|
The Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit
Midrash
The Eliyahu Narratives Yeshivat Har Etzion
Shiur #18: Eliyahu on his way to appear before Achav
(18:1-16) (continued-part 3)
By Rav Elchanan Samet
5. Monologue of the wronged victim
Everything that we have said thus far has not yet explained
Ovadyahu's emotional outburst. What is the connection between Eliyahu's plan, as
Ovadyahu estimates it, and Ovadyahu's own fate? Why will Eliyahu's mockery of
Achav lead to the king slaying Ovadyahu?
Ovadyahu believes that Eliyahu is using him as a pawn in his
mockery of Achav. On his way to provoke Achav and make him angry, Eliyahu is
exploiting the agency of an innocent bystander who will fulfill his mission
specifically because of his faithful obedience to the prophet. But it is this
innocent messenger who will pay the price of this "game" between the prophet and
the king. Achav's angry outburst at Eliyahu's provocation will come down on the
head of Ovadyahu, the scapegoat.
We may imagine the sort of claims that Achav will make against
Ovadyahu: why did he not capture Eliyahu before the latter disappeared; why did
he not bring him before the king? Either he was negligent, or he intentionally
refrained from doing so out of honor for the prophet. Achav is not unaware of
the fact that Ovadyahu is a God-fearing man. This being the case, it will be
apparent that Ovadyahu favors the prophet over the king. Either way, he is
deserving of punishment, and Achav - in a rage - is quite likely to kill
him.
Thus Ovadyahu ponders his expected fate, as a result of
entering the battlefield between the prophet and the king. He objects to what he
perceives as an injustice in the form of the prophet's request of him. It is
this sense of injustice that gives rise to his agitated speech.
Why does Ovadyahu believe that Eliyahu would want to do an
injustice to a righteous man? Obviously, we need not necessarily know the
reason. Perhaps this is the meaning of Ovadyahu's cry, that the injustice is
being done unintentionally, and he is going to be obliterated in a battle of the
mighty in which he has no part. But a close reading of the beginning of the
dialogue between the two may reveal a different answer:
(7) "IS IT YOU, my master Eliyahu?!"
Ovadyahu is asking a rhetorical question. It is clear that it
is rhetorical and nothing more, since before that we read, "HE RECOGNIZED HIM,
and fell upon his face." What, then, is the meaning of Ovadyahu's question? What
he means is: "Are my eyes seeing correctly, that you - the prophet who has kept
himself hidden for so long - have finally decided to appear?" The question is
admittedly formulated in respectful language - "Is it you, MY MASTER Eliyahu?,"
but it still contains a note of covert criticism. When Achav finally meets with
Eliyahu, he addresses a similar rhetorical question, but there the criticism is
overt and clear, and the style lacks any sign of respect or subjugation:
(17) "It was, when Achav saw Eliyahu, Achav said to him: IS IT
YOU, O troubler of Israel?!"
The words "my master Eliyahu" are absent from Achav's question;
in their place we find a reference to the prophet as the "troubler of Israel."
But the intention of the question is the same: to express grievance over the
prophet's prolonged absence, whose tangible results are being played out at that
very moment, with the king and his ministers searching all over "to find grass
to save the horses and mules."
Eliyahu ignores the critical tone hinted at in Ovadyahu's
question (unlike his encounter with Achav, where there is no possibility of
ignoring the furious criticism). He treats it as though it was an informative
question, answering laconically, "It is I." But he attaches an order, clarifying
the meaning of his surprising appearance: "Go tell your master, Eliyahu is
here!"
Attention should be paid to the dual use of the word "master,"
as spoken by Ovadyahu and by Eliyahu. In both cases the word "master" means
Ovadyahu's master, and the question is who this master - who the true bearer of
this identity - is. Ovadyahu calls ELIYAHU "my master" (as he does once again,
further on, in his speech, in verse 13; he also refers to himself twice as "your
servant," in verses 9 and 12). Eliyahu, however, refers to ACHAV as Ovadyahu's
master (and Ovadyahu refers to him the same way himself, in his speech, in verse
10). Thus Ovadyahu is the servant of two masters. This is, indeed, his objective
situation. And from Ovadyahu's perspective, it is this situation that has led
him into the tragic crisis in which he now finds himself.
In our scrutiny of the dialogue between Eliyahu and Ovadyahu,
we may perhaps guess that Ovadyahu hears a hint of counter-criticism in
Eliyahu's response, as if to say: "You call me 'MY MASTER,' but you are actually
a servant of Achav, a man of his trust; it is not I who am your master but
rather Achav, with whom you cooperate. THEREFORE I tell you: Go tell YOUR
MASTER, Eliyahu is here." Ovadyahu guesses that it is perhaps no coincidence
that Eliyahu turns him into a messenger to Achav; it is meant as a punishment
for being Achav's servant and a man of his trust. This being the case,
Ovadyahu's cry of unfairness and injustice becomes more focused. It concerns the
presumed accusation that Eliyahu is directing at him. He answers this accusation
specifically:
(9) "How have I sinned..."
If you mean that I have sinned by being Achav's servant, the
minister who is "the governor of the house" in the kingdom - does this say
anything about me?
(12) "Your servant fears God since my youth!"
If that is precisely your point - if you mean that a
God-fearing person should not cooperate with Achav -
(13) "Has my master not been told of what I did when Izevel
killed God's prophets, and I hid a hundred of God's prophets, fifty to a cave,
and I fed them bread and water?"
In other words - this cooperation brings blessing and salvation
to God's prophets; it is maintained for the sake of heaven! Is Ovadyahu
deserving of punishment for having risked his life, by using his respected
status in Achav's house for the purpose of saving the prophets?
Perhaps there is another element in Ovadyahu's cry of
injustice. His fearful hesitation to fulfill Eliyahu's command (expressed in the
three-fold repetition of his fear of being killed by Achav) may make him appear
cowardly to Eliyahu. Therefore he tries to defend his refusal. It is not out of
fear that Ovadyahu is refusing to fulfill Eliyahu's demand; after all, "Has my
master not been told of what I did..."? Ovadyahu, then, is a man of courage who
is prepared to risk his status and even his life to save a hundred prophets from
Izevel. But this is a case of risk to his life where there is great, tangible
benefit: saving a great many prophets who would certainly have died had it not
been for Ovadyahu's assistance. But why should he forfeit his life for the
prophet's wish to provoke and anger Achav, his master, with no real benefit?
Should he endanger himself for this purpose?
6. Structure of Ovadyahu's speech
On the basis of the above discussion, in which we attempted to
reconstruct Ovadyahu's line of thinking, let us now analyze the structure of his
speech. A monologue delivered by a character during the course of a biblical
story is usually a polished literary gem - and Ovadyahu's speech here is no
exception. The thought and careful composition behind his words explain the many
repetitions that characterize this speech - as noted previously.
Ovadyahu's speech begins with a surprising introduction,
formulated as a biting rhetorical question, as a harsh moral complaint against
Eliyahu who - by commanding Ovadyahu - is actually going to cause him to be
killed by Achav:
(9) "How have I sinned, that you are giving your servant into
the hand of Achav, to put me to death?!"
The reader finds it difficult to understand what Ovadyahu
means. There is no apparent logical connection between Eliyahu's preceding
command and this claim. Ovadyahu's next words, therefore, are meant to clarify
this opening statement so as to justify it and make it intelligible. This
clarification happens in two stages: in the first, including verses 10-11 and
most of verse 12, Ovadyahu explains the SECOND part of his introductory
statement - "You are giving your servant into the hand of Achav, to put me to
death." Why is this so, and how will Eliyahu's instruction bring about such
far-reaching results - the execution of Ovadyahu by Achav? This claim must be
explained, it must be substantiated in terms of realistic probability, before
the first part of the initial claim - the moral argument, "how have I sinned" -
can be addressed. The moral argument rests upon the probability of the scenario
that Ovadyahu predicts. If the scenario is not convincing, there is no further
point to the moral clarification.
On the other hand, there is reason to start the introductory
statement with the sharp rhetorical question, "How have I sinned," in order to
give the question is due moral weight and dramatic significance, right at the
start. Thus the relationship between the opening statement and its dual
clarification is chiastic in form. Let us attempt to analyze the speech
according to the structure that we have described:
Argument - part I: "How have I sinned?"->
Argument - part II: "That you give your servant into the hand
of Achav, to put me to death" ->
Clarification of part II:
PAST - "As the Lord your God lives, there is no nation or
kingdom to which my master has not sent to seek you, and they [all] said, 'He is
not here,' and he made the kingdom and the nation swear that they had not found
you." ->
PRESENT - AND NOW YOU SAY, 'GO TELL YOUR MASTER, ELIYAHU IS
HERE' ->
FUTURE - And it shall be that I will go from you, and God's
spirit will bear you I know not where, and I will come to tell Achav but he will
not find you, AND HE WILL KILL ME."->
Clarification of part I:
PAST - "Your servant fears God from my youth. Was it not told
to my master what I did when Izevel killed the prophets of God, and I hid a
hundred of the prophets of God, fifty to a cave, and I fed them bread and
water?
PRESENT - AND NOW YOU SAY: GO TELL YOUR MASTER, ELIYAHU IS
HERE
FUTURE - AND HE WILL KILL ME."
As we can see from the above, each of the two clarifications
that is given for the two parts of the opening statement comprises three stages.
Stage 1 relates to the past, with a review of the facts and actions that
substantiate the claim made in the opening statement. Stage 2 relates to the
present (indeed, it is introduced with the expression, 'and now'), which will
lead to the expected outcome in stage 3: the future. Stage 2 is of necessity
identical in both clarifications: this is the stage of Eliyahu's command to
Ovadyahu. Stage 3 is likewise identical in both clarifications, but its purpose
differs. In the first clarification of the speech (clarification of the SECOND
part of the introductory statement), it means to explain the expected PRACTICAL
outcome of Eliyahu's command. Therefore there is a detailed description of the
process that will lead to that result. In the second clarification (relating to
the FIRST part of the opening statement), the "future" stage consists entirely
of one word - "ve-haragani" (he will kill me). Here there is no need for
elaboration: not only because the practical breakdown of the process that will
lead to this result has already been presented, but also for another reason. The
function of the description of the future here is to present a stark moral
contrast to the lengthy description in stage 1 of the clarification, which
presents as a background a description of Ovadyahu's righteousness in SAVING THE
LIVES of a hundred prophets. It is specifically the terrible brevity of the
single word, 've-haragani,' that has the effect of creating this dramatic
contrast.
We can now understand the repetitions that previously presented
a problem: they arise from the dual clarification. The same phrases appear twice
because they play a different role in each of the two parts of the speech. The
quotation of Eliyahu's command and its result, "He will kill me," in the first
part of the speech (clarification of part II of the opening statement) is meant
to explain HOW this will happen, while in the other part of the clarification
(part I of the opening statement) they function as a moral contrast to the
description of Ovadyahu's God-fearing stance and good deeds, thereby
substantiating the claim, "How have I sinned?"
The repetition of the description of his act of saving the
prophets can now also be explained. The function of this description in
Ovadyahu's speech is entirely clear. Its omission from the speech would detract
greatly from the power of his moral argument and thereby nullify the contrast
between his act of SAVING LIVES and his expectation of being PUT TO DEATH by
Achav. But in the narration itself it is also important that this heroic episode
be recorded, as an illustration of the preceding assertion - "Ovadyahu had great
fear of God." This develops within us, the readers, the appropriate attitude
towards this man, and a proper appreciation of his personality. This helps us to
understand the conflict that faces him. We also understand much better Eliyahu's
decision to appear first before Ovadyahu and to turn him into a go-between
between himself and Achav.
Finally, two comments concerning the first part of the
speech:
i. What is the purpose of the lifelike, dramatic description of
Achav's searches for Eliyahu? It serves a dual purpose. Firstly, Eliyahu's total
disappearance during these years is the background to Ovadyahu's fear, expressed
later on, that "God's spirit will take you [again] I know not where." Secondly,
the description of Achav's desperate searches serves as the psychological
background to the expected furious response: "he will kill me." Achav is
frustrated by his continued failure to locate Eliyahu, and aggravating this
failure by yet another disappearance will cause an outburst directed against
Ovadyahu.
ii. Ovadyahu introduces his first clarification (clarification
of part I of the opening statement) with an oath: "As the Lord your God
lives...." Why does he make this oath before describing Achav's search missions?
Does he fear that Eliyahu may not believe his (completely credible) story? It
seems that his oath is meant to apply to the entire clarification. In other
words, he swears that the situation is so grave that when Eliyahu disappears (as
Ovadyahu is certain that he intends to do), Achav will immediately have him
executed. In fact, the oath may even be meant to apply to the description of his
righteous act, as well, in the second part of the speech.
Eliyahu responds to Ovadyahu's oath at the beginning of his
clarifications - "As the Lord your God lives..." - with an oath of his own,
nullifying the speculative stage of Ovadyahu's words in which he predicts a
repeated "disappearing act" by Eliyahu, which he fears so greatly:
(15) "As the Lord of Hosts, before Whom I stand, lives - today
I shall appear before him."
And once this stage is removed from Ovadyahu's "scenario," the
entire edifice collapses, and his fear of being put to death by Achav turns out
to be baseless. At that point he fulfills the prophet's command without further
argument:
(16) "Ovadyahu went to meet Achav, and he told him."
(to be continued)
Translated by Kaeren Fish |