Leitwort - Part VI
LITERARY
STUDY OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE
By Rav Dr.
Yonatan
Grossman
****************************************************************
This
series is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of
our dear
mother
עטל רחל בת פעראל
by Frieda
and Dovid Wadler
****************************************************************
Lecture
#14b:
Leitwort,
Part VI
A Pair of
Milim Manchot
In this lecture, as we conclude our examination of the
mila mancha, the leitwort
or guiding word in a biblical text, we will deal with a different technique.
Up until this point in our discussion of the
mila mancha, we have dealt with one word that recurs in a particular
unit (even if it has two meanings). There is another phenomenon, however, in
which it is not a single word or expression that turns into a
mila mancha, but rather a pair of
words. Obviously, in order to define two words as a pair of milim manchot,
there must be some internal connection between them for example, words that
belong to a common semantic field (such as "sun" and moon") or which are found
on the same relative scale (such as "good" and "bad"), etc.
In order to demonstrate this technique, I would like to analyze three
stories in which a unique use is made of the verbal pair of
re'iya (seeing) and shemia (hearing) or in their simple past conjugations, ra'a
and shama and to examine how this pair has the power to influence the
assimilation of a subliminal message in the unit in which it appears.[1]
As a
Complementary Pair (Shemot 19-20)
This pair is very prominent in the narrative of the Convocation at Mt.
Sinai, despite the fact that the words themselves are not mentioned many times,
because of the many uses of additional words which belong to the wider semantic
field of visual and auditory perception. These senses fill a role in the plot
itself, and the reader responds to them as
milim manchot. Let us track
the appearances of these two verbs.
Remember that these words are complex: shama may be "hear" or "listen,"
while ra'a may be "see" or "perceive."
You have
seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles wings, and
brought you to Me. Now, if you will certainly listen to My voice and keep
My covenant, then you shall be My own treasure from among all peoples; for all
the earth is Mine
And God said to
Moshe: "Behold, I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear
when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever." And Moshe told the
words of the people to God
And God said to
Moshe: Go down, charge the people, lest they break through to God to see,
and many of them perish
And all the people
perceived the thunders, and the lightning, and the sound of the shofar,
and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and
stood afar off. And they said to Moshe: "Speak you with us, and we will
listen, but let not God speak with us, lest we die
And God said to
Moshe: "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: You yourselves have
seen that I have talked with you from heaven."
From a simple reading, one can already sense the unique role of the two
verbs employed in this scene. The issue is particularly prominent in the opening
of the entire convocation, in God's words (19:4-5): "You have seen (attem
re'item) what I did to the Egyptians
Now, if you will certainly listen
(ve-atta im shamoa tishmeu) to My voice
" The two verbs serve different
roles the seeing is tied to the collective experience of the nation in terms
of the kindness that God has shown them up to this point (the Exodus from
Egypt), while the hearing is presented as the appropriate reaction to this
perception. It is the expected response from the people towards the events they
have experienced an agreement to bind themselves by and to observe the
covenant of Sinai.
However, the two verbs take their central place in the narrative with a
full retinue of auxiliary terms and synonyms:
And Moshe went up to
God, and God called to him out of the mountain, saying: "Thus shall you
say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel
"These are the
words which you shall speak to the children of Israel
And all the people
answered together, and they said: "All that God has spoken
we will do." And Moses reported the words of the people to God. And God
said to Moshe: "Behold, I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear
when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever." And Moshe
told the words of the people to God
"For on the third
day, God will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai
"
And it came to pass
on the third day, when it was morning, that there was thunder and lightning
and a thick cloud upon the mountain, and the sound of a shofar, very
loud; and all the people that were in the camp trembled
And when
the sound of the shofar grew louder and louder, Moshe spoke, and God
answered him with a voice.
Thus, alongside the recurrence of the verb "to hear," Scripture mentions
calling, saying, telling, speaking, reporting, responding, "the sound of a
shofar, very loud," and thunder. Alongside the verb "to see," Scripture
mentions that the Israelites will merit to witness God's descent upon the
mountain "in the sight of all the people."
Throughout the entire narrative, hearing and seeing receive their
appropriate places in the story: they represent the absorption of the revelation
the sensory reception, which symbolizes emotional-spiritual reception. In this
way, the seeing and hearing become witnesses to the collective memory of this
sublime convocation.
The internal shemia is alluded to by the external sense of
hearing, which we mentioned above; the verse uses this verb to express the
faithfulness which is expected from the people "if you will certainly
listen to My voice and keep My covenant".
Re'iya plays a similar role, mainly in Moshe's reaction to the
people's fear (20:17): "And Moshe said to the people: 'Fear not; for God has
come to test you, and that His fear may be upon you, that you sin not.'" The
seeing (re'iya) of the people in the
narrative brings to fear (yira) of God.
In other words, the reception of the revelation with the external senses
constitutes a sort of introduction to the internal-spiritual responsiveness to
the contents of the revelation, to the concept of existential fear of heaven. It
appears that through the aid of the use of internal-external verbs such as
these, the Torah turns the convocation under discussion into a sublime,
one-of-a-kind encounter. Can a man possibly absorb, with human senses, the
divine revelation? The answer alluded to in this narrative is complex: the
Israelites are invited to a rare revelation, and indeed they are capable of
absorbing the revelation with their senses, but in practice, the Israelites are
not up to this challenge, and they retreat. The senses that remain active at the
Convocation at Mount Sinai are more the internal senses than the external ones
listening to the voice of God and re'iya
which turns into yira. These
are the human capabilities that are left standing at the end of the day as a
basis for God's revelation.
A
Contrasting Pair (Bereishit 16)
Throughout the narrative of Hagar's flight, there is a unique use of the
pair of verbs ra'a and shama. These verbs appear already at
the beginning of the narrative; however, by the end of the episode, true tension
explodes between the two verbs.
After Sarah (then called Sarai) suggests to Avraham (then called Avram)
to take Hagar her maidservant, Avraham's response is described using the verb
shama: "And Avram listened to the
voice of Sarai" (16:2).
Avraham indeed takes Hagar, and she becomes pregnant by him. The reaction of Hagar to these events
is describes using the verb ra'a and
the noun ayin (eye): "And when she saw that she had conceived, her
mistress was despised in her eyes" (4).
Sarah describes to Avraham this surprising turn of events, once again
invoking ra'a and ayin: "And
when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes"
(5).
Avraham responds to Sara's claims by transferring the reins to her
hands. Although there is no repetition of either of the two verbs under
discussion, it is not coincidental that the "eyes" show up once again in his
words: "Behold, your maidservant is in your hand; do to her that which is good
in your eyes" (6). Indeed, the root of the word ayin (the letters
ayin-yud-nun) is spelled exactly the same as ayin meaning spring,
and almost the same as oni, mistreatment (the letters ayin-nun-yud).
Both of these words appear in the continuation of the story: first "Sarai
mistreated her" (6), and immediately afterward: "And the angel of God found her
by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur" (7).
Of course, these words have nothing to do with seeing, but because of the link
between re'iya and ayin, the
verb ra'a continues to echo.[2]
These instances do not compel us to see a case of milim manchot.
Nevertheless, in the words of the angel to Hagar and in her response, the reader
recognizes the intentional wordplay between these two verbs. The angel tells
Hagar what name to give the son she is destined to bear: "And the angel of God
said to her: 'Behold, you are with child and shall bear a son; and you shall
name him Yishmael, because God has heard your mistreatment'" (11). This name, in
a unique way, draws the attention of a reader who is searching for
milim manchot, because this name is
tied by its very nature to the linguistic and lexical expanse. The name of the
child destined to be born is tied to God's hearing of Hagar's oni.
At the end of the scene, Hagar indeed gives a name, not to her unborn
son, but rather to the angel speaking to her. Even more surprising is that she
uses the second verb in order to name the angel, calling him "El Ro'i", "God of
My Seeing." Moreover, the well at which the angel appears to Hagar receives a
similar name because of this occurrence: "Therefore the well was called Be'er
La-chai Ro'i" (14) a title which literally means, "Well to the Living One of
My Seeing." These verses stress the recurring
re'iya in the two new names, that of
the angel and that of the well, using the epiphora which concludes the clauses
(13-14):
And she named God
that spoke to her, "You are the God of my seeing" (atta El Ro'i)
For she said: "Have
I even here seen after my seeing?" (acharei ro'i).
Therefore, the well
was called Be'er La-chai Ro'i;
Behold, it is
between Kadesh and Bered.
It thus becomes clear that there is a delicate exchange between the two
verbs: God wants to grant a name on the basis of the root
shama, which is how He takes account
of the unjustified oni of Hagar; this is the name Yishmael, "God will
hear." Hagar, on the other hand,
calls the angel El Ro'i, based on God's
re'iya of her, and thus even the site receives a new name. Indeed, Wenham is
justified when he says: "Just as with the name of Yishmael, the name of the well
stands as a constant reminder of the concern of the Merciful God."[3] However, despite the great similarity
between the names, the split between
re'iya and shemia is recognizable.
If so, it is possible to argue that the pair of
milim manchot in this narrative
directs the reader to create a distinction between Avraham and God, who listen
in the story, and Hagar, who sees and interprets the response of God to her
through that verb (against, as we have noted, the words of the angel!).
Note that at the end of the day, Hagar is not the one to name the child
Yishmael; rather, it is Avraham who does so, despite the fact that Hagar
receives the command, "Name him Yishmael"! In this as well, the verse stresses
that Hagar is not tied in the narrative to God's
shemia, but rather to His re'iya.
What is the meaning of this distinction? First of all, there is worth in
the very distinction between God and Hagar; while God hears, Hagar believes that
He sees. A distinction such as this creates a gap between the speakers and
creates a feeling of communication which is not fully understood. Naturally, the
narrative alludes to the fact that Hagar in fact does not fully understand the
angel's words to her. He says one thing, but Hagar misconstrues his words.
This lack of communication may be tied to the Scriptural significance of
the two verbs under discussion. In Tanakh, the verb of
re'iya sometimes expresses the choice
of a certain person. As it were, this selective
re'iya perceives one while spurning others. So, for example, God says to
Shmuel: "Fill your horn with oil and go; I am sending you to Yishai of Beit
Lechem,
for I have seen among his sons a king for me"
(I
Shmuel 16:1).
The meaning of the verb "I have seen" in this context is "I have
selected," "I have chosen one from among many."[4]
Similarly, when
Avraham says to Yitzchak, "God will see to the sheep for the ascension-offering,
my son" (Bereishit 22:8), he is not referring to technical vision, but
rather selection (as Rashi explains there: "He will see to and select the
sheep"). On the basis of this re'iya,
after God does indeed see to the sheep in fact, to the ram, offered in
Yitzchak's place Avraham names the places "Hashem Yireh" (22:14), "God Will
See." Rashi explains: "God will select and see to this place, to make His
Presence rest here and to have offerings brought here."
This issue is very important in order to understand the aim of the
narrative of Hagar's flight. Aside from the patriarchs of the nation, there is
no other person who is blessed with benisons of seed and land like Hagar. The
blessings that Hagar receives are very significant in the general environment of
the Book of Bereishit, and they give a strong impression of
mini-selection. In light of her
oni, Hagar merits the blessing of increasing seed (16:10) and the blessing
of inheritance (16:12). The reader tends to believe that Yishmael is also
chosen, alongside Yitzchak.
Indeed, Hagar draws this very conclusion, as she repeats and repeats
that God sees her. However, the sensitive reader will note that although God
responds to her distress, shows her compassion, and grants her abundant
kindness, he nevertheless speaks of shemia,
not re'iya. God blesses her with an
increase of seed, but not national-specific selection, as God stresses to
Avraham in the next chapter in the context of the covenant of circumcision:
And as for Yishmael,
I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him, and I will make him fruitful, and
I will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he produce, and I will
make him a great nation. But My covenant I will establish with Yitzchak, whom
Sarah shall bear to you at this set time in the next year. (17:20-21)
Ra'a and
Shama as Two Stages (Bereishit
3)
As we have seen, the pair of words
ra'a and shama can stress a
continuous trend (as in the Convocation at Mount Sinai), but it can also allude
to a subliminal tension in the verses (as in Hagar's flight). This also makes it
easier on the reader to follow the two stages in a narrative.[5] An
example of this may be found in the story of the sin of the Tree of Knowledge in
the Garden of Eden.
In the dialogue between the serpent and the woman (not yet known as
Chava), which opens the story, the action of
re'iya is very prominent:
And the serpent said
to the woman: "You shall certainly not die. For
God knows that on the day you eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and
you shall be as God, knowing good and evil." (3:4-5)
Indeed, the woman's reaction is immediately described with a heavy
emphasis on the visual component: "And the woman saw that the tree was
good for food, and that it was attractive to the eyes, and that the tree
was desirable to make one wise
(6).
This is the reason that the woman partakes of the fruit of the Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil, and she even shares the fruit with her husband. The
effect is not long in coming: "And the eyes of them both were opened, and they
knew that they were naked" (7).
From this point on, the verses describe the characters through the
activity of shemia:
And they heard
the voice of Lord God walking in the garden toward the cool of the day; and the
man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Lord God amongst the trees
of the garden. (8)
Furthermore, the man's response to God's question utilizes
shemia: "And he said: 'I heard
Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid
myself'"(10). God then challenges him, once again entering the semantic field of
shemia: "And He said: 'Who told you
that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded you that
you should not eat?" (11). The activity of
shemia recurs one more time in the narrative, when God sentences the man:
And to Adam He said:
"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and
you have eaten of the tree, of which
I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground for
your sake; in toil shall you eat of it all the days of your life." (17)
It might have been feasible to suggest that here as well, there is a
certain distinction between the characters in the narrative and their connection
to the two verbs: the woman in the narrative is tied to
re'iya (as we have seen in the story
of Hagar's flight, in which she is tied to the
re'iya), while the man is more tied to
the activity of shemia (as in the story of Hagar's flight, in which Avraham listens).
However, it appears to me that the aim of the verse here is not to contrast the
two sinning characters in the narrative, but rather to distinguish between the
prelapsarian stage and the postlapsarian stage, the response to the sin and the
punishment.
At first, when the woman is seduced to eat from the Tree, the
re'iya is especially prominent. This
is the sense which brings the woman to eat from the seductive tree, which is
"attractive to the eyes," and this is the sins motivation so that their eyes
will be opened.
However, immediately after the eating from the Tree and having their
eyes opened, the characters come into conflict with the world of
shemia, and more specifically, the man
must now make a reckoning as to whom he has listened to and whom he has not.
Immediately after the sin, the man says, "I heard Your voice in the garden," but
God corrects him when He challenges him, "You have listened to the voice of your
wife." There are two voices in the narrative, and the man makes the decision to
listen to his wife's voice and not God's voice, as the Bekhor Shor (ibid.)
points out: "'Because you have listened to the voice of your wife' instead of
my voice."[6]
If so, the narrative succeeds in isolating different stages in the
process of the sin: giving in to the Evil Inclination and the act of the sin (in
which the verb of re'iya dominates)
and the spiritual significance of the sin which expresses rebellion against God
(in which the verb of shemia
dominates).
With this issue, we finally finish our discussion of the
mila mancha and its contribution to a
hidden reading of the narrative. As
in other topics, I must note that there is much to say beyond what we have said.
There are many complex examples of the integration of a
mila mancha in the narrative, which require exacting analysis of the
appearance and the form of its contribution to the design of the narrative and
its theme.
However, the time has come to turn our attention to additional aspects
that contribute to raising our consciousness of hidden meanings beneath the
surface of the verses. Therefore, we will draw our analysis of the
leitwort to a close here, with our
apologies to the milim manchot.
[Translated by Rav Yoseif Bloch]
[1] This example has
also been used by Amos Frisch to explore the concept of
milim manchot in pairs; he discusses
three cases of this pair (II Melakhim 20:12-19, Bereishit 21-22, I
Shmuel 15-16). See A. Frisch, "Ra'a Ve-shama Ke-Tzemed Milim Manchot,"
in Divrei Ha-Kongres Ha-Olami Ha-Sheneim Asar Le-Madda'ei Ha-Yahadut (Chativa
A) (Jerusalem, 5759), pp. 89-98.
[2] In fact, the
description of the place as being "on the way to Shur," which is on the border
of Egypt, is tied to the semantic field of seeing; one of the meanings of "shur"
is to look at, to perceive. See M. Garsiel, Midreshei Shemot Ba-Mikra
(Ramat Gan, 5748), p. 119; Frisch, "Ra'a
Ve-shama," p. 91. Frisch gingerly raises
the suggestion that even "ha-midbar," "the desert," which is stressed in
the verse, alludes to dibbur, speech (ibid. n.9).
[3] G. Wenham,
Genesis 16-50 (WBC, Dallas, Texas, 1998), p. 11.
[4] Compare also God's
word to Noach: "Come, you and all of your house, to the ark, for I have seen
that you are righteous before me in this generation" (Bereishit 7:1).
[5] Compare this to
Frisch's essay, "Ra'a Ve-Shama Ke-Tzemed Milim Manchot", mainly p. 95. He
refers to this phenomenon as the demarcated model: "There exists a spatial
division between the two words in the text: one part of the text is under the
influence of one mila mancha, and the
other part is under the influence of the second
mila mancha."
[6] The very phrasing
"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and you have eaten
of the tree," requires some explanation. The sin lies in the eating; why does
God mention listening to the woman's voice? It appears that the Bekhor Shor's
supposition is correct, and indeed the verse intends to contrast the man's
obedience to the woman's voice with his disobedience to God's voice, which is
mentioned just a few verses earlier.