[Avodah] (Neviim & Possible Mistakes); Akeidah & Yizchak

[David Riceman]

Micha Berger wrote:
> This matter involves the Ramban's questioning the Rambam saying that
> much of parashas Vayeira was a nevu'ah. The Rambam famously writes in
> the Moreh that it must have been so, since mal'akhim are incorpoeral and
> therefore whenever they are seen it must be the description of nevu'ah.
> The Ramban asks, were Sodom et al then not destroyed, and Lot not saved?
> The Abarbanel answers that the Rambam would say that the mal'akhim saved
> Lot AND they were only seen bederekh nevu'ah. Nevu'ah according to the
> Rambam is seeing things going on on higher planes of reality. Thus,
> Avraham and Lot only saw the mal'akhim bederekh nevu'ah because they
> were actually there.
You might want to reread that Abarbanel.  He holds that the Rambam held 
that Avraham, not Lot, had the prophetic vision, and the entire parsha 
up to 19:26 when Avraham wakes up is a retelling of Avraham's vision.  
The objective Biblical narrative (after the vision ends) says "b'shaheth 
elokim eth arei hakikar", but it doesn't describe how they were 
destroyed.  According to the Rambam you cannot predicate place of 
disembodied beings (I can find the citation in MN if you really need it) 
and therefore you can't literally mean "the angels were actually 
there".  I don't know what you do mean.
>  The Ramban seems to assume that nevu'ah is a
> message relayed to the navi, and thus the things in it are metaphors,
> not real entities.
>   
Do you mean Rambam here? This is a reasonably accurate summary of his 
position, but it's not accurate for the Ramban, who held that angels (as 
well as dead people like rebbe) can use and discard pseudo-physcial 
bodies (though, admittedly, he says that seeing these bodies is not 
nevuah, it's a lesser state).

David Riceman