E§) # # # #
Anno 1778 •
#
PHILLIPS ACADEMY #
OLIVER-WENDELL HOLMES
L I B R ARY
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation
https://archive.org/details/legendsofjews0006ginz
THE LEGENDS OF THE JEWS
THE LEGENDS OF THE JEWS
BY
LOUIS GINZBERG
in
VI
Notes to Volumes III and IV From Moses in the Wilderness to Esther
Philadelphia
The Jewish Publication Society of America 5729—1968
Copyright © 1928, 1956 by
THE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Fifth Impression, 1968
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review to be printed in a magazine or newspaper.
PRINTED IN
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
TO THE MEMORY OF MY DEAR FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE
ISRAEL FRIEDLAENDER
C3 ’sen *?:> ’t-tni non ptu D’mpV
CONTENTS
Page
Moses in the Wilderness (Vol. Ill, pp. 1-481) . 1
I. Joshua (Vol. IV, pp. 1-17) . 169
II. Judges (Vol. IV, pp. 19-54) . 181
III. Samuel and Saul (Vol. IV, pp. 55-77) . 215
IV. David (Vol. IV, pp. 79-121) . 245
V. Solomon (Vol. IV, pp. 123-176) . 277
VI. Judah and Israel (Vol. IV, pp. 177-191) . 304
VII. Elijah (Vol. IV, pp. 193-235) . 316
VIII. Elisha and Jonah (Vol. IV, pp. 237-253) . 343
IX. The Later Kings (Vol. IV, pp. 255-287) . 353
X. The Exile (Vol. IV, pp. 289-340) . 382
XI. The Return of the Captivity (Vol. IV, pp. 341-361) . 430
XII. Esther (Vol. IV, pp. 363-448) . 451
List of Abbreviations of Titles of Books . 483
MOSES IN THE WILDERNESS
Vol. Ill
1 Tosefta Sota 4.8; PK 10, 85b; Mekilta Beshallah (NnnTiD) 24a; Shir 1.7. Comp. vol. II, pp. 181-182. ShR 18.10 reads: Moses was occupied with taking care of Joseph’s body and with procuring the material Jacob had prepared for the tabernacle; comp. vol. Ill, p. 164.
2 An unknown Midrash quoted by Sabba, Beshallah 74b; BHM VI, 112; Aggadat Shir II, 3; comp, also Schechter on the last-named passage. Concerning the fragrance that emanates from the live as well as the dead bodies of the pious, see note 92 on vol. I, p. 334 and vol. II, p. 19. Comp, also Berakot 43b where it is said that in the time to come the young men of Israel will give forth a fragrance like Lebanon. As to the fragrance of the dead bodies of the pious in Christian legend, 6ee The Passing of Maria, second version, 10, and Smith, ZDMG 66, 167.
3 ShR 20.19; PK 10, 86a-86b. On the extension of Egypt see Pesahim 94a and vol. II, pp. 364, 374. The magic dogs are a reminis¬ cence of Serapis who was represented as being of dog-like form ; see Tertullian, Ad Nationes, 11.8. Later sources speak of several kinds of magic animals such as dogs, lions, and bulls. As soon as a fugitive slave met any of these animals, they would bark, roar and bellow until the fugitive was captured; but at the time of the exodus from Egypt none of the animals raised its voice; see Yalkut David, Exod. 11.7. For further details on the finding of Joseph’s coffin, see note 723; vol. II, pp. 181-182, and vol. Ill, pp. 66, 122, and note 156.
4 Mekilta Mishpatim 20, 98a; ShR 31.9; Targ. Yer. Exod. 22.
30.
s Perek Shirah (end); Yalkut I, 187.
6 Mekilta Beshallah (NniTTiS) 23b. Before the children of Israel left Egypt it had never happened that a slave escaped from that country, which was closed on all sides; Mekilta Yitro 1, 58b; Mekilta RS 88. Comp, note 3. — Moses kept the coffin containing Joseph’s body in his tent during the time that Israel journeyed through the wilderness; Pesahim 67a; comp, note 422 on vol. II, p. 183.
7 Zohar II, 45a-45b; comp, note 230 on vol. II, p. 371.
1
8-io]
The Legends of the Jews
8 Mekilta Beshallah (NnrrnB) 23b; Mekilta RS 38; ShR 20.11— 17 (here many more reasons are given for Israel’s long wanderings through the wilderness). See also Sifra 18.3, where it is said: The Canaanites honored Abraham, and as a reward for this a respite of forty years was granted to them. Comp, note 413 on vol. II, p. 151. That the journey through the wilderness was an exercise in discipline and an encouragement to study is also mentioned in Recognitiones, 1.35. Comp. Josephus, Antiqui., II, 15.3, and vol. Ill, p. 285.
9 ShR 20.16. According to Hadar, Exod. 13.17, the Philistines were kinsmen of the Egyptians, and on account of this kinship God did not wish that Israel should march through the land of the Philistines.
10 Mekilta Beshallah (NniTOS) 23b-24a and Shirah 9, 42b-43a; Mekilta RS 37-38; Sanhedrin 92b; ShR 20.11; PK 10, 85a-85b; PRE 48; Wa-Yosha‘ 54; Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 13.17; Targum Ps. 78. 9; Targum I Chron. 7.21-22; see also Yelammedenu in Yalkut II on Ps. 78, and Tehillim 81, 368. The chief of the Ephraimites is called ]Ul, ]ur, and in PRE — the correct reading is not certain; ]ir seems to be most likely; comp. Ps. 77. 17, and Sanhedrin 98b, where |1J* is one of the names of the Messiah — whereas according to the text of the Yerushalmi Targumim given in Mahzor Vitry 167, Ganon was the name of the king of the Philistines who attacked and destroyed the Ephraimites led by Jair. This legend very likely represents a kind of reminiscence of a historical event, the wars be¬ tween Egypt and Canaan which are frequently mentioned in the Tel- Amarna Letters. See Levy, Monatsschrift, 55, 285, and Ginzberg, Unbekannte Sekte 339— 340. In the latter passage it is suggested that there is a connection between the legend about the premature exodus of the Ephraimites and the belief in the advent of the Messiah, the son of Ephraim, who will precede the Messiah, the son of David. As to the war between Egypt and Canaan in pre-Israelitish times, see, also Jub. 46. 9—11, where it is said that Amram participated in the war of Egypt against Canaan and died in the Promised Land. The obscure reference in Shir 2.7, to the premature attempt of the exodus in the time of Amram is to be explained in accordance with Jub., loc. tit., and the Midrashim quoted above, which record the failure of the Ephraimites. Comp, note 12 on vol. II, p. 251, and vol. IV, p. 332. Joseph, who rose to power and dignity in Egypt, gave himself up to the enjoyments of life to such an extent that he forgot his father who was mourning his son 's death and did not inform him that he was still alive (comp. vol. II, p. 44, and note 370 on vol. II, p. 137). As a punishment for this sin, two
2
Moses in the Wilderness
[n-17
hundred thousand descendants of Joseph — the Ephraimites — perished at the hands of the Philistines; see Hasidim 231 and 232. This sup¬ position is very likely due to the phrase D’3T D’D’ used in I Chron.
7.22, in connection with the death of the Ephraimites, and in Gen. 37, 34, when the tidings of Joseph’s death were brought to Jacob. Josephus, Antiqui., II, 15.3, likewise speaks of earlier wars that took place between the Philistines and the Hebrews.
11 Yashar Shemot 137a-137b; PRE 58; Mekilta Beshallah (WUTTIS) 24a; comp. vol. II, p. 246.
11 Mekilta Beshallah 1, 25a-26a and Shir 1.13; Mekilta RS 42-43. Dibre ha-Yamim 11 relates that the mixed multitude (aiy *llDBDN = ai; comp, note 462) attempted to force Israel to return to Egypt; but in the ensuing battle between the Hebrews and the Egyp¬ tians the latter were almost entirely annihilated, so that only few of them reached Egypt to inform Pharaoh of Israel’s flight. Comp, also Yashar Shemot, 145b-146a.
13 Mekilta Beshallah 1, 25b-26a; Mekilta RS41; Targum Yeru- shalmi Exod. 14.2; comp. vol. II, p. 367. See vol. Ill, p. 13, where it is narrated that the Egyptians were furthermore misled by the fe¬ licitous course of their preparations for the war against Israel.
14 An unknown Midrash quoted in Sifte Kohen, Exod. 14.2; this is a combination of Mekilta Beshallah 1, 26a and Mekilta RS 41 with Pesahim 119b. On the treasures of Joseph and the Egyptians see Abkir in Yalkut I, 230; vol. I, 125, and vol. Ill, pp. 27, 286.
15 Mekilta Beshallah 1, 26b-27a; Mekilta RS 43-44. A sentence not found in our text of the Mekilta but quoted in Hadar, and Imre N&am, Deut. 25.18, reads: Amalek said: Pharaoh will attack Israel in the front and I in the rear. Comp, note 139. The magicians are mentioned only in Zohar II, 46b, whereas the Mekiltas have agents (this is how j’TiDpN, in Mekilta RS pncap, is to be translated)and mes¬ sengers of Pharaoh. See vol. Ill, p. 10. As to Pharaoh the “cos- mocrator”, see Abkir in Yalkut I, 241, and Mekilta Shirah 6. At the exodus the power of Egypt sank; Hallel 95; comp, note 738.
Zohar II, 51a-51b.
17 Mekilta Beshallah 1-2, 27a-27b; Mekilta RS 44-45; Tan. Shofetim 13. The last named source adds that Pharaoh presented the chieftains of the army with pearls and precious stones, to win them over to his plans. As to the fact that pagans attribute great importance to omens, see vol. IV, p. 301. On the chariots of war see Yerushalmi Kii'ayim 7,31c.
I 8-23]
The Legends of the Jews
18 Mekilta Beshallah 1, 26a; Mekilta RS 41. That Dathan and Abiram, the implacable enemies of Moses (comp, note 75 on vol.
II, p. 282), remained in Egypt is found only in Targum Yerushalmi, Exod. 14.3; this is probably based upon the midrashic source quoted in Sekel, Exod., loc. cit .; see also Haggadat Teman 22.
19 Mekilta Beshallah 2,27b; Mekilta RS 45; ShR 15.15; comp, vol. II, pp. 358, 367, vol. Ill, p. 10.
10 Mekilta RS 41.
91 ShR 21.5 and 15.15. Comp, also Tan. Shofetim 13-14; Me¬ kilta Beshallah 1, 26a and 28b; Mekilta RS 41-42. On the guardian angel of Egypt, see note 41. The midrashic basis for the legend about the angel of Egypt is the use of the singular ($?D1) in Exod. 14.10. According to another interpretation this verse speaks of Mizraim, son of Ham (Gen. 10.6), who came to the assistance of his descendants the Egyptians, the inhabitants of Egypt-Mizraim. See Hadar, Exod., loc. cit.; Zohar II, 19b.
3 3 Mekilta Beshallah 2, 28a-28b; Mekilta RS 46. The sinners in Israel said: God cannot deliver Israel from the hands of their masters, and He therefore commanded them to flee from the Egyptians. To show mankind His power, God caused Pharaoh to follow the Israelites that He might perform His miracles at the Red Sea; see ER 7.44. As to the power Moses exerted over his people, comp. vol.
III, p. 107.
J3 Mekilta Beshallah 2, 29a; Mekilta RS 47; Yerushalmi Ta'anit 2, 65d; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.13 and 2 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.3; PRK (Grunhut's edition) 43; Wa-Yosha‘ 51-52. The last two sources speak of the three divisions of the tribes. This is in agreement with ps.-Philo 11B who states that the tribes of Reuben, Issachar, Zebulun, and Simeon formed the first division ; Gad, Asher, and Dan the Second; Levi, Judah, the Joseph tribes, and Benjamin the third. Yashar Shemot, 146a, divides the tribes as follows: Reuben, Simeon, and Issachar formed the first party; Zebulun, Benjamin, and Naphtali the second; Judah, Dan (read pi instead of pi), and the Joseph tribes the third; Levi, Gad, and Asher the fourth. The task of the last-named was to intimidate the enemy by noise. The midrashic statement about the divided counsel of the tribes is derived from Ps. 68.28 (comp, the references given in notes 36 and 388), and not from Judges 5.15-16, as maintained by James on ps.-Philo, loc. cit. See also Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 33, who remarks that the Israelites were ready to throw themselves into the waters of the sea. Josephus,
4
Moses in the Wilderness
124-31
Antiqui., II. 15, 4, says: The people threw stones at Moses (see Num. 14.10); but he, self-reliant and fearless, calmed the people with his words, and made them stop the weeping and clamoring of the women and children. Reference to the weeping of the women and children is also found in Wa-Yosha‘, which, like Josephus, made use of Num. 14.1.
34 Abkir in Yalkut I, 233; comp. vol. Ill, p. 14, and ps. -Philo 11B.
35 Josephus, Antiqui., II. 16, 1; the prayer in Yashar Shemot, 146b, reads differently.
36 Mekilta Beshallah 3, 29-30a; Mekilta RS 47-48. The Dera- shot in these sources are based on the conception that just as the physical order of the world is maintained by fixed laws of nature, so the moral order cannot exist without Israel. Now inasmuch as the existence of the physical world depends upon the existence of moral man (see note 8 on vol. I, p. 50), it is manifest that Israel is indispensable to the world. The other point brought out by these Derashot is that the Israelites on account of their trust in God and because of the merit of their fathers, are entitled to expect that divine help would come to them; comp. Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.15.
3 1 ShR 21.7; Zohar II, 33a, 34a, and 181b, as well as III, 101b and 218a; PRK 33a. Comp, also note 34 on vol. II, p. 240, and Index, s. v. “Job”. A statement similar to that of the Midrash is found in Jub. 48.15-18, which remarks that God kept Mastemah bound from the fourteenth of Nisan to the eighteenth thereof, that he might not accuse Israel. See also the comment of Mekilta Beshallah 4, 30 and Mekilta RS 47, on the use of the name D’n^Nn in Exod. 14.19.
38 Abkir in Yalkut I, 241, and Wa-Yosha‘ 39. A somewhat different version of this legend is found in Hadar, Exod. 14.10. Comp, note 110 on vol. I, p. 235, and vol. II, p. 318.
39 ShR 21.1 and 6, which in the main follows Mekilta Beshallah 2, 29b-30a.
3° Wa-Yosha‘ 38-39; ShR 21.6; Mekilta RS 49-50. The sea did not want to divide i.ts waters before the Israelites because they rebelled against God; Tehillim 114, 475. Conflicting with this view there is the statement that Israel saw no other way to be delivered from the Egyptians than by passing through the Red Sea; for that day being Sabbath, they were unable to try their fortune in war; See BHM VI, 37. Comp, the following note, and vol. IV, p. 11.
31 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.21. As to the rod of Moses, see PK 14, 140a; Tehillim 114, 475; DR 3.8; vol. II, pp. 291 and 293.
5
32-36]
The Legends of the Jews
3 3 Mekilta RS 50; this is very likely a late source and is identical with that made use of in Sekel 182; ShR 21.6; DR 3.8; Hallel 95-97; Wa-Yosha‘ 51; Tehillim 114, 475; PRE 42; PR 19, 140; Haggadat Teman 55. In all these passages stress is laid upon the fact that it was God’s will, not the rod of Moses, that performed the miracles. BHM VI, 37, finds it even necessary to interpret 0"in (Exod. 14.16) in the sense of removing: God told Moses to lay the rod aside before dividing the sea. Hadar and Imre No‘ am on Exod., loc. cit., quote, from Tehillim, a lengthy passage bearing upon the controversy between Moses and the Red Sea. A poetical rendering of this dialogue is given in 2 Targum Yerushalmi Exodus 14.29, and in a somewhat different version by the Targum fragment in Kaufmann-Gedenkbuch, 235.
33 Mekilta Beshallah 4, 31a; Mekilta RS 50; Tehillim 18, 147;
ShR 21.6.
34 Abkir in Yalkut I, 234; Makiri Ps. 136, 258; Hadar and Da1 at
on Exod. 14.21; Eshkol 2, 105; Al-Barceloni 11; Or Zarua' II, 136b,
No. 314; the last-named source gives an essentially different version. Comp, also Shu1 aib, Beshallah 30b and Aggadat Bereshit 17.35. An old stratum of this version is found in Mekilta Beshallah 5, 31b and 6, 33a, as well as in Mekilta RS 51 and 54.
33 Mekilta Beshallah 4, 30b-31a; Mekilta RS 49-50. Concern¬ ing the darkness, see vol. II, p. 359. According to PRE 42, it was the angel Michael who made himself “a wall of fire” between Israel and the Egyptians. Philo, in a similar manner, identifies the pillar of fire with an angel; see Moses, 1.29.
36 Mekilta Beshallah 5, 31a-31b; Mekilta RS 50-51; Sotah 37a; Tan. B. I, 208; Aggadat Bereshit 74, 145; PRE 42; Aggadat Shir 2, 29; Tehillim 68, 320; 76, 341; 114, 474; Hallel 95; Tosefta Bera- kot 4.18; Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 14.16; Targum Ps. 68. 26; Wa-Yosha‘ 52. As to those who first entered the sea, comp. Josephus, Antiqui., II, 16.2, who maintains that Moses was the first to jump into the sea. See note 23; vol. II, p. 14; vol. Ill, p. 195. — On the ten miracles (this number is mentioned Abot 5, 4) see also Mekilta Shirah 6, 40a; Mekilta RS 64; Tan. Beshallah 10; PRE 42; Tehillim 114, 473; Hallel 96; ARN 33, 96 (second version 36, 94, and 38, 99); Wa-Yosha‘ 51; Midrash Shir, 38b; Midrash Temurah 111, quotation from Tan. in Makiri Ps. 136, 258. Several features of this legend are found in Wisdom 19.7-10 (the sea was changed into a pleasure-ground, as in Tehillim, loc. cit.), in Philo, Moses, 1.32, and 2 (3). 34 (the sea was changed into a highway, as in 2 ARN.
6
Moses in the Wilderness
[37-41
99), and in Josephus, Antiqui., II, 16.2. Comp, also Theodoretus, Exod. 14.16. — In Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33b, Mekilta RS 55, ShR 23.9, and Passover Haggadah three different opinions are given as to the number of the plagues inflicted upon the Egyptians at the Red Sea. Fifty, two hundred, and two hundred and fifty, respectively are the numbers represented in these opinions. The conflicting views are based on the assumption that at the Red Sea the plagues were five times as many as in Egypt (“the hand of the Lord’’ was seen at the Red Sea, whereas in Egypt His “finger” only was visible; compare Exod. 8.15 with 14.31). On this point they all agree, but they differ with respect to the exact nature of the plagues in Egypt, which, ac¬ cording to all views, were composite.
37 ShR 21.10; Wa-Yosha‘ 51; 2 ARN 38, 10; Yelammedenu in Yalkut I, 764
38 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.22; Wa-Yosha‘ 51. Comp, vol. IV, p. 5. This is the reply of the legend to the rationalists who maintain that the passage through the Red Sea took place during the low tide. Artapanus, 436b, is the oldest exponent of this rationalistic view.
39 Br 92.2; Midrash Shir 22b, where, however, the presence of
these prominent persons is spoken of in connection with the redemp¬ tion from Egypt; comp, also ShR 18.10 with regard to Jacob’s presence. Zohar II, 53a (this is the source of Shu'aib, 30a) further adds the presence of the twelve tribes, i. e., the sons of Jacob. “ The six mothers” i. e., Sarah, Rebekah, and Jacob’s four wives, are mentioned in this connection, it seems, only in this source and in the piyyut nr: ID for the Great Sabbath, in the Italian Mahzor. See Indexes. v. “ Mothers”. Rashi on Ta'anit 5b, catchword Kin Hasidim 34, Sekel, 190 read in BR, loc. tit., tOD (on this expression see vol. V, p. 276, top).
According to these authorities, Exod, 14.31 (and Israel saw) is to be explained as “and Jacob saw”. The contrast to NDD is D’TSn
iOD in the source quoted in note 21.
«° Wa-Yosha‘ 39-40, which is based on Abkir in Yalkut I, 241. For another version of this legend see vol. Ill, pp. 17-18. Concerning Pharaoh’s blasphemous language see vol. II, p. 333; on the Hebrew child used as mortar see vol. Ill, p.372. Hadar, Exod. 24.10, combined two sources for this legend, the version on p. 28b being taken from Wa-Yosha‘, whereas in 40a an unknown Midrasb is reproduced. Abkir in Yalkut I, 243, has a third version of this legend.
4 1 Abkir (perhaps Wa-Yosha‘), according to Hadar, Exod.
7
42-43]
The Legends of the Jews
14.10; ShR 21.5. That God first executed judgment on the angel of Egypt and then on the Egyptians is an old Haggadah; see Mekilta Shirah 2, 36b and Mekilta RS 58. The Mekiltas also know of the general rule that God 's wrath is first visited upon the guardian angels before the nations entrusted to their care are punished. This view is found in many passages of the Talmud and Midrash; see ShR, loc. cit., Shemuel 18, 98 (on the text comp. Abkat Rokel, 1.2); DR 1.22; Shir 8.14; Tan. Beshallah 13; Tan. B. II, 53, and V. 32; Sukkah 29a, according to Rashi ’s interpretation of this passage, which, how¬ ever, is hardly correct, as the Talmud evidently refers to the idea that idols which are worshipped are punished; comp. vol. II, pp. 250 and 348. See also Wa-Yosha‘ 45; Midrash Temurah 110; PK 4, 41a; Zohar II, 52b and 54b; Batte Midrashot I, 27. The last-named source is the only one which refers to the guardian angel of every individual as well as to that of every nation. Comp. vol. Ill, pp. 277, 340, and 369, and vol. IV, pp. 93 and 301. As to the burning of idols in Gehenna on the Day of Judgment, see EZ 21, 34; comp, also BR 28 (beginning),
and Vol. V, p. 418, note 118 towards end of page.
42 Wa-Yosha‘ 46-47. As to the older view concerning Rahab, see vol. I, p. 18, and comp. Sekel 182. In the latter legend Rahab is the “prince of Egypt” and at the same time Uzza is the “prince of the sea”. See the quotation from Wa-Yosha‘ (not in our text) in Hadar, Exod. 14.16. Abkir in Yalkut I, 234, makes Sammael the guardian angel of Egypt, and gives the following dialogue between God and him. Sammael said: The Israelites worshipped idols in Egypt, and yet Thou wishest to perform miracles for their sake. When the prince of the sea heard these words he became exceedingly wrath¬ ful against Israel, and wanted to drown them. Whereupon God re¬ plied to Sammael: “O thou fool, did Israel worship idols voluntarily? Was it not due to their servitude which deprived them of their senses?” These words of God turned away the anger of the prince of the sea from Israel to the Egyptians. Zohar II, 270, made use of Abkir, but, in accordance with the above-mentioned sources, changed Sammael to Rahab. Comp, also Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33a.
43 ShR 22; Mekilta Beshallah 6, 32b, and Mekilta RS 53-54; Tehillim 18, 147. Josephus, Antiqui., II, 15.3, states that six hundred chariots of war, fifty thousand horsemen, and two hundred thousand footmen of the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea, whereas Jub. 48.14 gives a million and one thousand as the number of those that were drowned. Shalshelet 96 is based on Josephus and not on rab-
8
Moses in the Wilderness
[44-51
binic sources which are by far more liberal with numbers, maintaining that the Egyptian army consisted of nine thousand myriads. Comp. Mekilta Beshallah 1, 27a-27b and Pa‘aneah Exod. 14.7.
44 Mekilta RS 51-52, taken verbatim from Aggadat Shir 1, 16- 17; Kaufmann-Gedenkbuch p. 3 (Hebrew); comp, also Tan. Shofetim 14; Midrash Shir lib; Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33a, and Shirah 4, 37b; Mekilta RS 54; Shir 1.9; Tehillim 18, 142-144; ARN 27, 183. The legend about the “heavenly mare”, mentioned in the sources quoted above, is very likely connected with the idea that the cherub has the form of a mare. Comp, note 94 on vol. I, p. 81 and note 47.
45 Tehillim 18, 14b; PR 21, 104a; Wa-Yosha‘ 45; BaR 8.3; ARN
27.83. Accompanied by nine thousand myriads of angels (on this number see note 43), God appeared at the Red Sea. The angels said unto Him : “ Permit us to execute Thy will upon the Egyptians. . . ”
God, however, refused their request, saying: “I shall not be content until I Myself have inflicted punishment upon the enemies of Israel.” See Mekilta RS 52-53, and in abridged form Pa‘aneah, Exod. 14.7. This legend in its original form wished to narrate the execution of the last of the plagues, not the drowning of the Egyptians; see note 213 on vol. II, p. 366, and the following notes.
46 Mekilta Beshallah 2, 28b; Mekilta RS 46-47; Yerushalmi Sotah 7, 22b; Tehillim 18, 143; Midrash Shir llb-12a. Most of the sources add that Moses showed the Israelites the multitudes of the angels that came to their assistance; comp, preceding note. Josephus, Antiqui., II, 16.3, also speaks of the thunder and lightning at the des¬ truction of the Egyptians. Ps. 18.13, seq., was taken by Josephus, as by the Rabbis (comp. Tehillim, ad loc.) to refer to the miracles which were performed at the Red Sea.
47 Aggadat Shir 1, 17; this is the source of Mekilta RS 52. Wa- Yosha* 52 proves quite clearly that this legend is a modification of the one concerning the “heavenly mare ” = cherub ; see note 44.
4 8 Mekilta Beshallah 5, 32a; Mekilta RS 52; somewhat differently Aggadat Shir 1.7. The idea concerning the provenance of the treasures from the river Pishon is found only in Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 14.9, and Num. 38.8. Comp. vol. II, p. 371, and vol. Ill, p. 11.
4» Mekilta Beshallah 5, 32a; Mekilta RS 52; Tehillim 18, 143.
5° Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33a; Mekilta RS 54. In these sources ft is presupposed that the Egyptians suffered great agony before they perished, see note 55. Concerning the angels see note 45.
s 1 Wa-Yosha‘ 52, which is a combination of Mekilta Shirah
9
52-54]
The Legends of the Jews
5, 38b and 7, 41, Mekilta RS 62 and 65. The two parties among the Egyptians spoken of by Philo, Moses, 30, correspond to the first and third, respectively, of the Midrash. The Haggadah found in Exod. 18.11 is support for the view that the drowning of the Egyptians was the punishment for the drowning of the Hebrew male children; see Tosefta Sotah 3.13; Mekilta Shirah 6, 40a; Jub. 48.14.
5 2 Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33a, and Shirah 2, 36a-36b; Mekilta RS 54, 58. The Great Sea emptied itself into the Red Sea, and the enormous quantities of water tossed the Egyptians about hither and thither; Mekilta Shirah 5, 38b, and Mekilta RS 62. Furthermore, the abyss ascended and united itself with the waters above in the heaven, so that the Egyptians met their death while engulfed in gloomy darkness; Mekilta, loc. cit .; Tehillim 18, 137. The interpretation of D’D lDiyj (Exod. 15.8) as “and the water acted with cunning”, given in Mekilta, loc. cit., Onkelos, and Ephraem (I, 216D), ad loc., is the midrashic Support for the legend concerning the different punishments which the water inflicted on the Egyptians, according to the grades of wickedness.
53 Abkir in Yalkut I, 235; Wa-Yosha‘ 52; Yerahmeel, 159 (the Hebrew text is given by Schechter, Zadokite Fragments, LIX-LX) ; Hakam ha-Razim in Yalkut Reubeni Exod. 15.7. In the last-named source it is the “prince of the Face” (the angel of His presence, Is. 63.9) who executes punishment upon the magicians. This agrees with Yerahmeel who makes Metatron the executioner. The identity of these two angels is presupposed in numerous places in the mystic literature; see Index, s. v.“ Metatron”. Comp, also Hadar and Imre No1 am on Exod. 15.10. Concerning the seizure of the hair-locks, see note 276 on vol. I p 394
54 Wa-Yosha‘ 52-53 Dibre ha-Yamim 11; Midrash Aggada, Exod. 14b; Sekel, 186, Hadar, Exod. 14.28; PRE 43; BHM V, 51; Tosefta of Targum Jonah 3.6; Yerahmeel, 128. Comp. vol. II, p. 150, and vol. Ill, p. 467, where Pharaoh is said to keep guard at the portals of hell. In the old sources different opinions are expressed as to the fate of Pharaoh: he was drowned simultaneously with his army; he was the last Egyptian to be drowned after having witnessed the struggle of his people and their destruction; he was the only Egyp¬ tian who escaped death, in order that he might see the power and might of God. Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33a; Mekilta RS 54; Midrash Tehillim 106, 455. Pharaoh, the inhabitants of the sinful cities, the builders of the tower of Babel, Sennacherib, and Nebuchadnezzar
to
Moses in the Wilderness
[55-59
committed the following eight sins which brought destruction upon them: Neglect of justice, idolatry, incest, bloodshed, blasphemy, arrogance, slander, and obscenity; ER 15.74 and 31.158. Comp. Index, s. v. “Noachian Laws”. Comp. vol. VI, p. 364, note 60.
55 Mekilta Beshallah 5, 32a-32b and 6, 33a-33b; Mekilta RS 53-54; Tehillim 22, 180 (on the text see Yalkut I, 240); Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 34; Wisdom 10.20; Josephus Antiqui., II, 16.6. Somewhat differently in ER 1, 12, where it is stated that the garments of the Egyptians did not sink with the bodies, but were washed ashore and appropriated by the Israelites. This source maintains that “as a rule ”, God punishes the wicked while they are naked; Comp. vol. IV, p. 375.
5 6 Mekilta Shirah 9, 42a; Mekilta RS 67-68; PRE 42; Wa-Yosha‘ 53; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.12; Tehillim 22, 188-189; Ekah 1, 73-74. Comp, note 413 on vol. II, p. 151; vol. I, p. 80; vol. IV, p. 37.
57 Mekilta Beshallah 6, 33b; Mekilta RS 55; Tan. Beshallah 4. The advance of Pharaoh with his mighty army caused a change of heart among the Israelites. They repented of their sins, and, trusting in God, they invoked His help which did not fail them in their hour of distress; PRE 42 and ShR 25.5; comp, however, the conflicting view in vol. Ill, pp. 36-37, and the following note.
58 Tehillim 18, 137; Shemuel 29, 134-135; Shir 4.3. Comp, also ‘Arakin 11a and Yerushalmi Pesahim4, 30c with reference to the atoning power of the song of the Levites in the Temple The Midrashim quoted above speak at great length of the sin which Israel had committed ; comp, the preceding note. An unknown Midrash, quoted by Shu'aib, Beshallah, 30a-30b, maintains that the reason why the Israelites sang the song (Exod. 15) was to be found in the Halakah, Berakot 54b, according to which a man returning from a sea-voyage, in order to thank God for having escaped death, must recite the benediction (rona ^DUH) : “ Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who bestowest benefits upon the undeserving (literally, the guilty ), and hast also bestowed all good upon me.”
s’ Mekilta Shirah 1, 34a-34b, and Mekilta RS 56-57. The “ten songs” are often referred to in the haggadic literature; but opinions differ as to the songs which are to be included in this group; see Targum Song of Songs 1.1; Aggadat Shir 1.10 and 2.29 on the Song of Abraham; Makiri Is. 5.37 and Ps. 96, 111; Responsen der Geonim (ed. Harkavy, No. 66) and the interesting essay on these songs by Epstein, Mi-Mizrah u-mi-Mc' arab I. 85-89. Concerning the song of the night of redemp-
11
60-63]
The Legends of the Jews
tion, see vol. II, pp. 368, 373. According to the Haggadah, Solomon composed Psalm 30, and the superscription of that Psalm is explained to mean: “A Song of the dedication of the house of David”, i.e., the Temple.
60 Tan. B. II, 60-61; Tehillim 106, 454; ShR 23.7; Ekah (Knn’rtS) 24. According to another legend, God silenced the song of the angels with the words: ‘‘The work of My hands is drowning in the sea, and ye wish to chant songs!” See Megillah 10b; Sanhedrin 39b (“God does not rejoice at the punishment of the sinners”); PK 29, 189a; Yal- kut II, 940 (from an unknown source; the word ItmD is not found in the editio princeps, and its insertion in later editions is unjustifiable, as this Haggadah does not occur in Midrash Mishle which is designated by Yalkut as enm in the part of that work belonging to Prov.; it is perhaps borrowed from Yelammedenu) ; R. Solomon ben ha-Yatom, 120, based on an unknown Midrash (comp. Chajes, XXX); Zohar I, 57b, 61b, and II, 170b; see also Mekilta Shirah 5, 34b. PK, loc. cit.y is the source for the statement made by many codifiers (see, e.g., Bet Yosef, Orah Hayyim 490) that the entire Hallel is recited only on the first day of Passover because on the seventh day the Egyptians were drowned. Concerning the song of the angels which follows that of Israel, see Midrash Tannaim, 71; Yerushalmi Sukkah 5, 55b; vol. I, p. 17, and II, p. 373. An unknown Midrash quoted by Hadar, Exod. 15.8, speaks of the song chanted by the water at the drowning of the Egyptians. This statement is very likely based upon a mis¬ understanding of Onkelos, ad loc.; see Mekilta Shirah 6, 40a. See Index, s.v.‘‘ Angels, Song of”; “Water, the Song of”. The very angels who counselled God against the creation of man (see vol. I, p. 53) descended from heaven to listen to the song chanted by Israel, and then returned to their place to sing their song of praise to God; Tosefta Sotah6.5. Comp. vol. VI, 397, note 32.
61 Wa-Yosha‘ 40-41, which, in the main, follows older sources (comp, references cited in note 25 on vol. II, pp. 257-258, and add PK, 47, 189a-189b; BHM VI, 38; Haggadat Teman 35, which reads: The clean animals suckled the male children of the Hebrews); PRE 42; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.2; ShR 23.18.
62 Mekilta Shirah 1, 34a; Mekilta RS 56; Shir 1.15 and 4.1; Yalkut I, 241, giving Mekilta as source, but this passage is not found in our texts of this Midrash; ShR 23.9. Comp, the following note.
6J Mekilta Shirah 1, 35a, Mekilta RS 57 (better text); Sotah, Mishnah 5.4; Tosefta 6.3; Yerushalmi 5,20c; Babli 30b. The manner
12
Moses in the Wilderness
[64-75
of reciting the Hallel is, according to the sources quoted above, the same as the song at the Red Sea; comp. Elbogen Studien z. Gesch. d. jtid. Gottesdienstes 57. According to Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 527, on Hosea 11, and ShR 22.8, Moses composed the song and the people sang it; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 338-339. ShR differs from the old source (comp, note 59) also in this respect that it declares the song at the Red Sea to have been the first ever sung in God’s honor.
4* Mekilta Shirah 1, 35a; Sotah, Tosefta 6.4; Yerushalmi 6, 29c; Babli 30b; Tehillim 8, 77; Zohar II, 60a. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 90.
64 Mekilta Shirah 3, 37a; Shir 2.14, 3.7, and 4.3; Zohar II, 60a. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 106.
66 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.18. According to this authority verse 18 concludes the song, whereas others consider verse 19 as the end. See Mekilta RS 70-71, where the nineteen verses of the song are said to correspond to the nineteen benedictions of the ‘Amidah (according to Babylonian ritual); Lekah Exod., loc. cit., and 20.11.
4 ? Wa-Yosha' 55.
48 Kohelet 1.9. Comp. vol. II, p. 302.
49 Abkir in Yalkut I, 241.
Mekilta Shirah 10, 44a; Mekilta RS 71; PRE 42. According to Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 34, the song was chanted by mixed choirs composed of men and women, whereas the Rabbis strongly disapprove of mixed choirs; see e. g., Sotah 48a. Comp, also Philo, De Vita Contemplativa, 11, concerning the mixed choirs among the Essenes.
71 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.21.
7a ShR 24.2; Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 44a; Mekilta RS 71-72. It is stated in the Haggadah that the Israelites brought along with them from Egypt an idol which they worshipped (or kept?) for a long time; see Mekilta Beshallah 3, 29b; PK 11, 99a; Sanhedrin 103b, where this idol is declared to be identical with that made by Micah; Pesahim 117a (on ’32a nDiy see Responsen der Geonim, No. 119, pp. 86- 88, and it is to be corrected as suggested by Lebrecht, Kritische Lese, 23-35); Yerushalmi Sukkah 4, 54c; ARN 34; Sifre N., 84; Tan. B. IV, 79, and V, 25; Shir 1.4; ShR 41.1; Tehillim 101, 427. Comp, note 127 on vol. IV, p. 49; Comp. vol. VI, p. 375 and Index, s.v. “Baalbek”.
7 3 Abot 5.4. On the ten temptations see note 708.
7« Tan. B. II, 63; this very likely is the source of Sekel 205; comp, note 55.
7s Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 44b where the text is to be corrected in accordance with Mekilta RS 72; ShR 24.4.
13
76-82]
The Legends of the Jews
76 Tan. B. II, 63-64. This legend is related to the one forming the basis for the Apocryphal work “Daniel and the Dragon”; see note 112 on vol. IV, p. 338.
77 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1,44b; Tan. B. II, 63; Shir 1.4. Comp, vol. II, p. 375.
78 ShR 24.4; Wa-Yosha‘ 46, which reads: The snakes stretched themselves out in order to allow Israel to pass over them as over a bridge. See reference given in note 241 on vol. II, pp. 374-375.
77 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 45a; Mekilta RS 72. Concerning the sweet waters of the Red Sea see vol. Ill, p. 22.
80 Philo, Moses, 1.33. Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 1.2, likewise attempts to excuse the behavior of the people.
81 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 45b; Mekilta RS 72-73; Targum Yeru- shalmi 16.22. Comp, the following note.
83 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 45b, and Mekilta RS 72-73; in abridged form, Tan. B. II, 64-65, 124, and Tan. Beshallah 23-24. On the conception that God employs the same means in inflicting pain and in curing it, see also Aggadat Bereshit 66, 132. The Mekiltas and the sources depending on them contain different opinions as to the kind of tree which made the waters of Marah sweet, and it seems as if the Tannaim attempted to explain away the miracle, maintaining that the change in the taste of the waters brought about by the tree was due to natural causes. A rationalistic view similar to this is ex¬ pressed by Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 1.2, whereas Philo, Moses, 1.33, is not quite sure whether the tree caused the cure in a natural way, or whether “it was then created for that special purpose”. The Mekiltas offer also an allegorical explanation of the tree. According to this interpretation, the word “tree” represents the Torah which is “the tree of life”. This allegory presupposes the legend that this tree was identical with the tree of life, or, to be more accurate, a branch of that tree, It is true that our texts of the Mekilta have no trace of that legend, but Makiri, Prov. 3, 4b, quotes it from the Mekilta. Ps. -Philo 13A likewise writes: And He — God — showed him the tree of life, whereof he cut a piece, which he took and put into Marah, and the water of Marah became sweet. Closely connected with this legend is the one found in Zohar Hadash Beshallah, according to which Moses threw his rod, called here also py, tree or wood. This rod is said in other sources to have been taken from the tree of life; see ARN 157, ed. Schechter. Comp, also Kaufmann-Gedenkbuch 6 (Hebrew). An entirely different explanation of the events of Marah is found
14
Moses in the Wilderness
[83-88
in Zohar III, 124b, where it is stated that the bitter waters of Marah served the purpose to establish which of the women were chaste and which were not (comp. Num. 5.18, seq.), and therefore Moses wrote God’s Name on the tree (this is taken from Targum Yeru- shalmi, Exod. 15.25) in accordance with the law concerning a woman suspected of adultery (see Sotah 2.3). Ps. -Philo, loc. cit., and 21A asserts that the waters of Marah “followed them in the desert for forty years, going up with them into the hills and coming down with them to the plains.” In another passage, 12C, ps.-Philo, in agreement with rabbinic and other sources, makes the same statement concerning “the well” (of Miriam), and the suggestion may be hazarded that the first passage contains an interpolation by a copyist who confused “the well”, which is very frequently spoken of in Hebrew sources as D’lD mtO (the well of Miriam; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 50, seq.), with HID bw mfcO (the well of Marah). Comp, note 126.
83 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 46a; Mekilta RS 73-74; Targum Yeru- shalmi Exod. 15.25-26; Sanhedrin 56b; Seder ‘Olam 5. Comp, also DR 2.18 and Tan. B. II, 65.
8 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 45a; Mekilta RS 72; Baba Kamma 82a; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.22. As to the reading from the Torah, see vol. IV, p. 356. Comp, also the allegory concerning the tree quoted in note 82.
85 Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 1.3; Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 46b where
VpVlpD or ^lpD is to be read instead of in accordance with
Mekilta RS 74 and MHG II, 170.
86 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 46b; Mekilta RS 74; MHG II, 170-171. Josephus maintains that the quails episode took place at Elim (Exod. 19.12, seq.), where the people murmured on account of the dearth of water. His attempt to “improve” upon the legend, known to us from rabbinic sources, concerning the scant supply of water at Elim is rather a failure, as quails are a poor substitute for water. Philo, Moses, 1.34, against Josephus and the Midrashim, maintains that Elim was a place distinguished for ifs abundance of water and wealth of vegetation.
87 Philo, Moses, 1.34; comp, the following note, where references to rabbinic and patristic sources containing the same allegory are cited. Concerning the symbolic significance of the palm-tree, see BR 40.6 and the parallel passages given by Theodor.
88 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 46; Mekilta RS 74; MHG II, 171; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 15.26 and Num. 33.9; Tertullian, C.
is
89-94]
The Legends of the Jews
Marc., 4.24. The tragedian Ezekiel, 446 describes the appearance of a wonderful bird at Elim. The text is quite obscure, and it seems that the poet wanted to describe how it came about that the Israelites discovered the twelve wells at Elim. They followed the wonderful bird (phenix?), which, accompanied by many other birds — “for birds of every kind hovered in fear behind this stately form ” — flew over the wells. In legends birds are frequently spoken of as guides to water.
89 Philo, Moses, 1.35; Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 1.3-5. The Hag- gadah very frequently refers to the miracle in connection with the cakes they had taken along with them out of Egypt. See e.g., Seder ‘Olam 5; Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 46b; Mekilta RS 74; Kiddushin 38a (the cakes tasted like manna); ShR 25.4; Mekilta Bo 14, 15a; Tan. Bo 9; Shir 1.8. Since ordinarily one partakes of two meals a day, the sources quoted above speak of the sixty-one meals which the cakes provided from the evening meal of the day of the exodus, i. e., the fifteenth day of Nisan, till the fifteenth day of Iyar. Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 1.3, remarks that the provision they took along with them out of Egypt became exhausted after thirty days, whereas the rabbinic sources emphasize the fact that they took food of one meal that lasted them for a month.
90 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 1, 47a, the text of which is to be corrected in accordance with Mekilta RS 74. The M-ekilfias quote an opinion according to which the Israelites spoke the truth when they declared that they enjoyed plenty of food in Egypt. As slaves of the royal household, they were supplied with food in plenty free of charge. For the status of Israel in Egypt see note 164 on vol. II, p. 334. On the three days of darkness see vol. II, p. 345, and vol. Ill, p. 390.
91 Philo, Moses 1.36.
9 3 ShR 25.4-5. That the manna, the well, and the other heavenly gifts which Israel received in the wilderness were rewards for Abraham 's kindness and piety is very frequently mentioned in the Haggadah; see Tosefta Sotah 4.2-6; Baba Mezia 86b; BR 48.10; Mekilta Beshallah (Knrrns), 25a; WR 24.8; PR 14, 57a; BaR 14.2; Kohelet 11.1; Tan. B. I, 87; ER 12.68.
93 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 2, 47a-47b; Mekilta RS 75; Sifre N., 89; Abkir in Yalkut I, 258; Yoma 76a; Sifre Z., 198; comp, also Philo, Leg. Allegor., 56.
9 4 PRE 3; Yerahmeel 1.3. The prevalent opinion, however, is that the manna was created in the twilight between the sixth day and the Sabbath; see Abot 5.6; Sifre D., 355; and the numerous references
16
Moses in the Wilderness
[95-101
cited in note 99 on vol. I, p. 83. Luria’s suggestion, PRE, ad loc., to read nUPDPn ]’3 instead of ’3tPn 0V3 is not acceptable. It is obvious that the view of this Midrash is that the “bread of the angels” was created on the very same day on which the angels themselves were created (see vol. I, p. 16). Comp, also Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 16.15, and the following note.
95 Tan. B. II, 67; this is the source of Makiri Ps. 78. 26. The idea that the manna is the bread of the angels is based on Ps. 78.25; see Septuagint, ad loc.', Wisdom 16.20; Yoma 75a, where this interpreta¬ tion of D’T3N on^ is maintained by R. Akiba. The colleague of the lattfer, R. Ishmael, however, strongly objects to the view that angels partake of food (comp, note 143 on vol. I, p. 243), and hence the change of “bread of the angels” to “bread prepared by angels” or “bread prepared in the place inhabited by angels”, i. e., in heaven. Comp. Targum Ps., loc.cit. See also vol. II, p. 173; vol. Ill, p. 117; Sibyl., proem 87, which reads: They will partake of the sweet bread coming from the starry heaven.
96 Hagigah 12b.
99 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 4, 50b; Mekilta RS 78. In view of the statement in PK 5, 49b, and BR 48.10, one is inclined to assume that in the Mekiltas the expression ton oViy1? is used inaccurately instead of HU1? Tny1?, i.e., the messianic times; see reference to Sibyl, at the end of note 95.
98 Tehillim 78, 345; Tan. B. II, 67. In these sources the two interpretations of O’TaN (Ps. 78.25) “the mighty”, i.e., angels, and
“remaining in the body” — are blended together; comp. Yoma
75b; note 95; vol. Ill, pp. 246 and 278.
99 Tan. B. II, 14 and 61 (text is corrupt); ShR 25.3; Yoma 75a; Sifre N., 89; Sifre Z., 197-198; Tosefta Sotah 4.3; Wisdom 16.21; Ephraem I, 218. See also Josephus, Antiqui.,l\\, 1.6; Recognitiones, 1, 35; ER 12.60; BHM VI.39; vol. Ill, p. 65.
*0° Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 3, 48b-49a; Mekilta RS 76; Tehillim 76, 346. The grains of the manna looked like pearls, and the ground
upon which it fell was like a golden table; Yoma 75a.
Sifre N., 89; Sifre Z., 198; Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 3, 48b-49a; Mekilta RS 76. As to the meaning of D’DDIN in Mekilta, loc. cit., see Low in Hoffmann- Festschrift. 119-120, who takes it to be a cor¬ rupt form of D’DIpDN “threshold”. The Bodleian MS. of the Mekil¬ ta has D’SDN, and a Genizah fragment of that Midrash in the same library reads □”BDN.
17
1 02-1 09]
The Legends of the Jews
103 Tan. B. II, 67; Sifre N., 89, and Sifre, Z., 197. A somewhat different view is found in Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 47b; Mekilta RS 75. Yoma 75a reads: For the pious the manna fell at the door of their tents; ordinary men had to go to the field and gather it; the wicked found it only after a laborious search.
10 3 Midrash Tannaim, 191; Tan. B. II, 66-67; TargumYerushalmi Exod. 16.21 (read perhaps N’DDy ’U instead of '3); Abkir in
Yalkut I, 258, whose text of Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 2 (beginning) reads ,□3*7 ’INT j’N, which is in agreement with the Bodleian MS. of that Midrash, and Mekilta RS 75. See also Lekah, Exod. 16.21, according to which Targum Yerushalmi, loc. cit., is to be emended to ’an I’TIDl. Zohar II, 191b asserts that even the mixed
multitude could not partake of the manna.
10 ■* Yoma 76a; Tehillim 23, 201; Tan. B. II, 66-67; Mekilta Wa- Yassa' 3, 49a-49b; Mekilta RS 77.
105 Tan. B. II, 66; Yelammedenu No. 51 = BHM VI 87-88; Abkir in Yalkut I, 258; Tosefta Sota 4.3.
106 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 3, 49b; Mekilta RS 77; Yoma 76a. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 73.
107 Yoma 75a, based very likely on Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 5, 51a, the correct text of which is found only in Mekilta RS 79. For the text of the Babli passage see Rabbinovicz, ad loc., and R. Bahya on Exod. 16.31, who seems to have had the reading given by Rabbinovicz. Lekah and Hadar, on the other hand, have the same text as our editions. See also Zohar II, 63a
108 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 2, 47b, and 4-5, 50~51a; Mekilta RS 75 and 78-79; Tan. B. 67-68. Tosafot on ‘Erubin38b, caption I’ttl, maintain that according to some Midrashim one would have to as¬ sume that the manna did descend on the holy days; but the Tosafists, it seems, failed to establish their view. — As to the phrase “the new world”, see the Apocalypse of Baruch 32.6. Concerning the manna as the food of the pious in the world to come, see vol. Ill, p. 44.
1 0 > Shabbat 118b. It is presupposed here that the commandment concerning the observance of the Sabbath was revealed at Alush, the place where the manna descended for the first time. This view is explicitly stated in Yerushalmi Yom Tob 2, 61a, and DR 3.1, whereas according to another opinion, the commandment concerning the Sab¬ bath was given at Marah; see vol. Ill, p. 39; Seder ‘Olam 5; Yerushalmi, loc. cit., and references cited in note 83. The statement, Sifre Z., 66, that the Israelites observed one Sabbath only, very likely refers
n
Moses in the Wilderness
[110-113
to the first Sabbath they had observed at Marah before they arrived at Alush; comp, also Tehillim 92, 402. A Haggadah, which seems to be another version of the one given in the text, reads: If the Israelites would but observe one Sabbath, they would forthwith be redeemed from exile; see Shabbat, loc. tit.; Yerushalmi Ta'anit 1, 64a; Tehillim 95, 420; ShR 25.12; WR 3.1. See also the very interesting collection, of midrashic sayings (among them quotations from unknown sources) on the observance of the Sabbath as leading to redemption, in Shibbale Ha-Leket 96—97. That some Israelites desecrated the very first Sabbath was partly the fault of Moses who failed to communicate the law of Sabbath in proper time; Tan. B. II, 67. Comp, the follow¬ ing note.
110 Tan. B. II, 67; Tan. Tezawweh 11; Mekilta RS 78; ShR 25. 10. In the last-named source, as well as in WR 13.1, it is stated that Moses forgot to communicate in due time the laws of Sabbath to the people (see Exod. 16.23). This negligence on his part was due to his indignation and excitement on account of the wicked action of Dathan and Abiram. On other occasions, too, anger had a bad effect on Moses (comp. vol. Ill, pp. 192 and 413); this should serve as a warning to all to avoid anger, since even “the wisest of the wise” neglected his duty in time of anger. Comp, note 862. — As to the worms which be¬ trayed the sinners, comp. Targum Yerushalmi and Midrash Aggada, on Deut. 21.8. A rather confused account of this legend is also found in the Koran 2.67.
111 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 6, 51b, and Mekilta RS 80. Comp, vol. Ill, p. 7.
113 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 5, 51b; Mekilta RS 80; Shekalim 6,49c. For further details concerning “the concealed objects”, see vol. Ill, p. 161; vol. IV, pp. 24, 234, 282, 320, seq., and 350. The oldest form of this legend knows only of three concealed objects which Elijah will restore; these are: three jugs, one filled with manna, another with water from the well of Miriam (this is how D’a, Mekilta, loc. tit., is to be understood; m3 ’D of our editions is a later emendation; comp. PRK 32 a), and the third with the sacred oil. The rpccrcrd aij^ara in Sibyl. 2.188 correspond literally to the D’JD’D nvbv of the Midrashim quoted above. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 303.
113 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 5,51b; Sifre D., 304; Seder ‘Olam 9 and 10; Tosefta Sotah 11.10; Ta'anit 9a; Tan. B, IV, 2-3; Tan. Bemidbar 2; Mishle 14, 74; BaR 1.2 and 14.20 (towards the end); Shir 4.5; Hash- kem 19b; Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 15, 554, and 578, as well as
19
114-122]
The Legends of the Jews
‘ Aruk, s.v. DimSN; PRK, 34b. Slight traces of this legend are to be found also in Philo’s remark {Moses, 1.36) that God caused the manna to descend in order to honor the leader (Moses), etc. Ps. -Philo 21A writes: “And afterwards, when Moses was dead, the manna ceased to come down... And these are three things which God gave His people for the sake of three persons: the well of the water of Marah, for Miriam’s sake (see note 82); the pillar of cloud, for Aaron’s sake; the manna, for Moses’ sake. And when these three came to an end, these three gifts were taken away.” The agreement of ps. -Philo with the sources quoted above is to be noticed even in the phraseology.
114 Sode Raza in Yalkut Reubeni Exod. 16.14; comp. Zohar II, 191b.
115 Midrash Shir 36a. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 53.
116 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 2-3, 47b-48b; Mekilta RS 76; Sifre N., 97; Yoma 75b, where the different kinds of quails are described. The Mekiltas are of the opinion that Exod. 16 13, seq., and Num.
II. 31, seq., refer to the same event (see Friedman on Mekilta Wa- Yassa' 3, note 5), whereas ER 12.60 maintains that, as a reward for Abraham’s hospitality (see vol. Ill, p. 43), God caused the quails to come down twice to the camp of Israel, once before the revelation at Sinai (see Exod., loc. cit.), and a second time after the revelation (see Num., loc. cit.). Philo, Moses, 1.37, presupposes that the quails came down regularly during Israel 's wanderings through the wilderness. See also Sekel 212, and vol. Ill, pp. 245, 253, seq.
11 f Yoma 75a-75b.
1 1 8 Berakot 48b. The prayer given in the text is the first bene¬ diction of Grace after Meals according to the Ashkenazic ritual. See also Hasidim 399, which reads: Before they ate the manna they pronounced the benediction: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who giveth bread from heaven.” This is a slightly modified form of the benediction on bread, substituting ‘heaven’ for ‘earth’.
119 Mekilta Beshallah (NnirnS), 23a; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 7 and 48.
120 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 6, 52a; Mekilta RS 80-81; Tan. Be¬ shallah 22; ShR 26.2; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 17.1.
121 Tan. Beshallah 22. See Mekilta Bo (NniTriD), 2a, and vol.
III, pp. 125, 283.
122 Mekilta Wa-Yassa‘ 6, 51a-52b. Tan. Beshallah 21; ShR 26.2; Mekilta RS 81. In this connection the Midrashim just quoted remark, with reference to Exod. 17.6, that God indicated to Moses
20
Moses in the Wilderness
[123-132
the place where he should look for the presence of the Shekinah, namely, where the rock shows the imprint of a human foot. This strange state¬ ment is very likely the oldest reference to the religious significance of the dolmens, whose form is described here as being similar to that of the human foot (toes?). Is O^D (“ladder”) perhaps to be read instead of 0“TN? Comp, note 271.
123 ShR 26.2. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 311 (end of paragraph).
12 « Mekilta Wa-Yassa’ 6, 52b; Tan. Beshallah 22; ShR 26.2. See Index, s.v. "Moses, Rod of”.
125 Seder ‘01am 5; Tan. B. IV, 127; comp, also references given in note 113.
126 Mekilta Wa-Yassa ‘ 5, 51b, and parallel passages given in note 311. The name “Miriam’s well” is not found in tannaitic sources, but is of frequent occurrence in later literature; comp., e.g., Shabbat 35a; WR 22.4; BaR 18.22; Tehillim 24, 206. Comp, also note 84.
1 2 3 PRE 3; comp, note 94; vol. I, pp. 324 and 349, as well as vol. II, p. 291.
128 Yalkut I, 764, on Num. 21.18, excerpted, perhaps, from Ye- lammedenu; see Likkutim {ed. Grunhut), IV, 58, and vol. I, p. 324.
129 Tosefta Sukkah 3.11-13, and a somewhat different version in the unknown Midrash cited in Yalkut I, 426; BaR 1.2 and 19.26; Tan. B. IV, 3 and 127-128; Tan. Bemidbar 2 and Hukkat 21 Onkelos and Targum Yerushalmi Num. 21.16, seq .; Berakot 54b; Zohar II, 191b (the source of the last-named, if not Yalkut, loc. cit., is the Midrash itself cited there); vol. Ill, pp. 338-339. I Cor. 10.4 has an allegory of this legend, wehereas ps. -Philo in 12C speaks of the well of water following them in the wilderness for forty years, and in 13A he refers to the well that followed them in the wilderness for forty years, going up with them into the hills and coming down into the plains. Comp, note 84. Ephraem 1, 263 is either based on ps.-Philoor on Jewish tradition communicated to him orally. Comp. Grunhut, Likkutim, II, lOa-lOb, and IV, 58b; Meleket ha-Mishkan 97-98.
139 Tan. B. IV, 127-128; Tan. Hukkat 21; BaR 19.26; Midrash in Yalkut I, 426; Yelammedenu in ‘ Aruk, s.v. 'DDOI. Comp, preceding note and Grunhut, Likkutim, IV, 49b.
1 3 1 Tan. B. Ill, 74-75, which has the additional statement that the Israelites will enjoy this gift in messianic times, and if not for their sins, they would have continued to enjoy it after they entered the Holy Land.
132 Tehillim 23, 200; Midrash Shir 36b, as quoted in Yalkut
21
133-136]
The Legends of the Jews
II, 588, on Song of Songs 5; Yelammedenu in ‘ Aruk, s. v. fpIN (comp. Griinhut, Likkutim, IV, 44b); Shir 4.11; PK 10, 93b. In Shir 4.14 and in the sources cited in note 115 it is the manna which is said to have served as a perfume. On other rival claims between the manna and Miriam’s well, see vol. Ill, p. 65, 1. 13; concerning the tastes of these heavenly gifts, see note 113 and vol. Ill, p. 44. Ephraem I, 287 A, follows the Haggadah which favors the well.
1 3 3 Midrash Shir 37a. Sifre N., 95, asserts that the well contained “fat fish.”
13,1 Shabbat 35a; Yerushalmi Kil’ayim 9, 32c (bottom); WR 22.4; Kohelet 5.8; Tehillim 24, 206; Tan. B. IV, 128; Tan. Hukkat 21; BaR 19.26. In all these sources it is presupposed that the well like the manna (see vol. Ill, p 44) will return in the time to come, and in PRE 51 we have a detailed description of the various services which the well will render at that time. This, in the main, follows the Kaggadah recorded in vol. Ill, p. 53. Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 15, on Josh. 5, as well as II, 378, on Zechariah 9, is closely related to PRE. See also Tosefta Sukkah 3.3-10; Sanhedrin 100a; Tan. Pinehas 14; the statement, in Tan. and in Sanhedrin, concerning the potion of healing in the time to come refers to the water of Miriam ’s well, as is explicitly asserted in Tosefta, loc. cit. See further Kaftor wa-Ferah, 139.
135 BaR 18.22; WR 22.4; Kohelet 5.8. A legend, mentioned by many medieval authors, maintains that at the termination of the Sabbath Miriam’s well moves about from river to river from well to well. It is therefore recommended to draw water at this time when one might be fortunate to get the “healing water” of the miraculous well. See Toratan shel Rishonim I, 59; Ha-Orah 230; Orehot Hayyim Shabbat 69a. We very likely have here a legend in which different elements are blended together. The drawing or drinking of water at the termination of the Sabbath is undoubtedly connected with the view that it is dangerous to drink water immediately before the termina¬ tion of the Sabbath. The reason for the latter is because at that time the souls of the departed take their last sip before returning to Gehenna (comp. vol. V, p. 143, note 36), when the respite granted to them during the Sabbath is at an end; see Tehillim 11, 102, and references given by Buber. The story (John 5.4) about the pool and its heavenly power is very likely connected with our legend about Miriam’s well. See also Tertullian De Anima 50.
136 PK 2, 21a-21b; PR 12, 52a, and 13, 55a-55b; Tan. B. I, 41, and II, 70-71; Tan. Beshallah 25 and Ki-Teze 9; Shabbat 118a (con-
22
Moses in the Wilderness
[137-140
cerning Amalek’s attack on Israel as a punishment for the desecration of the Sabbath, see note 109); Mekilta RS 81-82; PRE 43; ShR 26.2; Sanhedrin 106a; Berakot 5,6; Mekilta Amalek 1, 53a-53b. Comp, also Yalkut I, 938 (end). Concerning the seven clouds, see vol. II, p. 374.
137 PK 3, 26b; Tan. B. II, 71, and V, 40. The second etymology of the name is also found in Philo, Leg. Allegor., 2.66, and in De Cong- Quaer. Erud. Causa, 11.
138 Midrash quoted in Da' at, Exod. 17.18; a somewhat different version is given in Hadar: Esau made his son Eliphaz take an oath that he would kill Jacob and thus regain the birthright which Jacob had acquired through guile. Timna, the wife of Eliphaz, how¬ ever, dissuaded him from attempting to take Jacob’s life, pointing out to him the danger involved in measuring his strength against that of a hero like Jacob. Eliphaz followed his wife’s advice, and had to content himself with taking away Jacob’s possessions (see vol. I,pp. 345-347) without attempting his life. Esau, disappointed in his son, adjured his grandson Amalek to kill Jacob, but he, too, was persuaded by his mother Timna to let Jacob alone, pointing out to him that the descendants of Abraham were destined to serve the Egyptians, and the killing of Jacob would transfer the servitude upon Esau’s children. As long as Israel was in Egypt, Amalek held his peace. But no sooner had the Israelites completed their term of servitude and left Egypt than they were attacked by Amalek. Sabba, Exod., loc. cit. 77a, on the other hand, quotes a Midrash according to which it was Timna who incited her son Amalek to attack Israel. See also vol. I, pp. 379 and 422—423; vol. Ill, pp. 272,331, and 411; ER 24, 125-126, where it is stated that Eliphaz is to be blamed for having neglected the education of his son Amalek, who, unrestrained by his father, became wicked. Lekah Gen. 27.45 and Exod. 17.8 reads: Eliphaz, a pious and righteous man, refused to obey his father’s command concerning Jacob. See also DR 2.29; Shu’aib, Zakor, 37c; Sekel 321; note 318 on vol. I, p. 421.
13 » Mekilta Shirah 11, 43a; Tan. Ki-Teze 9; comp. vol. Ill, p. 11.
1 1° Mekilta Amalek 1, 53a; Mekilta RS 81-82; Midrash Tannaim 170; Tan. B. V, 40-41 ; Tan. Ki-Teze 9; PK 3, 26b; Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 12.1; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 16.8, where sixteen miles are given as the distance between Amalek’s place of settlement and the en¬ campment of the Israelites. The army of Amalek consisted of four hundred thousand warriors (Gorion III, 27; Yashar Shemot, 147a, and Dibre ha-Yamim 11, give different numbers), each of whom re-
23
141-144]
The Legends of the Jews
ceived great payment (Aggadat Shir 5, 46; text is corrupt). The war took place in the month of Iyar; Aggadat Esther 29; comp. vol. Ill, 272, and IV, p. 407. The ingratitude of Amalek is to be explained in accordance with the legend given in vol. I, p. 421.
PK 3, 27a-27b; PR 12, 52a-52b; Tan. B. V, 41-42 (read n’n mr:);Tan. Ki-Teze 9-10; Sifre D., 296; Midrash Tannaim 170; PRE 44; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 17.8 and Num. 11.1, as well as Deut. 25.19. On the registers of the Jews kept in the Egyptian archives, see Mekilta Beshallah 1, 27; on the sinful Danites, see vol. Ill, pp. 171, 223, 232, 233, 244, 303, and vol. IV, p. 112; Sekel 321. Comp, also note 72, and Index, s. v. “Dan, Tribe of’’. The Christian legend accordingly declares the anti-Christ to be of the tribe of Dan. See Bousset, Antichrist, Index, s. v. “Dan”. Even the early tannaitic sources use Amalek as a designation for Rome (see note 147), and in the legend Amalek ’s sneering at the Abrahamic covenant characterizes the attitude of the Romans (especially during the Hadrian persecutions) towards this very important ceremony; see notes 19 and 25 on vol. I, p. 315. In later literature Amalek, i. e., Rome, stands for Christianity; see Zunz, Synagogale Poesie, 439, and Liter aturgeschichte, 620. In the Kabbalah Amalek = Sammael = evil inclination; comp. Zohar III, 289b. It is highly interesting to observe that Justin, Dialogue 131, is ac¬ quainted with this use of the name Amalek. As to the refusal of the clouds to protect the sinners and those that were levitically impure, see Sifre N., 83; Targum on Song of Songs 2.5; vol. I, p. 242; vol. II, p. 375.
141 PR 12, 49a-50a, 53a, and 13, 54a-54b; PK 3, 28a-28b; Tan. B. 5, 43; Tan. Ki-Teze 10; Mekilta RS 87; Aggadat Esther 65, which reads: Only when the descendants of Rachel participated in war were the Israelites victorious. Comp. vol. I, p. 369; vol. IV, pp. 240- 241. As to the contest between Joseph and Esau, see BR 99.2 and ShR 26.3.
14 3 Mekilta Amalek 1, 53b; Mekilta RS 82; ShR 26.3; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 17.9.
144 Midrash quoted by R. Bahya on Exod. 16.9 and Menot ha- Levi, 69a. Comp, the similar legend in Yerushalmi Rosh ha-Shanah 3, 59a, to the effect that Amalek, who was a great magician, selected, for the attack on Israel, those of his warriors whose birthday was on the day of the battle. The reason for this was because “one is not easily slain on his birthday.” Moses, however, confounded the course of the heavenly bodies (ni^fD), and thus frustrated Amalek ’s device.
24
Moses in the Wilderness
[145-150
The last statement refers to Moses’ causing the sun to stand still (see reference in note 146), so that Amalek’s warriors were not cer¬ tain as to the actual time of their birthday. See also We-Hizhir Exod. 34a; Yashar Shemot 147a; Dibre ha-Yamim 11.
145 Mekilta Amalek 1, 54a-54b; Mekilta RS 82-83; Targum Yeru- shalmi Exod. 17.10-13; PRE 44. Moses’ hesitation is recorded in Exod. 17.9, where it is said that he waited a day before he under¬ took to attack Amalek. The haggadic explanation of the raising and the lowering of the hands (found also in Mishnah Rosh ha-Shanah 3.8) would seem to be directed against the Christian view, according to which it was a symbolic representation of the cross (see Barnabas 12.2; Justin, Dialogue, 90 and 91), but Philo, Moses, 1.39, offers an explanation which is similar to that of the Rabbis. Philo’s other statement that Moses, before going to war, was sprinkled with the waters of purification is based on the correct assumption that in ancient Israel warriors had to be purified before going to war; see 1 Sam. 21.6 and comp, also the legends, vol. Ill, p. 57, line 17, note 849 and Index,s. v. “Purification”; Sifre D., 258. The statement of Bahir (quoted as Midrash by Nah- manides and Shu'aib on Exod. 17.11) that Moses lowered his hands because one should not pray with raised hands longer than three hours is perhaps intended to discourage this form of prayer which is so much in favor among Christians. On Joshua’s war against Amalek, see vol. IV, pp. 3-4; concerning Hur see vol. Ill, p. 121; vol. IV, p. 158.
146 ER 2, 10; Tehillim 19, 167; Tan. Tezawweh 9; Sifre D., 306, reads The sun stood still as soon as Moses said: “Give ear, ye heavens.” Comp, also note 947 and note 43 in vol. IV, p. 11. Con¬ cerning the different occasions when Moses caused the sun to stand still, see below note 245
147 Tan. B. V, 41 and 45; Tan. Ki-Teze 9 and 11; PK 3, 27a; PR 12, 52a; Mekilta Amalek 2, 55a, and 56a-56b; Mekilta RS 84-85; Tehillim 9, 86; Haserot in Batte Midrashot I, 32a. Comp, also the quotation from the Yerushalmi (not in our editions) in Bet Yosef, Orah Hayyim 137. In all these sources Amalek represents Rome; hence the reference to the destruction of the Temple by him; but comp, vol. Ill, p. 332 on the destruction of the first Temple by Amalek.
148 Mekilta Amalek 2, 56b; Mekilta RS 84; Tan. B, V, 44; Tan. Ki-Teze 11; PK 3, 28b; PR 12, 51a.
149 ER 24, 126. Comp, note 138.
•so Mekilta Amalek 2, 56a, the text of which is to be corrected in accordance with the reading in Mekilta RS 84 and Bodleian MS.
25
151-154]
The Legends of the Jews
The conception “that God joins Himself unto His people when it suffers and when it rejoices” (vol. II, p. 88) is of frequent occurence; see Mekilta Bo 14, 16a; Mekilta RS 27; Sifre N., 84 and 161; Megillah 29a; Ta'anit 16a; Yerushalmi Sukkah 4, 54c; Ta'anit 1, 64a; Sanhedrin 4 (end); ShR 15.12 and 23.5; WR 9.3; BaR 2.2 and 7 (towards the end); DR 4.1; Ekah 1, 92 and 2, 110-111; ER 17, 89; Shemuel 4, 55; Tehillim 9, 89; 27, 223; 91, 401; Tan. B. Ill, 68 and 61, as well as IV, 9; Tan. Ahare 12; Aggadat Bereshit 71, 140; PK 5, 47a; Shir 4.7 and 5.2; BHM VI, 37. Comp, also vol. II, pp. 118, 187, 303, 374; vol. IV, p. 312. In practically all these passages two originally dif¬ ferent conceptions are blended together: the primitive conception that the suffering of a people indicates the impotence of its god, and the mystic-religious one that the essence of God manifests itself in the history of mankind, and especially in the history of Israel. Ac¬ cordingly God participates in the sorrows and joys of Israel. In Mekilta Bo, loc. cit., and Sanhedrin 6.5, the second conception is ex¬ pressed in an individualistic manner, and it is accordingly stated that the suffering of an individual, even of a sinner who suffers for his sins, causes God to grieve; comp, note 60. Later mystics frequently speak of the “exile of the Shekinah” {Galut ha-Shekinah) which each and every Jew ought to bewail more than any national calamity or his own mis¬ fortune.
151 ShR 27.5; PK 3, 21a and 22a; Tan. B. II, 70; Shemuel 12, 81. It is said: Jethro was in Amalek’s army, and after the defeat of the latter, he came to Moses. See also Mekilta Yitro 1, 56b-57a; Zebahim 116a; Yerushalmi Megillah 72b (bottom); ER 5, 30, where three different views are given concerning the time of Jethro’s arrival: 1) he came immediately after the Red Sea had been crossed; 2) after the defeat of Amalek; 3) after the revelation at Sinai. Concerning Jethro’s position at Pharaoh’s court, see vol. II, pp. 254, 296; vol. Ill, pp. 11 and 74. See more details con¬ cerning Jethro vol. II, pp. 287-291.
1 5 3 Mekilta Yitro 1, 58a; Mekilta RS 87.
153 Tan. B. II, 73; Targum Yerushalmi and Midrash Aggada Exod. 18.6-7; Mekilta RS 87. Concerning the clouds which enveloped the camp, see vol. II, p. 375; vol. Ill, p. 57.
154 Mekilta Yitro 1, 58a-58b; Mekilta RS 87; ER 5, 30; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 18.6; Tan. Yitro 6. See also Zohar II, 69b (Jethro brought his sons with him to make them proselytes to Judaism); Lekah Exod. 18.5, whose text of the Mekilta seems to have been
26
Moses in the Wilderness
[155-163
different from ours. On the idea of attracting proselytes by kindness, see the remarks of Tan. B. I, 63-64; DZ 1 ( = Yalkut I, 213); Batte Midrashot I, 45a. The Midrash quoted by R. Jacob of Coucy, SMG, positive precept 10, and negative precept 116, is identical with Tan., too. cit.
155 Mekilta Yitro 1, 58b; Mekilta RS 87 (the sentence about the importance of peace is taken from Perek ha-Shalom; comp. Reshit Hokmah end, who quotes it from that source), BHM III, 129.
156 Mekilta Yitro 1, 58b-59a; Mekilta RS 87-88; Sanhedrin 94a; Tan. B. II, 71-72; Tan. Yitro 7; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 18.8-11; Zohar II, 5a. Concerning the manna, the well, and the six gifts promised to Israel, see vol. Ill, pp. 44, 47, and note 132. Philo, De Ebriet., 11, seems likewise to assert that Jethro did not become a proselyte to Judaism prior to his visit to Moses. Comp, the different view found in DR 2.26, and vol. Ill, p. 289, according to which Jethro had abandoned idolatry even before Moses came to Midian. Mekilta and Sanhedrin 94a seem to assume that Jethro’s visit to Moses took place immediately after the Exodus, even before the crossing of the Red Sea; see note 151. As to the impossibility of escaping from Egypt, see note 3; Zohar III, 212a (the magic of Balaam made it impossible for anyone to escape); Shu'aib Wa-Era, 26d.
157 Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 3.1.
158 Mekilta Yitro 2, 59a; Mekilta RS 88; Sifre D., 38; Midrash Tannaim 30; Kiddushin 32b.
159 Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 3.1.
160 Lekah, Exod. 18.13; comp, also Pa'aneah ad loc.
161 Lekah Exod. 18.17.
163 Mekilta Yitro 2, 59b-60a; Mekilta RS 89-90. Concerning the seven qualifications of a judge, see Maimonides, Yad, Sanhedrin, 2.7, who very likely made use of an old source. Comp. Midrash Tan¬ naim 95.
l6s Sifre D., 11-13; Midrash Tannaim 6-8. Comp. vol. Ill, 248, seq., where the appointment of the seventy elders is described by the Haggadah in accordance with the rules governing the appoint¬ ment of judges. — The appellative “son of Amram” is a derogatory one; see vol. Ill, pp. 109, 110, 118, 176, 177, 178, 273, 297, 310, 312, 349, 384, 432, 464, 476, 479; vol. IV, pp. 305, 306, 309. Tehillim 11, 45, and BaR 18.17 cite the scripture passages where David is called “son of Jesse”, and remark that those who spoke of him in this manner
27
164-170]
The Legends of the Jews
intended to slight him. See also I Maccabees 16.15. — On the blessing of Moses see vol. Ill, pp. 187 and 454.
l6* Sifre D., 13-17; Midrash Tannaim 7-10. As to the number of the judges and officers, see Sanhedrin, Mishnah 1 (end); Babli 17b-18a; vol. Ill, p. 383, and vol. IV, p. 95. The number one hundred and twenty in Acts 1.15 is to be explained in accordance with Sanhed¬ rin, loc. cit. Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 4.1, in contrast to the view of the Rabbis, maintains that the people had to ratify the appointment made by Moses; but the Rabbis are of opinion that the people acted only in the capacity of advisers. Comp, also Philo, Moses, I, 29; vol. Ill, p. 155. In the tannaitic sources quoted above (as well as in ‘Erubin 100b; Alphabet R. Akiba 19; ShR 30.10; DR 1.10; Midrash Tannaim 95) it is stated that Moses did not succeed in finding men for office who combined all these qualifications (on the nature of these qualifications, see above note 162 and Hashkem 7-10) of the ideal judge as described by Jethro. On the respect due to a judge, see vol. Ill, p. 220.
165 Mekilta RS 90-91, which fs very likely taken from a version of Perek ha-Shalom different from ours; see Perek ha-Shalom in Reshit Hokmah, end( = BHM III, 125). See also Midrash Tannaim 97; Hashkem 5a-5b.
166 Mekilta Yitro 2, 60a, the text of which is to be corrected in accordance with Mekilta RS 91.
167 Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 4.2.
168 Sifre N., 78 and 80. See a similar remark with regard to the daughters of Zelaphehad in vol. Ill, p. 394.
169 Tehillim 78, 345-346; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 45-46. Concerning Jethro’s love for the Torah, see Sifre N., 78; Tan. Yitro 4; Sifre Z,, 74; Mekilta RS 91.
170 Sifre N., 78-80; Sifre Z., 76-78; Mekilta Yitro 2, 60a; Mekilta RS 91; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 18.27. Moses is described as king (of Israel) not only in the Midrashim quoted above, but also in many other passages; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 142, 153, 187, 188, 251, 286, 288, 296, 298, 384, 455. See also Midrash Tannaim 213; Tan. Beshallah 2; Tehillim 1,3, where Deut. 33.5 is referred to Moses, who is thus described as “king in Jeshurun.” The Hellenistic writers Demetrius and Philo, as well as Justus of Tiberias, call Moses the king of the Jews; see Schiirer, Geschichte (third edition) IV, 449. Comp, also Ibn Ezra on Gen. 35.31. — ToseftaBikkurim 1.2 and Yerushalmi 1, 64a, maintain
28
Moses in the Wilderness [171-175
that the descendants of Jethro enjoyed the legal status of pure blooded Israelites and not of proselytes. Comp, note 783.
171 Sifre N., 81, and D., 52; Sifre Z„ 70; ARN 35, 105; Targum Yerushalmi Num. 10.32; Midrash Tannaim 5; Mekilta Deut. 5. In the text (vol. Ill, p. 73, end of second paragraph) Benjamin is to be read instead of Judah.
172 Sifre Z., 76-77; Sifre N., 78, and D., 352; Mekilta Yitro 2 60a; Mekilta RS 91-92 (the descendants of Jethro abandoned their lucrative enterprises, and devoted themselves to the study of the Torah, supporting themselves by making pottery; comp. ARN 35, 105); Temurah 16a. Comp. vol. IV, p. 29.
177 Mekilta Yitro 2, 60b; Mekilta RS 91-92; Sifre N., 78; Sifre Z., 77; Tan. Wa-Yakhel 8; PR 40, 167b. In Mekilta RS 85 Jonadab the Rechabite is censured for his friendship with Jehu (see 2 Kings 10.15, seq.) but the text is very likely corrupt. The parrallel passage in ARN 9,42 (second version 17,36) proves that it is Jonadab the nephew of David (see 2 Sam. 13.3) who is described in the Mekilta as wise but wicked. For further details concerning the descendants of Jethro see vol. Ill, p. 380. — The Holy Land, the Temple, and the Davidic kingdom were given to the Israelites conditionally, and they lost them as soon as they sinned; but the Torah, the priesthood, and the distinc¬ tion of being called the Children of God were conferred upon the Israelites unconditionally. Israel therefore retained the latter gifts for ever. See Midrash Tannaim 39-40 and Ozar Midrashim I, 38-39 (read nKHp); but Mekilta Yitro 2, 60b, and Tehillim 132, 516, do not know of the last-named gift.
174 Tan. B. II, 74-75; PK 12, 103b and 106a; see also Midrash Aggada Exod. 18.27. A conflicting view maintains that Jethro’s visit to Moses took place before the revelation on Sinai; see note 151.
175 PK 12, 106a; Tan. B. II, 75. Medieval authorities quote the following legend from an unknown Midrash. While the Israelites were still in Egypt it was announced to them that fifty days after the exodus from Egypt the Torah would be revealed unto them. As soon as they were redeemed from bondage, they were so eager for the arrival of the promised day that they began to count the days, saying each day: “ Now we have one day less to wait for the revelation of the Torah.” To commemorate this counting, the Torah has prescribed to count the days from Passover to the Feast of Weeks (comp. Lev. 13.15-16), the so-called “Counting of the ‘Omer”. See Shibbale ha-Leket 210, 236; Orehot Hayyim 84a, 5; Abudrahim, Sefirat ha-
29
176-181] The Legends of the Jews
‘Omer; Shu'aib I, Pesah, 51c; Sabba, Emor 104c; comp. alsoR. Bahya Exod. 3.12.
176 PK 12, 104a and 106a-107a; Tan. B. II, 75-76; Shir 2.5; BHM 6.45; comp. vol. II, p. 374, and vol. Ill, p. 213, The Torah is personified in the legend, which accordingly narrates that the Torah rejoiced in the fact that it would be given to Israel. See vol. Ill,
p. 188.
177 Mekilta Rs 97; Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 64a (on the number of Israelites necessary in order that the Shekinah might dwell in their midst, to which reference is made in the Mekilta, see also Sifre N., 84; Yebamot 64a; Ketubot 17a; Baba Kamma 83a); Tan. Yitro 9; Tehillim 119, 490; Semahot 7; DR 7.8; WR 13.2; BR 70. 9; PR, 198a-198b; ER 23, 124-24, 125; Zohar II, 78b, and III, 22b. Just as the “recipients of the Torah” and the place of its revelation were predestined and selected for various reasons, even so was the time of the revelation. The Torah was to remain in heaven for a thousand generations after the creation (see Ps. 105.8), and in view of the fact that “nine hundred and seventy-four generations” had elapsed before Adam was created (see note 5 on vol. I, p. 4) , the time of Moses, the twen¬ ty-sixth generation after Adam, was the proper time for the revelation. See Zebahim 116a; Shabbat 88a.; Tan., loc. cit.; Tehillim 105, 449; Aggadat Bereshit 49, 100; BR 28.4 and the numerous parallel passages cited by Theodor on “the thousand generations”. Concerning the generation of the revelation, see also vol. Ill, pp. 109 and 313. — The time that elapsed from the creation till the revelation was the “time of Grace”, since mankind without the Torah as a guide could only be sustained by the grace of God. See Pesahim 118a; Tehillim 136,519.
178 PR 12, 106b, Tan. B. II, 74; BHM VI, 40; Ekah (Nnrrns) 20; Mekilta Bahodesh 1, 62a; Mekilta RS 94; Targum Yerushalmi 19.2; WR 9.9; PRE 41.
179 PK 12, 105a- 105b (rwVlPD n’m’mN “the number of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are divisible by three”, since it amounts to twenty-seven); Tan. B. II, 73; Tan. Yitro 10; Midrash ‘Aseret ha- Dibrot 41-42.
180 Shabbat 89a-89b; BHM VI, 90; Lekah, Exod. 19.18; Tan. IV, 7; Shir 4.4. Comp vol. II, p. 302.
1 8 1 Sifre D., 343, 142b; Midrash Tannaim 210; Mekilta Bahodesh 5, 67a, and 1, 62a; Mekilta RS 93; ‘Abodah Zarah 2b; ER 24, 122; EZ 11, 192; Hashkem 2b; WR 13.2; PK 5, 43b and 32, 199b-200a; PR 33, 142a; ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 68; Tan. B. Ill, 28, and V, 54-55;
30
Moses in the Wilderness
[182-184
Tan. Berakah 4; Sifre D., 311; Baba Kamma 38a; Ekah 3.123; BHM VI 39; Zohar II, 91b, and 191a-192b; 4 Ezra 7.20-210; Apocalypse of Baruch 48, 40; ps.-Jerome, Quaestiones in Jud. 5.4-5. The idea under¬ lying this widespread legend is that the heathen nations showed their unfitness to take upon themselves the yoke of the Torah by their im¬ moral and lawless conduct, which knew no restraint, not even the seven restrictions imposed upon the children of Noah (see Index, s. v. “No- achian Laws”), which are the minimum of laws necessary for the main¬ tenance of civilization. The people of the Torah is at the same time the boldest among the nations (as the dog is the boldest among the animals and the cock among the birds), ready to repel all attacks upon its teachings and doctrines; see Yom Tob 25b. Rashi, ad loc., takes this talmudic passage to mean that Israel was given the Torah, in order that, by its discipline, it might soften the “hardness” of the people that is the “hardest ” among the nations. This idea, though somewhat common in the rabbinic sources and in the New Testament (see e. g. Gal. 3.24), cannot be read into the passage of Yom Tob, loc. cit. — The six hundred and thirteen precepts of the Torah are frequently mentioned in the Talmudim and Midrashim, but are not found in tan- naitic sources. Sifre D., 76 (mSD'l) refers to the three verses of Deut. 12.23-25 which contains the prohibition against the use of blood, and is not to be emended to niXD 3'1-in, as is done by Friedmann, ad loc., while in the parallel passage (Midrash Tannaim 53) the word JYIKD after '3 is to be stricken out. In Mekilta Beshallah 5, 57a, J'nro is a later addition, as may be seen from the parallel passage in Sifre D., 343. MHG I, 226, has jn3£D a",-in in the dictum of the Tanna R. Eliezer the son of R. Jose ha-Galili. — Concerning the refusal of the nations to accept the Torah, see also vol. Ill, pp. 205, 341, 454, and vol. IV, p. 307.
1 8 2 Abkir in Yalkut I, 276; BHM VI, 40-41 ; ER 6,35, where Adam and Noah, too, are cited as examples of piety. On Joseph, see vol. II, p. 183, and vol. Ill, p. 201.
183 Targum and Tosefta Targum Jud. 5.5; Targum Ps. 68.16-17; BR 99.1; Tehillim 68, 318; PR 7, 27a; Mekilta Bahodesh 5, 66b; Yelam- medenu in Yalkut II, 47, and in Makiri Prov. 29, 85b; ' Aseret ha-Dibrot 66. On the reward of “the modest Sinai”, see also vol. Ill, p. 304.
184 Tehillim 68, 318; comp. vol. IV, p. 197. In the time to come God will cause the heavenly Jerusalem to descend upon these four mountains: Tabor, Hermon, Carmel and Sinai; see the quotation from an unknown Midrash (Yelammedenu?) in Makiri Is. 52, 195,
31
185-188]
The Legends of the Jews
and a similar statement in Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 319, on Isa. 2 (here, probably owing to a printer’s error, Hermon is missing, and the heavenly Jerusalem is substituted, as is often the case, by the Temple; see Vol. V, 292, note 141), as well as Zerubbabel (ed. Wertheim¬ er, 12a) according to which a fifth mountain, Lebanon, is to share this glory. Comp, also Tehillim, loc. cit.
185 BR 99.1;comp. vol. II, p. 303 on the “cleanliness” of the thorn bush. The revelation of the Torah did not take place in the land of Israel, but in the wilderness. By this God showed that the Torah was not given exclusively to Israel, but to all the inhabitants of the earth. For the same reason the Torah was not revealed secretly, but openly, in the presence of all mankind (comp. vol. Ill, p. 91); see Me- kilta Beshallah 1, 62a (DUIS =<pevcd;, “swindler”, i.e., acting in a stealthy manner), and 5, 67a; Midrash Tannaim 209. Comp, also Tan. B. IV, 7; Tan. Bemidbar 6; BaR. 1.7. According to Philo, De Decalogo, 1, the wilderness was selected as the place for the revelation because the cities are defiled by the impious and iniquitous conduct of men towards God and their fellows. For a similar view on the cities see note 181 on vol. II, p. 351.
186 Tehillim 68, 318, and reference given in note 184. The ex¬ planation of the word Moriah as the place whence the teaching of God went forth (see BR 55.7, and the numerous parallel passages cited by Theodor, as well as note 253 on vol. I, p. 285) presupposes, perhaps, the legend that originally Sinai formed part of Moriah; see Tosafot and R. Isaiah di-Trani on Ta’anit 16a.
1 8 7 ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 66 (read nnsC2D3"'D’l7rp) ; Batte Midrashot IV, 34; Mekilta Bahodesh 9, 72a; Sotah 5a; Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 960, on Prov. 22. Different opinions are expressed as to whether Moses acted rightly or not in covering his face at the appearance of God in Horeb (see Exod. 3.6). According to one view this was an act of humility for whicn he was rewarded, while according to another he was punished for his reluctance to accept the distinction conferred upon him. See Berakot 7a; ShR 3.2 (and the parallel passages given on the margin). Comp, also Ecclesiasticus 50.11; vol. Ill, pp. 137, 209, as well as vol. II, p. 305.
188 Mekilta RS 94; Sifra 1.1; MHG II, 203; Mekilta Bahodesh 2, 62a; Shabbat 86b-88a (different opinions are given here as to whether the revelation took place on F riday , the sixth of Sivan or on the Sabbath, the seventh of that month; but all agree that ZHra, Exod. 19.1, means “the new moon” and not “the month”; comp. Seder 'Olam 5,
32
Moses in the Wilderness
[189-191
and the references given by Ratner); Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 19.2-3. Jub. 1.1, in opposition to this view, maintains that the Torah was revealed on the fifteenth of Sivan. — Concerning the distinction of the third month as compared with all the other months of the year* see vol. Ill, pp. 78-79, and the sources quoted in note 179, to which the following should be added: BHM VI, 40; PR 20, 95a-96a; Tan. B. II, 76; PK 12, 107a. These read: The Torah was given in the month of Sivan when Gemini are in the Zodiac, to indicate that it does not belong to Israel alone, but also to his twin brother Esau (that is, the Gentiles). Comp, notes 181 and 185.
189 Mekilta RS 94 (read mnDN instead of D’33): Moses received this distinction for the sake of the fathers and the mothers; see In- dex,s.v. “Mothers, Merits of ”; ShR 25.2; 1 and 2 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 19.3. Comp, also Shabbat 87a; Sifre N., 99; Mekilta Baho- desh 2, 62b. The statement in Mekilta RS, loc.cit., that “everything” was done for the sake of Jacob is also found in Yalkut I, 276. See note 35 on vol. I, p. 317; Index s.v. “Jacob, the Merits of.”
190 ShR 25.2; PRE 41. These sources remark: Because men do that which women wish them to do. See also Philo, De Ebriet. 13: Women adhere to customs.
191 Mekilta Beshallah 2-3, 62b-64b, and 9, 72a (concerning the employment of the Hebrew language by Moses, referred to in this passage, see also Sifre N., 39, and the parallel passages cited by Fried¬ mann , as well as Mekilta D . 4, where the meaningless □’ mD31 is to be emen¬ ded to D’nom “in proper order”, as in Mekilta, loc. cit.); Mekilta RS 94-96; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 19.4-7. Comp, note 242. Concern¬ ing the honor due to the elders, see vol. II, pp. 330 and 363-364. As to the view that God ’s messengers return to Him and make their report as soon as they have carried out His command, comp. Mekilta Bo (Nnn’ns) 2a and Midrash Tannaim 210. Philo, Moses, 1.27, explains the designation of Israel as a kingdom of priests to mean that Israel works for the salvation of all mankind. A similar remark is found in Alpha¬ bet of R. Akiba 28 ('r) : The righteous among the Gentiles act as the priests of God. The proverb that “hearing is not like seeing” is found also in Philo. De Special. Leg., De Judice 2, and De Confusione Ling. 27. Comp, also Vita Mosis I, 49; Herodotus, 1,8. As to the applica¬ tion of this proverb to the revelation of the Torah, see PR 41, 174a; Shir 1.2. Moses went beyond that which he was commanded by God: he was asked to tell the people to observe “two days of pre¬ paration, prior to the revelation of the Torah, but he added a third
33
192-195]
The Legends of the Jews
day. God, however, submits to the words of the pious, and the state* ment of Moses was not altered. See BHM VI, 41, which, in the main, follows Shabbat 87a. Comp, note 239.
192 Mekilta RS 96-97 (is this the source of Meiri, Magen Abot, 61?); Keritot 9a; Gerim 2; Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 63b-64a. The ab¬ lution before the revelation is also referred to by Philo, De Decalogo, 11; Yebamot 46a; Yerushalmi Shabbat 9, 12a.
193 Lekah Exod. 24.5; ER 9, 52. These read: The innocent youth, though not of priestly descent are worthy to offer sacrifices upon the altar. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 93 and note 205, for the dissenting view as to who "were the priests” on that day.
194 Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 63b; Mekilta RS 96—97 (this source does not know of the view found in the Mekilta that twelve pillars were erected, one for each of the twelve tribes) ; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 24.4. As for the exact nature of these sacrifices, see Hagigah 6a; Midrash Tannaim 57; Sifre N., 143.
195 Midrash Tannaim 56-57; WR 6.5, which contains the addi¬ tional remarks that the angel assumed the form of Moses (probably a reminiscence of the legend, given in vol. II, p. 282, that Michael assumed the form of Moses), and that one half of the blood became black, while the other remained red; Haserot 41 in Leket Midrashim 11. Hadar, Exod. 24.6, has Gabriel instead of Michael. Comp. In¬ dex under the names of these two angels. WR explicitly states that one half of the blood was sprinkled upon the people ; but the tannaitic sources (Midrash Tannaim 57 and Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 63b), as well as the Tar- gumim on Exod., loc. cit., maintain that the blood was sprinkled upon the altar "to atone for the people.” It seems that the older sources at¬ tempted to combat the Christological doctrine of the atoning power of blood, derived in Hebrews 9.19-22 from the sprinkling of the blood upon the entire people and the book. The last part of the statement is entirely unknown in rabbinic sources. The remark that "there is no atonement without blood”, made in Hadar in this connection, is a sacrificial law often referred to in the Halakah; see e.g., Sifra 1.4 and Yoma 5a.— Opinions differ greatly as to the nature of the book of the covenant which Moses read to the people on this occasion; see Midrash Tannaim 56 and Mekilta, loc. cit. As to the view that this book was the Torah (in its entirety), see 1 Macabees 1.57, where the Book of the Covenant is used as a synonym for the Torah. Concern¬ ing the covenant, see further Mekilta Mishpatim 20; 102a; Sifre D., 104; Midrash Tannaim 75; but Tan. Nizzabim (beginning) and Tan.
34
Moses in the Wilderness
[196-198
B. V, 49, offer a somewhat different version of the Haggadah about the covenant. See also, on the covenant, Tosefta Sotah 8.10; Babli 37b; Yerushalmi 6, 21c; Hagigah 6a-6b; Mekilta Mishpatim 20, 102a; Lekah Deut 2.99. In Nedarim 25a it is pointed out that Moses told the people that no mental reservation would avail them, since their oath of allegiance to God would have to be taken in conformity with the meaning which He Himself assigns to it.
1,6 Shir 1.4; Tehillim 8, 76-77; ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 68 (according to this source, Abraham’s sin consists in having loved Ishmael); BHM VI, 42; Mekilta RS 100; Mishle 6,53 (here Israel offers the heavens, the earth, and the mountains as guarantors; but God rejects them because they are to perish in the time to come; see vol. Ill, pp. 431-432); an unknown Midrash quoted by Shu'aib, Wayyigash, 21a. On the sins of Abraham and Jacob, see vol. I, pp. 235, 411 ; vol. V, pp. 228, 316; on the children in their mothers ’ wombs see vol. 1 1 1 , p. 34. Concerning the death of infants as a punishment or atonement for the sins of their parents, see Shabbat 32b; Midrash Shir 13a; Hashkem 3a-5a. Until the revelation of the Torah God visited the sins of the generation upon all alike, without discriminating between the righteous and the wicked — many a “Noah” died in the deluge, and many an innocent child perished with the builders of the tower — but after the revelation of the Torah punishment and reward are meted out to each and every individual according to his merits; see Tan. Re’eh 3.
197 Mekilta RS 94; ARN (beginning); ShR 28.2; Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 19.13 ( Hadar , Exod. 34b, top, is based upon 2 Targum Yerushalmi). Concerning the heavenly punishment by fire, see also Targum Yerushalmi Num. 1.51, 3.10 and 38. In contrast to the Yerushalmi Targumim, Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 64 understands Exod. 19.12-13 to refer to punishment by the hand of man.
198 Mekilta RS 85 and 99 (on the sounds see below, note 213); Mekilta Yitro 1, 57a, and Bahodesh 3-4, 64b-65a, as well as 5, 67a- 67b; Zebahim 116a; Mishle 21,90; PR 20,95a; PRE 41; Nispahim 55; Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 5, 2-3 (the address of Moses to the people presupposes that the book of the covenant mentioned in Exod. 24. 7 is identical with the part of the Pentateuch from Gen. 1.1 to Exod. 19; comp, the references cited in note 195); 4 Ezra 3.18-19. In the last-named source it is stated that the “four gates of heaven” opened on that occasion; see a similar remark in BHM VI, 41-42, but in this passage m^lp 'T is very likely to be read; comp. Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 64b (bottom). Lengthy descriptions of the violent motions of the
35
199-203]
The Legends of the Jews
entire universe at the time of the revelation of the Torah are given by ps.-Philo 11.5; 15.6; 23.10; 32.7-8. Obviously Jud. 5.4-5 and Hab. 3.3, seq., served as models for these descriptions as well as for those found in rabbinic sources. Comp, also vol. Ill, 95-96.
199 pr 21, 99b-100a, where it is also remarked that the earth feared lest the revelation of the Torah should increase the sinfulness of man and thus cause the destruction of the world. Comp. vol. I, p. 55.
2 0 0 PRE 41; Shir 1.12 and 5.3. Concerning the description of God as the “bridegroom of Jacob’s daughter” (i.e., Israel), see DR 3.12 and Aggadat Bereshit 41, 126 (CTID1, Exod. 20.10, is here derived from ND3 = NE>1 “to marry”), which is the source of Mahzor Vitry 311. Some rabbinic sources speak of Israel as the bridegroom and of the Torah as the bride, at whose wedding God (and Moses) acted as best man; see Orehot Hayyirn II, 67; ShR 41.6; Epstein, R. Moses ha- Darschan 42-43.
2 0 1 Mekilta Bo (unn’ns) 2a and Bahodesh 4, 65b; Mekilta RS 101; Sifre N., 116 (comp. Friedmann, note 22); Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 21.19; Berakot 45a. Concerning Moses’ powerful voice, which could be heard throughout the entire camp, see Aggadat Shir 32 and note 228 on vol. II, p. 370; note 521. The later authorities (Jewish as well as mohammedan; comp. Goldziher, La Notion de la Sekina, 12) employ the expression “The Shekinah spoke through Moses’ mouth”, which is very likely nothing more than a striking paraphrase of this
statement of the Mekilta. Philo, Quis . Haeres Sit, 5, seems to have
shared this view. The Targumim mentioned above speak of “the heavenly music” heard on this occasion, and in all likelihood this is the meaning of ps.-Philo 11.3, who refers to the “music of the instru¬ ments sounding aloud” at the revelation on Sinai.
2 0 2 Mekilta RS 100; Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 65a (top); Shabbat 88a and 129b; ‘Abodah Zarah 2b; Midrash Shir, 44a; Shir 8.5; Tehil- lim 75, 337, and 76, 342; Tan. Noah 3. It is stated: “Israel was willing to accept the written Torah, but not the unwritten, and God was therefore obliged to use force (this Midrash is the source of Or Zarua‘ 1, 7a; Hadar and Da' at, Exod. 19.17); PRE 41. Concerning the idea that the existence of the world is conditioned upon the acceptance of the Torah, see also Shir 1.90; PR 21, 99b-100a; Midrash Aggadah Lev. 25.1. Note 26 and note 8 on vol. I, p. 50.
2 0 3 Shabbat 88a (this passage speaks of two crowns instead of the crown and the girdle of the other sources); PR 10, 37a; 21, 103b,
36
Moses in the Wilderness
[204-206
28, 154a; PRE 27 (equipped with these gifts they became like angels); Tehillim 9r, 397, and 103, 435; ShR 45.2 and 51.8; Shir 1.3, 4.13, and 8.5; Tan. Tezawweh 11 and Shelah 13; Tan. B. IV, 76, and II, 25, 99; BaR 16. 25; PK 16, 124b; EZ 4, 179; Ekah (NnrTTlB) 24.24 and 2.117-118; ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 68; BHM VI, 46; Makiri Tehillim 50, 275. Yelammedenu in Recanati Ki-Tissa has a version of this legend which differs essentially from that found in the other sources. Sabba, Zaw, 95c, reads: They lost the second crown in Jeremiah’s time, when they refused to listen to the word of God, See also Menorat ha-Maor III, 1.5, which quoted an unknown Midrash. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 132.
104 PR 21, 101a and 102a; comp. Hadar, Exod. 33.7, and PRE 41 (end). As to the other explanations of Moses’s shining face, see vol. Ill, pp. 119, 137. 143, 438. The crowns as well as the other heavenly gifts are said to have been the reward given to the Israelites for tneir willingness to accept the Torah before they knew its contents. This willingness they expressed in the words “All that the Lord hath spoken will we do as soon as we have heard it” (see Exod. 24.7; yDPl, literally, we shall hear). This attitude is often referred to as the high¬ est stage ever reached by Israel in the religious development; see, e.g., Shabbat 88a; Gittin 7a; Tan. B. II, 11, and III, 94. There is however, a dissenting view, according to which the Israelites, even at the moment when they expressed their willingness to accept the Torah, were employing nice words without intending to fulfil them; see Mekilta Mishpatim 13, 89b-90a; Tosefta Baba Kamma 7.9; Tan. B. I, 77; WR 6.1; DR 7.10; ShR 42.8.
“>5 PRE 41; ShR 28.3; Mekilta RS 102; Mekilta Bahodesh 4, 65b-66a; BaR 12.7; PR 5, 20b,. Concerning the first-born as priests, see vol. I, pp. 320, 332, and comp, (on the other hand), Zebahim 115b, and vol. Ill, p. 88 (bottom) ; note 139. The sources quoted at the begin¬ ning of this note, as well as Ephraem I, 222D, maintain that Nadab and Abihu performed the priesly service not only on this occasion but also previously.
306 pre 41; Nispahim 55. The legend of the "ascent of Sinai” is also found in Philo, De Decalogo, 11, and in several of the sources quot¬ ed in note 202. Concerning the ten revelations (literally, “descents”) of God, see BR 38.9 and parallel passages quoted by Theodor. The in¬ dividual opinion of a Tanna who flourished about the middle of the second century is quoted: The Shekinah never descended upon the earth, nor did Moses and Elijah ever ascend to heaven; the heavenly voice
37
207-210]
The Legends of the Jews
heard on Sinai made it seem as though the glory of God descended upon the mountain; comp. Mekilta Bahodesh 4, 65b, and Sukkah 5a, where instead of TQJ (“glory”) m’JP (“Shekinah”) is used. Comp, notes 296, 919, and note 32 on vol. IV, p. 200.
3°? Aggadat Shir 1.14; PR 21, 202b-203a; ER 22, 119; PR 12, 107b; Tan. Zaw 12; Tan. B. II, 76-77; III, 20; IV, 13; ShR 29.8; BHM V, 68; Tehillim 68, 318-319; Targum Ps. 68.18. On the crowns see vol. Ill, pp. 92-93, and on the piety of the Levites comp. vol. Ill, p. 130. The slaves and bondwomen who were present at the revelation of the Torah on Sinai saw more of the Glory of God than the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel; Mekilta Bahodesh 3, 64a; see a simi¬ lar remark in Tehillim, loc. cit.; comp, also vol. Ill, pp. 94, 106, 227 and 230.
>»* PR 21, 203b; PK 12, 108a.
209 pr 21, 105-106a, where numerous explanations of the “first word” Anoki are given; BHM VI, 42; ER 1, 22; Midrash ‘As- eret ha-Dibrot 47. Comp., however, vol. II, p. 300, where it is said that the Israelites spoke the Hebrew language in Egypt; see also notel91. On the use of the word Anoki in God’s revelations to the patriarchs, see PR 33, 153a, and note 140 on vol. I p. 352.
3 1 0 ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 69-70, which is based on old sources; see Tosefta ‘Arakin 1.10 (on the twelve miles, the extent of the camps, see ‘Erubin 55a, as well as note 445 and Index, s. v. “Camps, Extent of”); Sifre D., 313; Mekilta Beshalah 2, 63b and 9, 71b; Shabbat 88b; Tehillim 31, 338 (God enabled the idols to worship Him, i. e., the whole of nature recognized God’s power) ; 68, 317-318; 119, 490-491; Midrash Shir 2b; BHM VI, 42; ER 22, 119-120; Shir 1.2 and 4.4; Tar¬ gum Yerushalmi Exod. 20.2; Mahzor Vitry 320 (probably based on Midrash Shir 2a, or ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot, loc. cit.); Shu'aib, Yitro, 33b (his source seems to be a text of Shir 2.4 different from ours; comp, his quotation, in Bemidbar, 73b, from “Midrash Hazita”). Ps.-Philo 23.10and 32.7-8 is acquainted with several features of this legend; comp, above note 198. — Concerning the angels who accompanied God on mount Sinai, see vol. Ill, pp. 92 and 94. Some sources, however, maintain that there were no angels on mount Sinai, since even these heavenly be¬ ings, had they been near there at that time, would have been burned by “the words”; PR 33, 156a— 156b; comp, also note 248. — Each of the two hundred and forty-eight members of the body urge man, saying: “Fulfil God’s commandment”, and each of the three hundred and sixty-five days of the years likewise says: “Beware of the prohibition decreed
38
Moses in the Wilderness
[211-215
by God ; See PK 12, 101a; Tehillim 32, 244. On the six hundred and thirteen laws of the Torah see above, note 181. Concerning the dew which quickens the dead, see note 22 on vol. I, p. 10, and Index, s.v. “Dew”. Shabbat 88b, Midrash Shir 7a, 38b, 44b, and Zohar II, 84b, speak of the heavenly fragrance that spread over Israel at the time of the revelation. The purpose of this fragrance was very likely to restore the breath of life to the dead bodies. Comp. ps.-Philo 32.8, which reads: Then— at the giving of the Torah— did paradise give forth the fragrance of its fruits.
2 1 1 Mekilta Bahodesh 2, 66b, and Shirah 4, 37b.
JIJ Mekilta RS 103-104; MHG II, 215; Mekilta Mishpatim 20, 102a. Comp, also ps.-Philo 11.2, which reads: For men might say : “We have not known Thee, and therefore have not served Thee .” I will therefore take vengeance upon them, because they have known My laws. This is. given by the author as a comment on the first commandment of the Decalogue.
213 ShR 29. 9, which has the additional remark that the voice heard on Sinai had no echo. With regard to this voice, the following statement of the Jewish philosophers is to be noted. “God”, says Philo, De Decalogo, 9, “commanded that an inaudible voice be formed in the air.” The very same view is expressed by Sa'adya Gaon (quot¬ ed by Judah b. Barzillai, 314) and R. Judah ha-Levi, Al Khazari, I, 89. A Christian parallel to this legend concerning the complete standstill of nature is the one given in Protevangelium of James 18, in connection with the birth of Jesus. The Jewish legend evidently wishes to emphasize the fact that the revelation came directly from God; comp, note 248, and vol. IV, p. 198.
2,4 ShR 5.9 and 28.6; Shabbat 88b; Tehillim 68, 317, and 92, 403; Tan. B. II, 13-14; Tan. Shemot 25; Midrash Shir 2b; BHM VI, 39 and 45; Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 709 and 843 on Ps. 19 and 92, respectively. In all these sources “the seven voices” {i.e., sounds or tones) which were heard on Sinai are referred to, whereas in Berakot 6b and BHM V, 33 mention is made of only five voices, and in BHM VI, 41 (read '1 instead of comp. Judah b. Barzillai, 130-131, and note 198) the number is still futrther reduced to four. The seven sounds of the trumpet at the resurrection referred to in BHM VI, 58, are modelled after the seven sounds on Sinai. The seventy tongues stand for all the languages of the world; see vol. I, p. 173 and note 72 pertaining thereto.
213 ShR 28.6; Tan. Yitro 11; PRE 41; Lekah V. 99, where it is
39
216-219]
The Legends of the Jews
said that the same happened at the second covenant; concerning which see vol. Ill, p. 89. The idea underlying this legend is related to one of the legends given in vol. Ill, pp. 141-142.
316 PK 12, llOa-llOb; PR 21, 100b-102a, and 33, 155b; BHM VI, 39-40; Midrash Shir 39b; ShR 5.9 and 28.6; Tan. B. II, 13-13; Philo, De Posterit. Caini, 43. See also Mekilta Shirah 4, 37b ; v. VI , 359— 360. In the Decalogue the singular is used ( e.g ., I am the Lord thy God, and not your God), in order that everyone should say: On my account the world was created, and on my account the Torah was given. One righteous man is more precious in the sight of God than the whole of mankind: see ER 25, 126-127 (whence Lekah V, 17-18) and simi¬ larly Philo De Decalogo 10. Comp, also Sanhedrin, Mishnah 4.5, and Babli 103b, as well as ARN 31, which read: The soul of one righteous man weighs as much as the whole world. See note 8 on vol. I, p. 50. For other explanations of the use of the singular in the Decalogue see note 306 and PR 21, 106b. At the time of the revelation complete harmony existed in Israel (see vol. Ill, p. 79), the entire nation having only one mind and therefore addressed by God as one person; Zohar III, 84.
31 7 Mekilta 6, 67a-68b; Mekilta RS 105-106 (the Haggadot given in this passage concerning the five kingdoms are also found in BHM VI, 44, and Midrash Aggada Exod. 20.5); Targum Yerushalmi, Ephraem, and Theodoretus on Exod. 20.3-6. See also ps.-Philo 11.6, which reads: I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the sins of them that sleep upon the living children of the ungodly, if they walk in the ways of their fathers. Comp, note 251.
318 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 20.6. Theodoretus and Vulgate, ad loc., agree with this view that the second commandment forbids not only a false oath, but also swearing in vain. Comp. Yerushalmi Shebu'ot 3, 34c for the halakic discussion of this point.
319 Yalkut Reubeni Gen. 1.1,2b, quoting Sode Raza; Zohar
II, 91b; Ma'asiyyot 111; Raziel 11a (beginning nnyi); comp,
vol. IV, p. 96. God said to the Israelites: “Swear not falsely, that your young children die not on account of this”; BHM VI, 44, which, in the main, follows Shabbat 32b; comp, note 196. Besides this punishment for swearing falsely, Shabbat, loc. cit., mentions many other afflictions. Comp, also ps.-Philo 11.7, which reads: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, that My ways be not made vain. This is very likely a mistranslation of the Hebrew, which read: ’311 vb NIP1? ” DP rat NE>n “Thou
40
Moses in the Wilderness
[220-223
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, that the roads of My land (literally, that My roads) become not desolate.” See Shabbat 33a, which has: On account of swearing falsely or swearing in vain the roads become desolate. Perhaps the original read N’tPN “I shall not make desolate.”
320 Alphabet of R. Akiba 14 (']",7N7) and the second version 63 (n'E> 7” r), which has the additional remark that the joy of Sabbath is one-sixtieth of the world to come. The source for this statement is Berakot 57b.
331 BR 11.8; PR 23, 117b. The view that “everything was created in pairs” is a favorite with the Gnostics, but is also found in pseudepigraphic, rabbinic, and patristic writings. See Clementine Homilies 19.12 and Recognitiones 3. 59, 8.53; Apocalypse of Baruch 69.3-4; Lactantius, De Ira Dei, 13; Tertullian Adversus Omnes Haer- eses, 4; The “Midrash Temurah”, is, as the name indicates, entirely devoted to the explanation of the doctrine of syzygies. Comp. Joel, Blicke, I, 7, 161, and Ginzberg, Jewish Encyclopedia, II, 114, s. v. “Clementina, ”. — The variants in Exod. 20.8 and Deut. 5.12 gave rise to many a haggadic interpretation; comp. Shebu'ot 20b, which reads: Zakor (“remember”) and Shamor (“observe”) were uttered as one word, a feat which cannot be achieved by the human voice; Mekilta Bahodesh 6, 69a; Midrash Tannaim 21. In the last named source the statement quoted from Shebu'ot is applied as a solution for many other contradictions occurring in Scripture, as, e.g., the one discussed in Matthew 12.5. See also Bahir 57, which is the source of Zohar I, 48b; II, 92a; III, 92b, 224a; Nahmanides, Emunah u-Bittahon, 19. Medieval authorities quote the Midrash D’2 Tor ne’2’2 “llOtPl “ Remember while thou art at sea, and observe while thou art on dry land” (on the sea it is often impossible to observe the Sab¬ bath laws strictly); see SMG, positive precept 29; Shibbale ha-Leket 50, No. 65; Shu'aib, Ahare Mot, 62d; Kimha Dabishuna rat? "13. This Haggadah is found in PR 23, 116b, but most of the authorities just mentioned did not quote it directly, as may be clearly seen from the introductory phrase of SMG (Ent03 t V' TiyD®).
233 PR 23, 121a-121b; Kiddushin 31a; BaR 8.4; Philo, Quis Rer. Div. Haeres Sit, 35. Comp. vol. I, p. 153.
3,3 ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 76. The commandment concerning the honor due to parents is the “severest” ( i.e ., the most important) of all the commandments of the Torah; Yerushalmi Kiddushin 1,61b; DR 6.2. He who honors his parents commits no sins, but if one fails
41
224-229]
The Legends of the Jews
to honor his parents, evil visitations come upon him; ER 16, 134.
224 Niddah 31a; Kiddushin 30b; Kohelet 5.10; Wehizhir II, 120; Yerushalmi Kil’ayim 8, 31c. These passages state: God, the father and the mother contribute three things each in the formation of a child, God giving the spirit, breath and soul. According to 4 Ezra 8.8, the human body consists of fire and water, whereas Philo, De Mun. Opif. 51, maintains that it is formed of four elements, fire, water, air, and earth. Comp, note 15 on vol. I, p. 55.
225 Kiddushin 31a; ER 26, 134.
226 Yerushalmi Peah 1, 15d, and Kiddushin 1, 61b; PR 23, 122b; comp, also Mekilta Bahodesh 8, 70a, which is at the same time the source of the well-known saying : God regards the honor shown to parents as though it were shown to Himself; and conversely He counts the neglect to honor parents as an insult to Himself; Mekilta RS 110; Sifra Kedoshim (beginning); Midrash Tannaim 23; Kiddushin 30b; Tan. B. V, 16-17; Tan. Ekah 2. See also Josephus, Antiqui., IV, 8.2, and Contra Apionem, 2.27-28; Philo, De Decalogo, 22, and Special. Leg., De Col. Par, 1; ps.-Phocylides, 5.8; Sibyl. 3, 594. The words of Philo, Special. Leg., loc. cit., “parents hold a middle position, be¬ tween the divine and human kind”, go back to a Stoic source (see Prachter, Herakles der Stoiker, 45, seq.) ; but the idea underlying this statement is genuinely Jewish.
227 ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 78; Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 20.13; comp. Abot 5.8 (’13J7 means “delaying”, not “suppressing”); ARN 28.114 (second version 41, 114-115).
228 PR 24, 124b (here is taken to stand for rri^n “cause
to cry aloud”; similarly Mekilta RS 110 reads: As long as the murderer lives, the blood of the victim cries, i. e., seethes); DR 2.25; Visio Pauli 18; Enoch 22.7. He who sheds the blood of his fellow- man destroys the likeness of God; see Tosefta Yebamot 8 (end); BR 34.14 (see the numerous parallel passages cited by Theodor). A si¬ milar statement is found in Philo, De Decalogo, 25.
229 ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot 79; ER 34.14; DR 2.25. These passages read: All ascend from Hell (that is, they are not consigned to eternal damnation), except adulterers, those who put their fellow-men to shame, and those who give opprobrious names to their fellow-men; Baba Mezi'a 58b; comp., on the other hand, Rosh ha-Shanah 16b-17a. A very realistic description of the punishment of the murderer is given in BHM V, 144-146
42
Moses in the Wilderness
[230-238
1!0 Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 20.13; BR 26.5; Yerushalmi Sotah 1, 17a; BaR 9.33; Tan. Bereshit 12. A different view concerning the punishment for adultery is found in Abot 5.7. For “fourfold adultery” (*• «•. lustful eyes, etc.), see Mekilta RS 3; BHM VI, 45; PR 24, 124b.
331 Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 22.13; comp. Abot 5.7.
333 PR 24, 125b; WR 22.6; comp. vol. I, 153.
333 Yerushalmi Targumim Exod 20.13; PR 24, 125b; EZ 3,175; comp. vol. I, pp. 160-161 and vol. IV, pp. 109-110.
334 Yerushalmi Targumim Exod. 20.14; comp. Abot 5.7. The division of the Decalogue as given in vol. Ill, 98, seq., is the only one known in rabbinic sources. Sifre N., 112, 113, does not consider Exod. 20.3-6 as forming part of the first commandment, but describes idolatry as being at the same time an infringement of the first command¬ ment, “since he who professes idolatry denies God”. Philo, De Decalogo, passim, and Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 5.5, divide the Decalogue in a manner different from that of the Rabbis; they count 20.2-3 as the first commandment, 4-6 as the second, 7 as the third, 8-11 as the fourth, 12 as the fifth, 13 as the sixth, 14 as the seventh, 15 as the eighth, 16 as the ninth, and 17 as the tenth. Comp. Jewish Encyclopedia, IV, 495.
3 3 5 BaR 9.12; PR 16, 107a-107b. For a different version of the Haggadah about the sin which leads to the breaking of all the Ten Commandments, see Kad ha-Kemah (man) 86b; Orehot Zaddikim, 14. Concerning covetousness as the source of all evil, see also Philo, Special. Leg., De Concup. 2; Milhamot Melek ha-Mashiah, 117; Lactantius, Div. Instit. 5.6; comp. Ha-Hoker I, 67.
336 Mekilta Bahodesh 8, 70b (obviously the sentence n^lpP r'ytP
DJa stands for r"y TIJ3 nVipP comp. PR 21, 107b-108a);
BaR 9.12; Zohar II, 90a; see also Philo, De Decalogo, 12, and 12 Testa¬ ments, Reuben 4.6., which read: Fornication removes the soul from God, and brings it near the idols. See also Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata, 6.17.
33 7 PR 21, 108a. For a differnt version of the Haggadah concern¬ ing the Ten Commandments and the words of Creation, see Lekah Deut. 5.6; BHM VI 46; Zohar II, llb-12a. Comp, vol I, p. 49.
338 Mekilta Bahodesh 9.71a-72b, and 3, 64a; Mekilta RS 113. As to the awful vision on Mount Sinai which almost caused the people to die, see vol. Ill, pp. 95-96, and Berakot 22a. As to the visibility of the audible and the audibility of the visible see also 4 Ezra 5.37, which speaks of imago vocis; Philo, Moses, 2(3). 97; De Decalogo, 11; De Migration*. Abrahami, 11. The last-named passage, in which the author
43
239-242]
The Legends of the Jews
allegorizes, is the source of Origen, Con. Cel., 6.62. Comp., however, the quotation from Philo, De Decalogo, 9, given in note 213. Concerning the idea that the divine visions granted to the Israelites on Mount Sinai were greater than those seen by the prophets, see also DR 7.8; Zohar II, 82a, 94a, 146a. Comp, note 64 and vol. Ill, p. 34. Accord¬ ing to one view the Israelites were granted power over the Angel of Death at the time of the revelation; see Mekilta, loc. cit.; note 262; vol. Ill, pp.120, 278.
339 Shabbat 87a; ARN 1 (second version 2, 9-11); Sifre N., 103; PRK 24a; ER 18.101, which reads: Moses warned the people three days before the revelation not only to keep themselves clean from ritual impurities, but also from sin and evil which contaminate the soul and heart of man; comp. vol. II, p. 316, and vol. Ill, p. 256. In the sources quoted above mention is made, in this connection, of “the fence which Moses made around the Law”; he was commanded to tell the people to observe two days of preparation, but he added a third day “as a fence”. Comp, note 191.
340 Mekilta RS 114; Mekilta Bahodesh, 9, 72a, where the reading nrn DJD, found in Yalkut I, 301, and Lekah Exod. 20, 10 is supported by Mekilta RS. Israel received three gifts at Sinai: The feeling of shame ( i . e., modesty), the feeling of compassion, and the feeling of kindness; MHG II, 238; Nedarim 20a; Kallah 1, 4b; ER as quoted in Mahzor Vitry 317, but not in our texts. Comp. vol. IV, p. 110. As to the great influence of Moses upon the people, see Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 447, on Is. 40; ER 22, 120, and 23, 122; vol. Ill, p. 14.
341 Aggadat Shir, which is the source of Makiri Ps. 89.76. See also Mekilta Bahodesh 9, 72a; Mekilta RS 114; Yalkut I, 301, quoting an unknown midrashic source; DZ 4 = Yalkut I, 815; Shu'aib Wa- Yikra 44b. Concerning the souls of the pious see also Philo, De Plant. NoV 4, which reads: The pure souls are in the loftiest places.
343 Mekilta RS 114; WR 1.14; Yebamot 44b; Tehillim 90, 387— 388, where it is stated that Isaiah, and according to some also Elijah, retained his consciousness in his moments of prophecy; comp. DR 2.4, which reads: Moses and Isaiah, the greatest of the prophets. Sifre Z. 83 and 84 reads: The revelation granted to Moses came directly from God, and not through an angel; comp, note 248; Sifre N., 103; Sifra 9.7; Zohar III, 261b-262a; Nahmanides, Emunah u-Bittahon, 18; Philo, De Plant. No'i, 6. The last-named authority uses the same phrase as the Rabbis to describe the clearness of Moses’ visions: Moses looked through a clear glass, the other prophets through a
U
Moses in the Wilderness
[243-245
dark glass; comp. I Corinth. 13.12 and 2 Corinth. 3.18; Tertullian, Adversus Praxean 14. The view is also expressed that Moses was the only original prophet, whereas all other prophets confirmed the pro¬ phecies uttered by Moses; ShR 42.8; vol. Ill, p. 97. All other prophets received the divine communications in the language of the Targum (i.e., Aramaic), but Moses in the Hebrew language; Vital, Likkute Torah on Gen. 15.12; comp. vol. Ill, p. 87, and note 191. The angels, with the exception of Gabriel who is master of all the seventy tongues (Comp. vol. II, p. 72), are said not to understand Aramaic. The statement that God appeared in a pillar of cloud to three prophets only (comp Ps. 99, 6-7) is perhaps directed against Mark 9.7. Comp, vol. II, pp. 257-258, 356, and vol. IV, p. 69.
243 Shir 1.2; Yelammedenu in Yalkut II, 479 on Is. 14, and 317 on Jer. 31. In contrast to the view expressed in the sources quoted above, as well as in Makkot 24a (top ), Tan. Wa-Yelek 2; PR, 12, 111a, and in many other passages in rabbinic literature, to the effect that the first two commandments only were heard by Israel directly from the mouth of God, there is another opinion which maintains that all the Ten Commandments were heard by Israel from the mouth of God; see Mekilta Bahodesh 4, 66a, and 9, 71b (bottom); Mekilta RS 114 (verse 19); Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 27, and De Decalogo, 5; Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 5.4. Comp, also Horayyot 8a-8b; PRE 41; ShR 33.6; quotation from an unknown Midrash in Shibbale ha-Leket 7 (on the correspondence between the Ten Commandments and the Ten Words of Creation mentioned there, see vol. Ill, pp. 104-105). Rashi, on Makkot, loc. cit., quotes from the Mekilta the midrashic support for the first view, as given in PRE; but nothing to this effect is found in our texts of the Midrash (Bahodesh 6, 69a refers to Ps 62, 12 in an entirely different connection), and it is very likely that NnV’ZiO in Rashi stands for ’nsD; see Sifre N., 42. Comp. Geonica II, 307, note 2.
24 4 PRE 41 (end); Tehillim 22, 200; comp. vol. Ill, p. 79, for further details concerning the great distinction of the generation of the revelation. In striking contrast to this view is the opinion of R. Akiba, according to whom this generation lost its share in the world to come; see Sanhedrin Mishnah 9.3, Tosefta 13.10-11, Babli 110b, and Yerushalmi 9, 29c. It is true that, as may be seen from the passages just quoted, R. Akiba 's view is entirely rejected by the other scholars. See also WR 32.2; Tehillim 130, 490; vol. II, p. 302.
245 PRE 41, where *7150 DVn is to be taken literally. The sun stood still for Moses on the day of the battle with Amalek (see note
45
246-247]
The Legends of the Jews
146) and on the days of the battles against Sihon and Og (see vol. Ill, pp. 340 and 469), as well as at the time when Moses commanded heaven and earth to stand still and listen to him, saying: “Give ear, ye heavens, and I will speak and let the earth hear the words of my mouth.” See Ta'anit 20a; ‘Abodah Z. 25a; Tehillim 19, 167; PR 3, 13b; Sifre D., 306 (131a, in the middle of page); Lekah, Deut, 32.1 and 24.12; DR 10.2-3; DZ 30. A Midrash quoted in Hadar, Deut. 32.1, reads: Moses refused to submit to the Angel of Death, saying unto him: “ I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of God.” The angel of Death replied: “God has the sun and the moon to praise Him and to declare His glory.” Whereupon Moses bade the sun and the moon stand still and he began to praise God. In Sibyl. 5, 256-259 it is said that Moses, the best of the Hebrews — Philo, Moses, 1 (beginning), and Midrash Tannaim 186 call him the greatest and most perfect man — made the sun and the moon stand still. Comp, note 947.
346 ARN , both versions at the beginning ; Seder ‘ Olam 6 ; Y oma 4b ; Yerushalmi Ta'anit 4, 68b. According to another view given in the sources just quoted, Moses ascended, without further preparations, in the morning immediately after the revelation on Sinai. See also Mekilta RS 96.
2 4 7 Ma'ayan ha-Hokmah 58-60; PR 20, 96a-98a; Yalkut Mish- patim (end). The fragment published in BMH V, 165-266 very likely forms part of Ma'ayan ha-Hokmah; comp, also Mahzor Vitry 323-325; Zohar I, 5a; II, 58a; III, 78b. The description of Sandalfon and Gallizur, quoted in Ketab Tamim 5, 9 from a Midrash which is no longer extant, agrees in the main with that of Ma'ayan. — As to how .Moses found his way through the dark clouds, see Yoma 4b and Philo, Quaestiones, Exod. 2.48. On the angels guarding the gates of heaven, see Ascension of Isaiah 24, seq. Concerning the opposition of the angels to the creation of man, see vol. I, p. 53. On Sandalfon and the crown which he places on the head of the Lord, see Index, s. v. “Sandalfon.” The description of a certain distance as “a journey of five hundred years” is of frequent occurrence in the legends; see vol. I, p. 11; vol. II, p. 307; comp, also Yerushalmi Berakot 9, 13a. The conception about the fire of Rigion is certainly of Persian origin, being identical with Hvareno of the Avesta, concerning which see Cumont, Mysteries of Mithra, index, s. v. That Moses saved himself by holding on to God’s throne is a very old legend; seeShabbat 88a; vol. V, p. 417, bottom; comp, note 273; vol. Ill, pp. 124, 138 (top). When the angels attempted to expel Moses from heaven, he said to
46
Moses in the Wilderness
[248
them: “ I am permitted to sit in the place where ye are not even allowed to stand.” See quotation from Nahmanides in Neubauer’s The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah 1.76. As to the question whether Moses sat or stood in heaven, see Megillah 21a.
348 Ma'ayan ha-Hokmah 60-61 and PR 20, 98a, 25, 128a, which in the main follow old sources; see Shabbat 88b; ARN 2, 10; DR 7.9 and 8.2; Shir 8.11; Tehillim 8, 74—75. These sources read: When, owing to the worship of the golden calf, the first tables were broken, the angels rejoiced, thinking that Israel, because of his sins, lost theTorah. God, however, pointed out to the angels that they too, had transgressed the command of the Torah (comp. vol. V, p. 328, note 29) when, as Abraham ’s guests, they partook of forbidden food and ate meat with milk; PRE 46; Tan. B V, 51; Mekilta RS, 101—102 (not tannaitic); Zohar II, 3. When the angels were about to attack Moses, God changed his face, making him look like Abraham; He then said to the angels: “Are ye not ashamed to attack him in whose house ye ate and drank!” Turning to Moses God said : “ It is on account of the merits of Abraham that thou hast come into possession of the Torah.” On the “prince of the Torah” and his attitude toward Moses, see also BHM II, 116-117, and vol. Ill, p. 305. This legend, however, must not be taken to ex¬ press the idea that the Torah was revealed by an angel; the function of Yefefiyyah is that of a teacher of the Torah and not that of one who reveals it. Concerning angels as teachers of a chosen few, see vol. V, p. 117, top. The old authorities very frequently emphasize the direct character of the revelation of the Torah; Sifre Z., 84; Mekilta Ki-Tissa 1, 103b (comp., however, Mekilta RS 160); Hagigah 3b; second version of ARN 1, 2. Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 23, writes: The laws were partly revealed by God Himself, through the medium of divine prophecy (hence Philo, Moses, 1, and the Rabbis, Yerushalmi Sotah 6.1, describe Moses as the interpreter of the sacred laws) partly in the form of ques¬ tions and answers, revealing the will of God (comp. e. g. Num. 9.8), and some of them were promulgated by Moses while in a state of ecstasy. Though this tripartite division of theTorah is quite unknown to the Rabbis (they condemn as a heresy the view which would ad¬ mit even that one word of the Torah was written by Moses himself, and not received by him from heaven; see Sanhedrin 99a), they agree with Philo that the revelation was not through the medium of angels. The view of Paul, Galatians 3.17, is not Jewish, but rather anti-Jewish; comp. Ginzberg, Unbekannte Sekte, 246-249, where this passage of Gala¬ tians, as well as Josephus, Antiqui., XV, 5.3, and Jub. 1.17, is fully
47
249~254]
The Legends of the Jews
discussed. See also, above, note 242, and vol. Ill, p. 97. A rather advanced view is held by an unknown Jewish author of the middle ages according to whom, Moses, while inspired by the holy spirit, never¬ theless made use of written and oral sources for the compilation of the history prior to his own times as recorded in the Book of Genesis. See Neubauer, Medieval Jewish Chronicles I, 163.
349 Shabbat 89a. A different version of this legend is found in Hadar, Num. 14.7. In Babylon it was considered bad manners for a pupil to greet his master before being greeted first, but in Palestine, on the other hand, a pupil was expected to greet his master first; see Berakot 27b and Yerushalmi 2, 4b; comp. Muller, Hilluf Minhagim 32, No. 33.
as° Menahot 29b. For another version of this legend, see vol. II, pp. 325-326. Comp, also PK 4, 29b, which reads: Things not revealed to Moses were known to R. Akiba. See also the quotation from Sefer Tagin (not in our texts) in Yalkut Reubeni, Exod. 19.2. On the meaning of pip, Menahot, loc. cit., see Derenbourg, Journal Asiatique, I, 247.
1SI Sanhedrin llla-lllb; Baba Kamma 50b; PK 16, 166b; Yerushalmi Ta'anit 2, 65b; comp. vol. II, p. 304, and vol. Ill, p. 135, 138, 280. In one respect, however, it was Moses who made God to be more compassionate than He had intended to be. God first revealed to Moses that He would visit the sins of the fathers upon their children. Moses objected to this, saying: “Many a wicked man bore a pious child; why should the latter suffer for the sin of the former? ”God recognized the justice of this objection, and promulgated the law: The children shall not be put to death for their fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin (Deut. 24.16); see BaR 19.33. Comp, also vol. Ill, p. 98, and note 217.
Yerushalmi Peah 2, 17a; WR 22.1; ShR 47.1; Kohelet 1.10 and 5.8; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 97 and 119.
353 PK 4, 40; BaR 19.7; Tan. B. IV, 118; Tan. Hukkat 8.
334 Tehillim 19, 166-167; ShR 47.5 and 8. God taught him by day, and during the night he repeated his lessons; Tan. Ki-Tissa 36; Tan. B II, 119; PRE 46; Targum Lamentations 2.19. The night is the best time for serious study, and hence it was devoted by Moses to the study of the oral law; see ‘Erubin 65a; WR 19.1; Shir 5.11; Shemuel 5, 57; Comp, note 83 on Vol. IV, p. 101 and Vol. Ill, p. 143, first paragraph. There is an angel on whom a label is attached bear¬ ing the inscription Hesed (“Grace”). During the day the label is
48
Moses in the Wilderness
[255-258
attached to the angel s front, and by night to his back. By means of this the angels know to distinguish between night and day. See Pa- 'aneah Raza, Exod. 13.21, and comp. Index,s. v. “Israel”, Angel. As to the sun and moon worshipping God before they begin their task, see vol. I, p. 25. Concerning the grinding of the manna by angels, see vol. Ill, p. 44.
35s PR 20, 98b; PR 1, 4b; BaR 12.8; Shir 3.11. The place where Moses was during the forty days is described by ps.-Philo 12.1 as the one “where is the light of the sun and the moon”; comp, note 260.
2 5 6 ShR 41.6; comp. vol. Ill, p. 114. According to Jub. 32.25, Jacob likewise forgot the things cummunicated to him by an angel from the heavenly tables. While ShR and many other passages de¬ scribe the great efforts Moses made to acquire the knowledge of the Torah, it is maintained by Yerushalmi Horayyot 3.48c that he became the great master of the Torah without the slightest exertion. Comp, the following note.
2 s 1 Shabbat 89a (comp, the Midrash quoted by Tosafot) ; Sanhedrin 26b; Kallah 8, 15a. Moses put his life in danger for the sake of the Torah, Israel, and the maintenance of Justice (comp. Exod. 2.12); as a reward for this, Scripture speaks of the “Torah of Moses”, of “Israel the people of Moses”, and of the “justice of Moses”; see Mekilta Shirah 1, 34b; Midrash Tannaim 96; Tan. B. V, 29; Tan. Ki-Tissa 35; PR 5, 14b (here the erection of the Sanctuary is substituted for Israel); BaR 12.9; ShR 30.4; Tehillim 1, 15, and 30, 235-236. For other explanations of the expression “The Torah of Moses” (Malachi 3.22), see vol. II, pp. 277, 278, 309; vol. III.pp. 117, 141,429.
258 PRE Wand 46; Abot 5.6 (the characters and the stylus, men¬ tioned there as having been created during the twilight of the first eve of Sabbath, very likely refer to the character and stylus used for the tables; see, however, note 99, on vol. I, p. 83); Shabbat 104a (on this passage, see Hoffmann- Festschrift, 113-114); Shekalim 6, 49b where the following conflicting opinions are given: 1) five command¬ ments were engraved on one table and five on the other; 2) all the Ten Commandments were engraved on each of the two tables; 3) the Ten Commandments were on both sides of each of the two tables; 4) the Ten Commandments were on each of the four sides of each of the two tables (read in Responsen der Geonim, ed.H3.rka.vy 11, instead of
t«nD^«);Sifre D., 313;Sifre N., 101 ;Shir 5.14 (whence Lekah Exod. 31.18 states that the sapphire employed for the tables was taken from the Throne of Glory; see, however, Zohar I, 131b, according to which
49
259-261]
The Legends of the Jews
the tables were hewn out from the Eben Shetiyyah ); ShR47.6; Midrash Shir 40b; Zohar II, 84a-84b; Philo, Quaestiones, Exod. 2, 42. This legend about the nature of the tables is an attempt to express in popu¬ lar form the view strongly emphasized by Philo ( De Decalogo, 29, and De Special. Leg. passim) that the Ten Commandments contain the kernel of the entire Torah. The division of the six hundred and thirteen precepts of the Torah into ten classes, with the Ten Commandments as headings, is first found in the writings of Sa'adya Gaon, who perhaps followed Philo, whose book De Special. Leg. is the first attempt in this direction. It is worthy of notice that the talmudic-midrashic sources never speak of the Decalogue as containing the entire Torah, though this view is expressed with regard to theShema' ; see Yerushalmi Berakot 1, 3c. In this connection it maybe mentioned that the sect¬ ion of Lev. 19, seq., is said by the Rabbis to contain the Decalogue; see WR 24.5. Comp, notes 302 and 306.
Js9 Shir 5.14.
360 Tan. Ki-Tissa (end). God gave the Torah to Moses with His right hand; see EZ 11, 192; PK 32, 200a; Tehillim 1, 15; 16, 124; 18, 155; Mishle 6, 54; Tan. Berakah 3. God holds life and justice in His left hand, and grace and the Torah in His right, one who does jus¬ tice and observes the Torah receives life from God as an act of His grace; see WR 4.1; DR 5.4; Koheleth 3.16 (end). On the radiance of Moses’ face see the references given above, note 204, as well as PK 4, 37a; Tan. B IV, 114, and the parallel passages cited by Buber; notes 295 and 309. Zohar II, 58a, and Shu'aib Ki-Tissa (end) are based on Tan., loc. cit., where an opinion is quoted to the effect that “the rays sent forth’’ from the countenance of Moses owed their existence to the sparks which emanated from the Shekinah at the time when Moses received instruction in the Torah from God. Zohar adds (on whose authority?) that after Israel worshipped the golden calf the radiance of Moses’ face lost its lustre, retaining only a thous¬ andth part of its original strength, so that the angels who formerly dreaded to come near him attempted to attack him. Comp. vol. II, p. 306. Ps.-Philo 12.1 explains the radiance of Moses’ face in the following manner: He was covered with an invisible light, for he had gone to the place where is the light of the sun and moon' (comp, note 255), and the light of his face overcame the brightness of the sun and moon. The place of the great light is, of course, the place of the Shekinah.
361 PR 96b; PRE 41.
50
Moses in the Wilderness
[262-266
363 EZ 4, 179-180. That originally the Torah was given to Is¬ rael as a weapon against the Angel of Death, is an old conception; see Tan. B. II, 112, IV, 76, and the parallel passages cited by Buber in his note on the latter place, as well as Batte Midrashot III, 14-15; vol. Ill, p. 278; note 238.
263 Yerushalmi Ta‘anit 4, 68c (top); Sanhedrin 102a; ShR 43.2; Koheleth 9.11; Ekah 1.62.
*#4 Shabbat 89a; Tan. B. II, 112-113; Tan. Ki-Tissa 19 and Beha- ‘aloteka 14; ShR 41.7; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 32.1. The error of the people consisted in including, in their calculation, the day of the ascent, whereas Moses, in speaking of forty days, had “complete ones” in mind, excluding the day of ascent, which he partly spent on earth. See Rashi and Tosafot on Shabbat, loc. cit. Disappointed in their expectation to see their leader return, they came to Aaron with the request to appoint another leader (Q’nhN in Exod. 32.1 means judge, leader). See Hadar, ad loc., 42d and 43a.
365 PRE 45; ShR 41.5; WR 10.3., 7.1, and 2.1 (the women of this generation were pious); BaR 15.21 and 9.44; EZ 4, 180; Sanhedrin 7a; Tan. B. II, 113; Tan. Ki-Tissa 19; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 32.3-5; Zohar II, 191a and 192a. The legend that Aaron was intimi¬ dated by the people, especially when he saw the violent death of Hur, is also mentioned by Ephraem I, 224a. On Hur, see vol. Ill, pp. 60, 159. According to vol. Ill, p. 28, Jannes and Jambres met their death at the Red Sea; see Index, s. v. “Jannes and Jambres”. Concerning another attempt to exculpate Aaron, see below, note 351. On the piety of the women see vol. Ill, pp. 174, 393; on the New Moon as a festive day, see Menorat ha-Maor, Rosk Hodesh.
366 Midrash Shir 13a-13b. This is very likely the source of Hadassi, 45a (numbers 117-118) and 134d (numbers 362-363). For a different version of this legend, see vol. II, p. 182, and note 493 referring to it. Griinbaum Neue Beitrage, 151 gives the Arabic version. For a third version see note 126 on vol. IV, pp. 49-50. There is some relation between this legend and the one found in early Christian writ¬ ings, according to which the Egyptians identified Joseph with Serapis; see Tertullian, Ad Nationes 2.8, and Specilegium Syriacum 89; comp, note 271. In PRE this legend is abridged in the following manner: Aaron found a golden plate, upon which the Divine Name was engraved, together with the form of a calf. When Aaron threw this piece of gold into the fire, a bleating calf came forth, for Sammael had entered it,
51
267-271]
The Legends of the Jews
and started to bleat to deceive the Israelites. See vol. I, p. 155, where a similar part is ascribed to Sammael.
367 PK 9, 78a; WR 27.8; Tan. B. Ill, 94; Tan. Emor 1 1 ; ShR 42.6; Shir 1.9, which reads: The Egyptian magicians made the calf move about as if it were alive. Comp, the preceding note; vol. Ill, pp. 120, 127, 211, 245.
368 Ginzberg, Haggadot Ketu'ot 53-54, 64-66 = Haggoren IX; BaR 15.21, and, on the other hand, comp. vol. Ill, p. 248. As to “the redemption of God from Egypt”, see note 150.
=.69 pre 45.
370 Tehillim 3, 37; ShR 41.1; Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 10, 28b; WR 5.3. Yalkut David, Exod. 32.1, quotes Midrash and Targum Shir 2.17 to the effect that the clouds of glory departed from the Is¬ raelites as soon as they worshipped the golden calf. As far as can be ascertained, this legend is found neither in the Midrashim nor in the Targum (certainly not in the passage referred to). Did the author of Yalkut David use manuscripts? In vol. Ill, p. 374, it is said that the clouds of glory were not withdrawn from the Israelites when they worshipped the golden calf. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 93, top.
371 Ginzberg, as above, note 268; ShR 3.2, 42.5, and 43.8; Tan. Ki-Tissa 21. This legend presupposes an old Haggadah, accor¬ ding to which, Ps. 106.20 refers to “the ox of the Merkabah” (Eze¬ kiel 1.10); but as early as the time of R. Akiba great objections were raised to this view; see Mekilta 6.33 (the text is rather “doctored"); Mekilta RS 45; Shir 1.9; Tehillim 106, 455-456. See also Lekah, Exod. 32.4, which reads: They noticed that the feet of angels were like those of calves (see Ezekiel 1.7), and therefore they made the golden calf. The identification of the golden calf with the Apis of the Egyptians frequently mentioned by early Christian authors (comp, e.g., Apostolic Constitution, 6.20; Lactantius, Divinae Institu- tiones 4.10) is unknown in the old rabbinic sources. Ziyyoni, however, on Exod. 32.1 quoted from the “Book of the Magicians” a lengthy description of the Apis cult (introduced by a magician called Apis in the ninety-second year of Jacob), which is said to be identical with the worship of the golden calf. Comp, also note 3. Pa'aneah, Exod. 32.4, writes: They had noticed in the sand along the shore of the Red Sea that the imprints left by the feet of the angels were like those of the feet of calves, and therefore they adopted the form of a calf for their idol. This is a slight modification of Lekah, loc. cit. Comp, also note 122 on the imprints on rocks. At the request of Ezekiel, God changed “the ox
52
Moses in the Wilderness
[272-276
of the Merkabah” into a Cherub (comp. Ezekiel 1.10 with 10.14), so that He might not be constantly reminded of Israel’s sin. See Haggigah 13b.
373 ShR 41.7 and 42.4; Tan. B. II, 113. Comp, the reference to Zohar cited in note 260.
3 7 3 See the sources given in previous note. On clinging to the throne, see vol. Ill, pp. 112 and 138.
3 7 4 PRE 45; ShR 41.7 and 44.8; DR 3.2; Tehillim 7, 65-66 (in this passage it is said: At first God did not consider the merits of the fathers, for even they were not free from sin. Comp. vol. Ill, pp. 89—90), and 18, 142; Koheleth 4.2; PR 10, 38b. According to another version of this legend, Af and Hemah (on these angels see vol. II, pp. 308 and 328) were buried alive opposite the grave of Moses; see Imre No1 am (end); comp, also Sotah 14a and Tosafot, ad loc.; Targum Yerushalmi Deut. 9.19 and 34.6. The episode of the struggle of Moses and the destroying angels, as narrated in this legend, is said in PRE, loc. cit., to have taken place after Moses had descended from Sinai. This is in agreement with many other sources which tell of Moses’ intercession for Israel after his descent; see vol. Ill, pp. 131, seq.
3 7 5 Midrash Shir 14b-15b (on Ra'ah see note 196 on vol. II, p. 358); ShR 42.5 and 44.9 (God hinted to Moses that He waited only for the prayer of the latter to avert the execution of the threatened punishment; this is also found in 42, end; ER 4,17; Ephraem I, 225B; Tertullian, Adversus Marc. 2.26; Theodoretus, Exod. 32.10); PK 16, 128b. As to the idea that Moses owed his distinguished rank to Israel, see vol. II, pp. 51 and 283. On the three-legged bench (*. e., the descendant of the three patriarchs), see vol. Ill, p. 279. Kimha Ddbishuna Shekalim quotes a Midrash to the effect that God intended to choose the pious among the Gentiles for His people and place them in Paradise instead of the wicked Israelites. Comp, note, 540.
376 ShR 42-44; Tan. Ki-Tissa 21-24; DR 3.11-15; BaR 5.15. Concerning the rejection of the Torah by the sons of Esau, see vol. Ill, p. 81; on the readiness of Israel to trust in God and in Moses, see vol II, p. 364; on the guilt of the “mixed multitude” in making the golden calf, see Zohar I, 25a, 26a, and 28b; note 207. That God had revealed to Moses, even before the exodus from Egypt, the future defection of Israel, is also recorded in vol. II, p. 317. The Haggadah often discusses the question why God is “jealous of idols”, though they are things of nought; see Mekilta Bahodesh 6, 68 (on the text see Ma‘ asiyyot ed.Gaster 33); Mekilta RS, 105; ‘Abodah Zarah 54b-55a.
53
277-28i]
The Legends of the Jews
As to the idea that God submitted to the law of absolving vows, see quotation from an unknown Midrash in Yalkut Reubeni Num. 30. 14; against this idea comp. vol. Ill, p. 421.
2 7 7 Lekah, Exod. 32.19. On the devotion of Joshua to his master, see Batte Midrashot III, 26, and Index,s. v. “Joshua”.
278 Koheleth 9.11; ShR 41.1; Yerushalmi Taanit 4, 68c (top); comp, also Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 19. In Koheleth attention is called to the errors committed by Joshua on these two occasions when he at¬ tempted to impress his views on Moses; see Num. 11,28-29.
279 Yerushalmi Ta'anit 4.68c; ARN 2,11 (both versions) ; Shabbat 87a; ShR 19.3 and 46.3; Pesahim 87b; PRE 46; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 32.19; Baba Batra 14b; Tan. Ki-Tissa 26 and ‘Ekeb 11; ER 21, 117; EZ 4, 180; Batte Midrashot III, 13 (Yelammedenu?) ; PR 20, 96b. The Pesikta is the only source in which Joshua is said to have participated in the breaking of the tables; see also Ziyyoni, Deut. 5.6. In Shabbat, loc. cit., three things are enumerated which Moses did on his own authority and which were later sanctioned by God; these are: He broke the tables, added a day of preparation for the revelation on Sinai, and gave up conjugal life. Concerning the two last-named points see vol. II, p. 316; vol. Ill, pp. 107 and 355- 356; note 191. In opposition to all the sources just quoted, it is maintained in DR 3.14 that God reproached Moses for breaking the tables in his anger at the sinners, and told him that the world would not exist for a moment if He grew angry as easily on account of the sins of man; see vol. I, p. 304 and vol III, p. 116. The disappearance of the writing from the tables is also referred to by ps-Philo, 12.5, who says: And he looked upon the tables, and saw that they were not written, and he hastened and broke them. On the gigantic struggle of Moses, see vol. Ill, p. 141; concerning the weight of the tables, comp, also Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 31.18. It is noteworthy that the tables and the rod of Moses were not only of the same weight (sixty seah), but also of the same material, that is, sapphire; see vol. II, p. 293, and note 280 on vol. II, p. 292.
280 Zohar II, 113b; comp, the .following note.
2 8 1 Yoma 66b, which also gives the dissenting view that the three different forms of death ( i e., execution by the Levites, death caused by the water, and death from the plague) depended upon the manner of worshipping the calf; ‘Abodah Zarah 44a; Yerushalmi Sotah 3, 19a; BaR 9.48; PR 10, 38a; Tan. Ki-Tissa 26; PRE 45; Targum Yerushal¬ mi Exod. 32.30, which says: The lips of him who had devotedly worship-
34
Moses in the Wilderness
[282-284
ped the idol became tightly closed “like gold”; Tosefta ‘Abodah Zarah 4.19. A different version of this legend is found in ps. -Philo 12.7; And it was so, if any man willed in his mind that the calf should be made, his tongue was cut off (by the drinking of the water) ; but if any one was constrained thereto by fear, his face shone. Ephraem
I, 126 A-B gives this legend in agreement with the Rabbis. Ps- Jerome on 1 Samuel 7.6 maintains that Samuel preformed the same or¬ deal as Moses; comp. Ginzberg, Haggada bei den Kirchenv. I, 21-23. The Christian legend tells of a similar ordeal in later times; see The Gospel of ps. -Matthew 12. In opposition to the view that the execution of the idolaters was ordered by Moses on his own authority (ER 4, 17), there are some Rabbis who maintain that he did it at the command of God; see Mekilta Bo 12, 12b, according to the reading of Yalkut
II, 43; Rashi and Lekah on Exod. 32.27. The Levites, who not only re¬ frained from worshipping the calf, but, jealous for God, killed the idol¬ aters (comp. Tehillim 1, 13, and vol. Ill, pp. 94, 170), received the reward for their piety, and became the servants of the Sanctuary; see Philo, Moses, 2(3) 20 and 37, as well as Special. Leg. (on Priests), 1.4, 322-24. Comp. Index, s. v. “Levites”.
a8a ER 4,17. The same number of Israelites lost their life by drinking the water; Shu'aib, Ki-Tissa, 40b.
a «3 Tan. Ki-Tissa 26; Berakot 32a. In the latter passage the intercession of Moses for Israel is very graphically described.
3 ® 4 Hadar, Exod. 27.20; Da' at and R. Bahya, 22.23; Zohar III, 246a; comp, also Pa'aneah Exod. (end). From the section of Shemot in which the birth of Moses is recorded, to the end of the Pentateuch, the section of Tezawweh is the only one in which the name of Moses is not mentioned. Another explanation of “Thy book” (Exod. 32.32) is that it refers to the book of — eternal — -life in which all the pious are entered; see Midrash Tannaim 211; Wehizhir I, 78; comp, also Berakot 32a and Sotah 14a, where this explanation is presupposed. As to ths readiness of Moses to sacrifice himself for the sake of Israel, see PR 22, 1 1 la; Zohar I, 67b; note 257. Moses, David, Habakkuk, and Jeremiah are four pious men, who, carried away by their prayers, addressed un¬ becoming words to God; see Tehillim 90.385. For further details concerning this prayer of Moses for Israel, see Berakot 7a— 7b and DR 13.11. In most of the passages where this prayer is spoken of, his supplications on Sinai (Exod. 32.11) and those which he made after the descent therefrom are dealt with as one prayer. Comp, note 274.
55
285-290]
The Legends of the Jews
3 8 5 ShR 45.1-2. Zohar 1, 52b and 63b (on this occasion they lost their immaculate state; comp. vol. Ill, p. 108); Shu'aib, Ki-Tissa, 40b; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 33.6-7 (this is the only passage in which occurs the statement that Moses hid the heavenly gifts in the tent in which he taught the Torah); PK 17, 129b; Tehillim 25, 212; Ekah 1.58; EZ4, 180; Berakot 63b; DR 3.15; Tan. Ki-Tissa 26-27; Tan. B. II, 115-116. On the heavenly gifts, see also references in note 202. In most of the sources it is stated that these gifts will be returned to Israel in the time to come. See also vol. Ill, p. 463.
386 Seder ‘Olam 6. Moses ascended into heaven on Thursday, and descended therefrom on Monday; it is therefore customary to fast on these days; see Tan. B. I, 94 (on the text see Ketab Tamim, 88), and Midrash Wayekullu 18. These fast-days are mentioned in Luke 18.12 and BR 76.3. According to PRE 46, Moses spent only the first and last forty days in heaven, i. e., from the seventh of Siwan to the seventeenth of Tammuz, and from the twenty-ninth of Ab to the tenth of Tishre, whereas the forty days intervening between these two periods he remained on earth praying to God to forgive the sin of Israel. See Luria, ad loc., and EZ 4, 180.
387 ShR 44.5—9; Midrash Shir 13b; DR 3.15 (in this passage it is stated that there were at that time in Israel, besides Moses, seventy* seven pious men: the seventy members of the Sanhedrin, Aaron and his four sons, Caleb and Phineas; comp. vol. Ill, p. 127; Shir 1 (end); Aggadat Bereshit 5.13-14; Tan. B. II, 90-91. As to the conception that the pious are considered as living even after their departure from this world, see Berakot 19a-19b; Midrash Tannaim 101; Mekilta RS, 127; MHG I, 527; Philo, DeJosepho, 43; 4 Maccabees 7.20 and 16.25; Matthew 8.22 and 22.31— 32; 1 Timothy 5.6—7. Comp, also note 72 on vol. I, pp. 75-76. For a poetical description of the “living death” of the wicked, see Ben ha-Melek we-ha- Nazir 20.
3 8 8 Berakot 7a, where one opinion is recorded to the effect that God granted Moses also his third wish, and revealed to him “His ways” whereby He ordains good and evil in His world; Tehillim 25, 211. The difference between the presence of the Shekinah and that of an angel is the same as that between the immediate and mediate working of God; see note 62 on vol. I, 16; note 115 on vol. II, p. 304 and note 20 on vol. IV, p. 7.
389 ShR 25.6; Tan. Ki-Tissa 27; B. II, 116; comp, also Berakot 34b; Tan. B. V, 9; vol. Ill, p. 420.
3 9 9 Shu'aib, Debarim (beginning), 98c; this is very likely the source
56
Moses in the Wilderness
[291-296
of Rimka Dabishuma, ’D (Musaf for the Day of Atonement),
and of the Judeo-German rendering of this legend, concerning which see Griinbaum, Chrestomathie, 215, seq. The Hebrew original re¬ mained unknown to this author, as well as to Krauss, Ha-Goren, 215, seq., J. Q. R, New Series, II, 349 seq., and Friedlander, ibid. Ill, 179-180. Comp, also Gaster, Exempla, 432. On the German ren¬ dering of this legend, see Brockhaus in ZDMG, XIV, 706, who calls attention to the fact that the Persian poet Jclmi made use of this legend. From the Judeo-German writings this legend found its way into the hasidic literature. Modern writers, ignorant of the old sources in which this legend occurs, credit it to the Hasidim. A variant of this legend is No. 353 in Gaster l. c., where however it is Solomon to whom God’s justice is revealed.
3 9 1 EZ 6, 182-183. As to the problem of the theodicy, see also Berakot 7a; 2 ARN 22, 46, which is the source for Midrash Aggada Exod. 20.12. Next to Moses it was Habakkuk who wished to find out “the ways of the Lord"; comp. Tehillim 7, 70-71; 87, 343; 90, 389; Tosefta of Targum Hab. 3.1; Mahzor Vitry 170. The legend about Habakkuk refusing to leave the circle, which he drew, before God had given him an answer to his question (see Ta’anit 23a) very likely refers to Habakkuk ’s question concerning “the ways of the Lord”. For the view that God showed Moses all the generations, see also vol. Ill, p. 154; comp, further vol. I, p. 61.
393 PRE 46; comp. vol. II, p. 326.
393 Berakot 7a; ShR 45.5; comp, note 187, and vol. II, p. 305.
394 Megillah 19b; comp. vol. IV, p. 200.
395 PR 10, 37b; Tan. Ki-Tissa 37; ShR 47.7. As to the radiance of Moses’ countenance, see vol. Ill, pp. 93, 119, 143, and the notes appertaining to these passages.
3 9 6 PRE 46; PR 10, 37b; Sifra (end of Baraita de-Rabbi Ishmael). The phrase “born of woman ” is a designation of contempt in the mouth of an angel; see vol. II, p. 313; vol. Ill, p. 113; vol. IV, pp. 335, 395. Neither the angels nor the Holy Creatures ( Hayyot ha-Kodesh) see God or hear His voice; but the pious, after their death, see Him. See Sifre N., 103; Ta’anit, Babli (end). The same conception is also found in Recognitiones, 3.30, and Theophilus, Ad AutoU 7. — Concerning the attack of the angels on Moses,see vol. Ill, pp. 112, seq., 129. On the appearance of God on earth, see note 206. According to Sifre D., 343, and Midrash Tannaim 211, there are only four appearances of God: 1) He appeared in Egypt to redeem Israel (comp. vol. 1 1, p. 366);
57
297-301]
The Legends of the Jews
2) on Sinai to reveal the Torah; 3)He will appear to take vengeance on Gog and Magog; 4)and finally He will appear in the Messianic age.
297 Rosh ha-Shanah 17b. As to the thirteen attributes of God, see the references given by Simonsen in Lewy- Festschrift, 271. This scholar also calls attention to 4 Ezra 7.132-139, which represents a Midrash on the Thirteen Attributes. Comp, also Ginzberg, Compte Rendu 23 ( R.E.J . LXVII, 137-138); see also EZ 4, 183; Hasidim 123; Kimha Dabishuna Maimonides’ Responsa, 87. The
older talmudic-midrashic literature refers quite frequently to these attributes; comp. Rosh ha-Shanah, loc. cit., as well as Tan. B. I, 91; Nispahim 42 (EZ, 23); PK 6, 57a; PR 5, 22a; 16, 79b-80a, and 194a; Tehillim 93, 416; Hashkem 3b. Tehillim only knows of the dissent¬ ing opinions which count ten or eleven attributes of God. Comp, note 15 on vol. I, p. 8.
2.8 Sanhedrin 111a (bottom); Tehillim 93, 416. The views cited in these passages differ as to which attribute appeared to Moses to be the most exalted; each of the following attributes is named for this distinction: Long-suffering, grace, compassion, and truth. See also quotation from Tan. (not found in our texts) in Makiri, Ps. 92, 98, and vol. Ill, pp. 115-116- 280.
2.9 PRE 46; ER 1, 3-4. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 148. Philo remarks, in reference to Exod 33.23, that the human intellect cannot conceive the essence of God, but only His activities; see De Posteritat. Caini, 48 (end); De Profugis, 29; De Mut. Nom, 2. Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, I, 21, gives an explanation of Exod., loc. cit., which is in almost every detail identical with that of Philo. On the very curious statement (Berakot 7a) that Moses saw God’s phylacteries (Tefillin), which is certainly not to be taken literally, see R. Han- anel in Responsa der Geonim, Lyck edition, No. 115; Or Zarua’ I, 2 lb 2 lc ; REBN (]'3fcO) 42b. Baruk she-Amar 5d quotes, from Berakot loc. cit., a statement concerning the form of these phylacteries. This statement, however, is found neither in Berakot nor elsewhere.
3 0 0 EZ 4, 180-181; ER 17, 86; Tan. Pekude (end); Tan. B. I, 94; Seder ‘Olam 6; Ta'anit 30b; Baba Batra 12a. See also Yoma 20a, which reads: On the Day of Atonement Satan has no power to bring an accusation against Israel.
3 0 1 PRE 46; comp, also the reference given in the preceding note. As to the everlasting continuation of the institution of the Day of Atonement (i. e., its observance in the time to come), see Mishle 9, 61 and vol. VI, end.
58
Moses in the Wilderness
[302-306
S03 ShR 46.1. For a conflicting view comp. vol. Ill, pp. 119, 197.
303 PRE 46; Mishle 23, 94, where should be read instead
of D’JIPtnn.
304 PR 5, 21b; BaR 12.4; Tan. B. I, 193; Tan. Ki-Tissa 31 and Naso 17; Batte Midrashot III, 3 (Yelammedenu?). Comp, the dis¬ senting view in an unknown Midrash quoted in Yalkut I, 854, accord¬ ing to which the second tables were given amid great ceremonies like the first. Lekah Deut. 10.3 agrees with this latter view. See the follow¬ ing note.
305 DR 3.17; Tosefta Baba Kamma 7.4. A different version is found in an unknown Midrash in Yalkut I, 854: God disapproved of the act of Moses in breaking the tables (see above note 279), and therefore spoke to him as follows: “If thou hadst made these tables thyself, thou wouldst not have broken them; make thou now another pair of tables, that thou mayest appreciate their worth.” God then showed him a sapphire quarry under the Throne of Glory (comp, note 258 and the following note), out of which Moses made an exact replica of the first tables. See also ps-Philo 12 (end), who writes: Hew thee out therefore two tables of stone from the place where thou didst hew out the former, and write upon them again My judgments which were on the first. In Exod. 34.1 it is plainly stated that God Himself wrote the words upon the second tables, and accordingly one is justified in assuming that the original Hebrew of ps-Philo had ’rQTDI which, however, was misread as rarDI by the translator.— If the first tables had not been broken, Israel would never have forgotten the Torah; ‘Erubin 54a; comp, also vol. Ill, p. 108.
306 Nedarim 38a; ShR 46.2 and 47.3; WR 32.2; Koheleth 9.11 (God showed Moses the sapphire quarry in his own tent); PRE 46; Tan. Ki-Tissa 29, 31 and ‘Ekeb9(in this passage, in agreement with the Midrash quoted in the preceding note, it is said that the sapphire quarry was under the Throne of Glory, in allusion to Exod. 24.10); BaR 9.48 (read “i’BD instead of ~isd); Sifre Z., 82; ARN 9, 41; Midrash
Aggada Num. 12.2. In Vol. Ill, p. 141 line 6, Sapphire is to be read in¬ stead of diamond. On the fifty gates of wisdom, see vol. IV, p. 130, and the note appertaining to it. Concerning the qualifications of the prophet, see Maimonides, Shemonah Perakim 8. As to the idea that the Torah was originally intended only for Moses, see BaR, loc. cit.; DR 3.11; ShR 48.5 and 47.9; note 216; vol. Ill, p. 118. See also
59
307-309]
The Legends of the Jews
PR 21 106a, where the use of the singular in the Ten Commandments is commented upon in this connection. Comp, note 216.
3"i ShR 46.2. Comp. vol. Ill, pp. 5-6.
3°8 ShR 47.1-4; Tan. Ki-Tissa 34 and Wa-Yera 5; Tan. B. I, 88 and 118; PR 5, 14b; Yerushalmi Peah 2, 17a; WR 22.1; BaR 14.10 (end); Koheleth 1.9; Megillah 19b. The anti-Christian ten¬ dency of the Haggadah is obvious. The Church has the Bible in Greek, and yet refutes the oral law. Concerning “the completeness” of the Torah revealed to Moses, see also vol. Ill, pp. 97 (where it is stated that all the souls were present at the revelation) and 197. As to Moses being a king, see note 170. On the idea that the existence of the world is conditioned upon Israel’s acceptance of the Torah, see note 202. On the verbal difference between Exod. 20.2, seq., and Deut. 5.6, seq., see references cited in note 221, to which should be added Lekah Deut. 5.12. In this source attention is called to the fact that the Decalogue in Deut. contains all the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, whereas the letter D is missing in the Exod. version. The explana¬ tion of this missing D, as given in Baba Kamma 55a, is that the word 31D (“good”) could not be applied to the first tables, since they were broken. Lekah, loc. cit., though he had no variant reading of Baba Kamma, loc. cit., assigns an entirely different meaning to the simple words of the Amoraim. For other explanations of the missing D, see Emunah u-Bittahon 19 (this was borrowed by R. Bahya, notwithstand¬ ing his words EmD3 HDIIP HD) and Recanati, Exod. 20.17. Later authorities have a good deal to say about the distribution of the six hundred and twenty letters — corresponding to the six hundred and thirteen precepts of the Torah and the seven Noachian precepts — over the tables, which, according to an old tradition (see Shekalim 15, 49b) measured one by three hand-breadths; see Ginzberg, Geonica II, 23 and 35-36; Al-Barceloni, 68-69; BaR 13.16 and 18.21; Tan. Korah 12; Lekah Exod. 20.14; Ginzberg, Compte Rendu 21 ( =R.E.J . LXVII, 135); Ziyyoni, Deut. 5.6.
3 Of ShR 47.5 and 3.1; Tan. Ki-Tissa 36-37; Tan. B. II, 118-120; Makiri Prov. 30.3. Concerning the eating of the angels while guests of Abraham, see note 143 on vol. I, p. 243, and note 94. As to the idea that the radiance of the Shekinah sustains the angels, see Berakot 17a; Kallah 2,4a. The explanation of Exod. 14.11, found in the last- mentioned source, is identical with that given by Philo, who likewise declares that “seeing God ” was unto Moses the same as food and drink to other mortals; see Moses, 2(3). 2. The view that the rays coming
60
Moses in the Wilderness
[310-314
forth from Moses’ face had their origin in the writing upon the tables is presupposed also in Corinthians 3.7. Comp, the following note, as well as notes 204, 260, 295. Hasidim 296 narrates that the radiance of glory was seen on a pious man at the time of his death, which pheno¬ menon is explained in the following way: God, at the time of signing “the decrees of this man’s death”, caused a drop of ink to fall over him. — As to the manner in which Moses divided his study periods, see vol. Ill, p. 116, and Megillah 21a.
310 Lekah Exod. 34.10. See also op. cit. 24, where a reason is assigned for the fact that this distinction was conferred upon Moses on the occasion of the giving of the second tables and not before. According to ER 4, 17-18, this was Moses’ reward for his intercession for Israel after they had worshipped the golden calf. The earlier Mid- rashim, however, present a different view, and maintain that the radi¬ ance of the face of Moses preceded the giving of the second tables; see DR 23.11; PK 4, 37a; PR 14, 62b; Tan. B. IV. 114; comp, also references given in notes 204, 269, 295. Ps.-Philo, 12.1, is also of the opinion that Moses received this distinction when he ascended heaven for the first tables; see also Yalkut Reubeni Ki-Tissa (end). When Moses was commanded to write down the verse “And the man Moses was the meekest of all men” (Num. 12.3), he, on account of his humility, was very reluctant to obey and he therefore wrote a very small 1 in the word uy “meek”, so that it might also be read as qy “poor”. Not having used up the ink of his pen, he wiped it on the hair of his forehead, and from this the radiance of his face originated; see Onkeneira, Ayyumah Kannidgalot, 17a, who quotes an unknown Midrashic source. Comp. Sifre Z, 163, and note 490.
311 PK 5, 45a; PR 15, 69a; Shir 3.70; Shemuel 17, 97; BaR 11.3. Concerning fear as a consequence of sin, see vol. I, p. 76, and Berakot 60b.
31 2 ‘Erubin 54b; Mekilta RS, 6; Mekilta Bo 3, 3b. As to the studying of a text four times, see Mekilta RS, 117; Tan. Yitro 15 and Wa-Yakhel 4; BR 4.5; ShR 40.1; Yosippon (?) in Mahzor Vitry 88; Zohar I, 5a.
3,3 PR 10, 36b-37b; PK 2, 10b; Tan. Ki-Tissa 4. On the humiliation of Moses on account of Israel’s sin, see vol. Ill, p. 125. The Midrashim just mentioned play on the double meaning of twn PNI in Exod. 30.12, which signifies “count” and “hang". See also quotation, from an unknown Midrash, in Hadar, ad loc.
31< PK 2, 17b-18b (the numerical value of the initial letters of
61
3 I5-32I]
The Legends of the Jews
the names of the twelve tribes, if counted as thousands, corresponds to the number of people as given in Num. 1.46); PR 10, 40b; Tan. B. II, 197-108; Tan. Ki-Tissa 9. On the census at the time of the Exodus, see vol. Ill, p. 391; on the census during Saul’s reign, see Yoma 22b and Targum on 1 Sam. 15.4 (based on Pesahim 64a); on the inauspicious census in David’s time, see vol. IV, pp. 111—112. The counting of the number of Jews, whether of the entire people or of a section thereof, is forbidden by the Jewish law; see Berakot 62b, Josephus Antiq-ui., 181.
ns PK 2, 18b- 20a; PR 10, 40a; Tan. B. II, 108-109; Tan. Ki- Tissa 9-11; Shekalim 1, 46b, and 2, 46d. God produced the coin from under His throne; see Shekalim and PK, loc. cit. But PRE 48 remarks in this connection: God used each finger of His right hand to bring about deeds of salvation and redemption; with the little finger He pointed out to Noah the way to the ark; with the finger next to it He slew the Egyptians; with the middle finger He wrote the Ten Commandments upon the tables; with the finger next to it He pointed out to Moses the half-Shekel to be given by every Israelite for his atonement. He will use His entire hand to destroy Esau and Ishmael. On the text of PRE see Hadar (the source is erroneously given as Pesikta) and Da' at on Exod. 30.21. In the latter source it is said that God pointed out to Moses the New Moon (see vol. II , p. 362) with His fourth finger. Comp. vol. II, p. 18, and vol. Ill, p. 50.
3 16 ShR 51.4; Tan. B. II, 126-127; Tan. Pekude 2 and 6. Comp, also Yelammedenu in Yalkut I, 723 (read nrtnD ]WI7 min ]’«; ER 30, 148. Comp. vol. Ill, pp. 138 and 151.
3 1 i Midrash Aggada, Exod. 27.1, which quotes an unknown midrashic source.
3 1 8 Tan. B. IV, 35; Tan. Naso 11, which reads: I have, in heaven, a temple, a hall (^D’n), and a throne; PK 2, 20a-20b; PR 16,84b; Tehillim 91, 395-396; BaR 12.3. Com. also Likkutim, II, 2a; 2 Enoch 45, 204; Ecclesiasticus 32.1-5. See vol. I, p. 3.
3 1 « PR 2, 18b (emphasis is laid upon the place where the Shekinah dwells, and not on sacrifices); Tan. Naso 22; BaR 12.6.
Jao PR 5, 16a; Tan. Naso 19 and Terumah 9; Tan. B. II, 94; Shemuel 26. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 185.
311 Tan. Pekude 2; Midrash Aggada, Exod. 38.21; Yelammedenu in Yalkut I, 719, and supplement No. 54 ( = BHM VI 89); Shu'aib, Pekude 41c; comp. vol. I, pp. 51-52. The tabernacle is also explained to be, in its form, a symbolic representation of the human body, see
62
Moses in the Wilderness
[322-326
Shu'aib, Terumah 36b-36c, and Shibbale ha-Leket 3 (BR is given as the source in this passage); Tadshe 2 and 10. A third view finds in the tabernacle a symbol of heaven and of what it contains. See Tadshe 2; PK 1, 5a; Likkutim II, 3b- 4a, and vol. II, pp. 165-166. Comp, note 346.
3” Tan. Terumah 5-8; Tan. B. II, 90-92; Shir 4.13; Zohar II, 148a. Yalkut I, 429 ( = Likkutim II, 8b, which is the source for Yalkut Reubeni Deut. 1. 1), counts only eleven materials, whereas Mahzor Vitry 314, which quotes Wehizhir (not found in our text of this work), has fifteen. See also Lekah and Midrash Aggada on Exod. 25.3.
323 Tan. Terumah 7 (during the reign of Ahasuerus the Mede the destruction of Israel was sought by Haman by means of money; see Esther 3.9; “ Red Rome” is an allusion to the identification of Rome with Edom; see note 19 on vol. I, p. 314); Tan. B. II, 91-92; Hashkem 10a; Lekah Exod. 25.3; Kad ha-Kemah, Lulab I 140, and ‘ Osher II, 28b; see vol. Ill, pp. 166-167.
3 3 4 ShR 40.2. Philo, Moses, 2(3). 3> speaks of the incorporeal patterns, according to which Moses was to make the furniture of the tabernacles. The same idea is expressed in his Quaestiones, Exod. 2, 52 and 82-83. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 160. Concerning the Book of Adam, see vol. I, p. 61, vol. Ill, pp. 136 and 398.
3 3 3 ShR 48.3-4; Tan. B. II, 121-123; Tan. Wa-Yakhel 4-5. As to the statement that Miriam was Bezalel’s great-grandmother, see vol. II, p. 253; concerning his father Hur, see vol. Ill, p. 121. Bezalel was thirteen years old at the time of the erection of the tabernacle, and his father was only eight years his senior. The “former genera¬ tions” became mature, physically and mentally, at a very early age. See Sanhedrin 69b; Yerushalmi Yebamot 10, lib (Caleb begot his son at the age of ten); Kiddushin 1, 59c. Comp. vol. II, p. 122, and vol. Ill, p. 283.
336 Berakot 55a; Koheleth 7.11; Aggadat Shir 5, 36-37, where an opinion is quoted, according to which Bezalel and his assistant Oholiab went up Mount Sinai, where the heavenly Sanctuary was shown to them; BR 1.14; Yerushalmi Peah 1, 15b. The etymological explanation of the name Bezalel as meaning “In the Shadow of God” is also given by Philo who finds in it an indication that Bezalel’s conception of God was “shadow-like”, whereas that of Moses was a substantial one; see Leg. Alleg., 3.31, and De Plant. Noe, 6. As to the question whether the ark or the tabernacle was made first, see also vol. Ill, pp. 156-157, 160-161, and 176. It is very doubtful
63
327-330]
The Legends of the Jews
whether the combination of letters spoken of in the Haggadah is identi¬ cal with the Philonic ideas. Comp. Index, s. v. “Letters”. On the assent of the people, comp, note 164.
ShR 40.4; Tan. Ki-Tissa 13; PR 6, 26a; ‘Arakin 16a. Comp, also vol. Ill, p. 222. The names mentioned in 1 Chron. 4.1-2 are taken by the Haggadah to be those of Bezalel.
3 » s ShR 48.3; Tan. B. II, 122-123; Tan. Wa-Yakhel 5. Comp, also PRE 3. Concerning the spirit which God will shed over the animals in the time to come, see 2 ARN 43, 60.
3*9 ShR 50.1-2; Tan. Wa-Yakhel 5; Tan. B. II, 124. Comp, also vol. Ill, p. 155, where a different opinion is quoted, according to which the Sanctuary was first erected and subsequently the ark was fashioned. See also vol. Ill, pp. 160-161 and 176. God commanded Moses to make the entire nation participate in the work of the ark, in order that all might have a share in the Torah kept in the ark; ShR 34.2. Comp. Tan. Wa-Yakhel 7, which reads: Bezalel fashioned the ark with his own hands, whereas the rest of the work was done by others under his direction.
33° Tan. Wa-Yakhel 7; BaR 4.13 and 5.1; Yelammedenu in Yalkut I, 729; Tehillim 22, 185-186; Baba Batra 14b; Shir 1.2 and 3.5; DR 7.9; Yoma 21a, which states: The ark did not diminish the empty space of the Holy of Holies; see parallel passages cited on margin as well as Yerushalmi Baba Batra 6, 15c, and comp, note 65 on vol. IV, p. 156. Just as the ark, the receptacle of the Torah, was within and without of fine gold, even so must a scholar, the possessor of the Torah, take care that his inside is like his outside, that is, he must be sincere. See Yoma 72b, as well as Philo, De Ebriet. 21; Quaestiones, Exod. 2, 54. In 2 Clemens, 12, a saying attributed to Jesus, reads: The kingdom of God will not arrive before the inside of man will be like his outside. It is quite obvious that in this saying the rabbinic phrase 1133 13in (comp. Yoma 72b; Tan., loc. cit.; Leket Midrashim, 6b and 7b) is made use of. — The identification of the ark with the promised angel (see Exod. 23.20) is first found in Lekah, Exod., loc. cit. This identification is very likely based on old sources. Comp, the reference in note 435. Of all the furniture and vessels of the Sanctuary the ark is the only one whose measure is given in fractions (see Exod, 25.10); this indicates that, like the ark, the human receptacle of the Torah ought to be humble of spirit and contrite ( = broken) of heart; Kad ha-Kemah, Gaawah (end). See also the explanation of the four staves of the ark as given in Lekah, Exod. 25.12.
64
Moses in the Wilderness
[331-339
331 Shekalim 6, 49b; Sotah, Tosefta 7.18 and Yerushalmi 8, 22b-22c; Baba Batra 14a-14b; Meleket ha-Mishkan 6; Sifre N., 82; Sifre Z., 191. A different view is given in Yerushalmi Sotah, loc. cit., according to which there was only one ark which served as a receptacle for the two sets of the two tables, for the scroll of the Torah, and for the presents offered by the Philistines (see 1 Sam. 6.8).
33* Meleket ha-Mishkan 7; Shekalim, Mishnah 6.1-2; Tosefta 2.18; Talmud 7, 49b; Tosefta Sotah 13.1; Yoma 53b-54a; EZ 25, 129. Comp. Friedmann’s remarks on Meleket ha-Mishkan, loc. cit.; vol. Ill, pp. 48, 161.
333 Tadshe 2; Sukkah 5b; ShR 41.6; DR 3.16. The symbolic representation of the ark, as given by Philo, Moses, 2 (3). 8, and Quaes- tiones, Exod. 2, 62, offers many points of resemblance to that of the Midrashim. With reference to the Cherubim, Josephus, Antiqui., 6.5, writes: Cherubim are flying creatures, whose form is not like any creature, but which Moses saw near the throne of God.
334 Sukkah 5a; Mekilta Bahodesh 4, 65; comp, also Yerushalmi Shabbat 1, 2d.
335 Baba Batra 99a; a somewhat different version is given in Yoma 54a-54b. Comp, also Onkelos and Targum Yerushalmi on Exod. 25.20. The raising of the curtain during the festivals is also mentioned by Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 6. 4.
336 Meleket ha-Mishkan 7; Yoma, Tosefta 2(3). 7 and Babli 64a; comp. vol. Ill, p. 163.
337 Meleket ha-Mishkan 8; Menahot Tosefta 11.9, and Babli 98b-99a; Shekalim 6, 50a-50b. On the qualities of the south and the north, see vol. I, pp. 11-12, and the notes appertaining to them. Philo, Moses, 2(3). 10, writes: The table on which bread and salt are laid (salt is in agreement with Septuagint Lev. 24.7; whereas the Rabbis, Menahot 11, 5-8, and Josephus, Antiqui., II, 6.6, know nothing of salt) was placed on the northern side, since of all the winds, the north wind is the most beneficial for the production of nourishment. See also Yelammedenu 53=BHM VI, 88.
338 BaR 15.9; Tan. B. I, 49-50; Tan. Beha'aloteka 6. The pattern, fashioned of fire, for the ark, the table, and the candlestick came down from heaven to Moses, that he might be able to make these vessels of the sanctuary. According to another view, it was Gabriel who taught Moses how to fashion the candlestick; see Menahot 29a. Comp, also note 315, vol. Ill, p. 219, and note 202 on vol. II, p, 362.
339 Tadshe 2; Meleket ha-Mishkan 10; Menahot, Tosefta 11.10,
65
340-344]
The Legends of the Jews
and Babli 99a; Shekalim 6, 50a. Comp. vol. Ill, pp. 159-160, where a similar statement concerning Solomon’s tables is given. The sym¬ bolic explanation of the seven branches of the candlestick, as represent¬ ing the seven planets, is given by Philo, Vita Mosis, 2(3). 9; Quis .
Haeres Sit, 45; Josephus, A ntiqui., Ill, 6.7; as well as by the Midrashim, Tadshe 11; Tan. Beha'aloteka 6; Yalkut I, 219. The last-quoted source reminds one of Philo’s words. Comp, also vol. Ill, p. 151.
340 Tadshe 11. As to the view that paradise is situated in the north, see note 33 on vol. I, p. 11. The passage in Tadshe concerning the south is not very clear, and it may be translated: There — in the south— is only one light, that of the Shekinah. In Baba Batra 25b the candlestick is explained to be a symbolic representation of the Torah (comp. Ps. 119.105). A similar explanation is found in the Apocalypse of Baruch 17.4 and 59.2.
341 Tan. B. IV, 50; Tan. Beha'aloteka 6; BaR 15.9. Comp, vol. Ill, pp. 48 and 158.
342 Tan. Terumah 10-11. Concerning the heavenly beings, some of which are made of fire and some of water, see the statements in PK 1, 3a (numerous parallel passages are cited by Buber; comp, also ARN, second version, 24, 48-49, note 63 on vol. I, p. 16) which re¬ fer to Michael and Gabriel, as well as to those angels who are made partly of fire and partly of snow. On the sea of ice, see vol. I, p. 13. As to the idea that the cedars used for the Temple blossomed and bore fruit, see also Tan. B. IV, 32, which reads: Everything in the Temple, even the gold, was fruitful and multiplied; BaR 11.3 and 12.4; ShR 35.1; Shir 3.8; Yoma 21b and 39b; vol. I, p. 97 and vol. Ill, p. 159.’ The belief in the generative power of precious stones was widespread in the middle ages; see Kunz, The Magic of Jewels and Charms.
3 4 3 Tadshe 11. The view that the soul is sustained by fragrant odors is widespread; see, e. g„ Berakot 43b, and the explanation given by many medieval authorities concerning the custom of smelling spices at the termination of the Sabbath; comp. Mahzor Vitry 117.
3 4 4 Tan. Terumah 9-10; Tan. B. II, 91 and 94-95; ShR18.10, 33. 8, and 35.1; BR 15.1 (numerous parallel passages are cited by Theodor) and 94.4. Concerning Tahash, see vol. I, p. 34; concerning the view that Jacob prepared the necessary building material, see above, note 1, and vol. I, pp. 118-119. Shu'aib, Terumah 37b, quotes an unknown Midrash to the effect that the Shittim-wood for the tabernacle came from paradise, whence Adam took it with him when he was driven out of that place. Subsequently it came into the possession of
Moses in the Wilderness
[345-346
Abraham, who bequeathed it to Isaac. The latter, in his turn, bequeathed it to Jacob, who took it with him to Egypt. At the Exodus, the Is¬ raelites took it with them to the desert. According to Targum Yeru- shalmi Exod. 26.28, the middle bar was made of the wood taken from the tree which Abraham planted at Beer-sheba (comp. vol. II, p. 119). The angels felled this tree when the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, and threw it into the waters thereof, while an angel proclaimed: “This is the tree which Abraham planted in Beer-sheba.” The Israelites took the tree out of the water, and later made of it the middle bar, whose length was seventy cubits. This bar became circular when the tabernacle stood erect, so that it held all the boards together; but as soon as the boards were removed the middle bar became as straight as a rod.
5 45 Yoma 72a (bottom); Rashi, ad loc., who remarks that the boards were hidden and will be brought out again in the time to come. See vol. Ill, p. 194.
3 46 Midrash Aggada Exod. 26.7, based on an old source, since Abbahu, who flourished about the end of the third century, is quoted as the authority. See also ShR 33.4 and 35.6; PK 1, 4b-5a; BaR 12.8; Shir 3. 1 1 . The correspondence between the stars and the golden clasps, spoken of in the sources just quoted, is also referred to in Shabbat 99a and Yerushalmi Megillah 1, 72c-72d. The most elaborate symbolic explanation of the tabernacle, found in rabbinic sources, is the one given by R. Shemaiah of Soisson in his treatise on the tabernacle published by Berliner in Monatsschrift XIII, 225-231 and 258-264. A. Epstein, Mikkadmoniyyot (supplement), 2-4, calls attention to the close re¬ semblance of the symbolic explanation, as given by R. Shemaiah, to that found in Tadshe and Bereshit Rabbete, all three attempting to show that man, the world, and the Sanctuary correspond to one another. Shu’aib, Terumah 36b, drew upon a source closely related to the three mentioned above, whereas Shibbale ha-Leket 3 is a direct quotation from Bereshit Rabbete, and accordingly ’D31 n’PN133 is to be read instead of N31 '133 as found in our texts. Noteworthy is the following quotation from a Midrash given by R. Shemaiah {op. cit., 226), which reads: God said unto Moses:“Behold the celestial sanctuary, and erect the terrestial sanctuary in like fashion.’’ Comp, vol. Ill, p. 53, last paragraph. The symbolic explanation of the taber¬ nacle as given by Philo, Moses, 2(3), 3-10, and particularly Quaestiones, Exod. 2, 51-124, has many points of contact with that of the Rabbis. Clemens, Stromata, 4.6, is altogether based on Philo.
67
347-354]
The Legends of the Jews
347 Tadshe 2; comp. Index, s. v. “Heavens”.
3 4 8 Tadshe 10. The seventy names of God, of Israel, and of Jerusalem are enumerated in Aggadat Shir 1, 8-10. Comp. Schechter ad loc.
349 Tan.Terumah 10.
s s» ShR 35.5; Pesahim 118b. The Haggadah frequently speaks of Esau ( = Rome) priding himself of his descent from Abraham, and says that in the time to come he will attempt to save himself by claim¬ ing relationship with Jacob ( = Israel); see Yerushalmi Nedarim 3, 38a, and Tan. B. Ill, 15. All these Haggadot are very likely to be taken as anti-Christian. As to the gifts offered by the Gentiles to the Messiah, see also Enoch 53.1 and 90.30. Concerning the four kingdoms and their symbolic representations, see vol. Ill, p. 153.
3 s 1 ShR 37.1-4; Tan. Terumah 10; Shemuel 23, 112; Koheleth 7.1; Tehillim 101, 427-428, which read: The tribe of Reuben was re¬ jected because of Reuben’s sin in connection with Bilhah; the tribe of Simeon on account of their sins at Shittim (comp. vol. Ill, p. 382); the Joseph tribes because Joseph slandered his brethren. Comp, vol. II, pp. 5 and 6; ER 13, 63, and 31, 157, which read: Aaron strove to reconcile Israel to his God (see vol. Ill, p. 328), and he was therefore chosen to perform the work of reconciliation (i. e., atonement) in the Sanctuary. Concerning Aaron ’s real motives in fashioning the golden calf, see vol. Ill, p. 121, as well as Da' at and Hadar on Exod. 3.2. As to Moses’s aspiration to the priesthood, see vol. Ill, p. 316. Comp, vol. Ill, p. 182.
353 Tan. B. II, 100-101; Tan. Terumah 10-13; ShR 38.1.
3 5 3 WR 10.6; Zebahim 88b; ‘Arakin 16a; Yerushalmi Yoma 9, 44b-44c; Shir 34.1; Yelammedenu in Yalkut I, 513 (this passage agrees literally with WR). See also Yoma 7a-7b (in this passage atoning power is ascribed to the mitre only and that in a limited degree) and 72a-72b. A very elaborate symbolic interpretation of the priestly garments is given by Philo, Moses, 2(3). 2-14, and Special. Leg. 15-6, of which Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 7.7, seems to have made use, but of which no trace is found in rabbinic literature. The tripartite division of the tabernacle, as a symbol of the tripartite division of the cosmos into water, dry land, and heaven, is given by Josephus and in Tadshe 2 (beginning).
354 ShR 33.8, with the additional remark that the Jews at that time were so rich, that any one of them would have been able to defray
68
Moses in the Wilderness [355-358
the cost of the erection of the tabernacle. See also Yoma 95a; Zohar HI, 23b; comp. vol. Ill, pp. 176, 193.
355 Maimonides’ Yad, Kele ha-Mikdash 9.9 (he undoubtedly follows a tannaitic source); Sotah 36a, and Yerushalmi 7, 2 Id. See the thorough study of Epstein, Mikkadmoniyyot, 83-90, and comp, also Responsen der Geonim, Harkavy’s edition, 3, as well as the follow¬ ing note.
35 6 Yoma 73b; Sotah 36b. Comp, also Epstein, Mikkadmoniyyot 83-90, as well as Aristeas 97, and Josephus, Antiqui., Ill, 7.5. In order to have all the letters of the Hebrew alphabet engraved upon the stones, it was necessary to include the names of the three patriarchs, as well as the words “all these are, etc.” (Comp. Gen. 49.28). Had some letters been missing, the oracular sentences would not have been possible. See vol. Ill, p. 172.
3 5 7 R- Bahya on Exod., 28.17, which is the source for Toledot Yizhak, adloc.; Talpiyyot, s. v. n^PD, makes use of R. Bahya ’s
description, but does not follow it in every detail. See also ShR 38.8-9; Lekah and Targum Yerushalmi on Exod. loc. cit.\ Targum Yerushalmi Num. 2.2-25 (this passage differs from Targum on Exod.) ; Targum Song of Songs 2.12. The old rabbinic literature has no remarks about the peculiarities of the twelve stones, and there can be no doubt that R. Bahya, or rather the source which he followed, is based upon some medie¬ val lapidarium. Steinschneider, Semitic Studies in memory of Kohut 64, seq., gives a bibliography of lapidaria composed by Christian authors in the Middle Ages. Of course, the relation between the peculiarities of the stones and the history of the tribes is of Jewish origin. Comp. Index, under the names of the Twelve Tribes. See vol. Ill, pp. 233, 238; vol. IV, p. 24.
358 Yoma 73a-73b and Yerushalmi 7, 44c. The Urim and Thum- mim ceased to give oracular answers immediately after the death of the first prophets; Sotah 9.12. According to Tosefta 13.2 and Babli 48b, by the “first prophets” are meant those prophets who lived during the first commonwealth, so that the time when the Urim and Thummim ceased to function is identical with the time of the destruction of the first Temple. Yerushalmi 9, 24b, however, offers the opinion that the expression the “first prophets” refers to Samuel and David, and accordingly the Urim and Thummim did not function in the first Temnle. Targum Yerushalmi, Exod. 28.30, maintains that the high priest gave the oracular answers by means of the "great and holy Name" which was engraved upon the Urim and Thummim as well as up-
69
359-364]
The Legends of the Jews
on the Eben Shetiyyah. The sources quoted in notes 355 and 356 do not make the slightest allusion to the Name being engraved upon the stones of the breast-plate. Concerning the statement that the Name was engraved upon the Eben Shetiyyah, see Index, s. v. On the lustre of the stones, see vol. Ill, p. 455; vol. IV, p. 8. The view given in Lekah, Exod. 29.15, as that of DHD1N W' is quite unintelligible to me.
ass Mekilta Shabbat 2, 104b; Mekilta RS 165. See also Sifra 19.3 and 4 Maccabees 2.10, with reference to the honor due to parents, which one is not to observe when it conflicts with the honor due to God.
s 60 Tan. as quoted in Shibbale ha-Leket 67-68; Abkir in Yalkut I, 408; Rokeah 53 (the source, though not given by the author, is very likely Abkir). Comp, also Megillah 4a; Lekah, Exod. 34.34 (end); Zohar II, 203. The last-named passage reads: Moses communicated the laws of Sabbath to the Israelites before they worshipped the golden calf. But many of the people, misled by the “mixed multitude'* (see vol. Ill, pp. 122-123), did not observe them, and Moses therefore repeated them after the death of the “mixed multitude” (see vol. Ill, p. 130). This time he addressed himself exclusively to the Jews. The source of Zohar is Lekah, Exod. 35.4. The Sabbath as the day of study and religious instruction is of frequent occurrence in Jewish literature; see e. g., Pesahim 68b; Yer. Shabbat 15, 15a; PR 23, 116a and 121a; Philo, Special. Leg. 2.6; Vita Mosis, 2(3). 27 (in this pas¬ sage it is regarded as an institution of Moses); ps-Philo 11.7.
3 61 Shabbat 90a. Comp. Lekah, Exod. 34.34.
3 6 3 Shekalim 1, 45d; Lekah, Exod. 35.22; ShR 41.2 (which re¬ marks: All that was necessary for the building of the tabernacle was brought in the short space of “two morning hours”); BaR 12.37; Tehillim 101, 428; Tan. B. II, 90; Tan. Terumah 4(it is stated in this passage: God’s blessing was on everything which the people brought, so that even little things were put to great use).
j63 Shabbat 74b and 99a; Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 35.26. The goats came every day, with the exception of Sabbath and the New Moon, to the women, and offered their wool for the hangings of the Tabernacle; Shu'aib, Wa-Yakhel, 42b, On the New Moon as a festi¬ val of the women, see vol. Ill, pp. 121-122 and next note; on the animals participating in the erection of the Tabernacle, see vol. Ill, p. 156.
3 6 * Aggadat Shir 4, 79 (the word HD1?!? in this passage probably means, not "cloak”, but, as in Deut. 22.17, the garment used by the bride); BaR 9.14 (it says: They disposed of their mirrors as a proof
70
Moses in the Wilderness
[365-367
of their chastity); Tan. Pekude 9, reads: The women provided their husbands with food consisting of fish which came to them in a miraculous way as soon as they let their pitchers down into the well to draw water. See Sotah 11a, and comp, further PRK 15a on fish as a food conducive to fecundity. The statement with regard to the praise of the women in the passage cited by Hadar, Exod. 35.22, reads somewhat differently from that in the sources quoted above; it also adds that the women received the New Moon as a festival (see the preceding note), as a reward for their devotion to their nation by bearing and raising children under very trying circumstances. In the legends about the mirrors of the women, expression is given to the thought that it is the intention which counts more than the deed; comp. Mishnah Menahot (end), which reads: Whether one does much or little — does not matter — provided the intention is for the sake of heaven. The story told in WR 3.5 of the poor widow and the high priest, as an illustration of the importance of the intention, is very much akin to that of Mark 12.44; Philo, Moses , 2(3). 15, seems to presuppose a Haggadah similar to that given by the Rabbis concerning the mirrors presented by the women.
3 65 Tan. B. IV, 40; Tan. Naso 27 (the text is corrupt); comp,
vol. Ill, pp. 192-193. As to the provenance of these stones, see vol. Ill p. 169, as well as Targum Yerushalmi Exod. 35.27, where it is stated that the clouds fetched them from the river Pishon (see Gen. 2.12), and placed them in the wilderness (read instead of NrQlD),
where the princes found them. Comp. vol. Ill, p. 27. A similar legend is given in the following verse of Targum, according to which the clouds brought the perfumes from paradise, and placed them in the wilderness for Israel. In Yoma 75a, the clouds which carried the precious stones are identical with those which brought the manna. It therefore seems reasonable to assume that Targum did not draw upon this passage.
366 Tan. B. II, 125; Tan. Wa-Yakhel 10; ShR 50.4-5. Comp, the different opinion concerning the order of the work, as given in vol. Ill, pp. 155, 156-157.
3 6 7 PR 24a-24b (on the text, see Orehot Hayyim I, 26d), which has the additional remark that the month of Kislev was later compensated with the feast of Hanukkah, in memory of the dedication of the Temple under the Maccabees; Tan. Pekude (end); ShR 52.2. On Isaac’s birthday see note 203 on vol. I, p. 261; vol. IV, p. 155. On the deroga¬ tory expression “son of Amram”, see note 163, and comp, the phrase
71
368-371]
The Legends of the Jews
“son of Bath-sheba” in vol. VI, p. 155. On the people finding fault with Moses, see vol. Ill, p. 69.
3 68 Tan. B. II, 129; Tan. Pekude 7, and Ki-Tissa 27; ShR 51.6; Kiddushin 33b; Yerushalmi Bikkurim 3, 65; Zohar II, 226 (which reads: A heavenly voice told the people of the use made of the supposedly missing item); Midrash Aggada Exod. 38.21; Hadassi, 132a. No. 358. Similarly Manhig, Tefillah, 39, knows the tale about the sudden appearance of the hooks which came to defend Moses against his ac¬ cusers. See also Toledot Yizhak, Exod., loc. tit., and Ayyumah Kan- nidgalot, 16a, where this legend is given in accordance with the Manhig version.
i & 9 ShR 51.2; Tan. Pekude 5; Tan. B. II, 127; Midrash Esfah in Yalkut I, 737; Sifre Z., 62 and 110. Comp. Hoffmann, Wichtigste Instanzen gegen die Graf- Wellhausensche Hypothese, 81. To re¬ move all suspicion, Moses took Ithamar to participate with him in drawing up the accounts of the treasury of the tabernacle; ShR, loc. tit.
3 7“ Tan. Pekude 11; Tan. B. II, 132-133; ShR 52.2-3. As a reward to Moses for his great devotion to the work of erecting the tabernacle, Scripture speaks of the erection of the tabernacle “by Moses” (Num. 7.1) and not “ by Israel”. See Tan. Ki-Tissa 35; BaR 12.1. Com. note 257.
3 7 1 Horayyot lib and Keritot 5b; in both passages it is also stated that until Josiah hid the sacred oil (vol. Ill, p. 48) all the high priests and those kings who did not come to the throne by inheritance were anointed with the oil prepared by Moses. During the second common¬ wealth neither the high priests nor the kings were anointed with the "oil of ointment ”, though some of the kings were anointed with balsam. But according to PRK, 42a, Aaron and his sons and Zadok were the only “anointed priests”; among the kings, Saul, David, Joash, and Jehoash enjoyed this distinction. Comp. Ginzberg, Unbekannte Sekte 319-320; WR 3.5 and 10.8; ARN 1, land 34, 100; BaR 12.15, 14.13, and 18.9; PK 1, 7a; Sifre N., 92, Sifre Z., 53-54 (this passage gives a very detailed description of the ceremony of anointing) and 57; Shekalim 9, 49c-49d; Sifra 7.35 and 8.10; Tehillim 133, 517; Tan. Korah 6; Tan. B. IV, 90; Shir 1.10; Midrash Shir 34b (which reads: Through a miracle not a drop of the sacred oil was spilled;) Ekah 1,87; Batte Midrashot III, 16. The emphatic manner in which many of the passages just quoted state their view that neither Aaron nor the Messiah will be anointed in the time to come leads one to assume the probability that this opinion is directed against the Christian Messiah, literally
72
Moses in the Wilderness
[372-380
^the anointed one”. Com. Ginzberg, op. cit., note 4 on p. 348, and note 23 on vol. IV, p. 84.
3 7i PK 4, 38a— 38b (this passage quotes also the dissenting view, according to which Moses performed the services of high priest during the last forty years of his life; this opinion seems to have been shared
by Philo, who describes Moses as a high priest; see Quis _ Hae-
res Sit, 38); Zebahim 101b-102a; Ta'anit lib; Yerushalmi Yoma
I, 38b; WR 11.6; BaR 9.44; ShR 37.1; Tehillim 91, 423-424; PR 14, 63b-64a; comp, note 121 on vol. II, p. 316.
3 73 Tan. B. Ill, 19.21; Tan. Zaw 10-12; WR 10.9; Likkutim
II, 4b; BR 5.7 (numerous parallel passages are cited by Theodor); DR 4.11; PR 1, 2a (on the text see Rokeah, 221); PK 12, 108a-108b, and 20, 143a-143b; ARN 35, 106; Baba Batra 76b; Sifre D., 1. The question as to how, at the time of the resurrection, all the numberless multitudes will find place in Palestine engaged the attention of Sa'adya Gaon; see Emunot we-Deot, 7 (=BHM VI, 148-149). See vol. Ill, pp. 212, 311-312; vol. IV, p. 6. An allusion to the legend that all the Israelites were assembled in the Sanctuary is very likely to be found in Enoch 89.36. As to the date of the consecration of the priests, see Sifre D., 44; Seder ‘Olam 7 and parallel passages given by Ratner.
3 7 4 Sifra 8.15 and 35; Seder ‘Olam 7; Tosefta Menahot 7.6, seq.; PK 6, 6a-6b; PR 5, 15a; Yerushalmi Yoma I, 38b; BaR. 13.2.
375 Tan. B. II, 21-22; Tan. Shemini 1; BR 100.7; Yerushalmi Moed Katan 3, 82c; comp, also Tan. B. I, 222, and Tan. Wa-Yehi 17, as well as note 64 on vol. I, p. 142.
376 Seder ‘Olam 7; Sifra 9.1; BR 3.9; Shabbat 86b; PR 7, 27b; BaR 13.6; Tadshe 10. Comp, also Sifre Num., 44, and Shekalim 1. 2a (beginning).
377 Tan. B. Ill, 24; Tan. Shemini 10; WR. 11.6; Comp, note 372; vol. II, p. 316 and vol. Ill, pp. 168-169.
378 Sifra 9.1.
3 79 Tan. B. Ill, 24; Tan. Shemini 3. Comp. vol. II, pp. 328-329.
380 Sifra 9.2-24. Concerning the atonement for the selling of Joseph, see ShR 30.7 and vol. II, p. 25. On the admonition of Moses to drive away the evil inclination, see Philo, Moses, 2(3). 17, according to whom one of the sacrifices offered up on this occasion was intended to convey to the Israelites the thought that even the virtuous are not free from sin. On the fire of the altar, see 2 Maccabees 2.10; vol.
III.pp. 161-162, 245; vol. IV, p. 353. Besides the fire of the altar, it was the smoke by which God ’s grace was indicated; see Tan. Tezawweh
73
381-382]
The Legends of the Jews
15; Midrash Shir 28b; PK 27, 171b (by the smoke of the fire of the altar on the Day of Atonement one could judge whether the new year would be prosperous or not); PR 47, 190b; Tan. B. Ill, 60; WR 20.4; Yoma 21b; Baba Batra 147a. On the likeness of the fire of the altar to a lion, see Yoma, loc. cit., and Zohar III, 32b-33a.
3 8 1 PR 5, 15a-16a, 18b, 20b-22b; Tan. B. IV, 37-40; Tan. Naso 16-19, 23, and 25, as well as Pekude 11; BaR 12.4, 7. 12. Con¬ cerning the Shekinah’s withdrawal to heaven, see vol. II, p, 260; Tehillim 8, 76-77. In the old sources the view prevails that the ter¬ restrial sanctuary corresponds to the celestial one (comp. e. g., Mekilta Shirah 10, 43b; BaR 45.7; Index, s. v. “Sanctuary Celestial”),