished for disobeying the prophetic command to smite Ben-hadad. Now this certain man of the sons of the prophets is identified by tradition as having been Micaiah [a prophet mentioned there in Chapter 22 Verse 13]. When Micaiah ordered the man to smite him, he gave no sign that he was a prophet, yet the man was punished for disobeying! Hence the Gemara’s question: How was he to know that Micaiah was a prophet? the prophet gave him no sign and yet he was punished [for refusing to hearken to him! The Gemara answered]: It is different when a person is known to be an established prophet [in which case he need not give a sign]. And if this is not the case, how did Isaac hearken to Abraham on Mount Moriah [to submit himself to slaughter, a command, which had been given to Abraham but not to him]? And how did we rely on Elijah on Mount Carmel to bring offerings outside [the Sanctuary Court in Jerusalem? Obviously we must say that] it is different if the prophet is established [in which case he must be obeyed even if he does not offer a sign].”
Now Rashi wrote:²³⁰Verse 22. Rashi attempts to answer the question, how we are to know when to obey some one who claims to be a prophet? Regarding such a case, he writes, “they have already etc.” “They have already been commanded that if one comes to entice you from [observing] one of the commandments [of G-d] you are not to hearken to him²³¹Above, 13:9. unless it has been clearly established by you that he is an absolutely righteous man, like Elijah on Mount Carmel [who brought the offerings outside the Sanctuary Court] because of the needs of the time. Therefore it states, unto him ye shall hearken.”²⁰⁹Verse 15. — But this does not appear to be correct, for the necessary verification is not that he is a righteous man but that he is a true prophet known to all by having previously foretold future events which indeed came to pass, this being his “sign” as referred to in this section,²³²Verse 22: When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Eternal, if the thing follow not … or some wonders which he has done in our presence.²³³Above, 13:2. This constitutes the presumption of prophets. In saying “a perfectly righteous man,” perhaps Rashi meant what Harav Rabbeinu²³⁴“The Rabbi our teacher.” Moshe [ben Maimon] wrote in Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah:²³⁵“The laws of the Foundations of the Torah,” 7:7. “When a prophet is assigned a mission, he is given a sign or wonder so that the people might know that G-d had truly sent him. We do not believe everyone who shows a sign or wonder to be a prophet. Only a man whom we already know to be worthy of prophecy — by reason of his wisdom and deeds wherein he stands pre-eminent among all his contemporaries, and follows the paths of prophecy, in its sanctity and renunciation [of physical lust] — who then comes and performs a sign or wonder and says that G-d sent him, it is a commandment to hearken to him, as it is said, unto him ye shall hearken.²⁰⁹Verse 15. It is possible that such a man may perform a sign or wonder and still not be a prophet [in which case] the sign must have some [other] meaning.²³⁶“There is something hidden in this matter which requires scrutiny” (Rashi, Kethuboth 111a, in explanation of a similar expression in the Gemara there). Nevertheless, it is a commandment to listen to him, since he is a great man, learned and worthy of prophecy, we assign him the presumption [that his claim is true], just as we have been commanded to render a decision [in court] by the testimony of two proper witnesses even though it is possible that they testified falsely, because we consider them to be legitimate witnesses [having no basis to assume the contrary] we assign them the presumption of legitimacy in their testimony. On such matters it is said, The secret things belong unto the Eternal our G-d,²³⁷Further, 29:28, meaning that we are required to judge human affairs based only on the available evidence. and it is further said, for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Eternal looketh on the heart.”²³⁸I Samuel 16:7.

?איכה נדע את הדבר; when the authentic prophet commands a specific commandment such as when Elijah sacrificed on a private altar, something that had been forbidden for hundreds of years, or when Joshua waged war against Jericho on the Sabbath with all the violations this involved. (Kings I 18, and Joshua 6)

וכי תאמר בלבבך, “If you were to say in your heart, etc.” [Our author quotes Nachmanides although he does not say so. Ed.] Our sages (Sifri) do not view the word וכי in our verse as a conditional “if,” but as a prediction by Moses of what will happen in the future, a prediction that has been documented as having occurred in Jeremiah chapter 28. (About the false prophet Chananyah, and how Jeremiah dealt with him.) What prompted the sages to interpret the word וכי in this manner is that Moses did not say “ואם,” which would have clearly been something conditional. If you were to ask: “since when does the Torah make it a practice to allude to events in the future?” The reason the Torah does so at this stage is to remind future readers of the Torah that when such a man as Chananyah appears, the people, remembering what they had read here, should ask for verification of the prophet’s legitimacy. [Unbelievably, in Jeremiahs time, when true to his prediction the holy vessels of the Temple had already been plundered by Nevuchadnezzar, the people did not question the rosy predictions of Chananyah, but tended to disbelieve the established and proven prophet Jeremiah, presumably because they were thirsty for “good” prophecies rather than becoming penitents and to regain favour in the eyes of Hashem. Ed.] Why did the Torah not also portray the people as asking: “how do we know that the word that comes out of the mouth of the prophet is that which Hashem had told him to convey to us?” Seeing that it is the Torah’s principal purpose here to instruct us to execute false prophets, there was no need to spell this out, seeing that the predictions of a true prophet come true. When they do, the prophet enjoys such a high degree of trust by the people that even when he orders violation of a Torah commandment on a temporary basis, he does not become disqualified. A prominent example is Elijah rebuilding an altar that had long been in disuse and disrepair and forbidden as a “private altar” once the Temple had been erected. The word כמוך in verse 18 already contained the authority for the people to remain loyal to an established prophet, even if he commanded something that appears to conflict with the Torah’s law, provided he does not try to abrogate this law but demands temporarily ignoring such a law due to an emergency. When the prophet does predict a future event, after specifying the when and where, and it comes true, this legitimizes him, just as it legitimized Moses in the eyes of Pharaoh when the Nile turned into blood, and the frogs swarmed all over the country, all at the time predicted. Rashi felt that our verse was not needed to spell out the penalty for a false prophet as the Torah had already done so in 13,2 where the Torah legislated the death penalty even though the prediction of that “prophet” had come true, because the man in question had tried to get his listeners to violate Torah law. He felt that regardless of the stature of the “prophet,” he has to legitimize himself not only by his piety but also by a miracle that comes true. If, after both these conditions have been met, he once asks you to violate or tolerate violation of Torah law, such as Elijah did at Mount Carmel, this is no reason for you to disown that prophet. We do no less when we convict someone to death on the strength of the testimony of two witnesses whose lifestyle entitles them to be considered trustworthy as Torah observant. Maimonides considers the latter argument as a גזרת הכתוב, Divine decree, not capable of being upheld by human reasoning. Such matters all belong to what Moses described in Deut. 29,28 as הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו, “matters which are concealed form our eyes, are revealed to Hashem,” (Who will take care of them in His own way.)

You are destined to say this. Because the word וכי always refers to a future [event], [something] that will happen, such as (Shmos 21:20) “וכי יכה איש (if a man strikes)” which means when he will strike. And similarly (Ibid., v. 28) “כי יגח שור (when an ox gores),” and the same [holds true] in similar cases.

VV. 21 u. 22. וכי תאמר בלבבך וגו׳ אשר ידבר וגו׳. V. 20 ist der falsche Prophet, נביא שקר, der Prophet der Lüge, der im Namen Gottes spricht, was Gott ihm nicht aufgetragen, der gerichtlichen Ahndung überwiesen. Daran knüpft sich notwendig die Frage nach dem Kriterium, woran wir das erlogene Prophetenwort erkennen sollen. Ein Kriterium an dem Inhalt eines Prophetenwortes ist uns bereits Kap. 13, 3 und 6 gegeben. Ein Wort, das uns zum Abfall von Gott, oder zum Abfall von seinem Gesetze aufforderte, das auch nur ein einziges Gesetz als, abrogiert im Namen Gottes erklärte, erwiese sich durch seinen Inhalt als Lüge und machte den, der es spräche, und stände er sonst in vollstem Sinne als Prophet beglaubigt da, dem gerichtlichen Tode verfallen (siehe daselbst).

While Yirmiyahu will stand and cry out, etc. Meaning, he will say the opposite [i.e., that more exile will follow].

Allein es handelt sich hier um Beglaubigung eines Propheten als solchen im allgemeinen, woran, wenn sein Wort nicht im Widerspruch mit dem göttlichen Gesetze steht, zu erkennen sein solle, dass es gleichwohl Gott nicht gesprochen habe. Hierauf lautet die Antwort:

Concerning the columns and the basin, etc. I.e., the basin that Shlomo made.

ולא יהיה הדבר ולא יבא — אשר ידבר הנביא בשם ד׳ וגו׳. Das Eintreffen eines im Bereiche der Natur voraus verkündeten Wunders wird mit dem Begriffe היה bezeichnet. So die Wunder, die Mosche vor Pharao zu üben hatte: יהי לתנין ויהי לתנין ויהי ברד .חיה השחין ,למחר יהיה האות הזה .והיה לכנים היה כנים .ויהיו דם וחיה דם ויהי חשך .הברד לא יהיה עוד .לא היה ברד. Hingegen das Eintreffen von Ereignissen im Gebiete menschengeschichtlicher Verhältnisse findet in der Regel seinen Ausdruck in בוא. So: לא נפל דבר מכל הדבר הטוב אשר דבר ד׳ אל בית ישראל הכל בא (Josua 21, 43) und sonst sehr häufig. Wir glauben daher, dass durch ולא יהיה הדבר ולא יבא die beiden Fakta bezeichnet seien, durch welche das Faktum der Sendung eines Propheten, beglaubigt werden könne. Entweder durch das Eintreffen eines voraus verkündigten Wunders in der Natur: יהיה, oder durch das Eintreffen eines voraus verkündigten Ereignisses in der Geschichte: יבא. In der Tat gibt es auch zur Beglaubigung der tatsächlichen Wahrheit einer von Gott, dem Schöpfer und Meister der Natur und dem Gebieter und Lenker der Geschicke, herrührenden Sendung nichts anderes als: das Eintreffen eines voraus angekündigten Wunders, oder: die sich bewahrheitende Verkündung der Zukunft. Hat ein Prophet im Namen Gottes ein Wunder angekündigt, ולא יהיה und es trifft nicht ein, oder ein künftiges Ereignis, ולא יבא, und es kommt nicht, ׳הוא הדבר אשר לא דבר ד das ist ein Wort, das Gott nicht gesprochen, בזדון דברו הנביא, das hat der Prophet in frevelhaftem Missbrauch des göttlichen Namens gesprochen; und hätte er dir bisher im höchsten Vertrauen gestanden, mit einem einzigen solchen als falsch befundenen Worte hat er sich für immer gerichtet, לא תגור ממנו: wie hoch auch sonst seine Persönlichkeit in bisher verdientem Ansehen gestanden sein möge, du hast dich nicht zu scheuen, ihn öffentlich der Lüge zu zeihen und ihn der verwirkten Strafe zu überweisen. Beiläufig ist, wie uns scheint, auch dies לא תגור ממנו ein Beweis, dass, wie wir wiederholt bemerkt, der Berufung zum Propheten bereits die Erreichung einer hohen Stufe geistiger und sittlicher Größe vorangegangen sein müsse. Setzt doch eben dies לא תגור ממנו voraus, dass auch, abgesehen von der vorgeblichen prophetischen Sendung, es eine hohe Achtung und Beachtung verdienende Persönlichkeit sei.

Es hat aber, wie Sanhedrin 89 b erläutert wird, der Prophet nur beim Antritt seiner Sendung sich durch ein Wunder oder ein vorausverkündetes Ereignis zu legitimieren, keineswegs aber eine solche Legitimation bei jedem künftig von ihm im Namen Gottes zu sprechenden Worte zu wiederholen, vielmehr, sobald er einmal מוחזק geworden, heißt es von ihm für alle Folgezeit:

אליו תשמעון (V. 15; — siehe daselbst).

Überhaupt gehört Wundertätigkeit und sogenanntes Wahrsagen nicht zu dem eigentlichen Berufe der jüdischen Propheten und bildet keineswegs den Zweck ihrer Sendung. נביא zu sein, Organ Gottes, — נבא verwandt mit נבע; vergl. יביע אומר (Ps.19, 3) אביעה חדות (daselbst 78, 2) u.f. — Seinem Volke den Einblick in sich selber und in die Gänge Gottes mit ihm und mit den Völkern der Menschheit zu vermitteln, ihm das Verständnis seiner Gegenwärt und seiner Erwartungen für die Zukunft zu enthüllen, um es durch alles dies im Guten zu befestigen, vor Schlechtem zu warnen und ihm den ausharrenden Mut und die ausharrende Treue bei Gott und seinem Gesetze durch alle Gänge der Zeiten zu bringen, das war — wie ihr Wort uns ja noch offen liegt — ihr eigenster Beruf. Durch sie sollte Israel das Geschichtsvolk werden, das mit offenem, Gott schauendem Auge durch die Weltgeschichte wandert. Die Wunder, die sie taten — und wie verschwindend wenige wissen wir von allen den Männern, von Jesaias bis Maleachi, die den Jahrhunderte durchleuchtenden Prophetengeist trugen — waren alle nicht Selbstzweck, standen alle im Dienste dieses ihres nationalen obersten Berufes, und auch von Männern, wie Nathan und Gad, deren Prophetenwort mehr im Dienste ihrer nächsten Gegenwart stand und daher nicht für die kommenden Geschlechter aufgezeichnet wurde (Megilla 14 a), sind uns keine Wundertaten berichtet. Und wenn diese in dem Leben eines Elijahn und Elischa in größerer Zahl und vorzugsweise auch in Verhältnissen des Privatlebens auftreten, so halten wir die Bemerkung nicht für ganz irrig, dass deren Wirksamkeit sich ausschließlich im Reiche Israel bewegte, wo, von oben genährt, das Volksleben vielfach durch das heidnische Unwesen der Baalspfaffen und Baalspropheten getrübt war, dem gegenüber, durch Bekundung der wirklichen und wahrhaftigen Gegenwart und Allmacht des wahrhaftigen einzig Einen selbst, bis in die kleinen Verhältnisse des Einzellebens auf Erden hinein, das reinere Gottbewusstsein und die reine Gottesanerkennung in der Brust der Söhne und Töchter des Volkes zu wecken, zu nähren und zu befestigen, sowie den Lügenprätensionen der Hierophanten des dem Baaltum verfallenen Hofes mit vernichtenden Bezeugungen des Wahrhaftigen entgegenzutreten gewesen sein mochte. Im Reiche Juda finden wir wenigstens solche Wundertätigkeiten kaum. —