Abravanel

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible. Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblicalcommentator. Chapter 40 pertains to Joseph’s interactions with Pharaoh’s staff members, while in prison. But who were Joseph’s fellow inmates?

“And it came to pass after these things, that the Egyptian king’s wine
steward and baker offended their master, the king of Egypt. And
Pharoah was wroth at his two courtiers, against the chief steward, and
against the chief baker.”

Abravanel, who served as the treasurer to the kings of Portugal and Spain, understood palace protocol.
He draws upon personal experience in order to make sense of the verses quoted above.

The first verse brought above speaks about the king’s wine steward and baker. Yet, the next verse
describes two men as officers, before calling them chiefs. Abravanel seeks to clarify for Bible students
the cast of characters. Who exactly ran afoul Egypt’s king?

Abravanel posits that Pharaoh’s palace’s cuisine attendants – food and beverage personnel – likely
resembled palace staff hierarchy in his own time (15 th century). Thus, the first verse does not refer to the
chief wine steward or chief baker. Abravanel assumes this because the title “chief” or “minister” does
not appear there. Instead, the Bible merely mentions stewards or attendants. In contrast, the second
verse does talk about the food and drink officers, also known as ministers.

Untangling matters, Abravanel clarifies. Pharaoh had higher ups or ministers in charge of cuisine (wine
and baker). In their respective duties and areas of expertise, no attendant ranked higher than them.
These ministers personally served Pharaoh rarely, the exception being the most special of occasions
(Pharaoh’s birthday or major festival). Their presence at those celebrations showed the king respect,
and enhancing the event.

However, every other day, the ministers remained behind the scenes, supervising their sizable staff.
Clearly, the officers’ employees were reliable, professionals whose trust was implicit. After all, one
misstep on the employees part carried deadly ramifications for all concerned. Pharaoh, of course,
expected dependable service from his ministers, those closest to the throne.

Abravanel ties it all together. “And it came to pass after these things, that the Egyptian king’s wine
steward and baker offended their master, the king of Egypt.”These were the men who attended to the
king day in day out. As to their offense, it is not explicit. Perhaps they plotted to poison Pharaoh, or some other dastardly deed against the monarchy. Be that as it may, the king did not expend an ounce of energy on them after they were apprehended. He summarily chopped off their heads. 

“And Pharaoh was wroth at his two courtiers….” The regent fumed at his two ministers, under whose
supervision was an army of workers. “And he put them in ward in the house of the captain of the guard,
into prison, the place where Joseph was bound.” A white-collar lockup fit the two officers’ station, and
not a prison reserved for the rank and file.

At the end of our chapter, we will read about the circumstances surrounding the serendipitous meeting
between Joseph and the two senior ministers, one that will change the course of history.

cohesive unit in our parashah.

Parashat Bo, First Aliyah, based on Abravanel’s World of Torah

“And God descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and
proclaimed the name of God. And God passed by before him and
proclaimed: God, the Lord, God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering,
and abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy unto the thousandth
generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. And will by no
means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and unto the
fourth generation.”

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus 34, the Torah affords what is arguably the closest peek into God’s elusive
nature, including a guide into how He relates to man. Gorgeous eloquence transcribes God’s thirteen
attributes of mercy. Abravanel’s discourse on the subject provides Bible students with a memorable
interpretation of the Creator’s divine traits. See Abravanel’s World for the essay in its entirety.

Abravanel asks: What underlies the terse descriptions of the divine? Additionally, how are readers to
understand the grammatical style of this passage, one that appears choppy and disjointed? Note, for
example, how the thirteen attributes commence with God’s name, and repeats that name, before
providing adjectives which depict, per se, the Maker’s defining characteristics (“merciful”, “’gracious”
etc.). Finally, the paragraph switches gears into verbal or predicate phrases that portray God’s conduct
(“keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation”, “visiting the iniquity” etc.).

In fantastic shorthand, here is how Abravanel approaches these all-important theological lessons. God’s
(Hashem) name – repeated – establishes His credentials as the Creator of existence; His will perpetuates
life (“God, the Lord”). The next mention of the One Above (El) features His role as the Main Mover or
Lever of the heavens. The divine crank, for lack of a better word or image, churns lower celestial beings
into motion. Three appellations of God begin the first three of the thirteen attributes count (“God, the
Lord, God”).

Traits four, five, and six bespeak God’s relationship with man, at his embryonic and early development
stages. We refer to “merciful”, “gracious”, and “long-suffering.”

Next come seven, eight, and nine. These are the Creator’s benevolence with the righteous and pious –
“abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation.” God reserves and
applies the final four, which brings the attribute count to ten, eleven, twelve, and thirteen to evildoers –
“forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. And will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of
the fathers upon the children….”

“And it came to pass in the first month of the second year, on the first
day of the month, that the Tabernacle was erected…Then the cloud
covered the Tent of Meeting and the glory of God filled the Tabernacle.
And Moses was not able to enter the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud
abode thereon, and the glory of God filled the Tabernacle.”

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Chapter 40 concludes the book of Exodus, a chapter dedicated to the execution of God’s
commandment to the Hebrews to build for Him a house. When finished, “the cloud covered the Tent of
Meeting and the glory of God filled the Tabernacle.”

A “cloud covered the Tent of Meeting and the glory of God filled the Tabernacle…” Quite extraordinary –
to understate. How are Bible students supposed to understand these divine props (“the cloud and glory
of God”) Abravanel asks? See Abravanel’s World for the full treatment of this intriguing essay.

For our purposes here, however, we focus on Abravanel’s explanation of the last verse cited above:
“And Moses was not able to enter the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud abode thereon…”

Here is the context, according to Abravanel. After the Hebrews sinned with the golden calf, Moses
showed his displeasure by setting up his tent outside of the Jewish encampment. Furthermore, the
prophet brought the holy ark with him. Ensconced within the ark were the ten commandments etched
in stone tablets.

However now, when the Tabernacle was complete, Moses removed the holy ark from his tent and
placed it in the holy of holies. At that juncture, God’s sanctuary assumed its new name: The Tent of
Meeting. Going forward, Divine communications with the prophet would emanate from the holy of
holies, specifically from the ark’s covering consisting of two cherubs.

“And Moses was not able to enter the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory
of God filled the Tabernacle.” According to Abravanel, the verse acknowledges and confers great
prestige upon the Tabernacle. That is, the Creator’s earthly haunt bespoke divine glory and rapture, that
even the greatest of all prophets, Moses, was barred from entry. Initially, that is.

Here’s the caveat. Moses would be able to enter the holy of holies when the Maker called him, thereby
granting the prophet permission and authorization, as per the upcoming verse. “And God called unto
Moses, and spoke unto him out of the Tent of Meeting saying…” From that juncture onward, Moses was
allowed free access to the planet’s holiest place, as we learn from Numbers 9:8.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, penetrating scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Leviticus (Vayikra) 1 deals with animal sacrifices, specifically burnt offerings. The wording,
Abravanel notes, “When any man of you brings an offering unto God”, appears clumsy. The words “of
you”seem superfluous. If we omit them, the verse would read succinctly: “When any man brings an
offering…”

“And God called unto Moses, and spoke unto him out of the Tent of the
Meeting saying, speak unto the Children of Israel, and say unto them:
When any man of you brings an offering unto God, you shall bring your
offering of the cattle, even of the herd.”

Although the words “of you” address Jewish men and women, commanding them to bring offerings,
Abravanel adds that the verse does not negate Gentiles from also bringing animal sacrifices to
Jerusalem’s holy Temple. They certainly can, and did.

Abravanel elaborates, in the name of classic, medieval Biblical commentators. They explain that “of you”
rules out renegade Jews. Hebrew apostates are not permitted to offer animal sacrifices in the Temple,
for they have disowned their Jewish heritage.

Gentiles, on the other hand, didn’t disavow Judaism; they simply never embraced it. Hence, should a
non-Jew be inspired to draw closer to the Almighty – and bring an animal sacrifice as a means of doing
so – that would be perfectly acceptable.

When it comes to sacrifices and Hebrew renegades, however, it presents a different story, as
mentioned. Willfully, they rebel against God. Given their wretched conduct, why should the priests
accommodate them by accepting their offerings?

In sum, “When any man of you brings an offering unto God”reads quite well. The phrase, Abravanel
teaches, informs Bible students that some Jews, but not all of them, may bring sacrifices. Unequivocally,
the Bible conveys a powerful message to Jewish apostates. Either they mend their noxious ways, or they
become personae non gratae in the holy Temple.

“And when any one brings a meal offering unto God, his offering shall be
of fine flour. And he shall pour oil upon it, and frankincense thereon.”

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, penetrating scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Chapter 2 in Leviticus continues to discuss sacrifices in the Tabernacle. Here we turn to
meal offerings, of which there are four types.

Abravanel links and matches up the four kinds of meal offerings with four distinct groups or groupings
of people.

• Group 1, characterized by “fine flour”, matches up with righteous individuals, as verse implies.
  This grouping speaks about pious folks. They are pure in conduct, both in their own estimation
  as well as in the eyes of others.
•  Group 2 is the mirror opposite of the first grouping; they do evil and others see the evil they
  perpetrate. The operative verse is: “And when you bring a meal offering baked in the oven…”
  On account of their unbridled and red-hot impulses, these scofflaws flout the commandments.

Groups 3 & 4 comprise the middle ground, men who are neither totally righteous or wholly rotten, as
Abravanel will illustrate.

• Group 3 portrays men who acknowledge their flaws, yet manage to conceal their true selves to
  others. “…a meal offering baked on a griddle”captures this grouping. In Hebrew, the term
  “griddle” shares its root with the verb meaning “to hide”, hence the link.
• Group 4 includes those who are oblivious to their seedy actions, although others correctly
  assess these people’s shortcomings. They are compared to “…a meal offering of the stewing
  pan.”Again, Abravanel deduces his observation, based on the Hebrew term for “stewing pan.”
  Literally, it refers to hissing sounds or jeering noises, both would be the disapproving reactions
  that passers-by might express when encountering unsavory characters.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a probing and penetrating Jewish thinker, as well as a prolific
Biblical commentator. Leviticus 4 covers the subject of sin offerings in the Tabernacle. Here, Abravanel
transports Bible students beyond textual explanation, pivoting into theology. We shall explain.

“And God spoke to Moses saying, speak unto the Children of Israel
saying. If any one shall sin through error, in any of the things which God
commanded not to be done, and shall do any one of them…”

The Torah portion of Vayikra, successively, covers burnt offerings (chapter 1), meal offerings (chapter 2),
and peace offerings (chapter 3). Vayikra’s two concluding chapters (4 and 5) pertain to sin and guilt
offerings respectively.

What, Abravanel questions, can we learn from the sequence of these five chapters? To the point, why
does the Torah begin with voluntary sacrifices (burnt, meal, and peace offerings) before moving onto
obligatory sacrifices (sin and guilt)?

Abravanel supplies an answer that goes to the heart of Judaism’s understanding of God: He is
benevolent. Unequivocally, the Creator seeks the good and positive – traits associated with those
sacrifices that are brought out of good will and love. Those characteristics are common to burnt, meal,
and peace offerings. Love of the Maker motivated people to bring them, as they are not obligatory.

On the other hand, Hebrews brought sin and guilt offerings in order to rectify untoward conduct. Thus,
they were obligatory, and underscored serving God out of fear or angst.

For Abravanel, a pattern emerges that highlights God’s inner nature, one that desires people to behave
and serve Him out of affection, not anxiety. In this way, when the Torah launches sections pertaining to
blessing or curse, the section of blessing precedes that of curse. Sequence illustrates God as kind.

Jewish prophets, too, recognized this fundamentally favorable aspect of God, underscoring God’s love.
Hence, when the prophets spoke of sacrifices, they stressed burnt offerings – exclusively. King David in
Psalms put it this way: “Then will You delight in the sacrifices of righteousness, in burnt offering…” The
Creator equates righteousness with burnt offerings, and not sin offerings that bespeak man’s baseness.

Abravanel brings a second proof from Scripture, this one from the prophet Isaiah. “Even them will I bring
to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their
sacrifices shall be acceptable upon My altar…”

How the Maker deeply desires that man will not succumb to immorality, instead clinging only to good
and bringing sacrifices of love to His altar!