-
2. Divine Revelation and Human Exegesis; Or, How to Recognize a False Prophet When You See One
- University of California Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
39 two Divine Revelation and Human Exegesis; Or, How to Recognize a False Prophet When You See One As I noted at the conclusion of the previous chapter, one of the fundamental differences between the Qumran scrolls and rabbinic literature revolves around the theological dispute concerning the source for the authority of halakhah: divine or human. The Qumran scrolls present the exegesis of the Torah and consequently the halakhic decisions that stem from it as the product of divine inspiration, while the rabbinic writings treat it as an openended process of human exegetical activity. In what follows, I will argue that this aspect of the relationship between early sectarian and later rabbinic halakhic discourse is best explained by the developmental model. This is because early Jewish literature, very much like the Dead Sea Scrolls, strongly tends toward attributing a divine origin to halakhic biblical explanations, while later generations tend toward embracing human activity as a source of authority that is rooted in the exegetical process. The parting of the ways between early sectarian writings and Divine Revelation and Human Exegesis / 40 later rabbinic literature is especially evident in the procedures that the two groups employ for making legal decisions. The nature and extent of this difference is best illustrated by their opposing treatment of the biblical injunctions concerning the false prophet, on the one hand, and the status of the high court’s decisions, on the other. It is to that topic that I will soon turn. To arrive at it, however, allow me first to elaborate further on the background of the Qumranic and rabbinic positions on the authority of halakhah. THE SECTARIAN STANCE The Qumranites believed that the Torah that God commanded to Israel contains both revealed and hidden commandments, of which the revealed commandments are those explicitly mentioned in Scripture, whereas the hidden ones are those divulged to the members of the sect alone, which remain unknown to the rest of the people.1 Revelation of the hidden commandments ensues from fulfillment of the revealed ones; only he who meticulously observes the commandments of the revealed Torah merits divine revelation of the hidden commandments. This conception is also reflected in the sect’s understanding of the history of the people of Israel. According to the sect’s historical narrative, the Israelites, during the First Temple period, brazenly broke the revealed commandments. Consequently, they were punished by exile and the desolation of the land of Israel. Only a select group, which remained loyal to divine imperatives, was chosen by God for a covenantal relationship . In the framework of this covenant, God revealed the hitherto hidden commandments to it alone.2 The sectarian distinction between “niglot” (revealed) and “ni- [54.226.222.183] Project MUSE (2024-03-19 02:13 GMT) Divine Revelation and Human Exegesis / 41 starot”(hidden)isclearlybasedonDeuteronomy29:28:“Thehidden matters (ha-nistarot) belong to the Lord our God, and the revealed matters belong to us and our children forever, so as to do all the words of this Torah.” This verse stands at the heart of Moses’s exhortation of the people of Israel (Deuteronomy 29–30), in which Moses elaborates the historical process that will be set in motion when the Israelites sin in the future. There will be individuals among them who will bless themselves in their hearts, saying, “I will have shalom, though in the stubbornness of my heart I will walk” (v. 18). God in turn will exile them from their land “in anger , wrath, and great fury” (v. 27), and the land will be desolate (v. 22). Deuteronomy 29 concludes with our verse, while chapter 30 proceeds to narrate Israel’s future, prophesying the ingathering of the exiles (v. 3). Following the description of the future redemption, Scripture predicts Israel’s true return to God, its true commitment to his commandments and his laws, which are “not too extraordinary for you,” or “too far away!” (30:10–11). A similar exposition of a historical process involving sin, destruction , return to God, and redemption, is found in three places in the Damascus Document (1:3–11; 3:9–20; and 5:20–6:11). Its author, however, relates the circumstances of return and redemption to the sect alone, and not to Israel as a whole.3 It is in this context that the sect’s self-perception as “shave Yisrael” should be understood.4 The designation “shave Yisrael” bears a dual meaning : “penitents of Israel,” which refers to their spiritual...