창세기 18:2의 인용 해설

AND HE APPEARED TO HIM. Rashi comments: “To visit the sick man. Said Rabbi Chama the son of Chanina, ‘It was the third day after his circumcision, and the Holy One, blessed be He, came and inquired after him.’¹“After him.” In our text of Rashi: “after the state of his health.” And, lo, three men:²Verse 2 here. angels who came to him in the form of men. Three: one to announce to Sarah that she would bear a son, one to heal Abraham, and one to overthrow Sodom. Raphael who healed Abraham went from there to rescue Lot” for these do not constitute two commissions.³“One angel does not carry out two commissions.” (Bereshith Rabbah 50:2 and mentioned in Rashi here.) But, continues Ramban, these two missions given to the angel Raphael—healing Abraham and rescuing Lot from Sodom—do not violate the principle. See text. This is because the second mission was in another place, and he was commanded thereon after [he had completed his first mission].⁴It is as if he was sent on a new mission in another place after he had completed his mission in a different place. For it is clear that the principle of one angel not carrying out two commissions applies only to two simultaneous commissions, as explained in Mizrachi’s commentary on Rashi. Perhaps it is because the two missions had rescue as their common goal.⁵Since healing and rescue are missions with a common purpose, one angel could be charged with both missions. “And they did eat:⁶Verse 8 here. they appeared to be eating.”
In the book Moreh Nebuchim⁷Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43. it is said that this portion of Scripture consists of a general statement followed by a detailed description. Thus Scripture first says that the Eternal appeared to Abraham in the form of prophetic visions, and then explains in what manner this vision took place, namely, that he [Abraham] lifted up his eyes in the vision, and lo, three men stood by him,²Verse 2 here. and he said, if now I have found favor in thy eyes.⁸Verse 3 here. This is the account of what he said in the prophetic vision to one of them, namely, their chief.
Now if in the vision there appeared to Abraham only men partaking of food, how then does Scripture say, And the Eternal appeared to him, as G-d did not appear to him in vision or in thought?⁹In other words, why does Scripture begin the chapter with the statement, And the Eternal appeared to him, when in the detailed account of the vision it is explained that he saw only angels? Such is not found with respect to all the prophecies. And according to his¹⁰The author of the Moreh Nebuchim. words, Sarah did not knead cakes, nor did Abraham prepare a bullock, and also, Sarah did not laugh. It was all a vision! If so, this dream came through a multitude of business,¹¹See Ecclesiastes 5:2. like dreams of falsehood, for what is the purpose of showing him all this!¹²Since the vision concerning the preparation and the eating of the meal were not relevant to the prophecy of the birth of Isaac. Similarly did the author of the Moreh Nebuchim say⁷Ibn Tibbon’s translation, II, 42: in Al Charizi, Chapter 43. in the case of the verse, And a man wrestled with him,¹³Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel. that it was all a prophetic vision. But if this be the case, I do not know why Jacob limped on his thigh when he awoke! And why did Jacob say, For I have seen an angel face to face, and my life is preserved?¹⁴Ibid., Verse 31. The prophets did not fear that they might die on account of having experienced prophetic visions. Jacob, moreover, had already seen a greater and more distinguished vision than this since many times, in prophetic visions, he had also seen the Revered Divinity.¹⁵Ibid., 28:13. Now according to this author’s opinion, he will find it necessary for the sake of consistency to say similarly in the affair of Lot that the angels did not come to his house, nor did he bake for them unleavened bread and they did eat.¹⁶Ibid., 19:3. Rather, it was all a vision! But if Lot could ascend to the height of a prophetic vision, how did the wicked and sinful people of Sodom become prophets? Who told them that men had come into Lot’s house? And if all these [i.e., the actions of the inhabitants of Sodom], were part of prophetic visions, then it follows that the account related in the verses, And the angels hastened Lot, saying: Arise take thy wife. …And he said, Escape for thy life… See, I have accepted thee,¹⁷Ibid., Verses 15-21. as well as the entire chapter is but a vision, and if so, Lot could have remained in Sodom! But the author of the Moreh Nebuchim thinks that the events took place of themselves, but the conversations relating to all matters were in a vision! But such words contradict Scripture. It is forbidden to listen to them, all the more to believe in them!
In truth,¹⁸Ramban partially agrees with Rambam’s position. He says that wherever seeing or hearing an angel is mentioned in Scripture, it refers to a vision since the human senses can not perceive an angel. However, wherever Scripture ascribes human appearances to the angels, as in the case of Abraham, then their presence is sensually perceived. Other differences of opinion between Ramban and Rambam regarding prophecy are mentioned further on in the text. wherever Scripture mentions an angel being seen or heard speaking it is in a vision or in a dream for the human senses cannot perceive the angels. But these are not visions of prophecy since he who attains the vision of an angel or the hearing of his speech is not yet a prophet. For the matter is not as the Rabbi¹⁹Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139. pronounced,²⁰Moreh Nebuchim, II, 41. i.e., that every prophet, Moses our teacher excepted, received his prophecy through the medium of an angel. The Sages have already said²¹Megillah 3a. concerning Daniel: “They²²Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi—three prophets who lived at the beginning of the second Temple. were greater than he for they were prophets and he was not a prophet.” His book, likewise, was not grouped together²³The Men of the Great Assembly redacted the books of the Bible. See Baba Bathra 15a. They placed the book of Daniel in the section of the Writings. (Ibid., 14 b). with the books of the prophets since his affair was with the angel Gabriel, even though he appeared to him and spoke with him when he was awake, as it is said in the vision concerning the second Temple: Yea, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel,etc.²⁴Daniel 9:21. The vision concerning the ultimate redemption²⁵From the beginning of Chapter 10 there. also occurred when Daniel was awake as he walked with his friends beside the Tigris River.²⁶Ibid., 10:4. As for his friends, see ibid., Verse 7. Tradition specifies that these were Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. (Megillah 3a.) Hagar the Egyptian²⁷She was not a prophetess even though angels appeared to her. (Above, 16: 7.) Ramban thus differs with Rambam, who had said that all prophets received the prophecy through the medium of an angel. Rambam’s position is defended as follows: Rambam’s intent was not that whenever an angel is seen it is an instance of prophecy. Rather his intent was that whenever prophecy comes to any of the prophets it comes through an angel. However, it is possible that an angel may appear for the purpose of conveying information to one who is not a prophet. This was the case with Daniel and Hagar. is not included in the group of prophetesses.²⁸In Megillah 14 a, the Rabbis list seven prophetesses who arose in Israel: Sarah, Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, Abigail, Huldah and Esther. Hagar however was not listed among them. See Note 103 further. It is also clear that hers was not a case of the bath kol (prophetic echo),²⁹Guide of the Perplexed, II, 42. See Friedlander’s note on bath kol, p. 199, n.2. as the Rabbi¹⁹Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides). See Seder Bereshith, Note 139. would have it. Scripture, furthermore, sets apart the prophecy of Moses our teacher from that of the patriarchs, as it is said, And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] G-d Almighty,³⁰Exodus 6:3. this name being one of the sacred names for the Creator, and not a designation for an angel. Our Rabbis also taught concerning the difference in the degree of prophecy between Moses and the other prophets, and they said:³¹Vayikra Rabbah 1:14. “What is the difference between Moses and all the prophets? The Rabbis say that all prophets saw through unclear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And I have multiplied visions, and by the ministry of the prophets have I used similitudes.³²Hosea 12:11. Moses saw through a clear vision. It is to this matter that Scripture refers in saying, And the similitudes of the Eternal doth he behold,”³³Numbers 12:8. as is explained in Vayikra Rabbah³¹Vayikra Rabbah 1:14. and other places. But in no place did the Sages attribute the prophecy of the prophets to an angel.
Do not expose yourself to argument by quoting the verse, I also am a prophet as thou art; and an angel spoke unto me by the word of the Eternal, saying,³⁴I Kings 13:18. From this you might argue that the prophets themselves attributed their prophecy to an angel. This is not correct, as is explained in the text. since its meaning is as follows: “I also am a prophet as thou art, and I know that the angel who spoke to me was by word of G-d, this being one of the degrees of prophecy, as the man of G-d said, For so was it charged me by the word of the Eternal,³⁵Ibid., Verse 9. and he further said, For it was said to me by the word of the Eternal.³⁶Ibid., Verse 17.
Our Rabbis have further stated³⁷Bamidbar Rabbah 20:13. in the matter of Balaam, who said, Now, therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back,³⁸Numbers 22:34. [that is as if Balaam commented]: “I did not go [with the messengers of Balak] until the Holy One, blessed be He, told me, Rise up, go with them,³⁹Ibid., 22:20. and you [i.e., an angel], tell me that I should return. Such is His conduct! Did He not tell Abraham to sacrifice his son, after which the angel of the Eternal called to Abraham, And he said, Lay not thy hand upon the lad.⁴⁰Further, 22:12. He is accustomed to saying something and to have an angel revoke it, etc.” Thus the Sages were prompted to say that the prophecy comprising the first charge where G-d is mentioned is not like the second charge of which it is said that it was through an angel, only this was not unusual, for it is customary with the prophets that He would command by a prophecy and revoke the command through an angel since the prophet knew that the revocation was the word of G-d.
In the beginning of Vayikra Rabbah⁴¹1:9. the Sages have said: “And He called to Moses,⁴²Leviticus 1:1. unlike Abraham. Concerning Abraham it is written, And the angel of the Eternal called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven.⁴³Further, 22:15. The angel called, and G-d spoke the word, but here with respect to Moses, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘It is I Who called, and it is I Who spoke the word.’” That is to say, Abraham did not attain prophecy until he prepared his soul first to perceive an angel, and from that degree he ascended to attain the word of prophecy, but Moses was prepared for prophecy at all times.
Thus the Sages were prompted to inform us everywhere that seeing an angel is not prophecy, and those who see angels and speak with them are not included among the prophets, as I have mentioned concerning Daniel. Rather, this is only a vision called “opening of eyes,” as in the verse: And the Eternal opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Eternal;⁴⁴Numbers 22:31. similarly: And Elisha prayed, and said, O Eternal, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see.⁴⁵II Kings 6:17. But where Scripture mentions the angels as men, as is the case in this portion, and the portion concerning Lot — likewise, And a man wrestled with him,¹³Further, 32:25. The reference deals with Jacob wrestling with the angel. And a certain man found him,⁴⁶Further, 37:15. in the opinion of our Rabbis⁴⁷According to the Sages the man who wrestled with Jacob was the angel of Esau (Bereshith Rabbah 77:2), and the man who found Joseph was the angel Gabriel (Tanchuma Vayeshev 2). — in all these cases there was a special glory created in the angels, called among those who know the mysteries of the Torah “a garment,” perceptible to the human vision of such pure persons as the pious and the disciples of the prophets, and I cannot explain any further. And in those places in Scripture where you find the sight of G-d and the speech of an angel, or the sight of an angel and the speech of G-d, as is written concerning Moses at the outset of his prophecy,⁴⁸Exodus 3:2. and in the words of Zechariah,⁴⁹Zechariah 1:14, etc. I will yet disclose words of the living G-d in allusions.
Concerning on the matter of the verse, And they did eat,⁶Verse 8 here. the Usages have said:⁵⁰Bereshith Rabbah 48:16. “One course after the other disappeared.”⁵¹That is, the angels really did not eat. Rather as soon as a dish of food was brought, it was consumed by fire. The matter of “disappearance” you will understand from the account about Manoah,⁵²Judges 13:19. if you will be worthy to attain it.
Now here is the interpretation of this portion of Scripture. After it says that In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised,⁵³Above, 17:26. Scripture says that G-d appeared to him while he was sick from the circumcision as he was sitting and cooling himself in his tent door on account of the heat of the day which weakened him. Scripture mentions this in order to inform us that Abraham had no intention for prophecy. He had neither fallen on his face nor prayed, yet this vision did come to him.

המלאכים ANGELS — But elsewhere (Genesis 18:2) Scripture calls them men! When the Divine Presence was with them, it speaks of them as men. Another explanation is: in connection with Abraham whose power to receive heavenly visitors was great and whom angels visited as regularly as men, it calls them men, but in connection with Lot it calls them angels (Genesis Rabbah 50:2).

באלוני ממרא, ”in the grove belonging to Mamre.” This is not to be understood as a reference to the location per se, but the reason Mamre is mentioned here in connection with where G’d appeared to Avraham is that Avraham was granted this revelation in this location on account of having accepted the advice of Mamre to proceed with the circumcision. Other commentators ask whether Avraham really needed advice from Mamre on the subject of fulfilling a commandment by the Lord or not. They answer that the consultation did not concern if Avraham was to circumcise himself, but on which organ he was to perform this circumcision. This does not make sense to me either, as it is foolish to think that Avraham could not correctly interpret the words וערל זכר אשר לא ימול את בשר ערלתו ונכרתה הנפש ההיא, as referring to the male organ of the person referred to. Some commentators believe that seeing that so many other people were circumcised by him at the same time, Avraham wanted the stamp of approval on what he had done by a prominent person in that society. If he could not secure their approval, he in turn might lose his standing in that society. Maimonides, addressing the subject, writes that the whole paragraph has to be viewed as being written in the format known as כלל ופרט, a general instruction first, followed by detailed instructions later. The Torah first reports that Avraham was granted a revelation, without specifying the nature of this revelation. The Torah then proceeds that this revelation which had first consisted only of his raising his eyes and seeing the three men approach, afterwards turned out to have been the introduction to a number of messages, such as when Sarah would give birth and that Sodom would be destroyed. According to Maimonides, these three men were not real, but were part of Avraham’s visions on that occasion. [if so, debating Sarah’s denials is an exercise in futility. Ed.] Nachmanides contradicts Maimonides’ approach, listing a number of difficulties with such an exegesis. Among other points, he cites the fact that if Avraham is described on numerous occasions when he had visions as prostrating himself in awe of the spectacle occurring, then clearly these were not nocturnal visions in a dream but actual happenings. In this case Avraham was fully awake. He claims that any human being experiencing the appearance of an angel and being addressed by him, is not experiencing prophecy but an overwhelming revelation of divine forces. [the interested reader is referred to Rabbi Chavell’s translation of Nachmanides’ commentary for further study of the subject. Ed.]