Q&A: A Question About Derash in the Talmud
A Question About Derash in the Talmud
Question
“From where do we derive these eighteen? As it is written: ‘And sons were born to David in Hebron; his firstborn was Amnon, by Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; and his second, Chileab, by Abigail the wife of Nabal the Carmelite; and the third, Absalom son of Maacah … and the fourth, Adonijah son of Haggith; and the fifth, Shephatiah son of Abital; and the sixth, Ithream, by Eglah, David’s wife. These were born to David in Hebron.’ And the prophet said to him: ‘And if that were too little, I would add to you such and such.’ ‘Such’ — six; ‘and such’ — six; making eighteen in total. Ravina challenged this: say rather, ‘such’ — twelve; ‘and such’ — twenty-four. It was also taught in a baraita likewise: ‘He shall not multiply wives for himself’ — more than twenty-four. According to the one who expounds the vav, it would be forty-eight. It was also taught in a baraita likewise: ‘He shall not multiply wives for himself’ — more than forty-eight.”
I brought part of a passage from tractate Sanhedrin in order to ask what you think about derashot. How do you understand this? Do you think that, logically, they really intended to identify the source for “he shall not multiply wives for himself”? Did the Sages themselves think they were really pinpointing the source in the Torah? Because on the face of it, these seem like very far-fetched arguments…
If you have an article on this, I’d be happy to see it.
Thank you very much.
Answer
I don’t deal with aggadic midrash. In my view, this is a homiletic flourish, not a true derash (as in Jewish law). In my opinion it is unnecessary and teaches nothing, since you can do whatever you want with it.
Discussion on Answer
Indeed. I was mistaken. Maybe they needed to set a number and attached it to this derash. Not that they were really uncovering any truth here.
With all due respect, Rabbi,
the derashot there in the Talmud are legal derashot,
on the law of “he shall not multiply wives for himself.”