Eldad and Medad: The Men Who Were Not There

David J. Zucker, PhD, before retiring was the Rabbi/Chaplain and Director of Chaplaincy Care at Shalom Park in Aurora, Colorado. He publishes in a variety of journals. See his website, www.davidjzucker.org. His latest book is American Rabbis: Facts and Fiction, Second Edition, (Wipf and Stock, 2019). Other publications include The Torah: An Introduction for Christians and Jews (Paulist: 2005); The Bible’s Prophets: An Introduction for Christians and Jews (Wipf and Stock: 2013); The Bible’s Writings: An Introduction for Christians and Jews (Wipf and Stock: 2013); and [with Moshe Reiss, z”l] The Matriarchs of Genesis: Seven Women, Five Views (Wipf and Stock: 2015).

ELDAD AND MEDAD:

THE MEN WHO WERE NOT THERE

Numbers 11 takes place towards the end of the second year of the Exodus-

wilderness experience. There is trouble at Taberah. The people took to complaining bitterly before GOD. Then God responds with a fire ravaging the outskirts of the camp (Num. 11:1). Once again Moses has to intervene on behalf of the people. Shortly thereafter both the riffraff and general Israelites moan about what they have to eat. ‘Nothing but this manna to look to!’ (Num. 11:6). God is angry; Moses is distressed. From the beginning, Moses had been reluctant to take on the kind of leadership that God wanted from him (Ex. 3:11; 4:1, 10). He is patently fatigued with all the responsibilities that weigh on his shoulders (Num. 11:10-15). Moses specifically wants further assistance in the area of governing the nation. Clearly there are other leaders among the Israelites. The Torah explains that at one point Moses had appointed . . . heads over the people –chiefs of thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens; and they judged the people at all times (Ex. 18:25-26). In addition there were other leaders who assisted Moses in different activities: the elected of the assembly, the chieftains of their ancestral tribes … the heads of the contingents of Israel (Num. 1:16). Here, however, is a request for people to share the burden of prophecy.

God then directs him to gather a group of Israel’s elders. He is to take them out of the camp, and bring them to the Tent of Meeting. There God will descend, speak to the group, and take some of the spirit (ha-ruah) that is on Moses, and place it upon the elders. The ‘spirit that is on you [will be] . . . put it upon them; they shall share the burden of the people with you, and you shall not bear it alone’ (vss. 16-17). More specifically, Moses is to gather ‘seventy of Israel’s elders of whom you have experience as elders and officers of the

people’ (v. 16). About a half dozen verses on, Moses does gather seventy of the people’s elders, takes them away from the camp, and stations them around the Tent of Meeting, And when the spirit rested upon them they spoke in ecstasy [others: prophesied, have a vision], but did not continue (Num. 11:24-25). There are seventy elders with Moses, outside of the camp at the Tent of Meeting, and those seventy have some experience with the divine spirit, but then they cease that activity.1 At the same time, two men, one named Eldad and the other Medad, had remained in the camp; yet the spirit rested upon them . . . and they spoke in ecstasy [others: prophesied, have a vision] in the camp (Num. 11:26). The text indicates that Eldad and Medad were part of the original seventy elders, they were among those recorded, but they had not gone out to the Tent (Num. 11:26).2

Who were these two men? They only appear in this one chapter in Numbers.

How were they, and indeed the other elders chosen in the first place? The Bible is silent about those matters. In the absence of a biblical explanation, the rabbis in the world of midrash, and then some of the biblical commentaries step in and provide answers. The two most prominent midrashic sources which ad-

dress Eldad and Medad are Midrash Numbers Rabbah and Midrash Tanhuma

Numbers.3

Although the text speaks of seventy elders (Numbers 11:16), the rabbis suggest that the actual total number of elders in the Israelite camp was seventytwo, six from each tribe. Moses then devises a plan to come up with the number seventy without causing difficulties or resentments. Moses creates a lottery system and only those elders who chose the proper slip of paper with the word “elder” were chosen (Numbers Rabbah Beha’alotekha 15.19; Tanhuma Num-

bers, Beha’alotekha, 3.22). A variant has Eldad and Medad purposely stand

back, claiming that they were not worthy of that honor (TB Sanhedrin 17a). Similar ideas are found in Sifré Numbers 95.4 In both Numbers Rabbah and

Tanhuma Numbers there is a list of five indications that Eldad and Medad had special merit. (1) The seventy elders only prophesied on that one day, Eldad and Medad continued to prophesy. (2) The elders died during the period in the wilderness, Eldad and Medad entered the Land, suggesting that Eldad was the same person as Elidad ben Kislon, and Medad was Qemuel ben Shiftan (see

Numbers 34:21, 24). (3) The elders were not mentioned by name, Eldad and

Medad were. (4) The elders prophecy was limited it did not continue (Num.

11:25b) [while theirs, Eldad and Medad’s did not stop].5 (5) The elders’ prophecy shared some of Moses’ spirit, but Eldad and Medad’s spirit came directly from God.

That Eldad and Medad spoke in ecstasy at a different locale, actually in the camp and distanced from Moses, is no small matter. Offering a socio-political analysis about the matter, contemporary scholar David Frankel explains that Eldad and Medad remaining in the camp is done purposefully. The two men

consciously detach themselves from Moses.

“Eldad and Medad refused to go out in conscious defiance of Moses. God

and Moses chose them to be among his seventy ‘yes-men,’ an arrangement

designed to bolster Moses’ singular authority. All spirit had to be transmitted to others via Moses (see esp. v. 25 ), and the purpose of this transmission was strictly to authorize subordinates who would serve him . . . There was no place in this arrangement for individual spiritual voices that might speak independently of the figure of Moses and bring a diversity of opinions into the public domain. Eldad and Medad challenged not only the centralized and exclusive authority of Moses but also, at least implicitly, the attempt to wield political control over the divine spirit.”

Frankel continues, “God approves of Eldad and Medad who refuse to go out

to Moses’ tent.” God rewards Eldad and Medad by directly appointing them

with some of God’s spirit. Contrary to the traditional view of the rabbinic sages, as Frankel explains, it is because of their “spiritual audacity,” not because of their excessive humility. God bestows God’s “spirit directly, without the mediation of Moses at his tent. God allows them to prophesy in the midst of the camp because God ultimately endorses the spiritual freedom and pluralism that they seek to promote”6 (italics in original). Eldad and Medad, prophesying in the camp, distanced from Moses “serves to protect the independence of the prophetic office from those who would subject it to institutional control.”7 Their action, at least publicly, is strengthened by Moses’ endorsement of their behavior. It is no small thing that Moses says publicly ‘Would that all GOD’s people were prophets, that GOD inspired them!’ (Num. 11:29).

Moses recognizes that God is the ultimate source of prophecy. Moses had

asked God for help, ‘I cannot carry all this people by myself, for it is too much for me’ (Num. 11:14), and God replied with the instructions to gather ‘seventy of Israel’s elders . . . and bring them to the Tent of Meeting . . . I will draw

some of the spirit this is on you and put it on them’ (Num. 11:16-17). At the Tent God had drawn on the spirit that was on Moses and put it on the seventy elders, and they had a prophetic experience. Yet, with the occasion of Eldad and Medad, Moses recognizes that sometimes God bestows prophecy on cer-

tain individuals independent of Moses’ being directly involved. This speaks to the observation in the next chapter, that Moses himself was very humble, more so than any other human being on earth (Num. 12:3). It is not a matter of

either/or, but rather of both/and. There is Moses and those elders who were with him, upon whom God took part of the spirit that was on Moses and put it on those elders. In addition there was God’s spirit which God put directly on Eldad and Medad.

Framing their actions as “spiritual audacity” and claiming that God approves of “the spiritual freedom and pluralism that they seek to promote” Frankel argues that Eldad and Medad openly contest Moses’ claim of being the only one with whom God has a special relationship. Moses has a long history of being reluctant to share power and authority. In Exodus 18 Moses’ father-in-law

Jethro feels compelled to advise him to appoint capable and trustworthy people who will assist him. ‘The thing you are doing is not right; you will surely wear yourself out, and these people as well. For the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone’(Ex. 18:17-18). On that occasion Moses had appointed . . . heads over the people – chiefs of thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens; and they judged the people at all times (Ex. 18:25-26), but that was for matters of general administration. On religious matters, Moses largely limits power and authority to a very small group of people, primarily the Levites. Moses’ second in command is Aaron, his older brother. Moses’ older sister Miriam has a

prominent role in the camp, but there is some tension there as well (cf. Num. 12:2). Milgrom understands that what Miriam and Aaron “were really after

was a share in Moses’ leadership.”8 That said, their motivation may not have been entirely for their self-glorification, but rather recognition that Moses was so overburdened that he was unable to cope with all the demands put to him. Further, in Numbers 16 Moses will be challenged by his cousin Korah as well as some Reubenites. Their complaint is that Moses [and Aaron] appear to refuse to share power. Korah complains: ‘You have gone too far! For all the

community are holy, all of them, and GOD is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above GOD’s congregation?’ (Num. 16:3).

The Bible is silent about the long-term effects of the elders’ action at the Tent of Meeting. It has been suggested that while they prophesy, they “are not

prophets as such.”9 Did they share some of Moses’ burden? If they did, was it for a very limited time, or much longer? It is argued that there is a “clear failure of uncontrolled prophetic behavior to provide Moses with the administrative help he requested.”10 There is nothing in the text which shows how Moses’

burden was lifted through the elders’ prophesying. The elders “may have received a prophetic vision, but their authority, like the spirit that rested upon them, was dependent on Moses.”11 Baruch Levine suggests that perhaps alt-

hough “the elders did not continue to experience prophetic ecstasy, but clearly the spirit withdrawn from Moses and conferred upon them had altered their

status permanently. The spirit that had settled on them endowed them with the continuing capability of sharing responsibility with Moses in governing the people. Their ecstasy was a passing experience, but their status, and presumably their new competence, were permanent.”12 Yet, there is no textual evidence that this is so.

Then there is the matter of Eldad and Medad. If they, unlike the elders, continued to prophesy as Numbers Rabbah and Tanhuma Numbers suggest, were

they perceived by Moses to be a threat to his exclusive authority? The claim that Moses shared responsibility with the newly inspired elders is far from clear. Jacob Milgrom points to v. 28, Joshua’s call to Moses about Eldad and Medad, ‘My lord Moses, restrain them!’ “Joshua astutely recognizes the implication: Moses has rivals. Moses’ powers are not merely diminished; he is actually faced with qualified competitors.”13 Once again, it is not a matter of either/or, but rather of both/and.

In the event, neither the elders nor Eldad and Medad are referred to again in the Bible. It is possible, perhaps it is likely, that Eldad and Medad, and maybe the elders as well, took note of what happened to Miriam and Aaron, and to Korah and his followers. Time and again, God stands by Moses and supports

him in what Moses says and does. It appears that when it comes to Moses’

leadership, God generally favors him, and does not brook criticism or interference with Moses’ actions. This was not the time to publicly challenge Moses’ leadership and authority.

NOTES

I appreciate the suggestions made by the anonymous reviewers; they helped me to sharpen my arguments.

1. The three Targums to Numbers differ on a major point: how long the elders at the Tent of Meeting prophesied. While the Biblical text indicates that the elders “spoke in ecstasy (others: prophesied/had a vision) but did not continue” (v. 25), the Targums explain that they did not cease from prophesying (v. 25). Targum Onqelos is composed after the 4th century CE, Targum Neofiti possibly from the 4th century CE, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan’s final composition is from the 4th and 14th centuries CE. Targum Onqelos to Leviticus and Numbers. Tr. Bernard Grossfeld. (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1998), p. 102; Targum Neofiti 1: Numbers. Tr. Martin McNamara; Targum Pseudo Jonathan – Numbers. Tr. Ernest G. Clarke with the assistance of Shirley Magder (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1994), pp. 73; 219-20. The Talmud also suggests that the elders did not cease from prophesying. TB Sanhedrin 17a.

2. Eldad and Medad are part of the seventy elders, but they remain in the camp. Yet in vv. 24-25 there are seventy elders at the Tent of Meeting. The matter can be resolved by regarding the number 70 as a generic “large group” and not a specific number. See Nahum Sarna, JPS Torah Commentary – Genesis. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), p. 69, “The Seventy Peoples,” and Jacob Milgrom, JPS Torah Commentary – Numbers. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1990), p. 86, “Seventy Leaders.”

3. Midrash Rabbah Numbers, Vol. 2. Tr. Judah J. Slotki, (London: Soncino, 1961 (1939)). Numbers Rabbah is redacted perhaps 11th-12th centuries CE. Midrash Tanhuma, Vol 3, Numbers and Deuteronomy. S. Buber Recension. Tr notes, John T. Townsend. (Jersey City, NJ: Ktav, 2003), pp. 95-96. Midrash Tanhuma Numbers is redacted around the 9th-10th centuries CE. The Sforno (16th century CE, Italy) comments on v. 17 that the people will trust Moses’ leadership when they see that the elders are with Moses and concur in Moses’ decisions.

4. Jacob Neusner. Sifré to Numbers. Vol. 2, Sifré to Numbers 59-115. (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986) (composed c. 200-250 CE).

5. The parallel words in the Tanhuma reads: “4. The elders had their prophecy cease, but these [i.e. Eldad and Medad] did not have their prophecy cease.” In Sanhedrin 17a it states clearly that God approves of Eldad and Medad. The text explains that God says, “I will add to your greatness yet more greatness.”

6. https://www.thetorah.com/article/eldad-and-medad-successfully-challenge-moses-controlover-prophecy

7. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990), p. 85. 8. Milgrom, p. 94.

8. Philip J. Budd. Numbers. Word Bible Commentary. (Waco: TX, 1984), p. 130. 10. John R. Levison. “Prophecy in Ancient Israel: The Case of the Ecstatic Elders.” Catholic Bible Quarterly. 65. 2003, p. 504. This is so whether one follows the MT tradition where the ecstatic prophesying was a one-time event, or the Targum’s tradition that the elders continued to prophesy. Levison makes a case that the prophesying of the elders was not ecstatic behavior, but some kind of vision.

9. Levison, p. 516.

10. Baruch A. Levine, Numbers 1-20; Anchor Bible. (New York: Doubleday, 1993), p. 340. 13. Milgrom, p. 378.



If you have written a paper in the Jewish Bible Quarterly

and wish to see if it has been quoted in another aca-

demic journal, book, or doctoral dissertation, access

http://scholar.google.com and type in Jewish Bible

Quarterly under “journal” and your name under “au-

thor“.





INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

Detailed Instructions for Authors and journal style

can be found on our Internet website:

http://www.jewishbible.org

