Information about the speech that comes to the prophets, according to the expression used in the prophetic books, occurs in four forms. In the first form the prophet explicitly states that the speech addressed to him came from the angel in a dream or in a vision. In the second form the prophet only mentions the speech addressed to him by the angel, but does not explicitly state that this happened in a dream or in a vision because he relies upon the fact that it is known that there is no prophetic revelation except in these two manners: I do make Myself known unto him in a vision, I do speak with him in a dream}2 In the third form the prophet does not mention an angel at all, but attributes the words [ of God as having been spoken by Him to him; yet he explicitly states that the speech in question came to him in a vision or in a dream. In the fourth form the prophet simply says that God talked to him or told him: Act thus! or Do thus! or Speak thus! without making an explicit statement as to an angel or a dream, because he relies upon the fact that it is known and established as a principle that no prophecy and no prophetic revelation come in any other way except in a dream or in a vision and through the agency of an angel.
According to the first form, there are such dicta as: And the angel of God said unto me in the dream,-15 And God spoke unto Israel in the visions of the night,-1+ And God came unto Balaam }5 And God said unto Balaam }6 According to the second form, there are such dicta as: And God said unto Jacob: Arise, go up to Bethel,-17 And God said unto him: Thy name is Jacob,-18 And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven;19 And the angel of the Lord called unto Abraham a second time, and so on;20 And God said unto Noah f And God spoke unto Noah.22 According to the third form, there are such dicta as: The word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, and so on.25 According to the fourth form, there are such dicta as: Now the Lord said unto Abram And the Lord said unto Jacob: 10. Gen. 25:23. 11. Genesis Rabbah, LXIII. 12. Num. 12:6.
24. Gen. 12:1.
88 b] The Guide of the Perplexed II • 41 Return unto the land of thy fathers;2S And the Lord said unto Joshua,-26 And the Lord said unto Gideon.27 The dicta of most of [the prophets] are similar: The Lord said unto me;28 And the word of the Lord came unto me;29 And the word of the Lord came;50 And, behold, the word of the Lord came to him,-31 The word of the Lord came expressly;52 The beginning of the word of the Lord to Hosea,-33 The hand of the Lord was upon me.5* This manner of expression is very frequent.
All the dicta that are formulated according to one of these forms are prophecies, and those who utter them are prophets. However in the cases when it is said, God came to so and so in a dream of the night, there is no prophecy at all nor is the individual in question a prophet. | For this way of speech signifies that an intimation came to that individual from God. In addition it makes it clear to us55 that this intimation came to pass in a dream. For just as God causes a motion of the individual in question with a view to another individual’s being saved or his perishing, He also causes — by means of the vision of a dream — the creation in time of things that He wishes to be so created. For we do not doubt that Laban the Aramean was a perfectly impious man, and moreover an idolater. As for Abimelech, though he was a righteous man in comparison with his people, yet Abraham our Father said of his land and kingdom: Surely the fear of God is not in this place.56 In spite of this, this is what is said of both of them — I mean Laban and Abimelech: But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night 57 and similarly with regard to Laban: In a dream of the night..56 Know this and consider the difference between the dictum [of Scripture], God came, and its dictum, God spoke; as well as that between its dictum, In a dream of the night, and its dictum, In the visions of the night. Thus it is said of Jacob: And God spoke unto Israel in the visions of the night;59 whereas it is said of Laban and Abimelech: But God came, and so on, in a dream of the night. 40 Accordingly the latter expression is rendered by Onqelos: A word came from the Lord; and he does not say with reference to these two individuals: The Lord revealed himself. Know that it is sometimes said: And the Lord spoke to so and so — although that so and so was not a prophet4* and prophetic revelation had never come to him, but he was merely told 35. Or: it is made clear to us. 36, Gen. 20:11. 37. Gen. 20:3.
41. Translated according to the reading of a manuscript given in Joel’s critical apparatus, p. 484. The reading given in the text and corroborated by Ibn Tibbon’s translation does not seem to make sense.
]88 The Guide of the Perplexed II ■ 42 [ 89a the things in question by a prophet. Thus the text says: And she went to inquire of the Lord;*2 but [the Sages] say in explanation: To the school of Eber.*5 And that school gave her an answer; and it is with reference to the same event that it is said: And the Lord said unto her.** And even though it has been said that the expression, And the Lord said unto her, means that this was done through the agency of an angel, this should be interpreted as signifying that Eber was the angel; for a prophet is sometimes called angel, as we shall make clear. Or else this explanation alludes to the angel who came to Eber with the prophecy in question 5 or it is intended to make explicit that whenever words are | unqualifiedly45 ascribed to God, they came, as we have explained in the case of the other prophets, through the agency of an angel.
CHAPTER 42 We have explained that wherever it is mentioned that an angel was seen or had spoken, this has happened only in a vision of prophecy or in a dream whether this is explicitly stated or not, as has been said before. Know this and understand it thoroughly. And there is no difference between a statement in which the prophet literally affirms from the first that he sawr the angel and a statement according to whose external sense the prophet at first thought that a human individual had appeared to him, whereas at the end it became clear to him that it was an angel. For inasmuch as you find in the course of the event that he who was seen and had spoken was an angel, you ought to know and to establish as true that the event was from the first a vision of prophecy or a dream of prophecy. For in a vision of prophecy or a dream of prophecy, the prophet sometimes sees God speaking to him, as we shall explain, and sometimes an angel speaking to him; sometimes he hears somebody speaking to him without seeing an individual who is speaking, and again sometimes he sees a human individual who is speaking, and again sometimes he sees a human individual who speaks to him, and afterwards it becomes clear to him that he who spoke was an angel. Thus in this kind of prophecy, the prophet mentions1 that he saw a man who acted or spoke and that afterwards he knew that he was an angel.
42. Gen. 25:22. 43. Genesis Rabbah, LXIII. 44. Gen. 25:23.
45. Literally: absolutely.
1. Or: it is mentioned.
896 ] The Guide of the Perplexed II • 42 j 89 One of the Sages, may their memory be blessed, in fact a great man among those of them who were great, arrived at this capital principle. It was Rabbi Hiyya the Great, when speaking of the text of the Torah: And the Lord appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, and so on.2 For after he had first propounded the proposition that God manifested Himself to him,3 he began to explain what the form of this manifestation was; and he said that at first he saw three men and ran; | whereupon they spoke and were spoken to. He who propounded this allegoric interpretation says of Abraham's dictum — And he said: My lord, if I now have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant* — that it too is a description of what he said in a vision of prophecy to one of them; he 5 says in fact: He said it to the greatest among them.6 Understand this story too, for it is one of the secrets. I say likewise also of the story about Jacob in regard to its saying, And there wrestled a man with him,1 that it is in conformity with the form of prophetic revelation, inasmuch as it is finally made clear that he who was there was an angel. This is quite similar to the story concerning Abraham, in which it at first informs us in a general way, And the Lord appeared unto him, and so on, and then begins to explain in what way this happened. It is similar with regard to Jacob. At first it says: And the angels of God met him.8 Then it begins to explain what happened before they met him, and says that he sent messengers and acted and did this and that. Then Jacob was left alone, and so on.9 And these10 are the angels of God of whom it has been said at first: And the angels of God met him. All the wrestling and the conversation in question happened in a vision of prophecy. And likewise the whole story of Balaam on the way 11 and of the she-ass speaking; all this happened in a vision of prophecy, as it is finally made clear that an angel of the Lord spoke to him.12 Similarly I shall say with regard to what Joshua said when he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him,18 that this happened in a vision of prophecy, as it is finally made clear that the man was captain of the host of the Lord J* With regard to the dictum: And the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal, and so onf5 And it came to pass, when the angel of the Lord spoke these words unto all the children of Israel16 — the Sages have already literally stated that the angel of the Lord mentioned here was 2. Gen. 18:1. 3. To Abraham. 4. Gen. 18:3. 5. Rabbi Hiyya.
10. The reference is to the second part of the verse that has just been quoted: and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
jyo The Guide of the Perplexed 11-42 [ 90 a Phinehas. They said: This was Phinehas who, when the Indwelling descends upon him, resembles an angel of the Lord}1 We have already explained that the term angel is equivocal and that a prophet may likewise be called an angel, as | is said in the text: And sent an angel, and brought us forth out of Egypt.1* It also says: Then spoke Haggai the Lord's angel in the Lord's message19 And it says: But they mocked the angels of God}9 As for what Daniel says: Even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, approached close to me about the time of the evening offering91 — all this happened in a vision of prophecy. It should by no means occur to your thought that an angel can be seen or that the speech of an angel can be heard except in a vision of prophecy or in a dream of prophecy, according to what is stated as a principle: I do make Myself known unto him in a vision, I do speak with him in a dream}2 You can draw inferences from what I have mentioned as to what remains of the things that I have not mentioned.
From what we have set forth before regarding the necessity of pre¬ paration for prophecy and from what we have mentioned regarding the equivocality of the term angel, you should know that Hagar the Egyptian was not a prophetess23 and that Manoah and his wife were no prophets.2* For the words that they heard or that occurred to their mind were similar to the voices, 25 which the Sages constantly mention. This is a state that accompanies an individual who is not prepared for prophecy. It is only the equivocality of the term that occasions errors as to this — this being the principle that removes most of the difficulties found in the Torah. Consider the dictum, And the angel of the Lord found her 26 by a fountain of water, and so on,21 together with the use of a similar expression about Joseph: And a certain man found him, and, behold, he was wandering in the field}* With regard to this man, all the Midrashim 29 state literally that he was an angel.
25. bath qol. Literally: the daughter of a voice. 26. Hagar.
27. Gen. 16:7. 28. Gen. 37:15. 29. In the text: Midrashoth.
CHAPTER 43 We have already explained in our compilations1 that prophets sometimes prophesy in parables. For sometimes a prophet sees a thing under the aspect of a parable, | the meaning of that parable being sometimes inter¬ preted to him in that very same vision of prophecy — just as a man may see a dream and imagine in that dream that he has already awakened and that he has related the dream to somebody else and has interpreted its meaning to him, all this taking place in a dream. This is what they call a dream solved in a dream.2 Again there are dreams whose meaning becomes known after one awakens. Similarly there are parables of the prophets whose meaning is interpreted in a vision of prophecy, as is made clear with regard to Zechariah, when he says, after having first set forth the parables: And the angel that spoke with me returned, and waked me, as a man that is wakened out of his sleep, and he said unto me: What seest thou?, and so on,3 and then interpreted the parable for him; and as is made clear with regard to Daniel in the dictum: Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed.* Thereupon it sets forth all the parables and mentions his being anxious because he did not know their interpretation until he asked the angel who in that very vision made known to him their interpre¬ tation. And that is what he says: I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth concerning all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.5 It calls the whole story a vision [hazon] after having mentioned that [Daniel] had a dream-, this in view of the fact that, as has been mentioned, an angel interpreted the dream to him in a dream of prophecy. This is made known in the dictum that comes after¬ wards: A vision [ hazon ] appeared unto me, even unto Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.6 This is manifest; for hazon derives from hazoh [to perceive ], and maDeh [vision] derives from red oh [to see], and hazoh and red oh have the same meaning. There is no difference between one’s saying in a maAeh [vision], in a mahazeh [sight], or in a hazon? And there is no third way other than the two stated expressly in the Torah: I do make Myself known unto him in a vision, I do speak with him in a dream.8 However, there are degrees in regard to this, as shall be explained.9 Among the parables of the prophets there are | many whose meaning is not l. Cf. Mishneh Torah, Yesodei ha-Torah, VII 3, 2. B.T., Berakhoth, 55b.
7. The nouns mahazeh and hazon both derive from the verb hazoh (to perceive).
39 2 The Guide of the Perplexed II • 45 [ 9ia interpreted in a vision of prophecy, but whose purpose is known by the prophet after he awakens; thus, for instance, the parable of the staves that Zechariah took in a vision of prophecy.™ Know that just as the prophets see things whose purpose it is to constitute a parable — as for instance Zechariah' s lamps 11 and the horses and the mountains,12 Ezekiel's scroll™ the wall made by a plumbline that was seen by Amos,™ the beasts seen by Daniel, 15 and the seething pot that was seen by Jeremiah,™ and other similar parables whose purpose it is to imitate certain notions — they17 also see things whose purpose it is to point to what is called to the attention by the term designating the thing seen because of that term’s derivation or because of an equivocality of terms. In that case the action of the imaginative faculty consists in occasion¬ ing the appearance of a thing designated by an equivocal term, through one of whose meanings another one can be indicated. This too is one of the kinds of the making of parables. For instance the intention in the dictum of Jeremiah concerning maqqel shaqed [a rod of almond tree] is an indication based on the equivocality of the term shaqed [almond.]. Scripture accordingly proceeds to say: Ki shoqed 3 ani, and so on [For I watch over].™ Thus in this case the intention of the parable did not concern the notion of rod or that of almond. Similarly Amos saw klub qayis [a basket of summer fruit], 19 so that he should infer from it the end of the period. It accordingly says: Bed haq-qes [The end is come].20 Stranger21 than this is the intimation aroused through the use of a certain term whose letters tire identical with those of another term; solely the order of the letters is changed; and between the two terms there is in no way an etymological connection22 or a community of meaning.21 You will find an example in the parables of Zechariah, when, in a vision of prophecy, he takes two staves in order to shepherd cattle, naming one of them grace [nofam] and the other ravagers [ hoblim ].2+ The intention 18. Jer. 1: 11-12. The word shaqed (almond tree) has the same radical as the verb shaqod, which is translated in this verse as “to watch over.”
19. Amos 8:2.
20. Amos 8:2. The inference can be made because of the similarity of the words qayis (summer) and qes (end).
21. Or: more wonderful.
22. Literally: even if there is no etymological derivation between the two terms.
25. ishtirak ma'nd. One would expect “equivocality of the terms” (ishtirak fi'l-asma?).
24, Zech. 11:7. The translation grace and ravagers seems to conform to Maimonides’ interpretation, which follows immediately. In the English Bible, the two words are translated “Graciousness” and “Binders.”
gi£] The Guide of the Perplexed II - 45 of this parable was to show that in its beginnings the religious community25 subsisted in the grace of the Lord, who was the one who led | and consolida¬ ted it, and that it rejoiced and took pleasure in obedience to God, while God was pleased with it and loved it 5 just as it says: Thou hast avouched the Lord this day, and so on. And the Lord hath avouched thee this day, and so on.26 Moses was the one who governed and directed this community at that time, and after him some of the prophets. Afterwards the state of this community came to such a pass that obedience to God became repugnant to it and that it became repugnant to God. Accordingly He set up hoblim [ravage rs] like Jeroboam and Manasseh as its chiefs. This is to be under¬ stood according to the etymological derivation of the word 5 for hoblim derives from the expression, mehabblim keramim [ that spoil the vineyards].21 In addition the prophet inferred therefrom,28 I mean from the term hoblim, their repugnance for the Law and the repugnance of God for them. However, this meaning can only be derived from hoblim through changing the order of the “ha,” the “ba,” and the “lam.”29 Now it says, within the context of this parable, to signify the notion of repugnance and disgust: And My soul became impatient of them, and their soul also loathed [bohalah] Me.30 Accordingly it changed the order of haboV’ 1 and transformed it into bahol,32 Through this method very strange things appear, which are likewise secrets, as in its dictum with regard to the Chariot.-33 brass and burnished and foot and calf and lightning, and in other passages. If you carefully examine each passage in your mind, they will become clear to you — after your attention has been aroused — from the gist of what has been set forth here.
25. milla. Or: nation. 26. Deut. 26: 17-18. 27. Song of Songs 2: 15.
28. Or: it may be inferred therefrom.
29. I.e., h, b, and l. Maimonides uses the Arabic names of the letters even though the word is a Hebrew one.
30. Zech. 11:8.
31. The verb from which the form hoblim (ravagers) derives.
32. The verb from which the form bohalah (loathed) derives. 33. Ezek. 1.
CHAPTER 44 Prophecy occurs only in a vision or in a dream, as we have already explained several times. Accordingly we shall not perpetually repeat this. We shall say now that when a prophet prophesies, he sometimes sees a parable, as we have explained several times. Sometimes he sees God, may He be exalted, in a vision of prophecy, speaking to him. Thus | Isaiah says: And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?1 Sometimes he hears an angel speaking to him and he sees him. This occurs very frequently. Thus he says: And the angel of God said unto me, and so on; 2 And he said unto me: Knowest thou not what these are? And the angel that spoke with me answered, and so on;s Then 1 heard a holy one speaking.* This occurs innumerable times. Sometimes the prophet sees a human individual who speaks to him. Thus he says in [the book of] Ezekiel: And, behold, there was a man, whose appearance was like the appearance of brass, and so on. And the man said unto me: Son of man, and so on.5 He says this after he has said beforehand: The hand of the Lord was upon me.6 Sometimes the prophet does not see any form at all, but only hears, in a vision of prophecy, speech in which he is called. Thus Daniel says: And I heard the voice of a man between [ the banks of) Ulai.7 Eliphaz says: There was silence, and I heard a voice saying.8 And Ezekiel also says, And I heard Him that spoke unto me,9 for that which he apprehended in the vision of prophecy was not He who spoke to him. First he sets forth in detail the wondrous and strange story of that which he explicitly affirms to have apprehended. Thereupon he starts to explain the purpose and the form of the prophetic revelation, and says: And I heard Him that spoke unto me.
After we have set forth as a preface this classification, which is attested by the texts, I say that sometimes the prophet imagines the speech heard by him in the vision of prophecy to be extemely loud, just as a man may dream that he hears loud thunder or sees an earthquake or a hurricane. Such dreams are frequent. Sometimes he apprehends 10 the speech he hears in the vision of prophecy as familiar and well-known speech, so that nothing in it strikes him as strange. This may become clear to you from the story of 3. Zech. 4:5. Maimonides transposes the order of this verse.
93 a ] The Guide of the Perplexed 11-45 j