As I wrote above, the assumption that the
prophecies contained in the Holy Writ are correct is a very essential element
in Orthodox Jewish belief. The Torah itself says that after Moses's death G-d
would raise prophets for the Jews "from among their own people"
(Deuteronomy 18:18). A way to find out which prophet is true and which is not
is also specified: "And should you ask yourselves, 'How can we know that
the thing was not spoken by the Lord?' If the prophet foretells something in
the name of the Lord, and this thing does not come true, that prediction is one
not spoken by the Lord" (Deuteronomy 18:21-22). Sadly, it seems that many
predictions of the Prophets and even of the Torah itself did not in fact come
true.
The commandment of the sabbatical year
(shemitah) is given Leviticus 25:2-7. The Torah also says: "And should you
say, 'What shall we eat in the seventh year? For we shall not sow, nor gather
our harvest,' I will command My blessing upon you in the sixth year, and it
will bring forth harvest for three years. And you will sow the eighth year, yet
you will eat of the old harvest until the ninth year" (Leviticus
25:20-22). But we do not have a single historical document confirming that such
a miracle -- land giving a triple harvest on the eve of the sabbatical year --
had ever occurred. On the contrary, the book of I Maccabees (6:48-54) relates
that the inhabitants of Bethsura and Jerusalem had nothing to eat because of
the sabbatical year, and the Talmud (Sanhedrin 26a) tells that Rabbi Yannai
permitted the inhabitants of Judea to sow their fields in a sabbatical year so
that they would be able to pay taxes to Rome. Were the land actually giving a
triple harvest before each sabbatical year, such situations would not occur.
Even in modern Israel there are religious farmers who observe the sabbatical
year with all the strictness of the Halacha yet they do not gather a triple
harvest in the sixth year; observing the sabbatical year brings them
significant economical damage, for which they regularly ask compensation from
the Israeli government.
Indeed, there is a Halachic dispute on whether
after the First Temple period the Torah's commandment of keeping
the shemitah is valid, or whether the shemitah is kept in
these times according to a Rabbinical regulation only. Rashi (on Gittin 36a,
s.v. Bashvi'it bazman hazeh) and Tosfot (on Erchin 32b, s.v. Manu
yovlot) state that according to Rabbi Judah HaNasi, the Torah's commandment to keep
the shemitah is not valid in these times, while in the opinion of the
other Sages this commandment is valid even nowadays. It might be admitted that
the Torah's promise of triple harvest applies only when the Torah's commandment
of the shemitah is valid, but then one would be forced to say that
the Torah's promise has failed according to the Sages' opinion but not
according to that of R' Judah HaNasi. It seems a rather lame excuse.
What emerges is no record of the shemitah blessing
actually happening while the law was clearly Biblical, combined with an
explanation that when the law is Rabbinic (according to some opinions), the
blessing doesn't apply. Does it not seem more logical to conclude that the
promised blessings simply did not materialize?
The Torah says to the Israelites before they
enter the land of Canaan: "Every place where your feet tread will be
yours, from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river -- the river of
Euphrates -- even unto the uttermost sea your border will be. Nobody will stand
before you; the Lord your G-d will impose the fear of you and the dread of you
upon all the land where you tread, as He had spoke to you" (Deuteronomy
11:24-25). Yet no Jewish tribe or state ever possessed any land on the bank of
Euphrates, and even though the whole Scriptural narrative of the Israelite
conquest of Canaan seems to present many historical and practical problems,
even this narrative does not tell that the Israelites controlled "every
place their feet trod." Despite their endless wars with the Canaanite population,
many parts of the Land of Israel remained under gentile rule long after the
Israelites appeared in Canaan. A lengthy list of such places is brought in
Judges 1:27-36, and it seems that the Philistine cities did not lose their
nominal independence until the Babylonian conquest in the 6th century BCE. The
Scripture and Judaic tradition also freely admit that the prophecy "nobody
will stand before you" failed: "Joshua made war a long time with all
those kings [of Canaan]" (Joshua 11:18); "for seven years they had
been conquering [Canaan]" (Seder Olam Rabbah, Milikowski edition, chapter
11). And no Israelite army ever attempted an assault reaching the banks of the
Euphrates.
Thus far we have discussed the Torah, but the
books of the Prophets are not free of seemingly unfulfilled prophecies either.
We find in the book of Ezekiel (26:3-14): "Therefore thus says the Sovereign Lord:
Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, as
the sea brings its waves up. And they will destroy the walls of Tyre, and break
down her towers; I will also scrape away her rubble and make her like a bare
rock. She will become a place for spreading of nets in the midst of the sea,
for I have spoken it, says the Sovereign Lord, and she will be loot to the
nations. And her outward settlements will be ravaged by sword; then they will
know that I am the Lord. For thus says the Sovereign Lord: Behold, I will bring
upon Tyre Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north,
with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much
people. He will ravage with the sword your outward settlements, and he will set
up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields
against you. He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls
and demolish your towers with his weapons. The multitude of his horses will
cover you with dust; your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses,
wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls
have been broken through. The hoofs of his horses will trample all your
streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will
fall to the ground. They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise;
they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses, and throw your
stones, timber and rubble into the sea... I will make you a bare rock, and you
will become a place to spread fishnets. You will be built no more, for I the
Lord have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord."
King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (Nebuchadrezzar
in Ezekiel is a variation of his name) indeed laid siege to Tyre in 585-573 BCE
-- but this siege brought him no gain and Tyre remained unconquered until
Alexander the Great managed to take it in 332 BCE. It was Alexander, not
Nebuchadnezzar, who broke the walls of Tyre and ravaged its outlying
settlements. But even Alexander did not destroy Tyre completely, nor did he
turn it into "a bare rock... built no more." Tyre exists to this very
day, occupying most of the area of the ancient Phoenician city. Tyre's
population even grew from 16,000 inhabitants in 1961 to 70,000 in 1991. The
first time when a coalition of "many nations" made war on Tyre was
during the Crusades in 1124 CE -- long after Nebuchadnezzar's death
(Encyclopaedia Britannica, Tyre).
In fact, Ezekiel himself admitted that his prophecy about Tyre failed: "Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon drove
his army in a hard campaign against Tyre; every head was rubbed bare and every
shoulder made raw. Yet he and his army got no reward from the campaign he led
against Tyre." (Ezekiel 29:18)
[Of course, our rabbis tried to explain these
verses so that the prophecy of the fall of Tyre would not be seen as false:
Radak wrote in his commentary on this verse that "when Nebuchadnezzar
conquered Tyre and plundered its wealth, the sea rose on the city and rinsed
and washed away all the spoils, for that city was destined to be washed away
with all its inhabitants and wealth; so it came out that Nebuchadnezzar's army
worked hard in vain," and Rashi wrote similar things in his commentary.
However, it must be noted that in reality Nebuchadnezzar did not manage to
conquer Tyre, nor did all of Tyre's wealth ever wash away to sea, and it seems
more comforting to admit, along with Ezekiel, that his prophecy had not been
fulfilled (for whatever reasons), than to posit creative understandings trying
to "save" the prophecy from failure.]
As compensation for his loss in the campaign
against Tyre, Ezekiel promised Nebuchadnezzar -- in the name of G-d, of course
-- Egypt: "Therefore thus says the Sovereign Lord: I
am going to give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and he will carry
off its wealth. He will loot and plunder the land as pay for his army. I have
given him Egypt as a reward for his efforts because he and his army did it for
Me, declares the Sovereign Lord: On that day I will make a glory for the house
of Israel, and I will open your mouth among them. Then they will know that I am
the Lord." (Ezekiel 29:19-21)
But Nebuchadnezzar never did manage to conquer
Egypt and plunder it "as pay for his army." So this prophecy of
Ezekiel's seems also to have remained unfulfilled.
These are only some examples of the unfulfilled
prophecies in the Holy Writ, but in fact there are many more -- enough to make
the matter of unfulfilled prophecies a serious problem for our rabbis, who, in
order to solve the issue, introduced several limitations on the necessity for a
prophecy to come true. The best known of these limitations is by Maimonides, in
his Foreword to the Mishnah Commentary: only a prophecy which foretells good
and which a prophet said about other people (as opposed to a promise G-d gives
to a prophet concerning the prophet himself) must be fulfilled. However, these
limitations seem to contradict the Torah's description of a prophet, which
says, "If the prophet foretells something in the name of the Lord, and
this thing does not come true, that prediction is one not spoken by the
Lord," without distinguishing between predictions of good and ill. And
more than that: all the prophecies I have brought here are obviously
predictions of good for those to whom they were said (i.e. for the Jews), yet
these prophecies also proved false. So it would seem that even Maimonides's
limitations cannot save the Scripture from unfulfilled prophecies.
On the other hand, we find in the Gemara
(Yevamot 49b-50a) the following discourse: "'I will cause the number of your days to
be full' (Exodus 23:26) -- these are the years of generations [the years of
life allotted to a person when he is born -- Rashi]. If one attains merit, he
lives all these years, but if he does not, his life is shortened -- thus says
Rabbi Akiba. But the Sages say: if one attains merit, his life is lengthened,
but if he does not, his life is shortened. They said to Rabbi Akiba: it is
written, 'I will add fifteen years to your [King Hezekiah's] life' (II Kings
20:6). [R' Akiba answered:] The years added to his life were allotted him since
the very beginning; see for yourself, the prophet had already stood and
foretold, 'A son named Josiah will be born to the house of David' (I Kings
13:2) -- and Manasseh was not born yet."
According to Rabbi Akiba's opinion, the 15
years which were "added" to King Hezekiah's life were in fact
allotted him from his birth, for it was in those 15 years that Hezekiah's son,
Manasseh, was born, and since Manasseh was the grandfather of King Josiah,
Manasseh had to be born so that the prophecy of the "man of G-d"
concerning Josiah's birth and deeds in I Kings 13 would come true. From this R'
Akiba concluded that Hezekiah was initially destined to live 15 years more and
to sire Manasseh, to fulfill the prophecy; when Hezekiah sinned, these 15 years
were subtracted from his life span as a punishment, but when he repented and
prayed for G-d to forgive him, these 15 years were re-allotted to him.
An obvious question arises in this context,
which is indeed asked by the Tosfot on Yevamot 50a (s.v. Teda): "But
if Hezekiah had not prayed for himself, he would die [and could not sire
Manasseh], so the prophecy in that case would fail." But the Tosfot's
answer is really astonishing: "Inevitably, we have to admit: a prophet
foretold only what was designed to happen, were he [Hezekiah] not
sinning." That is, though the prophecy of the "man of G-d" is
said to have been made long before King Hezekiah was born and did not deal with
Hezekiah himself, but only with his great-grandson, Josiah, the deeds of King
Hezekiah could lead to this prophecy remaining unfulfilled. Thus, in the
Tosfot's opinion, a factor rather external to a prophecy is able to make the
prophecy fail -- and this, of course, makes the Torah's words about checking
whether a prophet is true or not entirely meaningless. If a prophet's
prediction fails, the failure can always be attributed to some external factor
-- that somebody sinned so his days were shortened and therefore he did not
manage to sire the person needed for the prophecy's fulfillment, or anything of
that kind. And so prophecy, one of the main issues of our faith, turns into a
product subject to a host of external spiritual factors. Hence, it would seem
beyond any objective verification and not capable of proving anything.
With regard to Shemitah, I concede
that I can’t point to a historical document that records the extra bountiful
produce. However, I think that it is important to keep in mind that, firstly,
we know that there are at least some records from those times that have not
reached us, for example, the chronicles of the Judean and Israelite kings that
are often referenced to in Scripture, and secondly, it is questionable how well
the Israelites kept the sabbatical years during those times, as this is one of
the points that the prophets kept rebuking the people about.
What makes this question so interesting is that I have come
across the argument from the opposite direction: someone once wanted to bring
the miracles that surround the sabbatical year nowadays, as a proof for the
truth of Judaism, as there has occurred in Israel a number of “miracle” stories
with regarding the produce grown there, around every sabbatical year.
For example, in the last sabbatical year that occurred in
2008, one of the stories that occurred was with regard to the potato crop,
where the potatoes planted in the Negev before the beginning of the sabbatical
year were spared the damages that the other non-sabbatical crops suffered,
which was caused by the sharp drops in temperature that occurred later on in
the year. In contrast, many of the potatoes that were planted later on, during
the shemitah year, were destroyed.
In addition, it has sometimes happened that even a triple
bounty occurred during the sixth year – though in the case that I know of, the
extra produce ended up being dumped into the Mediterranean Sea, as the
government regulates the prices to keep them stable.
Now, personally, I have a hard time accepting that, on its
own, as proof for the authenticity of Judaism. But I thought that it is quite
ironic that there exist here the two opposing arguments.
I wonder if, perhaps, this is the root of the disagreement
between Rabbi Judah HaNasi and the Sages, that you reference to, whether the
obligation of keeping the sabbatical year nowadays is a Biblical obligation or
Rabbinic in nature. It could be that the Sages were presented with a reality
that is similar to ours, where on the one hand, there is no universal miracle
that affects the crops of the entire nation, while at the same time, there are
some unnatural occurrences for individuals. Rabbi Judah Hanasi felt that if the
obligation was truly Biblical, than we should be witnessing a triple bounty
nationwide, and since this was not the case, then one can infer that the
obligation is only Rabbinic in nature. In contrast, the Sages were of the
opinion that if there was truly no Biblical obligation at all, then there
should not be any miraculous occurrences, even for a few individuals, and from
the fact that there are at least some, then one can infer that the obligation
to keep the sabbatical year remains a Biblical one.
As for your question on Rabbi Yannai’s ruling allowing the
people to plow the land, I feel that it is unfair to construe his ruling as
proof that they did not receive a bountiful harvest in his times, as it is
understood from a similar Talmudic section in the Jerusalem Talmud (Sheviit
chapter 4 halacha 2), that the concern was that the Roman government would interpret
their abstention from plowing the land as a sign of rebellion against the
government – which therefore falls under the category of pikuach nefesh (life
endangerment), which is why Rabbi Yannai ruled that it was permitted to work
the land.
Before I move on to address your following questions, I must
state that I take issue with your implication that the Rabbis delineated their
limitations on the fulfillment of Scriptural prophecies, in order to defend the
validity of Scripture, despite the prophecies that remained unfulfilled. You
mention Maimonides, and I am reminded of what he writes on a completely different
subject, at the end of his introduction to the Order of Taharoth, that, “for
[among] these ‘roots’ that I previously explained, there is no ‘root’ that I
did not toil greatly to reach its truth to its finest detail, and I collected
them, ‘one from a city and two from a family’, from all of the corners of the
Talmud, from the Sifri, and the Braisot and Toseftot”. I view Maimonides’
elucidation of the limitations regarding prophecies, in his foreword to the Mishna,
in the same way, as it seems obvious that he was trying to compile a complete
system, and one that was derived from the verses themselves.
For example, one of the exceptions for the fulfillment of
prophecies, is yigrom hachet (as a result of one’s sins). This seems to be
applicable to the prophecy of the borders of the Land of Israel reaching the Euphrates,
and again, a conclusion that I think is forced from the verses themselves. In
Deuteronomy 11:22-25, it states: “For if you keep all
these commandments which I command you to do them, to love the L-rd, your G-d,
to walk in all His ways, and to cleave to Him, then the L-rd will drive out all
these nations from before you, and you will possess nations greater and
stronger than you. Every place upon which the soles of your feet will tread,
will be yours: from the desert and the Lebanon, from the river, the Euphrates
River, and until the western sea, will be your boundary. No man will stand up
before you; the L-rd your G-d will cast the fear of you and the dread of you on
all the land upon which you tread, as He spoke to you.” It further says in
Judges 2:20-23: “And the anger of the L-rd was kindled against Israel and He
said, ‘Because this nation has transgressed my covenant which I commanded their
forefathers and have not obeyed Me, I too will not continue to drive out any
man from before them, of the nations that Joshua left and he died. In order to
test Israel through them, whether they would keep the way of the L-rd to walk
therein as their forefathers did keep it, or not.’ And the L-rd left these
nations without driving them out hastily, and He did not give them into the
hand of Joshua.”
In addition, the Midrash Lekach Tov explains that this
prophecy will actually be fulfilled in the Messianic era. On Exodus 23:31, the
Midrash explains: “This verse will be [fulfilled] in the days of the Messiah,
as the verse states, ‘And may he rule from sea to sea, and from the river until
the ends of the Earth (Psalms 72:8)’, as we do not find that the borders of the
Land of Israel [reach] from the ‘desert until the [Euphrates] river’, nor from
the ‘Sea of Reeds until the Sea of the Philistines’, rather, surely [this
refers] to the future to come.”
As for Joshua’s lengthy conquest of the Land of Israel – it
is explained that he purposely took his time in conquering the land, as he
understood that his remaining purpose in life was to complete this mission;
after conquering and dividing the Land of Israel, he would have to pass on. The
end result was that he passed away before he completed the conquest.
With regard to the prophecy of Ezekiel against Tyre and
Egypt, I must confess that I do not know much about it, so I can’t really
comment.
But I don’t agree that this should be considered as a proof against
the fulfillment of prophecies, as one of the limitations in this regard, is
that G-d may abolish or delay the fulfillment of a negative prophecy. This
limitation is, again, derived from Scripture itself, as can be clearly seen
from Jonah 3:6-4:2: “And the word reached the king of Nineveh, whereupon he
rose from his throne, took off his royal robe, covered himself with sackcloth,
and sat on the ashes. And he caused it to be proclaimed and published
throughout Nineveh: By the counsel of the king and his nobles, saying: Neither
man nor beast, neither cattle nor sheep shall taste anything; they shall not
graze, neither shall they drink water. And they shall cover themselves with
sackcloth, both man and beast, and they shall call mightily to G-d, and
everyone shall repent of his evil way and of the dishonest gain which is in
their hands. Whoever knows shall repent, and G-d will relent, and He will
return from His burning wrath, and we will not perish. And G-d saw their deeds,
that they had repented of their evil way, and the L-rd relented concerning the
evil that He had spoken to do to them, and He did not do it. Now it displeased
Jonah exceedingly, and he was grieved. And he prayed to the L-rd and said,
‘Please, O L-rd, was this not my contention while I was still on my land? For
this reason I had hastened to flee to Tarshish, for I know that You are a
gracious and merciful G-d, slow to anger, with much kindness, and relenting of
evil.’”
This would apply in our case of Tyre and Egypt as well, as
they are primarily negative prophecies concerning those countries, despite the
fact that these prophecies are beneficial to the Jews. This is similar to the
prophecy of Jonah, which is considered a negative prophecy, despite it, too,
being beneficial to the Jews, albeit in a roundabout way.
Even allowing for the limitations clarified by Judaic tradition,
there are still many prophecies that can be used to test the veracity of a
prophet, as mentioned in that same section of Maimonides’ writings.
Furthermore, Maimonides lists in the Laws of the Torah Foundation 7:1 the
attributes someone must have if he is to be considered a prophet, among them
that: “prophecy will only rest on someone who is exceptionally wise, valiant in
his middoth [character traits], and whose [evil] inclination never rules over
him, but rather, he always overpowers his [evil] inclination…” I think that
that provision, alone, rules out almost all of the impostors out there.
Finally, your question about the prophecy concerning Josiah
(and Hezekiah), is addressed in a different Gemara (Berachot 10a): “[Hezekiah]
said to [Isaiah]: What is the reason for all this, i.e. why am I deserving of
such a severe penalty [of death]? [Isaiah] said to him: It is because you did
not engage in procreation. [Hezekiah] said to him: But this was because I saw
with Divine inspiration that evil children will issue forth from me. [Isaiah]
said to him: Why do you concern yourself with these hidden things of G-d? What
you are commanded to do, you must do, and what is found to be good before G-d,
He will do. [Hezekiah] said to [Isaiah]: Now that I am apprised of my wrongdoing,
give me your daughter as a wife, perhaps my merits and your merits will suffice
to cause me to have virtuous children. [Isaiah] said to him: But a decree of
death has already been passed upon you. [Hezekiah] said to [Isaiah]: Son of Amotz,
end your prophecy and go, for I have received this teaching from the house of
my father’s father: Even if a sharp sword rests upon a person’s neck, he should
not refrain from praying from mercy …. Immediately, “and Hezekiah turned his
face to the wall, and he prayed to G-d (Isaiah 38:2).”
In other words, in contrast to gentile rulers, about whom it
says: “A king's heart is like rivulets of water in the L-rd's hand; wherever He
wishes, He turns it” (Proverbs 21:1), G-d does not wish to take away the free
choice of a Jewish ruler, even if that would prevent a prophecy from being
fulfilled. As Hezekiah had decided against having children, he was destined to
pass away, as he had otherwise fulfilled his Divine mission. Therefore, G-d
organized that Isaiah should visit him, and convince him to have children,
despite his foreknowledge that they would be exceedingly evil, and once
Hezekiah made that decision, his remaining years were returned to him.
No comments:
Post a Comment