The following was translated using ChatGPT.
Who was the author of this book?
The title of this book, as well as of the following one, among the Hebrew doctors is Samuel—both
because its beginning treats of Samuel and because the author of the
first part of the book is believed to be Samuel himself. For it is
evident that the deeds which occurred after the death of Samuel were not
written by him personally.
1 Sam 1:1.
“There was one man from Ramathaim Zophim, from the hill country of Ephraim.”
They say that Ramathaim signifies “two Ramahs,” but because of the preposition prefixed to the word, it signifies “one of the two Ramahs,” so that the sense is: “There was a man from the one Ramah.” For they maintain that there were two cities called Ramah: one in Ephraim, of which the present passage speaks (for it is added “from the hill country of Ephraim”), and another in Benjamin.
The word Zophim is also plural in form, but it is not believed to be a place-name; rather, it signifies watchers or lookouts. Why that Ramah was surnamed “Ramah of the Watchers” is not entirely certain—whether because of the suitability of the location for seeing far and wide, or because of watchmen appointed there in time of war, or because of the multitude of prophets devoted to contemplation. However it may have received this surname, it is called by Josephus Ramaha, which in Hebrew, as was said, is called Ramah.
“And his name was Elkanah.”
As it is written in 1 Paralipomenon (1 Chronicles) 6, this Elkanah was a Levite of the lineage of Korah, so that he was not of the tribe of Ephraim but of the tribe of Levi, dwelling in the hill country of Ephraim. For the Levitical tribe was dispersed throughout all the tribes of Israel.
“Son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathite.”
Just as in Judges 17 the Levite who dwelt with Micah is reckoned within the family of Judah and is described as a Levite from the family of Judah, so Elkanah, a Levite from the hill country of Ephraim, is also described as an Ephrathite, that is, a Bethlehemite, because he drew his maternal lineage from Bethlehem.
There are, however, some who think that Ephrathite is not a designation of birthplace, but that Ephrathi is an appellative name signifying what in Latin we would call augustus (“noble” or “distinguished”), since it is derived from increase or abundance—so that Elkanah is described not as an ordinary man but as a distinguished one, increased (as is believed) in wealth and honor. This literal sense seems less fitting, however, since it does not sit well that after describing the homeland with so many circumstances and after setting forth the lineage in a brief genealogy, the designation of another homeland should be added. But it fits very well that an outstanding quality of the man should be added. Choose whichever interpretation you wish.
“And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the second Peninnah. And Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.”
1 Sam 1:3. “And that man went up from his city at the appointed times.”
The sense here is ambiguous: namely, to adore God and to sacrifice. I say that the sense is ambiguous in this way, because among the Hebrews it is ambiguous whether it means “from year to year” or “at fixed times.” Thus the letter may mean that Elkanah went up to Shiloh at each appointed time. For there was no exemption from attending even one of the appointed times. According to the Hebrew, adoration and sacrifice were annual obligations.
Thus it is not asserted that he went up several times in the year, but only annually to perform the two duties—adoration of the Lord of hosts and sacrifice. According to the Law, however, the times for going to the house of God were three: Pentecost, the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Passover.
“To the Lord of hosts in Shiloh.”
Here is the place in Scripture where God is first called the Lord of hosts. And because YHWH is the name of essence, this title is taken up.
The author of this book seems to have drawn this designation from Genesis, where God the Creator of the whole universe—the hosts of heaven and earth—is described. Hence God is called the Lord of hosts, that is, the giver of being to all hosts, both spiritual and corporeal. This sense should be retained whenever God is thereafter called the Lord of hosts in Scripture.
“And there were there two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, priests of the Lord.”
1 Sam 1:4-5
“And when the day came, Elkanah sacrificed, and he gave portions to Peninnah his wife and to all her sons and daughters; but to Hannah he gave one portion.”
Here the discourse concerns the portion of the peace offering, for the victim of peace was distributed proportionally. And therefore Peninnah and her sons—and likewise her daughters—received many portions, but Hannah, because she had no offspring, received only one.
“She was sorrowful, because Hannah he loved, and the Lord had closed her womb.”
The word translated sorrowful in Hebrew literally signifies anger or faces. Because it is written without either an article or a preposition, it admits of several interpretations.
Some refer it to the giver of the portion, and by changing anger into sadness, say that he gave her one sorrowful portion, because he wished to give her many portions—that is, he wished Hannah to have children so that he might have occasion to give her many portions.
Others, referring it to the man himself, say that Elkanah gave her one portion but with a cheerful countenance, because he loved Hannah—so that the lack of many portions was compensated by the joyfulness of his face.
Others again refer the word not to the man but to the portion itself, and read: he gave one fair portion, that is, a pleasing or honorable portion, because he loved Hannah.
Whichever interpretation you choose, note that in the literal sense the reason for the single portion is given: because the Lord had closed her womb. But the reason for sadness, or joy, or the honor of the portion is given because he loved Hannah.
1 Sam 1:6.
“And her rival afflicted her, and troubled her exceedingly, because the Lord had closed her womb.”
According to the Hebrew: “And her adversary also grieved her, even to provoke her, because the Lord had closed her womb.” Here you see Peninnah described as touched by envy at the greater love which the husband showed to Hannah, striving to add affliction to one already afflicted—so much so that she even burned with anger against her, in order to increase her sorrow by reproaching her barrenness. She was afflicted not in any way, but as inflicted by God.
And so she did year after year, from the time when Hannah went up to the house of the Lord; thus she provoked her.
I Sam 1:7–8.Observe either a difference or an explanation of difference. A difference, indeed, if above it is read that Elkanah went up to Shiloh from time to time—for he himself went up to the house of God at all the times appointed by the Law, but he went up with his family only once a year. For here it is clearly described that he did this annually.
“And she wept and did not eat. And Elkanah her husband said to her: Hannah, why do you weep? And why do you not eat? And why is your heart afflicted? Am I not better to you than ten sons?”
In the common manner of husbands, he uses a consoling way of speaking, proposing the greatness of his own love toward her, and thus very fittingly calling her back from excessive desire for children—children of whom she lacked even ten, if she had had them. Nor did he speak falsely, because it sometimes happens—and perhaps often, as experience testifies—that a husband who loves his wife deeply is better to her than ten sons.
Comments
Post a Comment