Pemikiran Yahudi Keluaran 7:1: Akeidat Yitzchak, Derush Chiddushei HaLevanah & Derashot HaRan

וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהוָה֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה רְאֵ֛ה נְתַתִּ֥יךָ אֱלֹהִ֖ים לְפַרְעֹ֑ה וְאַהֲרֹ֥ן אָחִ֖יךָ יִהְיֶ֥ה נְבִיאֶֽךָ׃

Yang Mahakekal berfirman kepada Musa: “Lihatlah, Aku telah menjadikan engkau penguasa atas Firaun, dan Harun, saudaramu, akan menjadi nabimu.”

Akeidat Yitzchak

Shemot Rabbah Section 8 asks why G-d is described as the melech hakavod, the king of glory. The Midrash answers that this is so because He accords honor and prestige to His subjects. Normally, a king's horse or mantle is not used or worn by his subjects; however, G-d let Elijah ride on His horse (Nachum 1, Kings II, 2,1), Moses used the staff of G-d (Exodus 17,9), and Solomon sat on the throne of G-d (Chronices I 29,23). There is a commentary which understands this as an absence of jealousy on the part of G-d. Since all the aforementioned paraphernalia of G-d’s power are His, first and foremost, and even when they are employed by human beings are never mentioned except as things which belong to G-d, it proves that He does not mind that the symbols of His sovereignty are used by some of His subjects. All of this is explained quite properly by Midrash Tanchuma, who uses the simile of G-d saying to Moses, "I am not like a human being who forbids his subjects the use of royal prerogatives, but I even share My very Name with you." Moses is called "elohim." G-d referred to Jeremiah as "chassid." The Jewish people are referred to as "kedoshim,” all of which are Divine attributes, names. This last Midrash does not refer to the same thing as the Midrash Rabbah we quoted, else it should also have used the term "an ordinary person has no right to use etc," instead of "one does not use." When a king delegates authority to a minister or general, he usually does so in order that his own glory be enhanced. If the king hands his seal of office to a minister, it is in order for the minister to rule in the name of the king, on behalf of the king. Not so in the case of G-d. When G-d delegates His authority, He does not do so for His own sake, but for the sake of the prophet and his people. When Elijah was in possession of the key to rain, he used it independently, as he saw fit, on behalf of his people. When Elisha had the key of life at his disposal, and revived the dead, he did so in his own right. Moses smote the sea, and was in fact criticized by G-d for praying instead of using the power delegated to him (Exodus 14,26). Solomon who had asked G-d to delegate this power to him, acted in his own right. His wisdom was considered as having been a gift from the Divine, but he employed it for the benefit of his people. In this way all of these people became partners of G-d, a status far above that of ministers or generals of human monarchs who always remain strictly servants or employees.
Tanya RabiBookmarkShareCopy

Akeidat Yitzchak

In fact, since according to our sages, Moses had been handed the keys to all G'ds treasure chambers, he is criticized when he resorts merely to prayer instead of action, deed. At the sea, when threatened by the Egyptians who were close on his heels, G'd says to him "why are you crying out to Me, tell the Jewish people to get going!" (Exodus 14,15) Not for nothing did G'd say to him "see I have made you Lord over Pharaoh." (Exodus 7,1) Moses was like a deity who would employ Aaron as his prophet to impose his will upon Pharaoh. The contrast with Bileam is striking. The latter, by his own admission, had no idea when G'd would respond to his requests, and was certainly quite powerless to act on his own and display supernatural powers. Every utterance made by Bileam in his capacity as seer, needed approval by G'd. He did not even have latitude to depart from his prepared text. (Numbers 22,38) His utter lack of vision is best demonstrated when he said to his she-ass "if I had a sword in my hand I would kill you now." (Numbers 22,29) The Midrash that stated that among the nations there did arise a prophet, did not mean to compare Bileam with Moses, but to point out the contrast between the two. Even when a prophet does arise among the gentiles, there is no comparison at all. In every vital matter, Moses was far superior to Bileam. (see Sifri on Deut. 34,10) In order to convey G'ds messages, Moses did not need to hear them spelled out, since he always found himself on the right wavelength. Bileam, on the other hand, had to stress that what he conveyed was the word of G'd. The meaning of the Sifri in Deut. 34,10, that Moses did not know who was going to talk to him, whereas Bileam knew, is, that Moses did not need to prepare himself for an encounter with G'd, whereas Bileam had to. Moses communicated with G'd from an upright position, Bileam only while he was prostrate. The fact that Bileam was uncircumcised was a further impediment to his receptiveness for Divine communication. Prior to circumcision, even an Abraham received the word of G'd only while falling down. Not until after the circumcision when G'd addressed him, (Genesis 18,1) do we find him remaining seated. The gentile is communicated with only at night, since he is compared to a mistress, someone whom one visits discreetly during the hours of darkness. Israel, however, is like a wife with whom one communicates openly during all hours of the day. When Bileam describes himself as "one who hears the words of G'd, receives visions of the Almighty, (Numbers 24,4) one forms the impression that he was indeed on very familiar terms with the Almighty. However, this is misleading. Whereas the chef in the king's kitchen must be familiar with every ingredient in the king's meal, the maitre D' does not have to concern himself with every detail. When the Midrash, in apparent inexactitude, states that whereas Moses did not know "what was talking, whereas Bileam knew "what was talking," the reference is to the subject matter. Bileam who knew that a specific topic would be discussed with him without preamble, needed advance knowledge of that subject. Similarly, he knew when this subject would come up. This is why he could tell Balak's messengers to stay overnight till he would get instructions. Moses needed no advance knowledge of the subject matter, nor did he ever have to wait for an opportune moment. As soon as he entered the tabernacle, "he would hear the voice of the Lord talk to him." (Numbers 7, 89.) The somewhat peculiarly worded Midrash (Sifri) mentioned, has yet another meaning. Since Bileam's mode of communication with G'd was not on the level of "face to face," he could identify the source of what was speaking to him, since "it" assumed a certain form. Moses, on the other hand, while on the level of "face to face" communication had also been told by G'd "you cannot see My face, you can only see My rear, i.e. in retrospect." (Exodus 33,20) At the actual moment of the communication, he never knew how close to the "face to face" level the emanation from which he heard the voice actually was. Bileam had a kind of visual contact machazeh. Not so Moses, to whom a completely disembodied voice would not present a conceptual problem. The thrust of the whole commentary on the verse "there did not arise another prophet etc." is not to minimise the accomplishments of an Elijah in reviving the dead, nor to belittle Joshua arresting the sun and moon in their respective orbits. The commentary wishes to underline that no one other than Moses performed such miracles except by their own initiative. None were as privy to G'ds intentions as had been Moses. For that very reason, namely that he was on such intimate terms with G'd, it would have been practically impossible for Moses to have produced a miracle on his own initiative. If the whole portion is written to demonstrate the inadequacy of the most brilliant of gentile prophets, then we can understand Rabbi Yitzchak's statement that commencing with the functioning of the tabernacle, no more prophetic powers were granted to the gentiles.
Tanya RabiBookmarkShareCopy

Derush Chiddushei HaLevanah

On this verse, there is a relevant passage from the Midrash:32Bereishis Rabbah 6:8. “How do the spheres of the sun and the moon set?... Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai said: ‘We do not know whether they fly through the air, glide in the heaven, or proceed in their usual manner. It is an exceedingly difficult matter, and no created being can fathom it.’”… It is possible to explain that “flying” refers to proceeding at an exceedingly fast pace. “Gliding” also reflects swift progress, but not as fast as “flying.” An object glides rapidly because the air does not impede its progress to the same degree as an entity of substance which holds back one who runs on it. One who “proceeds in his usual manner” does not move quickly. All of these three approaches, however, follow the approach of our Sages, that the stars revolve and the heavenly sphere remains fixed in place.
Tanya RabiBookmarkShareCopy