Pemikiran Yahudi 1 Samuel 3:1: Derush Chiddushei HaLevanah, Akeidat Yitzchak & Kuzari

However according to our understanding, Iyov’s words can be understood here as follows: If I ever saw the light of the sun shining on the world, and the moon proceeding on its course with glory. Rav Avraham ibn Ezra explains that the latter phrase describes the moon’s progress “in the half of the month” (i.e. when the moon becomes full). Now, the word הֹלֵךְ, “proceeds,” is not entirely appropriate here.⁶The verse seems to say that in the first half of the month, the moon’s glory grows. That concept, however, could have been understood from the word יָקָר without the word הֹלֵךְ. Hence, the term הֹלֵךְ implies that there is a further concept to be learned from this verse. Accordingly, I think that the verse can be interpreted as referring to an additional concept. Although we have translated the word יקר as “glory”, it can also be translated as “rare” or as “valuable”. Indeed, we find the term יָקָר, “rare”, used in association with speech, in the verse,⁷ I Shmuel 3:1. ודבר ה' היה יקר, “The word of God was rare.” It could thus be said that Scripture alludes to the fact that the moon spoke of a matter that is יָקָר, “valuable.” This can be understood as a reference to the moon’s statement cited in the passage – i.e. “Is it possible for two kings to wear one crown?” that the moon described as “proper,” and as a result of which it was הֹלֵךְ – progressively diminished. Seemingly, the moon has a valid complaint. This relates to the continuation of Iyov’s words: וַיִּפְתְּ בַּסֵּתֶר לִבִּי – “I was lured in the secret reaches of my heart.” This phrase could be understood as meaning, “I was lured to think within my heart that Your judgments are not correct and just.”

Shemot Rabbah 42, answers the question from where Moses took the authority to kill Jews found worshipping the calf, by referring us to G-d’s own example on the occasion of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Tower of Bable respectively. In either case, G-d had proceeded to mete out punishment after He had investigated the facts. Similarly, Moses, G-d’s trusted servant, was expected to carry out this task as G-d’s messenger. When the Levites had completed their task, Moses addressed the nation exhorting them to remain loyal to G-d, and thus turn away His wrath. He pointed to the example of their fellow Jews the Levites, who had demonstrated such loyalty by disregarding family ties when the law required that their closest relatives be executed. He explained that all that is needed to qualify for G-d’s blessing, is loyalty. (Exodus 32,29) On the morrow, after the three thousand had died, Moses said to the people that they too had sinned gravely by having demanded proof of G-d’s existence and power. Also, they should have prevented the three thousand from dancing around the calf. Therefore, it was now necessary for Moses to ascend the mountain and plead for forgiveness. Moses uses both understatement and exaggeration in his plea, in order to present a credible defense. By describing the sin as the construction of a golden deity, he exaggerated its importance. By pointing out that it had been removed, and that the guilty had been punished, and that none of those witnessing the punishment had protested the death of the guilty, he prayed that surely the time had come to forgive the remainder of the nation for this episode. G-d’s reply "whosoever has sinned against Me, I will wipe out from My book," is not a direct response to Moses’s request. Moses had spoken about the book "You have written," meaning the Torah, whereas G-d referred to the book of life, a book which G-d retains for His own exclusive use. The people were to be punished by acts of G-d only, since no human witnesses were at hand to testify to their culpable participation in the construction of the golden calf. However, G-d reserved the right to exact such punishment whenever an occasion would arise in the future to punish them for other misdeeds. For the present therefore, G-d says to Moses "lead this people to the place I have said to you." We read in verse 35, "G-d smote the people because they had made the calf that Aaron had made." The repetition of the words "they had made...Aaron had made," indicates that the intentions of the people and the intentions of Aaron had been quite different from one another. Aaron's part in it had been merely incidental, the real culprit having been the people. Nonetheless, Aaron reproaches himself after two of his sons have died, saying "all these things have happened to me," when in fact we had not read of anything else happening to him. 11) Since the progress of the Jewish people from now on was to be under the guidance of an angel, (Exodus 33, 1-3) the people thought that the Divine Presence would no longer be among them. They mourned this news by failing to wear their jewelry. Since they had not actually removed their jewelry from themselves, there was reason for Moses to command them to "remove" it. Apparently, some of the people had put on their jewelry. Why did some people wear their jewelry, whereas others did not? If we follow the tradition that the "jewelry" were the phylacteries of the head, the latter could be viewed as a protective device while worn. When in mourning, wearing such phylacteries is forbidden. The Jews who did not wear their phylacteries considered themselves in mourning, having heard G-d’s decree. Others considered themselves in the category of "outcasts," and as such Jewish halachah requires the continued wearing of phylacteries. The difference between the two groups stemmed from which part of G-d’s stricture they considered as paramount. (33,5) If they considered the reference to them as "a stiffnecked people" as paramount, they would be in mourning. If they considered the words "I will not go up with you" as paramount, they would view themselves as outcasts. When G-d used the words "children of Israel," a term of endearment at one and the same time, this was proof to those who continued to wear their phylacteries that it was the danger to their souls that was the greater source of worry. G-d having rescinded His descision to abandon the Jewish people, they were told not to grieve more than their brethren who had mourned their physical fate and had therefore divested themselves of their phylacteries. The commandment to the last group to remove their phylactries also, is a commandment to downgrade the state of their despair to a level in which they only mourned the physical consequences arising out of the episode of the golden calf. When Moses realised that the people were in a state of banishment, he had to remove his tent from their midst, or he would have forfeited further communication from the shechinah, since the latter would not communicate with him as long as he was amidst the banished.

THE RABBI: According to our view a servant of God is not one who detaches himself from the world, lest he be a burden to it, and it to him; or hates life, which is one of God's bounties granted to him, as it is written: 'The number of thy days I will fulfill'; 'Thou shalt live long' (Exodus 23:26). On the contrary, he loves the world and a long life, because it affords him opportunities of deserving the world to come. The more good he does the greater is his claim to the next world. He even reaches the degree of Enoch, concerning whom it is said: 'And Enoch walked with God' (Genesis 5:24); or the degree of Elijah, freed from worldly matters, and to be admitted to the realm of angels. In this case he feels no loneliness in solitude and seclusion, since they form his associates. He is rather ill at ease in a crowd, because he misses the divine presence which enables him to dispense with eating and drinking. Such persons might perhaps be happier in complete solitude; they might even welcome death, because it leads to the step beyond which there is none higher. Philosophers and scholars also love solitude to refine their thoughts, and to reap the fruits of truth from their researches, in order that all remaining doubts be dispelled by truth. They only desire the society of disciples who stimulate their research and retentiveness, just as he who is bent upon making money would only surround himself with persons with whom he could do lucrative business. Such a degree is that of Socrates and those who are like him. There is no one nowadays who feels tempted to strive for such a degree, but when the Divine Presence was still in the Holy Land among the people capable of prophecy, some few persons lived an ascetic life in deserts and associated with people of the same frame of mind. They did not seclude themselves completely, but they endeavoured to find support in the knowledge of the Law and in holy and pure actions which brought them near to that high rank. These were the disciples of prophets. He, however, who in our time, place, and people, 'whilst no open vision exists' (I Samuel 3:1), the desire for study being small, and persons with a natural talent for it absent, would like to retire into ascetic solitude, only courts distress and sickness for soul and body. The misery of sickness is visibly upon him, but one might regard it as the consequence of humility and contrition. He considers himself in prison as it were, and despairs of life from disgust of his prison and pain, but not because he enjoys his seclusion. How could it be otherwise? He has no intercourse with the divine light, and cannot associate himself with it as the prophets. He lacks the necessary learning to be absorbed in it and to enjoy it, as the philosophers did, all the rest of his life. Suppose he is God-fearing, righteous, desires to meet his God in solitude, standing, humbly and contritely, reciting as many prayers and supplications as he possibly can remember, all this affords him satisfaction for a few days as long as it is new. Words frequently repeated by the tongue lose their influence on the soul, and he cannot give to the latter humbleness or submission. Thus he remains night and day, whilst his soul urges him to employ its innate powers in seeing, hearing, speaking, occupation, eating, cohabitation, gain, managing his house, helping the poor, upholding the law with money in case of need. Must he not regret those things to which he has tied his soul, a regret which tends to remove him from the Divine Influence, which he desired to approach?