Pemikiran Yahudi Yeremia 18:9: Akeidat Yitzchak, Derush Chiddushei HaLevanah & Derashot HaRan

Since we have established that events in this world can be due to natural law or G-d’s direct intervention, and that the latter is reserved for the Jewish people, it is proper to show how construction of the tabernacle fits into the second category. When events are the result of natural law, the fate of the righteous and the fate of the sinner are alike, since natural law does not distinguish between good and evil, rich and poor etc. This is not so when events are due to Divine intervention. Then the guilty gets his just deserts and the innocent, i.e. the righteous reaps the reward due him. It is crucial therefore, to have chosen the right way of life. He who chooses the lifestyle of a sinner, is in effect choosing death. This fact is spelled out in the Torah on several occasions, such as Deut.30, 16, et al. We have discussed G-d’s Personal Providence in chapters 15 and 31. Since we have explained in chapter 48, that the tabernacle was a microcosm of the universe, we will explain how Israel is taught a lesson by G-d exercising His Personal Providence in connection with the tabernacle and its parts, about His macrocosm. When one speaks about how the world is being run, this "running" can be subdivided into three aspects. 1) Availability of food and shelter. Both are available in equal measure for the righteous as well as for the sinner, as stated in Deut. 4, 19, "sun, moon and stars have been allocated to all nations." 2) The availability of free choice within the framework of natural law. (compare chapter 3) This is necessary in order not to make good conduct something that is merely functional. If bad conduct were to be followed automatically and immediately by punishment, good behaviour could not qualify for reward since it would be due merely to fear and other functional considerations. 3) Sometimes, matters that had been preordained in accordance with natural law, are synchronised to occur at a time when they demonstrate G-d’s pleasure or displeasure with the conduct of man. If Nebuchdnezzar's star rose at the time of Yehoyakim so that he became the world's ruler, Israel, by reason of its wicked conduct was not excluded (saved) by special Divine intervention. Normally, when prophets make predictions they have in mind those preordained events. They announce their knowledge of these events and the time they would occur. Should the people repent, the preordained event will be cancelled, i.e. Divine intervention in Israel's fate will become manifest. False prophets base their predictions on their knowledge of natural law, not being privy to these preordained happenings that are timed to coincide with certain actions, resp. inactions of the Jewish people. Thus they deny Divine Personal intervention. Chapter twenty seven in Jeremiah is a case in point. Personal Providence does not apply to Nebuchadnezzar, but it would apply to Israel if they would follow the urgings of the prophet. Proof that the chapter discusses events due to natural law, is the prophecy concerning Nebuchadnezzar's son and grandson who had as yet not proven themselves, and whose dominion, if preordained, had nothing to do with Divine intervention. In such circumstances, intervention by hashgachah peratit, Personal Divine Providence, cannot be expected. Also, by means of natural law, the seventy years of Babylonian exile were to have the psychological effect of bringing about repentance by those who had to live in Babylonia as strangers. King Cyrus responded to their seventy year exile when he granted permission to re-establish the Jewish state, (province within the Persian empire) When king Solomon states in Kohelet 8,5, "he who obeys the commandments will know no evil, and a wise mind will know time and justice, for everything has its time and justice for man's evil overwhelms him..l have taken this to heart," this passage does not mean that all fates are determined exclusively by natural law. It merely means that there is such a thing as natural law, but that G-d works according to His timetable. Those who believe that there is only natural law err. Therefore, all attempts to calculate the coming of the Messiah in advance are doomed to failure. When G-d has said in Isaiah 63,4, "the day of vengeance is in My heart," He means that He will not reveal the timing, but it remains in His heart. Sanhedrin 97, curses those who calculate the timing of the Messiah's arrival beforehand. Such calculations actually delay his arrival. If someone had calculated that the Messiah would not arrive until the year seven thousand, using astronomic and astrological data, we would resign ourselves to a lengthy exile and slacken our efforts to hasten his arrival through the performance of good deeds. We must believe that a) "My redemption is close at hand," (Isaiah 56, 1) and that when least thought about, it may arrive. (Sanhedrin 94) Experience has taught us that G-d may hasten the end, (Haggadah of Passover) when He shortened our exile in Egypt." I the Lord, at its time, I will hasten it" (Isaiah 60,22). G-d reserves the right to accelerate His timetable, if warranted. At this point we learn that "natural law" can be supplanted by hashgachah perartit. When Jeremiah expresses the hope that the prediction of the false prophet Chananyah ben Azzur who had predicted the return of the captured holy vessels within two years, would come true, (Jeremiah 28, 6) he did so because the principle of hashgachah peratit can override the dictates of natural law. G-d’s prerogative to employ this method has certainly not been abrogated. When Jeremiah expressed doubt however, that this would happen, and predicted the false prophet's imminent death, he merely indicated that the conditions to bring about G-d’s personal intervention on behalf of the Jewish people did not exist at that time. The people simply did not merit it. The acid test of whether a prophet speaks the truth is when he predicts something "good" and it does not come true exactly as promised. Prediction of disaster merely serves to arouse feelings of fear and, hopefully, remorse. The reverse is achieved when the false prophet predicts something "good," lulling his listeners into a false sense of security, an impediment to arousing feelings of remorse and repentance. This is what was the case in Jeremiah chapters 27 and 28. In Jeremiah 27, 18, Jeremiah exhorts those prophets that if they were indeed prophets of the Lord, they would pray to G-d not to lose the remaining holy vessels of the temple, and for their king not to be taken into captivity. At least, if they did that, they would attempt to ward off a decree already in the process of being executed. The reason the "good" prophecy has to come true is that hashgachah peratit supersedes natural law, and a good prophecy is always based on hashgachah peratit being employed. The reverse is not true, since prophesies of doom are based on G-d’s intervention having been forfeited. Hence there is a chance of doom. When no doom occurs, it proves that Divine intervention did take place on our behalf and superseded the natural law which would have proved fatal to us had it been allowed to run its course. (more on this in chapter 96) When two prophets prophesy simultaneously about the same people however, the true prophet threatening doom in order to arouse feelings of repentance, and the false prophet assuring the same people that regardless of their conduct the good will come true since their merit suffices, then only by the "good" coming true can we have proof positive of who was the true prophet and who was not.

xi) Since the wording, “must I diminish myself,” which the moon used, employs the future tense, it is apparent that the moon had yet to carry out God’s decree and diminish itself. From the fact that God offered the moon several conciliatory gestures, it appears that the moon’s arguments were accepted. If so, why did God not rescind His decree and fulfill the moon’s request? Nothing is beyond God’s capacity, and there is certainly another way that He could have resolved the difficulty of two kings using the same crown. There is no reason to say God did not rescind His decree was because once a Divine decree is issued, God does not desire to retract it, as reflected in the interpretation of Yirmeyahu’s statement:²⁵Yirmeyahu 28:9. “Regarding the prophet who will prophesy promising peace, when the words of the prophet will come to fruition, it will be made known that God truly sent him.” Rashi,²⁶See Rashi’s commentary to Yirmeyahu 28:7. based on the Midrash Tanchuma,²⁷Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Masei, sec. 7. explains that if a prophet prophesies that negative events will occur, the fact that his prophecy does not materialize is not a proof that he is a false prophet, for God is patient and relents, and may withold harmful consequences. Radak²⁸See Radak’s commentary to Yirmeyahu, loc. cit. offers a similar explanation, supporting his words through the example of God’s retraction of the prophecy of doom for Nineveh. A prophecy for good, by contrast, will certainly materialize. True, it is possible that a prophecy for good will later be annulled as a result of sin, as reflected in Yirmeyahu’s words:²⁹Yirmeyahu 18:9-10. “If at any time, I speak concerning a nation… to build it and to plant it… if they do what is evil in My eyes, I will retract the good.” Nevertheless, at least initially, the positive prophecy will be fulfilled. In a similar vein, the Talmud Yerushalmi states³⁰Talmud Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 11:5. that when the false prophet Chananyah ben Azur challenged Yirmeyahu to prove his words, Yirmeyahu answered him: I am prophesying concerning harmful events. Therefore, I cannot supply proof for my words, because although God said that the evil would come, He may relent. You are prophesying concerning positive events, so it is you who must give a sign of the truth of your words.” From all this, it is apparent that a negative Divine decree may be abrogated. Why then – if God acknowledged that the moon’s claim was valid – did He not retract?

But what shall we do? For the Ramban extends his principle to the prophecies of good to Abraham, most of which were reinforced by symbolic acts! Listen, then, to what I shall tell you. There is nothing in the nature of a good forecast which makes it more susceptible of fulfillment than an evil forecast. For just as the attribute of justice dictates that an evil decree be annulled upon the repentance of its objects, so does it dictate that the objects of a promised good have that good withheld from them if they adopt evil ways. There is no difference whatsoever between the two, as is explicitly stated by the verse (Jeremiah 18:9-10): "And at another time I spoke concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom to build and to plant; but if they do evil in My sight, not to listen to My voice, then I shall repent of the good…" However, if things proceeded along these lines; that is, if good and evil forecasts would change, there would be no way in which to confirm the truth of a prophet. (For signs and wonders can be contrived in many ways which have nothing of truth about them.) It was therefore necessary for the Blessed One to establish some of the forecasts as firm and unchangeable. He did not choose to do so with the evil forecasts, for it would be in violation of His mode of conduct to do evil to those who returned to Him. It was the good forecasts, then, which had to be positive of fulfillment; for if they were not, a true prophet could not be discriminated.