Pensée juive sur Isaïe 47:13

Maimonides, in his "guide for the perplexed 32, section two, states, that though a man may have acquired both the moral and physical qualifications necessary to become a prophet, this does not mean that he will in fact become a prophet. Baruch ben Neriah, illustrious disciple of the prophet Jeremiah is a case in point. (Jeremiah 45,5) He was told that this did not reflect on him personally, but rather on the fact that his contemporaries had not been found worthy to have a prophet in their midst. Our sages tell us that Hillel had twenty students, each of whom possessed all the qualifications necessary to receive the gift of prophecy; however, the time was not propitious for the dissemination of that gift to their fellow men. (Baba Batra 13) The likelihood of a person who lacks the personal qualifications demanded of a prophet to attain that stature, is as great as that of frogs turning into prophets. Our sages (Berachot 7) explain that Moses prayed to G'd to make the gift of prophecy exclusive to the Jewish people. (Exodus 33,16) They infer that this was the meaning of Moses' request, from the answer given "also the thing you have said, I will do." This proves that the request for the Jewish people to have the distinction of the gift of prophecy, had been granted. Even though this might appear as an unfair advantage for the Jewish people, at first glance, the fact is that G'd knew that none of the other nations was inherently able to produce the kind of personality which would qualify for the gift of prophecy. Just as even the most enlightened horse will never be a philosopher, so a gentile would never make a true prophet. What a gentile could achieve however, was the ability, aided by consultation of horoscopes coupled with close observation of the laws of nature, to foretell certain events, as has been discussed in chapter twenty six. Having said all this, it is difficult to understand the sages in our Midrash who claim that Bileam was a prophet, and that G'd had matched the gift granted the Jews by giving similar powers to Bileam. Also the well known interpretation of the verse "there never arose in Israel another prophet such as Moses." (Deut. 34,10) We are told that the words "in Israel," mean that among the gentiles there was another such prophet, namely Bileam. Avot 5, describes Bileam and his students as being possessed of the "evil eye", hardly the inspirational characteristic one expects of a prophet. The Talmud in Sanhedrin 105 states, that the verse in which Bileam describes himself as "of the eye that is opened" (Numbers 24,3) refers to the fact that he had only one eye with which to see. If so, how is it that a person of such visible deformity became a prophet? In chapter fifty six we explained that the term "prophet" when applied to gentiles normally applies to astrologers and the like, people who are considered by their countrymen as seers, though they are not prophets in the true sense of the word. Also, the seers referred to in Isaiah 47,13, had their power supply cut off when the tabernacle was erected, and G'd established a new order. When our sages employ the term "prophet" in reference to gentiles, it is just like when they use the term "king" for the lion or the ox, describing them as the leaders of their respective species. Proverbs 6,7 or 30,27 supports the view that animals have leaders just as humans have. The word "prophet" then is merely an umbrella term. Our sages have been careful never to use the term "prophet" for a gentile without pointing out that it is a gentile who is being discussed. The reason the Torah has devoted an entire portion to the doings of Bileam, is precisely in order to show us why the gentiles had no further prophets. If Bileam represented the finest among the gentiles, one can imagine what other gentile prophets might have been like. The human qualities that are such essential ingredients in the prophet's makeup, were so sadly missing. Whenever Moses and Aaron performed miracles, they were certain beforehand that their efforts would be crowned with success, since G'd had communicated the miracle to be performed. Especially close was Moses' relationship with G'd, as the Torah testifies (Deut. 34,11) "G'ds intimacy with him was of a face to face nature." On the other hand, such prophets as Samuel or Elijah were almost always in need of a prayer before they could perform a miracle that they had set their minds to perform. Samuel in particular typifies that kind of prophet as we find in Mitzpah (Samuel I 7,5-13) as well as on numerous other occasions. If Psalm 99, describes Moses and Aaron as G'ds priests, and Samuel as someone who "called upon His name, that describes the difference between them. The former was a priest around the clock, so to speak, whereas the latter needed to call on G'd from time to time to await the time and place acceptable to G'd. They did not know beforehand whether G'ds response to their calls would be positive. Samuel, as the leading prototype of that group of prophets, possessed a great amount of confidence. This is why the Psalmist says of him "whenever he called.. G'd would answer." Other prophets such as Elijah or Isaiah were often not free of doubt if their prayers would be answered immediately. Moses, on the other hand, did not only not entertain any doubt, but had been instructed beforehand to perform each miracle. That is why he was able to point out to Korach and Datan and Aviram, when the latter accused him of being power hungry, that he had not ever acted from his own initiative. (Numbers 16,28). The few instances when Moses prayed for specific solutions to such problems as the bitter waters at Marah, when he was taught to use a certain variety of wood to sweeten the water, or when he prayed concerning the exact time the frogs were to be removed from Egypt, had no direct relationship to the miracles performed. For this reason, these instances were preceded by prayer.

Our approach will be different from that of all the classic commentators. Central to the problem is the statement by Jeremiah that G'd reserves the right to reverse even such promises as would have a positive impact on the recipient of that promise. The parable of the piece of pottery destroyed by the potter, teaches that if a product does not measure up to the expectations of its creator, the latter reserves the right to destroy it and fashion another in its place. Man, likewise, is like clay in the hands of the Almighty, and despite the fondest hopes expressed for him, he may be found unworthy before he has reached maturity. Should a group of Jews think that in order for G'd to fulfil His promises to our forefathers, their continued existence and well being is indispensable to G'd, they are in error, and are warned by the prophet that their own personal existence is by no means assured. The fact that these forefathers, although themselves recipients of G'ds promise, were constantly afraid, is evidence that their understanding of these promises had always been that they were conditional, not absolute. While it is true that generally G'ds promises are not subject to change unless there is a change in the moral stature of the recipient, there is on record an instance when the decree to spare the righteous at the time when the Temple was destroyed, was revoked. This was despite the fact that the tzaddikim referred to had not changed. The midat hadin, attribute of justice, had drawn to G'ds attention that the failure of the righteous to protest the wicked conduct of the masses was inexcusable since they could not have known that their protests would be to no avail. (Shabbat 55). It is also true that G'd frequently gives a clearly conditional promise, which is what our sages describe as "the attribute of goodness being in the ascendancy." Psalms 105,45, says of G'd, "He gave them the lands of the nations; that which others had toiled for, Israel would inherit in order to observe His statutes etc." What it all boils down to is that whenever possible, the promise of G'd is not left unfulfilled. Certainly the yardstick by which prophets are measured is the accuracy of the fulfilment of their prophecies. Astrologers of old who had a record of 80-90% accuracy in their weather prognosis, did not claim to be prophets either of G'd or the Baal. It is not to test their stature that the Torah tells us how to test such men. Similarly, anyone who teaches the omission of even a single commandment of the Torah or the addition of a single mitzvah or even the change of the traditional interpretation of that mitzvah, needs no test to tell us that he is an impostor. When Yehu reminded the people of the fall of Achav, the decisive factor was that all the details which had formed part of the prediction had come true. (Kings II 10,17) Joshua was able to tell the people that the whole promise by G'd to Moses had been fulfilled. (Joshua chapter 23) He warns however, that disobedience of G'ds commandments would result in the Jewish nation becoming the target for all the punishments listed in the chapters dealing with such eventualities. In Samuel I 3,19-20, we are told that everything Samuel predicted had come true. In this way the people knew that he was a true prophet. In our liturgy, in the benedictions following the readings from the book of prophets every week following the Torah reading, we recite the fact that G'ds word as issued through the prophets never went unfulfilled. In all cases of the prophet being an observant Jew, exhorting the people only to observe Torah law, no test of his truthfulness is needed. On the other hand, if someone even of the stature of Elijah were to ask us suddenly to disobey a law of the Torah, there is no need for a test either, since the man would have stamped himself as an impostor. Such people need to be executed.

The influence of the stars on events: Nevertheless, the [understanding of the] laws of this influence of the stars is also limited, according to what the Supreme Wisdom decreed to be appropriate. Hence some of its ways are known according to the ways of those that observe it, and this is that which the diviners of the heavens grasp. However not all of its true ways are revealed by this. Hence the stargazers will only grasp some of the future content of the stars - and only partially. And all the more so when there is a nullification of their effects, as we have mentioned. And therefore they, may their memory be blessed, said (Genesis Rabbah 5:3), "'From that' (Isaiah 47:13) and not 'all of that."