In the following, { = ayin.
Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses -- whom the
Lord singled out, face to face, for the various signs and portents that
the Lord sent him to display in the land of Egypt, against Pharaoh and
all his courtiers and his whole country, and for all the great might and
awesome power that Moses displayed before all Israel.
(Deut 34:10-12, JPSV)
The statement at the end of Deuteronomy that Moses was never
equaled by another prophet has attracted relatively little attention. Perhaps
scholars have implicitly agreed that this is Moses's "literary epitaph"
and hence deserves no more attention than is usually paid to epitaphs.1
But a moment's reflection should suffice to indicate that the passage is
more than that. It is hardly stereotypical. Biblical biographies of other
great leaders usually end with their burial and do not go on to evaluate
their role in history.2 As the final statement about Moses in
a markedly ideological book, and as the book's own conclusion,3 the
passage is likely to have a significance that serves the ideological aims
of the book as a whole. Like the Bible's declarations about the incomparability
of YHWH, it may well have a polemical purpose.
Medieval Jewish writers were alert to the polemical possibilities of the passage. Combining it with Deut 4:2 and 13:1 ("You shall not add anything to what I command you or take anything away from it"), they understood it as asserting the supreme authority of Moses's Torah, forestalling attempts by later proph-ets to contradict or supersede Moses's Torah.4 These writ-ers meant their interpretation as a rebuttal of Christianity and Islam, for which reason Maimonides held that belief in Moses's incomparability as a prophet is a dogma of Judaism.5 More recently S. Dean McBride, avoiding the anachronism, observed that in Biblical times the incomparability of Moses would have had the effect of making his Torah "the measure of truth by which all subsequent prophetical revelations were to be assessed and interpreted."6
Both of these views agree that Deut 34:10-12 underscores the superiority of Moses as a prophet of YHWH: Moses's teachings are the most authentic expression of YHWH's will because YHWH favored him and dealt with him more directly than any other prophet (cf. Num 12:6-8). It goes without saying that Moses is also greater than prophets of other gods, but that is not the issue here (according to Deut 18:20, prophesying in the name of other gods is a capital crime). Here the aim of the text is to authenticate Moses's teachings against competing versions of Yahwistic revelation.
What competing versions might Deuteronomy have in mind? One possibility is suggested by the fact that the waw at the beginning of v. 10 could be adversative, meaning "but," with the intention of contrasting Moses and Joshua: Joshua succeeded Moses, but was not his equal. This would have the effect of subordinating the laws given by Joshua at Shechem (Josh 24:25-26) to those given by Moses. Another possibility is that the passage means to subordinate any aspects of later prophetic teachings that might be inconsistent with those of Moses, such as the classical prophets' critique of sacrifice.
These possibilities, however, are purely theoretical and do not correspond to Deuteronomy's express concerns. There is evidence, in Deuteronomy and in books describing conditions around the time that it was discovered, that some parties claimed that YHWH authorized practices radically inconsistent with the fundamental principles of Deuteronomy. These parties were polytheistic Yahwists or, to borrow Morton Smith's term, "syncretistic Yahwists"7 who claimed, among other things, that YHWH commanded Israelites to offer child sacrifices and to worship His subordinates, the heavenly bodies and other gods, in addition to Himself. In the following discussion I shall refer to them as polytheistic when I refer only to their advocacy of worshiping many gods, and as syncretistic when I include as well their advocacy of what the Bible considers to be distinctively pagan practices such as child sacrifice.
That some Yahwists believed that YHWH accepted human sacrifice is clear from the case of Jephthah and from other evidence to be cited below. It is also clear that there were polytheistic Yahwists in ancient Israel who worshiped YHWH along with other deities. Joash had a Yahwistic theophoric name and told his son Gideon about YHWH's wondrous deeds, but also had a Baal altar and an asherah.8 Ahab gave his children Yahwistic names but worshiped Baal as well.9 Elijah's demand -- character-istically monotheistic -- that Israel stop "hopping on the two boughs" and choose between YHWH and Baal implies that his audience was likewise worshiping both simultaneously.10 From the Biblical point of view such polytheistic Yahwism is a contradiction in terms: worshiping other gods is by definition "abandonment" of YHWH. But this definition is a dogmatic hyperbole.11 Polytheistic Yahwists would have rejected it because polytheists did not have to choose one god to the exclusion of others.
Evidence for syncretistic Yahwism is present in Deuteronomy itself and in sources describing conditions in the seventh century, when the book was developing. Although I have elsewhere expressed doubt that polytheism, including syncretistic Yahwism, was extensive in late monarchic times in Israel,12 syncretistic Yahwism enjoyed royal support and was perceived by mono-theists as theologically dangerous enough to require a strong response. Deuteronomy is aware of claims by syncretists that YHWH wants Israelites to worship other gods alongside of Him. This is clear from 17:3, which describes "the worship of other gods...the sun or the moon or any of the heavenly host" as "something which I (YHWH) never commanded." The need to deny that YHWH made such a command implies that others claimed that He did. Some commentators take "which I never commanded" as a case of litotes, a figure of speech in which a positive idea is expressed by negat-ing its contrary, meaning "which I commanded not to do" (compare "not a few" meaning "many").13 However, the same phrase appears several times in Jeremiah where God describes child sacrifice as something "which I never commanded, never decreed, and which never came to My mind" (Jer 7:31; 19:5; 32:35). There the phrase is not a litotes ("never came to My mind" hardly means "came to My mind not to do") but a denial of something that others claimed was true. It appears from Ezek 20:25-26 that some people claimed that YHWH did require child sacrifice; this is the claim that Jeremiah is rejecting.14 In Deut 17:3, therefore, "something I never commanded" is meant to deny claims that YHWH ordains the worship of certain other gods.15 Just as human sacrifice had advocates in Jeremiah's time claiming divine authority, the polytheism rejected by Deuteronomy must have been supported by similar claims in the period preceding the book's composition. We do not know who made such claims, but they clearly included Manasseh and Amon, the kings of Judah who established the worship of other gods in the temple of YHWH.16
It would have seemed perfectly natural to polytheistic Yahwists that YHWH authorized the worship of other deities, conceived as His subordinates. Even the monotheistic text of the Torah states that God granted the heavenly bodies dominion (Gen 1:15), and Deuteronomy acknowledges that He ordained the worship of the heavenly bodies by other nations (4:19).17 An Israelite polytheist -- even one who believed that YHWH is the supreme deity -- might well believe that YHWH favored the worship of His "fellow gods" and lesser supernatural beings even by Israelites.18
Deuteronomy 13:2-6 confirms that Deuteronomy is concerned about advocates of polytheistic Yahwism who base their claims on an oracle from YHWH. There, the "prophet or dream-diviner" who advocates the worship of other gods is said to have dibber sarah {al YHWH, "uttered falsehood about YHWH." Many translations and commentators understand the Hebrew to mean "he urged disloyalty to YHWH,"19 which would admittedly fit the context, but that translation is unlikely. It is not certain that dibber sarah ever means "urge disloyalty" in the Bible, but there are several passages where the idiom clearly means "utter falsehood." Most importantly, when describing the speech of prophets, dibber sarah {al YHWH means "to claim falsely that YHWH said something."20 Since the prophet in Deut 13 has urged the worship of other gods, his falsehood about YHWH must have been a claim that He ordains the worship of those gods,21 the claim that we have seen is implied by 17:3. In other words, 13:2-6 does not refer to a prophet of another god, but to a prophet of YHWH who advocates the worship of additional gods.
If Deut 34:10-12 is indeed aimed against syncretistic Yahwism, the medieval writers cited above were right to connect the passage with 4:2 and 13:1, which forbid abrogating any of the laws taught by Moses or adding to them. Although this prohibition is well known as a general principle,22 in the context of Deuteronomy it has a specific focus. Each time it appears it is connected with warnings against adopting pagan practices.23 In 13:1 it concludes a warning not to adopt Canaanite religious practices, particularly child sacrifice, for the worship of YHWH (12:29-31) and it introduces the prohibition against following a prophet who claims that YHWH commands Israel to worship other gods (13:2-6).24 In 4:2 it precedes a reminder that all who worshiped another god (Baal-peor) perished. Evidently, then, these passages cite the prohibition in order to stress that one may not nullify the commandments banning the worship of other gods (such as the first commandment of the Decalogue)25 and the adoption of pagan practices, or add commandments ordaining their worship or adoption of child sacrifice and other pagan practices.26
It is likely that various other practices forbidden by Deuteronomy were also defended with claims of prophetic validation by YHWH. For example, the priests of the local sanctuaries that are forbidden in chapter 12 probably claimed that their sanctuaries, and the sacred posts and pillars used at them (forbidden in 16:21-22), were erected at YHWH's command, just as the Tabernacle, Solomon's temple, Jacob's altar at Bethel, and the copper serpent were.27 Deut 34:10-12 would nullify the authenticity of any claims of this nature that are inconsistent with Mosaic prophecy.28
Seen in this light, Deut 34:10-12 possesses significance worthy of its place as the conclusion of Deuteronomy. True to the "pluralism" that is inherent in polytheism, the Israelite polytheism combated by Deuteronomy and the rest of the Bible was essentially a syncretistic form of Yahwism, and its adherents included prophets who claimed that this syncretism was desired by YHWH. By reminding the reader that Moses, who forbade the worship of other gods and the adoption of pagan practices, was the sueme prophet of YHWH, and hence the final authority on His will, Deut 34:10-12 undercuts all such claims in a final effort to safeguard the uncompromising monotheism that is its primary message.
NOTES
Menahem Haran is a scholar whom I have long admired because of the thoroughness and depth of his magisterial contributions to scholarship and the keen intuition that has led him into important areas of research that many others had not suspected could be so rewarding. It is a pleasure for me to take part in this expression of esteem and to thank him for his many personal courtesies and for all that I have learned from his work.
1. P.C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament; Grand Rapids, 1976) 406. G.A. Smith calls the passage "homage to [Moses's] incomparable rank as a prophet" (The Book of Deuteronomy [Cambridge, 1918] 378), while A. Bertholet calls it a "panegyric" (Deuteronomium [Freiburg, 1899] 113).
2. See, for example, Gen 25:9-10; 35:29; 49:33-50:13; 50:26; Josh 24:30, 33; Judg 8:32; 12:7; 16:31; 1 Sam 25:1; 31:13; 1 Kgs 2:10; 2 Kgs 13:20. The evaluation of Josiah in 2 Kgs 23:25 is modeled on Deut 34:10 and is not the final sentence in the account of his life.
3. The endings of Biblical books are discussed by Isaac B. Gottlieb, "Sof Davar: Biblical Endings," Prooftexts 11 (1991):213-224.
4. Seforno: "No other prophet ever reached his level of prophecy and thus it is clear that no prophet is permitted to institute new laws henceforth" (cf. b. Shabb. 104a; see R. Pelcovitz, Sforno: Commentary on the Torah [Brooklyn, 1989], 2:903); Gersonides ad loc and lesson 15; Crescas, 'Or 'Adonai II, 4, 3 (ed. Vienna, 1859 45a [ref. courtesy of Daniel Lasker]; cited, with better reading [nitsxutah, instead of betsaxutah], by Abravanel, Perush {al Ha-Torah [Jerusalem, 1979] 354 col. ii).
5. Maimonides, Introduction to Pereq Heleq (m. Sanh. 10).
6. S. Dean McBride, Jr., "Biblical Literature in Its Historical Context: The Old Testament," in Harper's Bible Commentary, ed. J.L. Mays et al. (San Francisco, 1988) 23. In a paper presented to the Biblical Colloquium in October, 1992, McBride suggested that the passage would have the effect of relativizing Ezekiel's "Torah" (Ezek 40-48) and subordinating it to that of Moses. This is certainly what happened to Ezekiel's Torah in late Second Temple times. Talmudic sources state that because it contradicts Moses's Torah, the book of Ezekiel would have been withdrawn from circulation (nignaz) had it not been for one Hananiah ben Hezekiah who found ways to harmonize it with Moses's Torah (b. Shabb. 13b). In what follows, I attempt to explain the passage in the light of Deuteronomy's own emphases.
7. M. Smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics that Shaped the Old Testament (New York, 1971) 27 and passim.
8. Judg 6:11, 13, 25.
9. 1 Kgs 16:32; 22:40; 2 Kgs 3:1; 10:18.
10. 1 Kgs 18:21.
11. Because the Bible demands exclusive loyalty to YHWH, it hyperbolically characterizes the worship of other gods as abandonment of Him, since whatever relation the idolater continues to maintain with Him is meaningless. Note how Isa 1:11-15 scolds Israel for lavishly (though hypocritically) maintaining YHWH's worship, while vv. 4 and 28 accuse them of "abandoning," "spurn-ing," and "turning their backs on" Him. Compare also Jer 2:4-13 and 17 with 7:9-10 and 14.
12. J. Tigay, You Shall Have No Other Gods. Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions (HSS 31; Atlanta, 1986).
13. A.B. Ehrlich, Mikra Ki-Pheshuto (New York, 1969); Driver (ICC). Cf. Num. 11:11; Isa. 10:7.
14. M. Greenberg, Ezekiel (AB; Garden City, 1983) 369-370; "Ezekiel 20 and the Spiritual Exile," in {Oz le-Da-wid. Studies...Ben Gurion, ed. Y. Kaufmann et al. (Jerusalem, 1964) 437 n. 3; and class lecture, 1964. Similarly Mic 6:7 and Deut 12:29-31, although they do not necessarily imply the existence of a heterodox view that YHWH commanded child sacrifice, imply at least the existence of a view that He would accept it.
15. Cf. Sifrei Deuteronomy, sec. 148: This commandment "includes one who joins (YHWH's name to idols)," that is, who worships YHWH along with other gods (see D.Z. Hoffmann, Sefer Devarim [Tel Aviv, 1959], 2:300).
16. See 2 Kgs 21:3-7; 23:4, 11. Those behind the pagan practices in the Temple described in Ezekiel 8 must have made similar claims (as Morton Smith observed: "The temple was the temple of Yahweh; such things could not have happened in it without the consent and cooperation of the priests of Yahweh. This proves that the cult of Yahweh was not conceived as exclusive by the priests of his principal temple. Those who did con-ceive of it as exclusive were not at the time the official repre-sentatives of the country's legally established religion" [Palestinian Parties, p. 26]). However, all or most of these practices likely reflect the time of Manasseh, not Ezekiel; see Kaufmann, The Religion of Israel (trans. by M. Greenberg; Chicago, 1960) 405-8, 430-32; M. Greenberg, "Prolegomenon" to C.C. Torrey, Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy, and Critical Articles by S. Spiegel and C.C. Torrey (New York, 1970) XX-XXV; contrast M. Smith, "The Veracity of Ezekiel, The Sins of Manasseh, and Jeremiah 44:18," ZAW 87 (1975):11-16.
17. See also Deut. 32:8-9 (reading bny 'lhym in place of bny ysr'l, with 4QDeut-j and LXX); Ben Sira 17:17.
18. Cf. M. Greenberg, "Religion: Stability and Ferment," in WHJP 4/2 (Culture and Society) 104. For pagan gods ordaining the worship of other gods or spirits, see Enuma Elish VI, 110-120 (ANET 69); ANET 624, letters e and g. Even later monotheism at times made room for the worship of subordinate divine beings along with YHWH; Kaufmann notes the worship of saints and intercessors in Christianity and Islam and the rabbinic under-standing of the scapegoat as a propitiatory offering to Sammael (The Religion of Israel 135-138; cf. Smith, Palestinian Parties 218 n. 111. Note Josephus's description of the Essenes' -- who were no polytheists -- morning pray-ers to the sun, "as though entreating him to rise" (Josephus, J. W. 2 secs. 128-129). The reasoning that might lead even a loyal worshiper of YHWH to think that the worship of the heav-enly bodies and other gods in addition to Himself is acceptable is spelled out by Maimonides in his explanation of the origin of paganism:
In the days of Enosh, the people [reasoned]: 'Since God created these stars and spheres to guide the world, set them on high and allotted to them honor, and since they are ministers who minister before Him, they deserve to be praised and glorified, and honor should be rendered them; and it is the will of God...that men should aggrandize and honor those whom He aggrandized and honored, just as a king desires that respect should be shown to the officers who stand before Him, and thus honor is shown to the king.' [The people then began to honor these objects in order] to obtain the Creator's favor...Their error and folly consists in imagining that this vain worship is [God's] desire...Even if the worshiper is aware that the Eternal is God, and worships the created thing in the sense in which Enosh and his contemporaries did [i.e., as subordinates who manage the world under God's orders], he is an idolater.
Maimonides, Hilkhot {Avodah Zarah 1:1; 2:1 (translation, slightly modified, from M. Hyamson, The Mishneh Torah by Maimonides, Book I (New York, 1937) 67a-b, and I. Twersky, ed., A Maimonides Reader [New York, 1972] 71-72). For other commentators writing similarly see S. Fraade, Enosh and His Generation (Chico, CA, 1984) 129 n. 53.
Maimonides' comment refers to the worship of natural phenomena. Nachmanides suggests that even the worship of foreign gods might be rationalized in a similar way (comment to Deut 13:2):
"The prophet mentioned here [in 13:2] prophesies in the name of the Lord saying, 'The Lord send me to say that you are to worship (Baal) Peor since he was associated with Him in the work of creation, or he is the greatest of all the gods in His service, and He wants you to worship him.'"
The real likelihood of such reasoning explains why the Torah so frequently repeats the prohibition of worshiping other gods.
19. Various translations and commentaries use terms such as "disloyalty," "rebellion," "going astray," and "apostasy": LXX, Vg., Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J., Ibn Janah in his dictionary, Bekhor Shor, Ibn Ezra, Bahya, KJV, Moffat, RSV, JPSV 2d and subsequent editions (since 1966), NEB, NAB, JB, Smith (The Book of Deuteronomy), ICC, Mayes, Craigie.
20. Saadia; Rashi; Shadal here and at Isa 1:5; AT; JPSV 1st ed. (The Torah [Philadelphia, 1962]; Chaim Rabinowitz, Da'at Sofrim, Deuteronomy (Jerusalem, 1957); Ehrlich, Randglossen; E. Jenni, "Dtn 19,16: sara "Falschheit," in Melanges bibliques et orientaux en l'honneur de M. Henri Cazelles, ed. A. Caquot and M. Delcor (Kevelaer and Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1981) 201-211. As Shadal notes, dibber sarah unquestionably means "lie" in Jer 28:16; 29:32; and probably in Isa 59:13b, as does "testify sarah" in Deut 19:16 (cf. v. 18). The cognate Akkadian expression, "to speak sartu [or sarratu, surratu]" means both to tell lies and to propose disloyalty. In Biblical Hebrew, however, there are no convincing cases with the second meaning; in Jeremiah, the prophets are clearly not proposing rebellion against YHWH. If the idiom meant that in Deut 13:6, it could have been used in v. 11, too.
21. Seforno; Nachmanides, paraphrasing b. Sanh. 90a top (see Rashi there); Maimonides, Hilkhot Yesodei Hatorah 9:5. Cf. B. Goff, "Syncretism in the Religion of Israel," JBL 58 (1939):154: "Even some prophets of Yahweh encouraged a syncretistic cult."
22. As a general principle -- the first that Moses declares in Deuteronomy -- this is a fitting introduction to the laws, expressing the completeness of Moses's teachings. Injunctions against adding and removing items appear in various genres of ancient literature, including treaties. Likewise, the Laws of Hammurapi conclude with exhortations against changing them. See M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy (AB; Garden City, 1991) at 4:2; Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Oxford, 1972) 262 n. 3. Cf. ANET 178cd; N. Lewis and M. Reinhold, Roman Civilization (New York, 1951) 1:169.
23. Hazzekuni at Deut. 4:2 (H.D. Chavel [ed.], Hazzekuni. Perushei Ha-Torah le-Rabenu Hizkiah bar Manoah [Jerusalem, 1988] 531).
24. The MT parashah division marks 13:1 as the conclusion of chapter 12:29-31, from which M. Greenberg inferred that it may be intended as a rejection of current claims that YHWH wants child sacrifice (Greenberg, "Ezekiel 20 and the Spiritual Exile," 437 n. 3). This does not negate the fact that 13:1 is also an apt introduction to 13:2-6 (as implied by 4:2-3 and sensed by Maimonides, Hilkhot Yesodei Hatorah 8:3; 9:1), since prophets who would instigate Israel to worship other gods in addition to YHWH would in effect be adding to His command-ments or subtracting from them. Clauses about not adding or subtracting often refer to prophets, scribes, and messengers who must faithfully report what they have been told (see Jer 26:2; Rev 22:18-19; Josephus, Antiquities 1:17; Erra Epic 5:43-44 [W.G. Lambert, "The Fifth Tablet of the Era Epic," Iraq 24 (1962):122-23]; ANET 413a, 434b). The placement of 13:2-6 after 13:1 implies that 13:1 was also understood as a warning against the falsification of God's message by prophets. Note also the inclusio that 13:1 forms with 13:19 calling on Israel to "obey all His commandments."
25. Ibn Ezra recognized that "You shall have no other gods beside Me" (Exod 20:3; Deut 5:7) rules out worshiping other gods in combination with YHWH, as was done by those who worshiped mlkt hashamayim (Jer 44:18), the first Samaritans (2 Kgs 17:33), and Naaman (2 Kgs 5:18) (Ibn Ezra, introduction to Exodus 20, in Perushe Ha-Torah leRabbenu 'Avraham Ibn 'Ezra, ed. A. Weiser [Jerusalem, 1976] 2:133). We may add that he phrase 'al panai in the commandment may mean "in addition to Me." Note the use of {al in Laban's demand that Jacob not "take other wives beside ({al) my daughters" (Gen 31:50).
26. This interpretation of 4:2 is consistent with the fact that 4:1-40 are primarily concerned with preventing the worship of other gods, not simply with the integrity of Deuteronomy as a legal code. In fact, throughout Deut 4-11 "the laws and rules" which Moses expounds are usually those against idolatry (note, for example, 4:14 and the subject to which Moses turns after it). For this reason, Deut 4:2 is an appropriate beginning for Chapters 4-11.
27. Exod 25-31; 2 Sam 7; Gen 35:1; Num 21:8. In Mesopotamia, too, the building of a sanctuary required divine authoriza-tion revealed by divination. See the evidence gathered by T. Ishida, The Royal Dynasties in Ancient Israel (BZAW 142; Berlin, 1977) 85-88.
28. Strictly speaking, this passage emphasizes the authority
of Moses, not of Deuteronomy, and would not by itself strengthen Deuteronomy's
positions on matters where it disagrees with other Mosaic traditions
in Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.