Shaving Sennacherib (article summary)

My article for the Jewish Link last week was Shaving Sennacherib and Midrashic Figurativism. You can read it in the image below, or on Scribal Error Substack, Jewish Link HTML, or flipbooks. An outline summary below the image, though the summary might be as long as the article.

Here’s the outline:

1. The verse in Yeshaya 7:20:
   בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא יְגַלַּח אֲדֹנָי בְּתַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה בְּעֶבְרֵי נָהָר בְּמֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר אֶת־הָרֹאשׁ וְשַׂעַר הָרַגְלָיִם וְגַם אֶת־הַזָּקָן תִּסְפֶּה׃
   

   “In that day, my Sovereign will cut away with the razor that is hired beyond the Euphrates—with the king of Assyria—the hair of the head and the hair of the legs, and it shall clip off the beard as well.
   

2. Note how the English translation was אֲדֹנָי / my Sovereign. It is אדני which is ambiguous, especially since YKVK appears in context above and below. But, taking it as referring to Hashem, is this verse intended literally?
   

3. Allegory can be peshat. Point to Shir Hashirim and Rashi’s commentary, where he renders the literal meaning of the words in the surface story, and in a separate pass, explains what that literal meaning is allegorically referring to. Both levels are important and, for Rashi, the mashal and nimshal are both peshat. And the fact that there is mashal and nimshal is itself core to the peshat.
   

   So too in Yeshaya, Rashi seems to make two passes. It seems that he regards the verse as allegory, as a matter of peshat.
   

4. What is disconcerting is that, at the very end, he seems to say that Chazal said that this was literal shaving. If Rashi thinks he is saying the verse is allegory, and he also says that Chazal were saying something different, then Rashi would be saying that Chazal think it literal.
   

5. The story is Sanhedrin 95b, which goes:
   
   אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: אִלְמָלֵא מִקְרָא כָּתוּב, אִי אֶפְשָׁר לְאׇמְרוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא יְגַלַּח ה׳ בְּתַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה בְּעֶבְרֵי נָהָר בְּמֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְשַׂעַר הָרַגְלָיִם וְגַם אֶת הַזָּקָן תִּסְפֶּה״.

   § Rabbi Abbahu says: Were the following verse not written, it would have been impossible to say it, since it appears to be a desecration of the name of God, as it is written: “On that day shall the Lord shave with a hired razor in the parts beyond the river the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the legs, and it shall also sweep away the beard” (Isaiah 7:20). The blasphemous indication is that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will Himself shave Sennacherib.

   אֲתָא קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא, וְאִדְּמִי לֵיהּ כְּגַבְרָא סָבָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כִּי אָזְלַתְּ לְגַבֵּי מַלְכֵי מִזְרָח וּמַעֲרָב דְּאַיְיתִיתִינְהוּ לִבְנַיְיהוּ וּקְטַלְתִּינְהוּ, מַאי אָמְרַתְּ לְהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הַהוּא גַּבְרָא בְּהָהוּא פַּחְדָּא נָמֵי יָתֵיב. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הֵיכִי נַעֲבֵיד״ אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל

   Rather, this is the incident depicted in the verse: The Holy One, Blessed be He, came and appeared to Sennacherib as an old man. God said to him: When you go to the kings of the east and the west whose children you brought and killed, what will you say to them? Sennacherib said to the Holy One, Blessed be He: That man, referring to himself, also sits overcome with the same fear, as I do not know what to say to them. Sennacherib said to the Holy One, Blessed be He: What should we do? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: Go
   וְשַׁנִּי נַפְשָׁךְ. בְּמַאי אֵישַׁנֵּי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל אַיְיתִי לִי מַסְפְּרָא וְאֶיגְזְיָיךְ אֲנָא. מֵהֵיכָא אַיְיתֵי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עוּל לְהָהוּא בֵּיתָא וְאַיְיתֵי. אֲזַל, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ לְמַלְאֲכֵי שָׁרֵת וְאִידְּמוֹ לֵיהּ כְּגַבְרֵי, וַהֲווֹ קָא טָחֲנִי קַשְׁיָיתָא.

   and change your appearance so that they will not recognize you. Sennacherib asked him: With what shall I change it? God said to him: Go bring me scissors and I will shear you Myself. Sennacherib asked: From where should I bring the scissors? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: Go to that house and bring them. He went and found ministering angels, who came and appeared to Sennacherib as men; and the angels were grinding date pits.

   אֲמַר לְהוּ: הַבוּ לִי מַסְפְּרָא. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: טְחוֹן חַד גְּרִיוָא דְּקַשְׁיָיתָא וְנִיתֵּן לָךְ. טְחַן חַד גְּרִיוָא דְּקַשְׁיָיתָא וִיהַבוּ לֵיהּ מַסְפַּרְתָּא. עַד דַּאֲתָא, אִיחֲשַׁךְ. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: זִיל אַיְיתִי נוּרָא. אֲזַל וְאַיְיתִי נוּרָא. בַּהֲדֵי דְּקָא נָפַח לֵיהּ, אִתְּלִי בֵּיהּ נוּרָא בְּדִיקְנֵיהּ. אֲזַל גַּזְיֵיהּ לְרֵישֵׁיהּ וְדִיקְנֵיהּ. (אֲמַרוּ): הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״וְגַם אֶת הַזָּקָן תִּסְפֶּה״. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי: ״גָּרֵירְתֵּיהּ לְאַרְמָאָה שְׁפַר לֵיהּ, אַיתְלֵי לֵיהּ נוּרָא בְּדִיקְנֵיהּ וְלָא שָׂבְעַתְּ חוּכָא מִינֵּיהּ״.

   Sennacherib said to them: Give me scissors. The ministering angels said to him: Grind a se’a of pits and we will give it to you. He ground a se’a of pits and they gave him scissors. By the time he came back with the scissors it grew dark. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Sennacherib: Go and bring fire to provide light. Sennacherib went and brought fire. While he was fanning it, the fire ignited his beard and it spread and sheared his head and his beard. The Sages said: This is the meaning of that which is written: “And it shall also destroy the beard” (Isaiah 7:20). Rav Pappa says that this is in accordance with the adage that people say: If you scorch a gentile and it is pleasant for him, ignite a fire in his beard and you will never tire of ridiculing him. It means that if one does not protest when others ridicule him, they will escalate the ridicule. The adage is based upon this incident involving Sennacherib.

   אֲזַל, אַשְׁכַּח דַּפָּא מִתֵּיבוּתָא דְּנֹחַ. אָמַר: הַיְינוּ אֱלָהָא רַבָּא דְּשֵׁיזְבֵיהּ לְנֹחַ מִטּוֹפָנָא. אֲמַר: אִי אָזֵיל הָהוּא גַּבְרָא וּמַצְלַח, מְקָרֵב לְהוּ לִתְרֵין בְּנוֹהִי קַמָּךְ. שְׁמַעוּ בְּנוֹהִי וְקַטְלוּהּ. הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי הוּא מִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה בֵּית נִסְרֹךְ אֱלֹהָיו וְאַדְרַמֶּלֶךְ וְשַׂרְאֶצֶר בָּנָיו הִכֻּהוּ בַחֶרֶב וְגוֹ׳״.

   Sennacherib went and found a beam from Noah’s ark, from which he fashioned a god. He said: This beam is the great god who delivered Noah from the flood. He said: If that man, referring to himself, goes and succeeds, he will sacrifice his two sons before you. His sons heard his commitment and killed him. This is the meaning of that which is written: “And it came to pass as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god that Adrammelech and Sarezer, his sons, smote him with the sword, and they fled to Ararat” (II Kings 19:37), where Noah’s ark had come to rest. The Gemara explains that this interpretation is based upon the etymological similarity between neser, the Hebrew term for beam, and Nisroch, the god that Sennacherib fashioned from a beam.
   

6. I didn’t note it in the article, but tangentially, it makes sense that this is Ravavahu, the seventh-generation Babylonian Amora / early Savora, as opposed to third generation Amora of the Land of Israel. This is a subject I hope to discuss later this week.
   

7. So this is that midrash that Rashi seems to think was authored with literal intent, while he himself disagrees and thinks the verse was allegorical. And that midrash involves Hashem assuming human form or, perhaps more likely, involves Hashem controlling a humanoid avatar. That sounds heretical. Could Rashi actually have believed that Chazal believed this?
   

8. Sure! See Rabbi Natan Slifkin’s article, “Was Rashi a Corporealist? That article begins:

   

   and he explores reasons to think Rashi might have been, despite that chain of logic.
   

9. Rambam famously says the aggadot in Chelek are allegorical. He divides people into three groups, and those who think that these midrashim are intended literally are fools.
   

10. I argue from a literary perspective, rather than attesting to things that are theologically untenable. Are there aspects of the midrashim that attest to an allegorical nature. I think some of the random details, for instance grinding the date pits, suggest allegory.
    

11. People wrongfully (IMHO) apply Rambam’s saying to all midrashim. But his words, and his targeted aggadot, indicate that he’s writing specifically about “impossibilities”. I point to Rabbi Yitzchak Grossman’s article article On Divine Omnipotence and its Limitations, where these are logical impossibilities, mathematical impossibilities, and philosophical impossibilities.
    

12. I kvetch a bit about how people overapply this Rambam to say that all midrashim are allegorical, and if you say otherwise, either that you literally believe them as historical, or that you believe that Chazal literally believed them as historical, then you’re a fool. But that isn’t what Rambam said. Sure, feel free to argue with midrashim as the meaning of a verse, but don’t take the easy way out by saying that Chazal never really intended it.
    

13. I give a list of “reasonable” midrashim which needn’t be allegorical. Maybe they are, but they certainly don’t have to be. That last paragraph was kind of concise and cryptic, so I expanded upon it in a separate post, yesterday, in Follow-up Sennacherib Thoughts, about what each example adds. Two such examples: that Esther had a sallow (rather than actually neon green) complexion, and that it was the brothers, not passing merchants, that pulled Yosef out of the pit.