2022/5783
We must abide by the words of a Navi, and if we fail to do so, the punishment is “Mitah Bidei Shamayim,” “Death by the hands of God” (Devarim 18:19 and Rambam Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 9:2). On the other hand, the Torah instructs us to execute a false Navi (Devarim 18:15-22). How do we know who is an authentic Navi and who is a false Navi? The written Torah presents a basic sketch of how to authenticate a Navi, which Rambam (Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah, chapters 8-10) explains at some length. The authentication of prophets also serves as a model, to a certain extent, for how we determine today who is an authentic Torah authority and leader. This essay is based on a 2002 study with students at the Torah Academy of Bergen County, members of the Congregation Shaarei Ora women’s Chumash Shiur, and my cousin Yehuda Brandriss.
The Model of Moshe Rabbeinu
Hashem told Moshe that He would present prophets to Am Yisrael “Kamocha,” “like you” (Devarim 18:18). This appears to be problematic because Moshe was a Navi that was in a class by himself and was greater than any other Navi that will ever arise among Am Yisrael, as stated explicitly in the Chumash (Devarim 34:10). Rashbam (Devarim 18:15) explains that future prophets must model themselves after Moshe Rabbeinu even though they cannot reach his level of Nevu’ah. They must be completely devoted to Torah and neither detract from nor add to the Torah. They must be thoroughly devoted to relaying the truth as they heard from Hashem and they must be on an especially high spiritual level. Interestingly, the very last Nevu'ah that Am Yisrael received was Malachi exhorting us to “remember the Torah of Moshe” (Malachi 3:22), which is very much in synch with the idea of a Navi modeling himself after Moshe Rabbeinu.
In fact, Rambam (Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 10:1) writes that someone who presents himself to Am Yisrael as a Navi must be deemed suitable for this role even before we begin to test him to determine if he is a true Navi. Rambam (Hilchot Y.H. 7:1) describes the personal characteristics of a Navi. This includes being an extraordinary scholar who possesses excellent character and consistently masters his Yeitzer HaRa without fail.
Testing a Candidate for Nevu'ah
The Torah (Devarim 18:22) presents a straightforward manner for determining the authenticity of a legitimate candidate for Nevu'ah – we test whether his prophecies are fulfilled. There appears to be a problem, though (as TABC Talmid David Ginsburg notes), because the Torah (Devarim 13:2-6) teaches that if someone presents himself as a Navi and performs a miracle to legitimate his call to worship Avodah Zara, we should ignore him, as Hashem is simply testing us. Accordingly, even though someone’s prediction is fulfilled, the person is not considered a Navi. What is the difference between Devarim 13:2-6 and Devarim 18:22?
There appears to be at least two solutions to this problem. First, a prerequisite to even considering someone to be a candidate as a Navi is that he model himself after Moshe Rabbeinu and demonstrate complete fidelity to the Torah. Someone who urges the worship of idols is automatically rejected and thus the miracles he performs are irrelevant. Second, the false prophet presents an Ot or Mofet, a sign or wonder. A legitimate Navi, on the other hand, does not produce such a phenomenon. Instead, he proves his credentials by making predictions that come true. Rambam explains that every detail of the predictions must be fulfilled without the slightest deviation. The Navi is tested repeatedly and if he passes the tests without exception then he is accepted as a Navi.
Interestingly, Rambam cites as a proof text for his assertion that the Navi must be tested repeatedly, the Pasuk describing the Navi Shmuel: “VaYeida Kol Yisrael MiDan Ve’Ad Be’er Sheva Ki Ne’eman Shmuel LeNavi LeHashem,” “And all of Israel from Dan to Be’er Sheva knew that Shmuel was accredited as a prophet of Hashem” (Shmuel 1:3:20). This indicates another requirement for accreditation as a Navi, that the entire Jewish people accept the individual as a Navi. Indeed, we do not find in the Tanach any accepted Navi (save perhaps with the unusual circumstances of Yirmiyahu) whose authenticity was mired in controversy. We trust the collective wisdom of the Jewish people to determine the legitimacy of a Navi, as a false prophet will not succeed in fooling the entire Jewish people.
My cousin Yehuda Brandriss makes the following poignant observation. He asks why the Torah refers to a false prophet as a Navi if he is not a Navi. Shouldn’t the Torah describe him simply as a fraudulent person or liar? Yehuda suggests that the Torah is communicating a subtle warning that we should be aware that the false prophet would deceptively appear to have credibility as a prophet. He will be a person of some substance whose words do not have the obvious appearance of falsehood. Indeed, Chazal (see Rashi to Bemidbar 13:27) teach, “Any lie that does not contain a measure of truth does not stand.” Jewish History does bear out the accuracy of Yehuda’s insight, as the leaders and ideologues of deviationist groups have been people of intelligence and oratory ability. They are false prophets rather than simple charlatans.
We should also note that Rambam is emphatic that an Ot or Mofet is inadequate to prove the legitimacy of a Navi. In fact, Rambam devotes the eighth chapter of Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah to teaching that Moshe Rabbeinu’s stature as a prophet does not rest upon the miracles that he performed. Rather, the fact that we all saw at Ma’amad Har Sinai that Hashem communicated directly with Moshe Rabbeinu is what endows Moshe Rabbeinu with legitimacy. The signs that Moshe Rabbeinu performed (Shemot 4:30) before Am Yisrael to prove that God spoke to him were only a temporary measure to introduce Moshe Rabbeinu to Am Yisrael upon his return to Mitzrayim. Mollie Fisch and Abby Leichman explain that these signs were merely a “hook” to demonstrate that Moshe Rabbeinu was a unique individual. His eternal stature as the greatest of all Nevi’im was established at Ma'amad Har Sinai, as is indicated by the Torah (Shemot 19:9). For further discussion of this issue, see Nechama Leibowitz’s New Studies in Sefer Shemot (pp. 118-123).
This idea may be compared to the contemporary use of Torah codes to introduce people to the Torah. They cannot serve as a foundation of a lifelong commitment to Torah, but they can serve as a “hook” to demonstrate to people that the Torah is no ordinary book and motivate them to further explore the Torah.
The Model of Yehoshua
We may ask, though, how did Yehoshua establish credibility as a Navi, as we find no evidence in the Chumash of his providing verification of his status as a prophet? Rambam (Hilchot Y.H. 10:5) explains that a Navi need not demonstrate his legitimacy if another Navi vouches for his authenticity as a Navi. Rambam writes that one about whom an accepted Navi has testified to his legitimacy is accepted “BeChezkat Navi,” as a presumed Navi. One who is BeChezkat Navi need not be tested as a Navi and is accepted as a Navi unless evidence to the contrary emerges.
Similarly, today many great Sages develop their reputations because of older and well-accepted Rabbinic Greats affirming their stature. This explains, in part, why younger Rabbanim ask older Gedolei Torah to write Haskamot (letters of approbation) to their Sefarim. Two examples are Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach’s Me’orei Eish, endorsed by Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski and Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook and the first volume of Rav Ovadia Yosef’s Teshuvot Yabia Omer’s adornment with the Haskamot of many of the Torah giants of the day such as Rav Ezra Attia and Rav Zvi Pesach Frank. These works were published when Rav Shlomo Zalman and Rav Ovadia were young, and the approbations and content of these works gave them prominence.
The Yonah Question
Many people ask that since a prophet’s failed prediction proves that he is a false prophet, why is Yonah not considered a Navi Sheker (false prophet)? After all, Yonah prophesized that in forty days, Nineveih would be destroyed, and this did not happen. Rambam (Hilchot Y.H. 10:4) explains that evil tidings may not materialize because people might do Teshuvah and motivate Hashem to abrogate the evil decree. Thus, a prophet will verify his stature by predicting only good tidings. If these do not materialize, then we can be sure that the person is a Navi Sheker.
The Eliyahu Question
Another question that people often pose regards the action of Eliyahu HaNavi at Har HaCarmel (Mount Carmel), when he offered Korbanot outside of the Beit HaMikdash to disprove the false prophets of Ba’al (Melachim 1 chapter 18). The problem is that the Torah strictly prohibits offering Korbanot outside the Beit HaMikdash after the Beit HaMikdash was established in Yerushalayim (VaYikra 17:1-9). Accordingly, why isn’t Eliyahu HaNavi discredited for violating a specific Torah prohibition? Rambam (Hilchot Y.H. 9:3, based on Sanhedrin 89) explains that four criteria must be satisfied to permit radical action, such as the step taken by Eliyahu at Har HaCarmel. First, the prohibition against engaging in Avodah Zara is never waived in any circumstance (as is indicated by Devarim 13:2-6). Second, there must be an extremely good reason to violate the Torah. In Eliyahu HaNavi’s time, so many people were involved with the popular mode of worship of the time (Ba’al) that Eliyahu had to take drastic action and challenge the “prophets” of Ba’al to offer Korbanot alongside him and see upon whose Korban fire would descend from the heavens. It was inconceivable to do this in the Beit HaMikdash, as it is intolerable for the Nevi’ei HaBa’al to offer their sacrifices there. Third, the Navi must only temporarily suspend the prohibition. A Navi who claims that a particular prohibition should be permanently removed from the Torah must be dismissed as a Navi Sheker. Fourth, the individual who calls for the temporary suspension of a Torah prohibition must be an accepted Navi whose authenticity is beyond reproach. A modern application of this idea is Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook referring to his implementation of Rav Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor’s Heter Mechirah (selling farmland of Eretz Yisrael to a Muslim to side-step Shemittah regulations) as a Hora’at Sha’ah, a temporary ruling. Although Rav Kook was not engaged in what he believed to be a direct violation of Torah law, he nevertheless felt that the Heter Mechirah offends the spirit of the Torah and was permitted only temporarily because of dire circumstances faced by the Jews living in Israel in his time.
Contemporary Leaders
Contemporary leaders also must prove themselves to Am Yisrael before we recognize them as Gedolei Yisrael. They must have excellent character as well as excellent scholarship. An interesting example is Rav Moshe Feinstein, who permitted many women to remarry on the basis that their husbands perished in concentration camps. To this day, none of the men he pronounced dead was later discovered alive. The same applies to the thousands of Agunot (many of whose husbands went missing in action during the Yom Kippur War) Rav Ovadia Yosef permitted to remarry. A Poseik and Gadol can also prove himself by demonstrating his fidelity to Torat Moshe and his competence in Torah teachings and rulings to the point when the committed portion of our nation regards him as a Gadol, as they regarded Shmuel in the days of Sefer Shmuel.
Conclusion
The process of identifying an authentic Navi serves as a model for identifying legitimate Torah leadership in all generations. It also parallels the manner in which we shall soon identify the Mashiach (as described in the Rambam Hilchot Melachim 11:4). An authentic Jewish leader does not deviate from the teachings of Moshe Rabbeinu in any generation. A legitimate Torah leader does not seek to change Halachah but rather guides Am Yisrael on how to properly observe the Torah amid the many challenges that individuals and communities encounter in every generation.