Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk 1 Samuel 5:11

לד׳ ;והוקע אותם לד׳ נגד השמש damit wird der Forderung Gottes, der nur auf Reinheit des Sittenprinzips und des Gottesgedankens Israels Zukunft basiert, genügt, indem durch Ausscheidung der Verbrecher aus der Reihe irdischer Existenzen und tatsächliche Proklamierung des hohen Grades solcher Verworfenheit die Idee der Heiligkeit des Prinzips wieder aufgerichtet ist und " ד" Sein Verhältnis zu Israel wieder fortwalten lassen kann. נגד השמש: das ganze kriminalrechtliche Verfahren der jüdischen Gesetzgebung, גמר דין ,תחלת הדין und auch die Strafvollziehung ist ביום, gehört in das helle, aufrechte, freie, sozialmenschliche Tagesleben. Es ist nicht Ausfluss eines nächtlich dunklen Rachegeistes. Es ist eine von der ihrer Selbst und ihrer Bestimmung sich bewussten Nation zu vollziehende, dem Gesetze und dem Verbrecher selbst Sühne bringende Handlung der Pflicht, darum לד׳ und וישב .נגד השמש, die Cholemform, statt des gewöhnlichen ישוב, spricht durchgreifend eine Rückkehr in ein früheres Verhältnis aus, das man nur ungern verlassen. So: ילך וישב לביתו (Dewarim 20, 5 f.); וישב למקומו (Sam. I. 5, 11) וישב אל מקומו (das. 29, 4) וישב העפר על הארץ (Pred. 12, 7) und sonst.

ויתעצב אל לבו, “and His heart felt sadness.” In terms of the plain meaning of the words the term “heart” when applied to G-d is, of course, only a figure of speech. The same is true whenever the Torah speaks of other organs and appears to attribute them to G-d Who is totally abstract, devoid of any such organs. The reason that the Torah nonetheless employs such terms is to convey to us that our actions may or may not please G-d, may even elicit reactions that if they had been observed in humans would be described as “joy, anger, frustration, happiness and the like.” Such reactions when expressed by human beings usually involve human organs also. When the psalmist (Psalms 104,31) speaks about ישמח ה' במעשיו, “G-d rejoices in His works,” on the one hand, and in this instance we read ויתעצב ה' אל לבו, ”G-d was saddened in His heart,” both descriptions are of necessity anthropomorphisms, i.e. approximations of G-d’s reactions in terms which we humans can understand. They do not reflect the objective reactions of Someone Whose Essence we have not been privileged to understand
It follows that when the Torah wishes to give us an inkling of G-d’s reaction to man’s behavior it uses the word “heart” in order to help us understand. Seeing that the human heart is a major vessel in his thinking process, the Torah chose to attribute G-d’s feelings in reaction to human aberrations as reactions by “His heart.”
You find that if a person wants to concentrate he isolates himself and bends his head so as to exclude distracting intrusions into his thinking. The reason for this is that the brain, i.e. the head is where his ability to form thoughts originates. This thought process is then relayed to the heart. Granted, that this metaphor sounds somewhat far-fetched, the fact remains that ideas, thoughts travel in a downward direction from the brain to the heart.. When the Bible speaks about a messenger from G-d, such a messenger is usually described as פי ה', the “mouth” or “mouthpiece” of G-d (compare Isaiah 34,16) כי פי הוא צוה, “for My mouth (He) has commanded.” The prophet describes himself as G-d’s messenger (agent, or angel) who acts as G-d’s mouthpiece. The spirit of G-d is described as פי the spirit of the angel known as פי,“my,” resp “His mouth.” Yonathan ben Uziel therefore translates our verse here not as “G-d was saddened to His heart,” but as “His angel was saddened to his heart.” [Our editions of Yonathan ben Uziel do not have this wording; Ed.] According to our author the אורים ותומים, the parchment with the Holy name of G-d inside the breastplate of the High Priest which served as a source of communication from G-d to him, was also known as פי ה’, “the mouth of G-d, i.e. as an angel named “mouth of G-d.” Another example of such a reference to פי ה' is found in Joshua 9,14 where the acceptance of the Gibeonites as allies of the Jewish people is described. The failure of consulting G-d on that issue is described there as ואת פי ה' לא שאלו, “they did not consult ‘the mouth of G-d.” When we read in Numbers 11,1 ויהי העם כמתאוננים, רע באזני ה', “the people were as if looking for something to complain about, it was evil in the ears of G-d;” here to the word “in the ears” may be understood as the “ear” in question being one of G-d’s angels. Whenever the function of G-d’s angel is passive, i.e. he is to be an instrument of receiving G-d’s instructions, such a function of the angel is described as his being the “ears” of G-d. When he is supposed to be active in a supervisory manner, he is called “the eyes of G-d.” A very interesting example of this approach is found in Zechariah 3,9 where the prophet describes G-d’s supervision of the Jewish people in revolutionary terms, saying על אבן אחת שבעה עינים, “a single stone enjoying a variety of no less than seven supervisory “eyes,” i.e. agents of G-d.” When David speaks of אזנים כרית לי , “You assigned an ear [in order to listen to You ] “to me” [rather than the commandment to offer sacrifices, Ed.], he refers to his ear as the organ, or in this case G-d’s instrument, which helps to make him tune in to G-d’s “wavelength.” Whenever the term “ear or ears” is used for celestial beings the meaning is that these ”ears” are listening to Israel’s prayers. When G-d dispatches an angel to fight against Israel’s adversaries such an angel is usually described as יד ה' “the hand of G-d,” i.e. His executive arm. One of the examples of such a meaning of the term יד ה' is found in Samuel I 5,11 כבדה מאד יד האלוקים שם, “for the hand of the Lord had been very heavy there.” There are, of course, numerous similar quotations in Exodus when the Torah describes the plagues G-d inflicted upon Pharaoh and the Egyptians. When G-d’s agents are about to reveal a previously unknown manifestation of the Lord, the angel performing this task is often described as “the feet of G-d.” We find an example of this in Zechariah 14,4 ועמדו רגליו ביום ההוא על הר זיתים, “and on that day His feet will stand on Mount Olives, etc.” The prophet refers to G-d’s “soldiers.” There are numerous other examples of that nature.

ויאמרו החרטומים אצבע אלוקים הוא, “The sorcerers said that it was manifestation of a ‘finger’ of G’d.” Ibn Ezra wrote that far from admitting that Moses and Aaron were superior to them, seeing that thus far they had been able to match Moses and Aaron plague for plague, they now attributed this plague directly to a natural phenomenon, i.e. part of nature and its cycles, and as not related even remotely to the situation of the Israelites. [the fact that Moses had not given any warning of this plague helped convince Pharaoh that his sorcerers were right. Ed.] Pharaoh had never denied the existence of elokim the Creator, he had only refused to acknowledge the existence of the attribute Hashem, and the special relationship of that attribute to the Israelites, as “HIS” people. Ibn Ezra cites the fact that the sorcerers did not say: אצבע ה' אלוקים הוא, “it is a manifestation of the finger of Hashem elokim, although even Pharaoh had begged Moses to entreat Hashem to remove the plague of frogs, as proof of their being far from acknowledging the phenomenon Hashem. Nachmanides writes that in his opinion Ibn Ezra is not correct, seeing that the Torah would not refer to a plague as אצבע אלוקים, unless such a plague was a clear indication that it occurred as a Divine punishment, not as a random event, part of astrologically predictable “normal” phenomena. Expressions such as “G’d’s finger, G’d’s hand, G’d’s arm,” are always reserved for manifestations of G’d’s direct intervention in the affairs of man, not natural phenomena which could have occurred at any time without reference to specific events known to man. He quotes such examples as Exodus 14,31, Samuel I 12,15, Samuel I 5,11 as support for this thesis. Furthermore, the very fact that the Torah reports that the sorcerers were themselves afflicted to the extent that they had to leave Pharaoh’s presence, would make any claim that this was not a Divine manifestation related to the Israelites’ continued enslavement quite unlikely. Seeing that the sorcerers ceased playing any role, as Pharaoh did not summon them to try and get rid of the plague of wild beasts, a plague that he had been forewarned about, shows that Pharaoh by then was isolated in his obstinacy, knowing that the sorcerers would be of no help to him at all. The sorcerers had referred to “a finger of G’d,” in order to minimize the awe in which G’d would be held on account of a minor plague such as the vermin. We do not find that Pharaoh and his advisors ever referred to G’d as Hashem, except when they were in the presence of Moses and Aaron. This was mere lip service, as they did not want to aggravate their relations with Moses who had proven capable of not only orchestrating a plague but also of causing it to stop. As to Ibn Ezra’s argument that Moses and Aaron had not given warning of this plague, this is only technically so, as no doubt they had struck the earth while being in the presence of Pharaoh, and this clearly was meant to bring forth the vermin. To attribute such a plague of vermin to “natural” atmospheric phenomena would hardly be believable to anyone. If, in apparent contradiction to the above, we find that the Torah describes the sorcerers as so afflicted by the plague of boils, (#6) that “they were unable to remain in the presence of Moses,” (9,11) the Torah does not mention this because the sorcerers had come to duplicate the plague of boils, but because the Torah had stated that in spite of this very painful plague, something which should have given Pharaoh food for thought, the Torah wants to illustrate how painful this plague was by stating that even the sorcerers who had their reputation at stake, could not maintain a posture during that plague. If the sorcerers could not maintain a posture, how far less could any other Egyptian, excepting Pharaoh, of course. The Torah therefore explains that if Pharaoh remained steadfast this was only because G’d had given him the strength to do so. ויחזק ה' את לב פרעה. (9,12)