owing to Aaron's decease, they began to lose courage, and gave up their hope of entering the Holy land, and so took the road to return to Egypt; and whereas their journies had previously been from Mosera to Bené Jaakan, thence to Hor-a-Gidgad, thence to Jotbatha, thence to Ebronah and Ezion Gaber, and from Ezion Gaber to Kadesh, and thence to Mount Hor, where Aaron died, we find that they retraced the steps of these journies until they came back to Mosera, whence they had set out. As a punishment for this offence, God permitted them to be attacked there by the king of Arad, and many were taken prisoners, which the very text infers, "And the Canaanite king of Arad heard that Israel came by the way of the spies, and he fought with Israel;" meaning, that they followed the evil example of their fathers, who, crediting the false report of the spies, conspired to return unto Egypt, saying, "Let us choose a captain and return unto Egypt;" and these had the same intention, which the king of Arad learning, resolved to attack them, thinking to make an easy conquest. The ancient Sages say, that those of the tribe of Levi were here actuated by the same holy zeal they had previously shewn; and in taking up arms against the people, and compelling them to abandon their evil purpose, obliged them to prosecute their journey forward, when they acknowledged their fault, and repented of their sinful determination: and as the death of Aaron was the cause of these evils, they mourned as sincerely as if he had died and been buried at that very place. The texts are thus reconciled as to the journies they made, first from Mosera to Mount Hor, and subsequently returning to Mosera from Mount Hor, and saying that Aaron died at Mosera, instead of Mount Hor, shew that Israel wept and bewailed his death as if he had actually died there. This opinion of the ancients is adopted by Rashi and R. Bechayai. The learned Aben Ezra conciliates these verses in another manner, saying, that the same journies which are represented in one text as having been made, are referred to and related in another. The text appears to favour this idea, Beerot of Bene) בארות בני יעקן,Bené Jaakan) is one thing) בני יעקן for Jaakan) is another, DD (Mosera) and noin (Moserot) are not the same; therefore, as the Scripture does not name these places by unvarying terms, it may reasonably be supposed they are not the identical; and, therefore, Kadesh may have been called Beérot-bené-Jaakan, and Hor-a-Har (the mount) Mosera; in this way the verses are not contradictory, for it says in one verse that they removed from Kadesh to Hor-a-Har, and the same in another verse, denominating the places differently, that is, Beérot-bené-Jaakan and Mosera, stating that Aaron died there, Mount Hor and Mosera being the same. It is not surprising that a place should be called by different names, for it occurs very often in Scripture; the wilderness of Shur is also termed of Etham, thus the two doubts are solved, seeing that the movements are not related in two ways, for Beérot-béné-Jaakan and Moserot are not Bené Jaakan and Mosera, consequently, Aaron died in Hor-a-Har (Mount Har) or Mosera, which is one and the same place; in this way also, the forward journeys which they made from this place are related by giving them different names, for in Numbers it is said, that from Hor-a-Har they moved to Zalmona, and in Deuteronomy from Mosera (which is Hor-a-Har) they moved to Gudgoda, which is the same place, as also Punon and Obot. Jotbiata is a place called Béér (a well), on which account, the term springs of waters is applied to it: thus the verses conciliate. 2 Num. 14:4. R. Levi ben Gershon observes otherwise on the second text, saying, “ And the children of Israel moved from Beéroth-bené-Jaakan Mosera;" if the verse had intended to say, "to Mosera," it ought to have been written is, with the letter, or the preposition to; from which omission, he infers that it would otherwise have been contradictory of the first passage. His exposition is this: "And the children of Israel moved from Beéroth-bené-Jaakan and Mosera; and in these journies Aaron died;" or in Hor-a-Har, since there it is not named. The doubts also solve in this way; for it neither mentions the movements in a different manner, nor does it say he died at Mosera, but during those journies. * Nachmanides has another idea, that Mount Hor was an extensive region, and, therefore, called Hor-a-Har, which means Mount Hor, for distinctions sake, and that it began at Hasinona and terminated on the borders of Edom; and in the plains at the base of Mount Hor, were the seven places mentioned as lying between Mosera and Kadesh. This being the case, Israel (as stated in Numbers) journeyed from Moserot, and encamped at Hor-a-Har, that is, on a spot at its base, where Moses received the command to ascend the heights with his brother Aaron, which he obeyed, all these places were close to each other, in that part of the Mount that was above Moserot Aaron died, and was interred: in this way one of the contradictions is reconciled, as Aaron died in Hor-a-Har, above Moserot, and was buried in that part of the mount which had that place at its base. To solve the other doubt, Beérotbené-Jaakan is not Bené-Jaakan, but a place called Hasmona, where those of Bené-Jaakan had dug wells to water their flocks, for n means "wells;" and it says, departing from Hasmona, Israel encamped there, and thence moved to Mosera, then to Moserot, and on to Bené-Jaakan, which makes four days' journey; and as events are more detailed in Deuteronomy, it there mentions these two additional journies of Beérot-bené-Jaakan and Mosera, and then proceeds to those of Jotbiata, to give the opportunity of stating that they were places containing plenty of water; on which account they tarried there many days. The second contradiction is thus disposed of, since these two places are additional ones to those before named. Another explanation is given on this point, thus: They may have been the same places; but Aaron dying in that part of Hor-a-Har above Mosera, the elders and pious men of Israel, or even the whole people, retraced those journies, which were short, for the purpose of ascending the mount at Mosera; and there they prayed, and bewailed the loss they had sustained by the death of one so eminently worthy, which lasted thirty days; when they returned, and continued their journey. This is easily credible. The mode of conciliation is, however, left to choice. QUESTION 170. Num. 35:4. And the suburbs of the cities which ye shall give unto the Levites shall reach from the wall of the city and outward, a thousand cubits round about. Num. 35:5. And ye shall measure from without the city on the east side, two thousand cubits, &c. These contradictions are closely connected, one verse saying 1000 cubits, and the following one 2000-How is it explainable? RECONCILIATION. The contradiction is mooted in the Guemara,1 and thus conciliated by R. Eliezer: Two thousand cubits were given to the Levitical cities, measuring from outside the city, of which one thousand was for pasturage, and the adornment of the city, on which houses might not be built, nor vines planted, nor might it be cultivated, but used only for grazing their cattle; and this the text says. The Sages say they could not bury their dead there, but they might do any of these things in the outer thousand cubits. This precept was given by the Lord to save them trouble, and that they might have their cattle near to them and the city. 1 Sota, c. 5. T DEUTERONOMY. QUESTION 171. Deut. 4:7. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all that we call upon him for. Isaiah 55:6. Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near. According to the words of Moses, the Lord is always ready to hear those who call upon him; why, therefore, does Isaiah say, "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found;" which seems to indicate that there are times when he may be found, and others, when he may not? How can these apparently repugnant verses be reconciled ? RECONCILIATION. One of the accusations made by the impious King Manasseh against Isaiah was, that he was a false prophet; from contradicting the words of Moses, which must necessarily be positive, as he was the greatest of all prophets; and he had declared that there was no God like the Lord, who at all times heard those who called upon him, yet Isaiah, who was a prophet, when compared to him, much inferior, said "Seek him while he may be found;" although he had no power or authority to cancel or alter the dicta of Moses. The Guemara1 says, that for this and many similar reasons, that wicked king condemned Isaiah to death without waiting for any explanation or answer, which the prophet might have given to elucidate the point. The ancient Sages answer this doubt in the same Treatise, and in Yalcut,2 by this distinction-" This, is by a single person, and this (the other), is in a congregation," meaning that prayers are more acceptable to the Lord when made in common, than individually; and this is shewn in the Guemara3 to be understood for a congregation of (or exceeding) ten persons; great sanctity being attached to that number; for which reason, when Abraham interceded for Sodom, he stopped on coming to ten righteous persons, as he could not go below that number: the Cabalists hold it to be the most perfect number. This doctrine of our Sages is supported by Avicenna in the last book of his Metaphysics. Thomas Aquinas 5 also taught it, and even Augustin conforming to it, says, Those who have but little, acquire great merit on forming a body in order to pray, as it appears incredible that the prayers of many should not be heard. Therefore all the prayers of our ancient Sages, and those composed by the men of the Great Synagogue are in the plural, as “Our father, O make us turn to thy law," "Heal us,' "Answer us;" our prayers are invariably in this mode, none being in the singular.7 1 Yebamot, c.4. 4 Meguila, c. 1. 5 Thomas, ques. 22, & 83, art. 7. It must not be supposed from this that we are without prayers for individual cases: we have many; for instance-"Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the Universe, who Aris The philosophical foundation of this rests on the following reasons. totle, Plato, and Scot, 10 say that every thing composed of parts is not the same as the parts were, which assertion effects changes conformable to true metaphysics, that a mixture forms a third description in respect to its component parts. According to this truth the verses conciliate; for Moses saying "The Lord is always near to those who call upon him," alludes to prayers made in a congregation of ten when they would certainly be heard; whereas Isaiah's words, "Call upon him while he may be found," refers to private orisons, when God is sometimes to be found, and at others not, according to the merits of the supplicant. In the Jerusalem Talmud 11 this doubt is solved in another way. R. Jeremiah, in the name of R. Abhu, says, "Seek the Lord while he is to be found." Where is he to be found? In the synagogues and colleges: this he takes from the in the word 1 (when he is to be found), which is termed pipon n', a Beth (2) of locality, and therefore explains that God is always found ready to hear, and near to prayers made in synagogues, colleges, and places of public worship, although not always so to private devotion. This is also founded on reason; for now prayers being offered up in lieu of sacrifices, which were only performed in the Temple by the priests, so should they be offered in the synagogues, or small temples, such as we now have. This doctrine is not only confirmed by Philo,12 but also by Plato,13 who ordains that no one should have private oratories in their houses wherein to offer sacrifices. This also conciliates the verses; for Moses saying, that in all our calling upon God, we shall always find him ready, is to be understood of public places of worship; and Isaiah does not say the contrary, but preaches that God is not always to be found, nor is he always near to individuals: he therefore recommends that he should be sought in those places where he is to be found. In the Guemaral4 and Yalcut,15 they give another interpretation, which is, "Seek the Lord while he is to be found," means during the penitential days, from New Year to the Day of Atonement, which must be thus understood: The world was created on the first day of Tisri, as before shewn; and as it is the beginning of the year, all the planets commence their revolutions; and in the same manner as they denote the events of man's future life at his birth, so do they demonstrate all the events of the elemental world at this period of the year's commencement, as well as general events, such as famine and plague, plenty and health, war and peace, &c. ; life or death, and gain or loss, to particular provinces or individuals, as will happen to each. The Hebrews call that day 'D', a day of judgment, as thereon by the celestial constellations every thing is judged; but this judgment is general and not particular: and as the people of Israel are not governed by the heavenly bodies, nor are under the influence of their movements, nor that of any celestial prince, but guided by Divine Providence only, as the Scripture clearly says, "Lest thou lift up thine eyes to heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest thou be moved to worship them and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath partitioned unto all nations under the whole heaven." "But the Lord hath taken you;" which proves that all bestowest benefits on the undeserving, for on me hast thou bestowed all good;" which is publicly said in synagogue by a person arriving from a dangerous journey, being released from prison, recovering from illness, or coming from a sea voyage, which our Sages derive from Psa. 107, where allusion is made to those four cases, and v. 35 commands a public expression of gratitude.-TRANSLATOR. 8 Metaphysics, 5, text 19. 12 De Monarchia, b. 2. 15 B. 1. art. 825. 9 Thecteto. 11 Berachot, c. 5. |