Sha'ar HaEmunah VeYesod HaChasidut, Entrance to the Gate of Beit Yaakov 11

מחזק דברי המהר"ל, שיש הנהגה ע"פ טבע והנהגה נסית,, ושניהם מסודרים בסדר ההנהגה, רק הטבע הוא מצד המשפט והנס מצד הרחמים, ולכן יכול להשתנות, ואין זה שינוי בעצמותו ח"ו. גם דבריו בנס עמידת השמש אצל יהושע שהם שני הפכים, אמת. Miracles – Can God Change His Mind?
R. Gershon Hanokh returns to the theme of miracles. A miracle is a temporary suspension of the laws of nature, which were themselves set in motion by G-d from the very onset of the creation. Most often, it is in response to an event in the world, such as in order to affect a deliverance (e.g. the splitting of the sea, the sun standing in the sky over Gibon). This sudden shift in G-d’s providential direction suggests that a change occurred in G-d’s will for creation – a spontaneous decision to abrogate one structure of reality for another. However, such a shift raises an important question: was a corresponding change in G-d’s will – a concept axiomatically refuted by the Torah? The author offers an answer, based upon the famous medieval philosopher, the Maharal. His own conclusion, however, is that the very question is faulty, and based only upon our limited, dualistic consciousness. In truth, G-d can both initiate new and miraculous events without altering His eternal and unchanging will at all. Regarding various miraculous events of the past, many Rishonim³³⁴Torah scholars of the Middle Ages. have questioned how such miracles fit into God’s overall plan.

וכן בעניני הנסים שהיו בזמנים, מה שהעירו על הענין הרבה מהראשונים אם הם מסודרים, כדאי' במדרש רבה (בשלח) שתנאי התנה הקב"ה במעשה בראשית שהים יתקרע, וא"כ אין זה נס כלל שהרי ניתן בו בטבע, ועיין פרקי ר"א שחשב שם שהרבה נסים היו מסודרים מששת ימי בראשית. וכן אם נאמר שלא ניתן בו בטבע, א"כ הרי נשתנה רצון הבורא. והאריך בזה הגאון מהר"ל מפראג בהקדמתו לספר גבורות ה' ואסף שם כל הדיעות בהתעוררות הנ"ל. ואחר כל דבריהם, שביארו בדבריהם שיש שני מיני הנהגות, הנהגה טבעית, והנהגה נסית, ושניהם הם מסודרים בסדר ההנהגה. אך שההנהגה הטבעית היא המתנהגת תמיד, וההנהגה הנסית אינה מתגלה אלא בשעת הנס. ואך שאפשר לשנות הסדר על ידי המקבל. וכמו שאם היו המצרים עושים תשובה לא היה נקרע הים, אע"פ שהיה תנאי במעשה בראשית, כי סדר הטבע הוא מצד מדת המשפט, וסדר הנסים הוא מצד מדת הרחמים. ולכן יכול להשתנות כפי ערך המקבל, ואין זה שינוי בעצמותו יתברך, שכל הפעולות אינם מביאים שום שינוי בעצמותו יתברך. וכן מבאר שם נס יהושע בעמידת השמש שהיתה הולכת ועומדת בפעם אחת, מצד הטבע היתה הולכת ומצד הנס היתה עומדת והיו שני הפכים בנושא אחד. זה תוכן דבריו בקיצור והם אמת לאמתם שפתים ישק משיב דברים נכוחים, ויש הרבה ראיות ומופתים אמתים שכן הוא שבנס יש שני הפכים בנושא אחד: In the Midrash Rabbah (Beshalach) we find the statement, “When God created the world, He made a condition with the sea that it would split when the children of Israel would leave Egypt.” If so, how is this considered a miracle, if it was instilled in the nature of creation? Pirkei D’Rebbi Eliezar (chap. 18) gives numerous examples of miracles that were programmed into the creation from its outset.³³⁵Such as the manna in the desert, the miraculous rock that gave water, the hole in the earth that swallowed Korach and his cohorts. See, also, Pirkei Avot 5:6. For, if it were said that they were not preprogrammed into nature, one could claim that God changed His will.³³⁶That is, G-d’s deciding to change the order of nature, which He established with the very creation of the world, implies a change in His will or intention in response to events in this world. Yet, G-d’s immutability is an axiom of Jewish faith. The Maharal of Prague discusses this at length in the introduction to his book, Gevurot Hashem, and provides many opinions on this subject. After presenting these opinions, he explains that there are two forms of Divine governance: a natural governance, and a miraculous governance. Both are worked into the general order of Divine governance. The difference is that natural governance is always happening, while miraculous governance is revealed only at the time of the miracle. Furthermore, the order can be changed in response to the recipient. For instance, if the Egyptians had repented, the sea would not have split, even though its splitting was set as a condition in the very fabric of creation. This is because the natural order follows the attribute of God’s judgment, and the miraculous order follows the attribute of God’s mercy. ³³⁷Again, the contradiction is, “If God made a condition with the Red Sea that He would create it only if it would split before the Children of Israel at the time of the exodus, then how could the Sages teach us that if the Egyptians had repented at the time, it would not have split?” This is resolved by seeing the splitting as a part of “natural governance,” or God’s judgment, and the revelation of the miracle as part of “miraculous governance,” flowing from God’s mercy. Ironically, the splitting of the sea was not a miracle, since it was preprogrammed in the creation. The miracle would have occurred had the Egyptian soldiers repented, and the sea not split. Because of this, the mode of governance can change according to the status of the receiver. This does not imply any change whatsoever in God’s essence, for no actions can affect any change in His essence.³³⁸As the verse states: “For I am G-d, I do not change” (Malakhi 3:6) Changes in the Divine governance of the world do not indicate a change in God’s essence. In the same passage, the Maharal explains the miracle of the sun standing still for Yehoshua (Yehoshua 10); for the sun was moving and standing still at the same time.³³⁹That is, the sun stood still in the sky for the Israelites, until they defeated their enemies in battle, while for the rest of the world, it moved through the sky normally. According the natural governance, the sun was moving as usual, and according to “miraculous governance’, it stood still. Two opposites existed in the same event. This is a synopsis of his words, which are correct, and (Mishlei, 24:26) “every man shall kiss the lips of one who gives a true answer.” There are many proofs and real wonders, for with miracles, two opposites can exist simultaneously.

והאמנם כי כל דבריו הקדושים אמתים. אכן כל התירוצים על זה, הם רק לתרץ שאין בנס שינוי רצון, אבל עדיין יכול השואל לשאול, וכי שייך שינוי בידיעת הבורא יתברך, וממילא כשיש שינוי בידיעה יש שינוי ברצון ג"כ. שכשסידר הש"י מעשה הבריאה היה הרצון שיהיה בזמן הזה הנס, וכשמתעכב מאיזה צד הרי נשתנה הרצון הקדום, ומאחר שתנאי התנה הקב"ה במעשה בראשית על הים שיתקרע הרי ידע שיתקרע, ובאמת כן היה שנתקרע, וא"כ האיך היו המצרים ביכלתם לעשות תשובה שלא יתקרע הרי ישתנה הרצון. וכן יקשה בהא דאי' בש"ס ברכות (ד.) סוטה (לו.) ראוים היו ישראל להעשות להם נס בימי עזרא כדרך שנעשה להם בימי יהושע בן נון אלא שגרם החטא. ודריש לה התם מקרא דעד יעבור עמך ה' וגו' יעו"ש. הרי שהיה הנס מסודר מכבר ונתעכב וא"כ ח"ו הרי נשתנה הרצון. ועיין ברא"מ (פ' וישלח) בביאורו לרש"י גבי ויירא שמא יהרג ובלחם משנה (סוף ה' יסודי התורה) שהעירו ג"כ במאמר זה אלא שגרם החטא, מהא דמס' שבת (נה.) דאמר רב אחא בר חנינא מעולם לא יצא דבר טובה מפי הקב"ה וחזר בו לרעה כו' ונדחקו מאד לתרץ זאת, ועם כל דבריהם אינו מתורץ הערה זו, דא"כ יש שינוי רצון ח"ו. אכן כפי שנתבאר לעיל, שכל דעת הנבראים היא דעה נבראת, וסדר המערכה הוא סדר נברא ונערך, וגם גבול וגדר זה שההשתנות בסדר שנסדר מכבר, אי אפשר שיהיה רק בשינוי רצון, הוא ג"כ דעה נבראת רק מצדנו. ובעת התגלות הנס יתגלה שאפשר להיות בלי שינוי רצון. ועבודת ישראל הוא להגיע לאמונה הזאת לקבעה בלב בשלימות, ומצד האמונה יכול להגיע למעלה מכל סדר ההנהגה, וממילא אין שום הפרש גם מצד הבריאה מן הטבע לשינוי הטבע. However, even though all of the Maharal’s words are true. Yet, all of his arguments were proffered only in order to show how there is no change in God’s will when a miracle occurs. One could still assert that God’s knowledge can change, from which it follows that His will also changes. When God arranged the work of creation, it was His will that certain miracles would happen at a definite time in the future. If this plan is delayed in any way, then the primordial will must have changed. Since God programmed into the creation the condition that the sea would split with the Exodus, therefore He knew that it would split, which it eventually did. If so, how could we be taught that the Egyptians could have repented prior to the sea’s splitting, which would have cancelled the order for the sea to split. With this in mind, we also find it difficult to understand the statement of the Talmud (Berachot, 4a, Sotah, 36a), “At the time of Ezra,³⁴⁰And the nation’s return from the Babylonian exile. the nation of Israel was worthy of experiencing a miracle of the same magnitude that happened in the days of Yehoshua,³⁴¹The miracle would have been their entering the land of Israel with a high hand, just as they left Egypt. Rashi. but the prevalence of sin prevented it.”³⁴²Instead, they could only return from Babylon by the permission of Cyrus. Rashi. The Gemara explains the verse in the Song of the Sea (Shemot 15:16), “until Your people shall pass over, O God, until they shall pass over...” is alluding to two “passing overs” into the Land – the first in the time of Yehushua, and the second in the time of Ezra. All this leads to conclusion that a miracle was supposed to happen at the time of Ezra, yet God’s will changed. R. Eliyahu Mizrahi, in his commentary on Rashi (Parshat Vayishlach), examines the situation of Yaakov Avinu returning to Israel, and confronting his brother Eisav and his army of four hundred men. The last Yaakov heard from Eisav was that he wanted to kill him, and he assumed, now twenty years later, that this was still true. Thus, the verse says, “and Yaakov was afraid,” on which Rashi comments, “He was afraid that he would be killed.” (The Lechem Mishnah, at the end of the fifth chapter of the Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah, also addresses this issue.) Yaakov was afraid that his own sins may have nullified God’s promise to protect him.³⁴³That is, G-d’s promise, made in Bereshit 28:15: “Behold, I am with you and will protect you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not abandon you until I have done that which I have promised you." Furthermore, we have the statement of the sages in the Gemara (Shabbat, 55a), “Rav Acha son of Chanina said: God never once broke His promise of bestowing good, and brought calamity in its stead.” We would have to bend over backwards with forced arguments in order to reconcile this contradiction. Based on the words of the sages, one would seem obliged to concede that God’s will can change. Yet based on all we have explained above, that all human knowledge is a created entity, and the whole order of existence is a created and arranged order, then we can also see that the borders and limits of what may change is also something that was arranged with the creation as an expression of God’s will. It is impossible that it could be only a change of will, for that very conception is no more than a created idea that can only be understood from our own greatly limited human perspective. At the time of the revelation of the miracle, it will be revealed that the miracle could occur even without any change in God’s will. It is the function of the Divine service of the Jew to arrive at this faith and to fix it permanently in his heart. Purely out of faith, man can reach a place above all orders of governance. Then it will be readily apparent that there is no difference between nature and miracles even from the perspective of created beings.