Shoftim 01 - Why is the story of Kalev, Otniel and Achsa in Hevron Repeated?
In Yehoshua 15 (15-19), the following is recorded:
טו ויעל משם, אל-ישבי דבר; ושם-דבר לפנים, קרית-ספר. טז ויאמר כלב, אשר-יכה את-קרית-ספר ולכדה–ונתתי לו את-עכסה בתי, לאשה. יז וילכדה עתניאל בן-קנז, אחי כלב; ויתן-לו את-עכסה בתו, לאשה. יח ויהי בבואה, ותסיתהו לשאול מאת-אביה שדה, ותצנח, מעל החמור; ויאמר-לה כלב, מה-לך. יט ותאמר תנה-לי ברכה, כי ארץ הנגב נתתני, ונתתה לי, גלת מים; ויתן-לה, את גלת עליות, ואת, גלת תחתיות.
Compare this to Shoftim 1 (11-15):
יא וילך משם, אל-יושבי דביר; ושם-דביר לפנים, קרית-ספר. יב ויאמר כלב, אשר-יכה את-קרית-ספר ולכדה–ונתתי לו את-עכסה בתי, לאשה. יג וילכדה עתניאל בן-קנז, אחי כלב הקטן ממנו; ויתן-לו את-עכסה בתו, לאשה. יד ויהי בבואה, ותסיתהו לשאל מאת-אביה השדה, ותצנח, מעל החמור; ויאמר-לה כלב, מה-לך. טו ותאמר לו הבה-לי ברכה, כי ארץ הנגב נתתני, ונתתה לי, גלת מים; ויתן-לה כלב, את גלת עלית, ואת, גלת תחתית.
As you can see (English translations are available through the links above), except for some very minor differences, these narratives are identical. Why is it that this passage is repeated in Shoftim? What is added?
The commentary of the Malbim gives a very interesting answer to this question. The story is repeated to tell about actual events (the first telling, in Yehoshua) and to give allegorical meaning to what is going on (the second telling, in Shoftim). This interpretation is based on the gemara in Temura (16a). What is the allegorical meaning?
The city of Devir (11) is also called Kiryat S’neh (Yehoshua 15:49). From this (the fact that Devir had these different names) we learn that this city was set aside as a “capital for the book” (translation of Kiryat Sefer) - that students gathered there to learn and teach from the Sefer Torah, and there was a big academy there. It was also called Kirya S’neh in connection to the verse in Devarim (33:16), which alludes to the s’neh (burning bush) where God first revealed himself to Moshe, which took place on Har Sinai, where the Torah would eventually be given. Otniel was the Rosh Yeshiva - the main teacher. As the gemara in Temura explains, 1700 of Moshe’s teachings were forgotten after he died, and Otniel was the one who was able to return them from his learning. This learning took place in his yeshiva in Devir/Kiryat Sefer/Kiryat S’neh.
When Calev challenges someone to “smite Kiray Sefer” (12) he is really asking who is able to win the battle of Torah - who is able to emerge victorious in his arguments and opinions regarding interpretations of the Torah and come to a conclusion about the halacha. In the end, Otniel is the one who was able to do this (as related in Temurah). Thus, he is the one who was able to “conquer” Kiryat Sefer - both in the real battle against the Canaanites (as related in Yehoshua) as well as in the allegorical battle (as related in Shoftom).
So Calev gives his daughter Achsa to Otniel, and she tells her father that he has given her the land of the Negev (כי ארץ הנגב נתתני) and because of this, she needs more land. The word Negev literally means dry. In Yehoshua, Achsa told her father that she was given dry, parched land, and she therefore needed something more fertile that could produce more. In Shoftim (the allegorical interpretation), she is saying that he husband has turned into an ארץ הנגב - into a “dry land” - i.e.: he is so absorbed in his Torah study that he is not tending to the physical needs of our house (he is earning a living just like a dry land), and therefore she needed some more land that would be able to provide for them (in place of what her husband would have earned).
In response to her request, Calev gives Achsa גלת עלית and גלת תחתית (the high springs and the low springs). Literally, this was land with springs that could be used to irrigate her dry land and make it more able to produce. Allegorically, Calev was telling his daughter that she already had a man who was able to bring the “water of life” (ie: Torah) from the high places (divine wisdom) and the low places (terrestrial wisdom) and that she therefore had no need for anything else, for many people would gather around her husband (see the next verse - 1:16 and the commentaries on it) and their needs would thus be taken care of.
Posted in Chapter 01, Chapter 15, Commentary, Shoftim - Judges by Yaakov Ellis on November 20, 2007 | No Comments
Destroy the Horses and Chariots
ויעש להם יהושע, כאשר אמר-לו יהוה: את-סוסיהם עקר, ואת-מרכבתיהם שרף באש.
And Joshua did unto them as the Lord commanded him; he hamstrung their horses, and burnt their chariots with fire. (Yehoshua 11:9)
Why did God command Yehoshua to injure and burn the horses and chariots of the defeated Canaanite nations after this battle, when such a command had not been given in previous battles? What is the reason for the command?
Radak explains that this command had not been given in a previous battle because this was the first battle since crossing the Jordan in which horses and chariots had played any meaningful role. In previous battles, Bnei Yisrael were attacking cities, or defending the Giv’onim against the five neighboring Canaanite kings. This is the first battle that featured large opposing forces in which horses and chariots took part, thus it is the first time that such a command could be applicable.
And what is the reason for the command? To teach the Jews a lesson: the other nations made war on you using their modern instruments of warfare - horses and chariots. They trusted in these weapons that they would emerge victorious. However, they did this ignorant of the fact that horses an chariots were not the keys to winning the battle against the Jews. God is the source of victory or loss. The Jews were able to defeat their enemies without aid from horses and chariots because God was on their side. They were the commanded to destroy these weapons to send home the message (lest they come to think like their enemies in the future) that horses and chariots (or F-16s and artillery) cannot win the battle when God is not with you. And when God is with you, they are unnecessary.
Posted in Chapter 11, Commentary, Yehoshua - Joshua by Yaakov Ellis on February 16, 2007 | No Comments
Did the Sun Really Stand Still?
אז ידבר יהושע ליהוה, ביום תת יהוה את האמרי לפני בני ישראל; ויאמר לעיני ישראל, שמש בגבעון דום, וירח בעמק אילון. וידם השמש וירח עמד, עד יקם גוי איביו - הלא היא כתובה על-ספר הישר; ויעמד השמש בחצי השמים, ולא-אץ לבוא כיום תמים. ולא היה כיום ההוא, לפניו ואחריו, לשמע יהוה, בקול איש: כי יהוה, נלחם לישראל
Then Joshua spoke to the Lord on the day when the Lord delivered the Amorites before the children of Israel; and he said before Israel: ‘Sun, stand still upon Giv’on, and Moon - in the valley of Ayalon.’ And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Yashar? And the sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and did not to go down for a whole day. And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the Lord hearkened unto the voice of a man, for the Lord fought for Israel. (Yehoshua 10:12-14)
According to the simple meaning of these verses, as Bnei Yisrael was chasing after the give Canaanite nations that attacked the Giv’onim, Yehoshua called upon the sun and moon to “wait” and temporarily, time stood still. He did this so that the Jews would be able to complete the battle and completely vanquish their fleeing adversaries, something they might not have been able to do had the sun gone down (Metzudat David). This interpretation of the pesukim is accepted by Rashi, Radak and the Malbim, and is supported by the Gemara in Avodah Zara (25a, also in Pirkei d’Rebbi Eliezer 52) which states that the sun stayed in its place for 26 straight hours.
There is one commentator though who disagrees with the notion that the sun actually stood still. The Ralbag in his commentary on this verse expresses his opinion that this could not possibly have happened as described above. His reasoning is that if the sun were to have ceased in its (perceived) movement, this would have been a miracle of a higher degree than that occurred for Moshe. Moshe’s miracles changed the way that natural processes worked. This miracle completely removed one of the natural processes (the sun) from fulfilling its role (rising, setting, etc). If this were to have happened, it would be a contradiction of the verse that says that “no prophet will arise in Israel like Moshe” (Devarim 34:10-12). (It would also not make sense to say that Moshe had performed miracles of this magnitude and they were just not recorded in the Torah - since the Torah mentions these miracles in order to cause people to believe in and fear God). The Ralbag goes on to give proofs from the language used that the expression “there was no day like that before it or after…” was not referring to changes in nature, but rather referred to the battle itself, and the magnitude of the great victory that Bnei Yisrael experienced.
The position of the Ralbag (whose views on other philosophical matters were also not widely accepted) is not accepted by other commentators. (In fact, other commentators like the Malbim and Radak both take a very opposite approach from the Ralbag, saying that the miracle that happened here was in direct fulfillment of promises of wondrous miracles that were made to Moshe in Shemot 34:10: “Behold, I will make a brit, before all of your nation I will perform marvels…”). However, the main theme of his commentary here - that a miracle stated in the text may not have happened exactly as stated - is worth noting (see the commentary of Radak on Yehoshua 4:11 for an example of a different commentator disagreeing with the views of others who believed that certain miracles happened in specific ways).
Posted in Chapter 10, Commentary, Yehoshua - Joshua by Yaakov Ellis on February 11, 2007 | No Comments
The Power of an Oath - Yehoshua and the Givonim
In the 9th Chapter of Sefer Yehoshua, the Givonim come an offer to become servants of the Jewish people in exchange for peace. They do so under the guise of travellers who have come from an ארץ רחוקה מאוד - a “very far off land” (9) and as evidence for their long journey, they show their stale bread and dried out wine sacks (12-13). The leaders of the Jewish people immediately accept.
The RaDaK (Rav David Kimchi) explains in his commentary to verse 7 how it was even possible for peace to be made between the Jews and a Canaanite nation: If the Jews had known the true origin of these people, they would have been forbidden to make a covenant with them (because of the biblical commandment against this). Even though Bnei Yisrael would have accepted peace with any of the Canaanite nations, if it had been offered, this would have been under the condition that they destroy all of their idolatry and observe the seven Noahide laws, in addition to paying taxes and accepting some form of servitude under the Jewish nation.
Only after a few days do they find out that these people had been lying about their place of origin, and in fact lived just a few miles away. Upon becoming aware of this, the Tanach states:
יח ולא הכום, בני ישראל, כי-נשבעו להם נשיאי העדה, ביהוה אלהי ישראל; וילנו כל-העדה, על-הנשיאים. יט ויאמרו כל-הנשיאים, אל-כל-העדה, אנחנו נשבענו להם, ביהוה אלהי ישראל; ועתה, לא נוכל לנגע בהם.
“And Bnei Yisrael did not attack them because the leaders of the congregation swore to them before God, the Lod of Israel, and the people complained against the leaders. And all of the leaders said to the entire congregation: “we swore to them on God, the Lord of Israel, and no we cannot touch them!” (9:18-19).
As explained earlier, peace with any of the Canaanite nations was possible, assuming the proper conditions. Why then do the leaders cite their oath as the only thing holding them back from destroying the Givonim?
The Radak goes on to explain: Because the Givonim tricked the Jews and made a covenant with them under false pretenses, and because of this they deserved to be killed, were it not for the chillul Hashem that would be by this, because many had heard the oath that was made by the leaders of the people to the Givonim, and they had not heard anything false nor had any conditions been stated when the oath was made public. (Because of this, the Givonim were given more menial jobs than they would have had otherwise). Chazal learn (Gittin 46a) from this incident that a vow or oath made in public cannot be annulled. Others argue and say that a public oath or vow can be annulled, and in this case it was not done so in order to perform a Kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God’s name), to show the world how seriously Jews take their oaths made to God.
Posted in Chapter 09, Commentary, Yehoshua - Joshua by Yaakov Ellis on February 08, 2007 | No Comments