Pensée juive sur L’Exode 19:9

Although it is a scientific fact that major physical phenomena are reversible, G-d’s ability to destroy earth proves that it had not always existed, that He had created it. Otherwise, whence would G-d have taken the power to destroy it? The fact that the reversals of certain phenomena are the product of G-d’s free will and did not happen of their own, needs to be demonstrated. The verse (Jeremiah 31,10) "He who disperses Israel will gather it in," which might indicate the opposite, when viewed superficially, does in fact not prove that such reversals occur automatically. Jeremiah does not refer to the ingathering as being an automatic corollary of a previous dispersal, but as an act of G-d requiring supernatural means. This is demonstrated clearly by the context of the whole chapter in which this verse appears. Shepherds do likewise with their flocks, and so does the Lord. Sometimes He scatters in order to discipline, sometimes He collects people. All this is due to G-d exercising benevolent Personal Providence. This is true also when such happenings occur as part of the shepherd's vocation. When we talk about natural phenomena, the same does not hold true. Gideon, who wanted to see if the wool which is naturally moisture absorbent could also be made moisture repellant at the will of G-d, had his wish fulfilled (Judges Chapter 6). Thereby the power of G-d to reverse the laws of nature which He Himself had formulated had been demonstrated. Similarly, King Hezzekiah (Kings II, chapter 20). When the king saw the shadow of the sun dial reversing itself, he had found proof of the Creator's ability to reverse the seemingly irreversible processes of nature. The story of the deluge also demonstrates that He who has established natural law can also reverse it. Thereby He proves that His existence had preceded the laws of the universe, else He could not have demonstrated mastery over these laws. G-d therefore is able to decree after the deluge that natural law shall not again cease to function normally. Summer, winter, heat, and cold will all alternate at predictable intervals, as stated in Genesis 8,22. Noach and his sons, having witnessed first a universe which functioned beautifully then a universe in the process of destruction and lastly a newly functioning universe, were the witnesses for all future generations of the truth of the claim that G-d had created the universe ex nihilo. According to the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 11, the technical method that brought about the flood was the relocation of two stars forming the Pleiades. Even if mankind were to serve G-d, but under the mistaken impression that the laws of nature are immutable, such service of G-d would degenerate if man grew to believe that they were only in touch with intermediaries such as the sun and the moon, and that the Lord Himself would forever unconditionally allow these intermediaries to possess independent power which could not be curbed. At this point, the author engages in polemics against all those Jewish philosophers who, in common with their Greek counterparts, attempt to explain away most of the miracles. He singles out Ralbag especially. He defends the Rambam as having been wilfully misunderstood by some who read his commentary. He ascribes the tendencies of some commentators to rob the story of miracles of their fundamental value to two considerations. 1) No one can perform miracles that outclass those performed by Moses. 2) The beneficiaries of such miracles were not worthy of such far-reaching changes in nature to be performed for their sake. The Talmud Shabbat 53 relates that a husband whose wife died while leaving behind a small baby was in a predicament since he could not afford to hire a wet nurse to nurse the baby. A miracle occurred; the father's nipples produced milk on which the baby fed and survived. Rabbi Joseph views this as an extreme compliment to the father for whose sake such a great miracle was performed. Abaye, on the other hand, feels that it points out the unworthiness of the father, since G-d had to resort to supernatural means to supply the infant's needs. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the father's position was such that a miracle was not denied him, in order for him to fulfil his function of raising the infant. We have to view the role of pious men and prophets at various times in our history in a similar light. On the one hand, the generation of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai and of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, were praised because there was no need for a rainbow to appear during their respective lives (Ketuvot 76). They were praised for the fact that no miracles were needed in their time. No doubt, had the need arisen, these men would have been able to call on the power of miracle to be used on behalf of their contemporaries. Jacob moved a rock meant to be removable only by a whole group of shepherds. On the other hand, when praying for victory against Amalek, Moses’ss hands were so weak they had to be supported. This does not make Jacob superior to Moses. Certain needs arise at certain times. Only at those times can it be determined whether a miracle is in place to meet those needs. Examples are numerous. Joshua's commanding the sun and moon to be arrested in their orbits, does not denigrate the powers of Moses one iota. Had Moses found himself in the same predicament Joshua had found himself in, he would have been able to perform a similar miracle. Even a Yehu, a king of Israel who had failed to remove the golden calves Jerobam had erected, was enabled to wipe out all the priests of the Baal singlehandedly, something none of those greater than he had been able to do. Elijah and Elisha revived the dead, feats not credited to Moses, yet no one puts down Moses’s abilities on account of that. If you will, the revelation at Mount Sinai, and Moses’ss role in it as well as the participation of the entire nation, so outclass and overshadow any miracles performed by anyone subsequently or prior to that, that Moses’ss honor as the prophet/miracleworker par excellence can never be called into question. At that time, Moses had been instrumental in a chidush ha-olam, a renewal of the universe, so to speak. What happened was such a thorough reversal of all natural laws that the work of later prophets pales into relative insignificance by comparison. If this were not so, the miracles predicted in Yoel chapters three and four, would not be capable of being performed without relegating Moses to an inferior position vis a vis the Messiah or whoever will be G-d’s instrument when the time comes to fulfil those prophecies. In fact, all subsequent miracles are ascribed by G-d to Moses, when G-d promises in Exodus 34,10 that all the miraculous acts which are yet to occur are based on what G-d does for, with, and through Moses. In Moses, as it were, rests the fountainhead of all miracles ever performed by any prophet after him. In all of the Torah, we do not find any events which would constitute fulfilment of G-d’s promise to Moses made at that point. Joshua 11,16 makes it clear that throughout his career as leader of the Jewish people, his role remained that of being Moses’ss disciple. Nothing he did is to be understood as being innovative. It may have been Moses’ss desire to personally carry out these miracles as demonstrations of G-d’s power, which prompted him to request permission from G-d to cross the river Jordan. G-d’s denial of this request was coupled with the assurance that indeed his disciple would perform such miracles, thus fulfilling G-d’s promise to Moses in Exodus 34,10. The instructions to Moses to invest Joshua with part of his own glory and Moses’ss subsequent action cause our sages to comment that whosoever leaves behind him pupils fit to take his place has not in fact died at all (Midrash on Numbers 26,20). Our sages have accepted the principle that the Torah occasionally employs language in the manner people do in their every day speech. Therefore, we find both exaggeration and hyperbole. This fact, however, is not sufficient reason to explain away the very miracles that demonstrate the power of the Creator. There is also no foundation for the assumption of some commentators that miracles involving extra terrestrial matters are of inherently greater significance than miracles involving behavior of phenomena that we are familiar with on earth. In fact, one could argue the reverse with at least equal persuasion. If one can change phenomena that occur on earth despite the fact that their celestial causes have NOT been altered, this is more remarkable than changing patterns of behavior by phenomena whose celestial causes have either been neutralised, interfered with, or have been reversed. If, for instance, someone's arm can stay the wheel of a watermill in spite of the fact that the flow and pressure of the stream that activates it has not diminished, this is more remarkable than halting such a wheel by stopping the flow of water to it. If Daniel told Darius that the angel of G-d shut the lions' mouths, this is more remarkable than if the angel had merely killed the lions. We have discussed such events in chapter fifteen, also in chapter thirty-eight, in connection with the Passover in Egypt. The statement in Deut.34,10 that there never arose another prophet comparable to Moses, does not refer to Moses’sd power as a performer of miracles, but to the fact that no one since ever attained the face to face relationship with G-d that the Torah testifies Moses had achieved. The effortlessness with which Moses performed miracles, as compared to the need of other prophets to engage in prayer beforehand etc., proves how much Moses was on G-d’s "wavelength," so to speak.

When striving to achieve his potential, man must look beyond himself and attempt to act as if he had become a partner in what he is striving for. When king Saul listened to the people and allowed Agag to live, his error was that he was too aware of his own shortcomings and not sufficiently aware of the lofty position he occupied by reason of being king of Israel, G'ds holy nation, (compare Samuel I chapter 15) Concentrating on the Divine, which constitutes part of man's roots, is the antidote to dwelling on one's mortality. The latter is depressing, whereas the former is elevating. G'ds imperative "be holy, for I am holy," means "do not use the fact that you are in a mortal shell as an excuse not to strive for the ultimate you are capable of." This seems to conflict with the view expressed by Akavyah ben Mehallalel in Avot 3,1, who states "look at three things and you will not become a sinner. Your origin, i.e. a smelly drop of semen; your destiny, i.e. a place of dust and worms; the celestial tribunal before which you will have to give an account of your life to the Almighty." Surely, a person who is imbued with that outlook is apt to become rather permissive with himself, telling himself that nothing much can be expected of him seeing he is of such lowly origin and headed for such a miserable destiny. This also seems to be what Job argued when he justified his despair saying: "man, the product of woman, of short lifespan and excess of trouble, anger etc." (Job 14,1) Did not Samuel say to Rav Yehudah (Eyruvin 54 ) "smart one, eat and drink while you can, since the world we will depart from is like a feast." Even though the parable may tell us to seek the permissible pleasures of life while we are still here to enjoy them, it is certainly a public pronouncement totally different from that of Akavyah ben Mehallalel. In fact, since man's sins are rooted in any or all of three types of motivations, "jealousy, sensual desire, quest for honour and glory," the considerations Akavyah asks us to bear in mind, will act as brakes to any of the aforementioned causes of sin. How can a person be haughty, seek glory, when he considers his lowly origin?- How can a person be consumed with desire to gratify the urgings of his flesh, when he knows all too well that he will soon return to dust, and his own flesh will be food for the worms? How can one be greedy and jealous of someone else's possessions, when one knows full well that all these possessions will be left behind? How can one indulge the flesh when one knows one has to render an accounting of how one spent one's time down here? While Akavyah seems to make a good case, superficially, his arguments can be countered nonetheless. If one will turn into dust and worms, what judgment is there to be afraid of? If one's origin is low, so is everyone else's; how could this be a deterrent to sin then? Pride, i.e. being vainglorious, may reflect merely one's achievments, not one's origin! Why does Akavyah describe the fate of the corpse? It would have been simpler to say "we are all headed for death!" Is not the fact that one has to die a sufficient deterrent? In Kohelet 9,10, Solomon has already said "whatever you are able to do, do it with all your might; for there is neither action nor reasoning nor knowledge nor wisdom in she-ol, [the place] that you are going to." Since your body is finite, all that is connected with it comes to an end when your body dies. Akavyah, however, reminds us that we should consider the elevated part of man, not desecrate it or debase it. To this end, the considerations he suggests to keep in mind are very helpful. It is only the body that is lowly, just as it is only the body that turns into dust and worms; the soul, the Divine part of our roots will live on and have to give an accounting of itself. All phenomena in nature share three criteria. A) They are all observed in their present stage of development, evolution. B) They have all undergone some metamorphosis before they reached their present stage. C) They all appear in a certain format. Remembering these three facts, Rabbi Akavyah says will help one avoid sin. 1) Considering that one's raw material is only matter. 2) Considering that all matter is in a constantly changing state, not enduring as such. 3) Considering that one's format is "in the image of G'd." When considering all these factors combined, remembering the Divine part of our format helps to give us the proper perspective on life. Akavyah's warning then is not to let the yetzer hara mislead us into thinking that because our bodies are transient and our origin insignificant, we are not losing anything by enjoying the pleasures of life, but to remember that there is another part of us that transcends the body, and which we may place in jeopardy if we do not act properly. If the body is subject to metamorphosis, how much more so the soul. Death of the body as an end to existence is quite an illogical premise then. Death is merely a transition to another state, not a final disposition, extinction. It is this thought that is the rationale underlying all yirat chet, fear of sin, the knowledge that there is no escaping the consequences of one's actions. When the Mishnah in Ediyot 5,6-7, describes this same Akavyah as a person possessed both of great wisdom and fear of the Lord in the highest degree, it only shows that the author of the statement quoted in Avot, himself lived in accordance with his own philosophy. He is reported to have declined the highest office in order not to compromise what he believed to be the truth. He preferred to be called a fool, rather than appear wicked in the eyes of G'd by recanting publicly something which he believed privately. He who gives people cause to suspect him of wrongdoing, cannot be well liked in the eyes of the Lord. This is what Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha had referred to in the opening quote from Tractate Avot. People of Akavyah's caliber require wisdom to help them distinguish true integrity. This is the reason that they are granted such wisdom. If, however, people want to employ their wisdom for ulterior personal motives, they are not really in need of such wisdom. Therefore, it will not endure, they will lose it. G'd does not endow people with the talent to deny their fear of G'd. In the words of the psalmist, Rabbi Chaninah's statement is "the beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord, ensuring good intelligence for those who practice its dictates." (Psalms 111,10.) Those who act in accordance with that wisdom will find that their intellect stands them in good stead. When that psalm continues "his fame will endure forever," this is parallel to the statement in Avot "those whose deeds are more numerous than their theoretical wisdom will enjoy enduring wisdom." Anyone whose fear of the Lord is his priority number one, will try and do more than his wisdom dictates. He will do both what his own wisdom dictates and what his mentors have taught him to do. Those people who invert the process are described by the Rabbis as being like builders who have provided doors, but lack the house to put them in. What good are doors when you do not have a house?

Since the highest attribute man can achieve is the power of prophecy, and a nation aspiring to an intimate relationship with its G'd, needs prophets in its midst in order to achieve that intimacy, extraordinary measures are called for to preserve the spiritual standards of such a nation. At Sinai, every individual Jew had achieved a degree of prophetic stature, if ever so briefly. Israel is distinguished from other nations in three ways. 1) Its collective fate is subject to G'ds Personal guidance, hashgachah peratit. 2) They are aware that it is possible to achieve prophetic stature on a national basis, having experienced Divine revelation. 3) They are in possession of the holy Torah, something that transcends prophetic instruction, since it addresses itself to any facet of life, and its teachings are available to all those who study it. It is these three things G'd had in mind, when He said to Moses (Exodus 19,9) "Behold, I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever." This verse embodies the three ways in which Israel was distinguished. Since Moses was so important to our faith that even G'd made an effort to ensure that the people would have enduring faith in the authenticity of everything Moses conveys to them in His name, any attempt to challenge His stature must be disproved beyond any doubt. Just as an architect's reputation cannot be based merely on the excellence of his designs on the drawing board, but can be confirmed only after execution of his plans has stood the test of time, so the reputation of Moses could be confirmed only after it had stood up to the challenges of would-be competitors. In order to make the point that Moses was indeed superior beyond any doubt, the challenge to his leadership had to emanate from the highest quarters. 2) The nature of the challenge had to be plausible, so that if refuted, Moses would emerge as even greater in stature than had been believed up to that point. 3) The insincerity of the challengers' motives had to be demonstrated by showing that their actions had been at variance with their avowed purpose. It is true that after reading the glowing terms in which Korach and his followers are described, the reader may conclude that possessing all the intellectual and material assets of a Korach may be a handicap in life rather than an asset. However, the Torah teaches that the piety displayed by some people may only mask a wicked interior, on occasion. Such a wicked interior comes to light when one carefully observes the actions of the "pious person." It may be found that the mantle of piety is worn only in order to help one achieve some nefarious design. It is this the Talmud Nedarim 62, condemns, when it discusses a person who learns Torah in order to amass wealth, or earn a title. When we see such a person commit a sin, it is not the Torah scholar who commits the sin, but it is a sinful person whose personality has not changed in spite of the Torah knowledge he has absorbed.