[JSOT 96 (2001) 83-99] ISSN 0309-0892

NADAB AND A B I H U ATTEMPT TO FILL A GAP: LAW AND NARRATIVE IN LEVITICUS 10.1-7 Bryan D. Bibb Department of Religion, Furman University, Greenville, SC 29613, USA

The sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu took each one his censer and put fire m it And they placed incense upon it, and brought near before Yahweh strange fire that he had not commanded them Then there came out fire from before Yahweh and it consumed them Thus they died before Yahweh And Moses said to Aaron, 'This is about which Yahweh spoke, saying, "In my near ones I will be sanctified And in the presence of all the people I will be glorified " ' But Aaron was silent So Moses called unto Mishael and Elzaphan, sons of Uzziel, uncle of Aaron, and he said to them, 'Go near, lift up and take your brothers from before the holy place to the area outside the camp' And they went near, lifted them up in their tunics, and took them to the area outside the camp as Moses had ordered And Moses said to Aaron and to Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons, 'Do not dishevel your heads, and do not rend your garments so that you will not die nor upon all the congregation will anger strike And your kinsmen, all the house of Israel, they will be the ones to mourn the burning that Yahweh has ignited But from the door of the tent of meeting, do not go out, lest you die since the oil of the anointing of Yahweh is upon you ' And they did according to the word of Moses (Lev 10 1-7)

The brief story of Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10.1-7 is an enigmatic passage in the midst of long, almost pedantic lists of cultic procedures and laws. The people are preparing to leave Sinai where Yahweh has revealed through Moses the shape and operation of the cultic system. The narrative in Leviticus 8-10 concerns the ordination and installation of the Aaronic priests in their important cultic roles. Leviticus 10.1-7, however, disrupts the orderlyflowof the inauguration ceremonies, shatters the neat hierarchy
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001, The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SEI 7NX and 370 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA

84

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

of Aaron and his sons, and forces Moses to take emergency measures to contain the trouble. The thesis of this article is that this story exposes our need to fill in gaps of understanding, and reveals the inherent fragility of our attempts to do so. The genres of law and narrative interact in a desperate effort to resolve the fundamental ambiguity of one's situation before 'the holy'. The events in this story occur during the highest moment for the cult, the best chance that they will ever have for getting things just right. They have Moses present for careful instruction. The people are all looking on with anticipation and wonder, not wandering off to follow the other gods with their pagan rituals. The golden calf incident is like the fading memory of a bad dream, and they have the highest hopes of making a clean start.1 Nadab and Abihu, however, step right into the consuming fire of Yahweh, sending Moses' carefully laid plans into a tailspin. The swift and mysterious destruction of these two leading priests, eldest sons of Aaron no less, strike fear into the hearts of the remaining priests, and no doubt dread into the minds of the congregation. Since that initial moment of burning, observers of the scene have attempted to understand the fiery execution of these two men. The characters in the story, as well as the rest of us, have a stake in filling in the gaps and resolving the ambiguities that the text leaves open. Despite our best attempts to smooth over these difficulties, the seeds of fear and doubt have already been sown. This story does not merely have gaps that need to be filled; this story is itself about gap-filling and its attendant danger and frustration. Let us turn now to the text. Presence and Absence In the beginning of the story, Nadab and Abihu each take a censer and place in it hot coals from a fire,2 put incense over the coals, and bring it into the presence of Yahweh. From the beginning of the story, the key movement of the action is toward the 7]}7]^ ^ S . The presence of God is the chief problem and complicating factor in the narrative. The initial characters are motivated by their desire to be in the presence of God, and
1. The presence and enthusiasm of the people is indicated in several places in Lev. 9; see w . 5, 22-24. 2. Jacob Milgrom clarifies that the 'fire refers to the hot coals from the source'. See Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation and Commentary (AB, 3a; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1991), p. 597.
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

85

from the beginning we may wonder if they will be successful We do not have any real reason to worry, however, because they have just experienced a powerful ceremony of installation They are freshly minted, so to speak, and are beginning their new phase of service in the sanctuary of Yahweh The first major gap concerns their underlying reason for taking incense into the presence of Yahweh Sweet smelling incense was offered by the priests twice daily on the inner altar (Exod 30), and once each year by the high priest as part of the Day of Atonement ritual (Lev 16) 3 We do not know at this point what relationship Nadab and Abihu's incense bears to these particular incense offerings The text does not explicitly link their censing with any prescribed activity involving incense, but at the beginning we have no real reason to feel uneasy with this gap The details of the narrative seem innocuous enough the two highest-ranking officials of the cult, after Moses and Aaron, are taking some incense and offering it before the Lord We do not know what particular kind of incense they are offering The terms used in the other passages give more detail m o p nQD ('perfumed incense') m Exod 30 7, and Hpl CD m o p ('finely ground perfumed incense') in Lev 16 12 However, the basic noun here is the same m p Therefore, there is no reason to assume that this is some special concoction of Nadab and Abihu's own invention, or that they are engaging in any particularly offensive activity After the initial statements, however, our suspicions are suddenly raised What is UN? What kind of fire could be called strange^ There have been several attempts to identify the 'strange' quality of thefire,all of them indicating that Nadab and Abihu willfully violated a ritual con vention 4 A list of the major theories will suffice to demonstrate the diffi culty of knowing the exact nature of this phrase They may have offered at the wrong time of day, or from the wrong motives, or m an over-zealous manner because of the shouts of the people Maybe they used the wrong procedure by not purifying themselves properly, by daring to enter the
3 See the discussion in Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp 597-98 4 For summaries of the history of interpretation, see Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp 633-35, Robert Kirschner, 'The Rabbinic and Philonic Exegesis of the Nadab and Abihu Incident (Lev 10 1-6)', JQR 73 (1983), pp 375-93, Edward L Greenstein, 'Deconstruction and Biblical Narrative', Prooftexts 9 (1989), pp 43-71, John C Laughhn, 'The "Strange Fire" of Nadab and Abihu', JBL 95 (1976), pp 559-65, and Roland Gradwohl, 'Das "fremde Feuer" von Nadab und Abihu', ZAW15-16 (1963 64), pp 288-96
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

86

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

adytum, or by taking fire from a profane source Perhaps they were bringing foreign incense used in pagan cults, or maybe they were not even priests at all1 It has also been suggested that this story should be understood in connection with the sin of Aaron with the golden calf (Exod 32), as a counterpart to the rebellion of Korah (Num 16), or a cipher for the sin and punishment of Jeroboam (1 Kgs 1415)5 The rabbis prove themselves superior in cleverness and creativity, as usual, by proposing a senes of possible readings 6 In addition to prefiguring later interpretations, they suggest that the priests officiated while drunk, neglected to consult with each other or with Moses, did not wear the right garments, were childless, wanted to usurp Moses and Aaron, looked boldly at the divine presence, or thought arrogantly that no women were equal to their status 7 Jacob Milgrom argues that the primary problem is that the priests are offering private incense 8 He puts much weight on small textual clues that point to differences between this practice and the official incense offerings He points out that each one takes his censer, which can be interpreted to mean that the censers belong to the men themselves, and are therefore part of individual religious practices rather than the official cult Also, the two priests take fire (that is, hot coals) and put it in the pans They do not, however, take from the fire that was always burning upon the altar Furthermore, the incense is not described as the sweet smelling variety used m the official rites, so therefore the mixture is their own special recipe and not the incense intended for official purposes Therefore, the key to the 'strangeness' of the fire is that the priests are not operating within the official parameters of the cultic apparatus, and therefore their sin rests in their use of 'unauthorized coals' 9 They use the coals from a fire source other

5 See David Damrosch, 'Leviticus', in R Alter and F Kermode (eds ), The Literary Guide to the Bible (Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press, 1987), pp 6677, ErhardS Gerstenberger, Leviticus A Commentary (trans D W Stott, OTL, Louisville, KY John Knox Press, 1996), pp 116-22 6 See Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp 633-35, Kirschner, 'The Rabbinic and Philonic Exegesis', pp 380-85 7 If these are really capital crimes, many contemporary ministers should be afraid, very afraid' 8 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp 596-98, 628-35 He surmises that the authors of the story wrote this invective against private incense offerings because such rites were easily penetrated by worship of other gods 9 Milgrom translates the T UN in comparison with the 'unauthorized incense' (1 m o p ) of Exod 30 9, 37, see Leviticus 1-16, 598
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

87

than the one on the outer altar, therefore one that was 'profane' rather than 'holy' This interpretation of 'strange fire' certainly has its merits However, the facts in the story do not provide an unassailable basis for his reading Much of his argument rests on precise expectations for the way that the language ought to appear but does not For example, the assumption is that if the incense were really the proper kind, then the text would cer tainly use the full name for it Further, if the two priests each take his pan, then that must mean that the pans belong to them personally Finally, it does not say that they take coals from the fire, so therefore the fire was from some illegitimate source The fact that Milgrom must rely on evi dence that is not there to explain the single clue that is there () illu strates most clearly that the gap resists closure Milgrom's interpretation seems plausible, but its chief assumption is that Nadab and Abihu are stupid They willfully transgress their explicit instructions about how to perform censing although they have witnessed the consuming power of Yahweh's presence (ch 9) The problem is that the text is not so clear in saying that Nadab and Abihu are willful about any sinful thing, or that they know of a prohibition that they are transgressing While the 'strange fire' leaves us wondering so many things about these priests and their activity, this enigmatic phrase may be made clearer by the explanatory phrase that follows tob , 'which he had not commanded them' This phrase, though, is not itself very easy to deci pher 10 Who is doing the commanding? Who is receiving the command? Finally, what is implied here, a certain kind of command or the absence of a command? Most commentators have assumed that there existed a spe cific command that Nadab and Abihu violate by bringing their incense offering The text explicitly says, however, that there is no command particularly relevant to this incense offering They perform something that he had not commanded them This is quite different from other formula tions that describe disobedience, such as Lev 26 14-16, which says, 'If you will not obey me, and do not observe all these commandments bD bXn ) I will bring terror on you' The reference m eh 26 is to specific commandments that are willfully broken The language m ch 10

10 Timothy Beai and Tod Lmafelt offer a rather speculative reading of this phrase m 'Sifting for Cinders Strange Fires in Leviticus 10 1-5', Semeia 69-70 (1995), pp 24-28 They read this phrase as referring to child sacrifice Their reading, however, is more of a commentary on Derrida than on this text
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

88

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

is quite different The priests are operating in a realm in which no com mand of God is pertinent This is a fact ignored by many commentators in their search for the hidden crime that merits this swift punishment The recipient of the 1 *b could be the priests m general or the two priests here in particular This choice does in fact make a difference in our interpretation If Nadab and Abihu are the specific recipients of the noncommand then the source must be Moses, since we do not find Yahweh speaking directly to any of the priests under Moses and Aaron {1 If Moses is the source of the non-commandment then the issue is one of rebellion against Mosaic authority Moses, though, could be negligent at times (see, e g , 16) and so we should not immediately blame the priests involved Further, if it were a matter of usurping Moses' prerogative to administrate the sacrifices, this still does not provide an explanation for the events to follow Alternatively, the priests as a group could be the recipients of the command, which would probably make Yahweh the lawgiver In this reading, there is no command that specifically authorizes or prohibits the priests' incense offering here How could Yahweh hold the priests respon sible for transgressing a law that he had not yet given them? The real problem for Nadab and Abihu is the absence of Yahweh's word or command The priests prepare their incense offering and bring it near p i p ) unto Yahweh The text gives us no indication that they knew their incense to be inherently wrong, but the narrator does tell us two facts about the offering First, the offering uses strange fire, which seems to have an indeterminate meaning Second, they bring an offering that Yah weh has not explicitly commanded Therefore the priests are living within a gap In the absence of Yahweh's word they seek his presence, but the narrator has alerted us that they are acting withm a lacuna in the legisla tion There is no explicit prohibition of this activity For the priests (and others working withm gaps) is this comforting or threatening7 In the next verse (v 2) we see that the priests do in fact encounter the presence of Yahweh However, instead of experiencing Yahweh's D^S, they only feel the presence as an EN coming forth from the Dn]S The lan ? guage m vv 1 and 2 reveal the irony regarding what they seek and what they actually find In the absence of Yahweh, they bring 1 n 3S^ UN, but find instead that presence through n ]S b2 UN The fire comes 11 This is an example of a gap in the story that isfilledfor the sake of interpretation Each rendering will have certain gaps that arefilledwhile others are left open Even when choosing a particular reading, however, one should recognize the ambiguity always resident m such gaps
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

89

forth from Yahweh and consumes 'them', the same 'them' that Yahweh has previously not commanded. Therefore, God has been the subject of only two verbs, one of which seems particularly appropriate within the priestly worldview and one that does not. Yahweh consumes (literally, 'eats') the two priests just as the fire had consumed the offering in 9.24. The difference, however, is crucial. Instead of consuming bun, the fire consumes DDIN. The destruction by Yahweh of the two ranking priests is even starker, however, in light of the only other action by Yahweh so farnot commanding (v. 1). This action is more like a non-action than a particular activity. The absence of Yahweh is heightened in the text, which speaks without a specific nominal agent for the verb (). The Greek provides the noun, KUpios, which clears up the ambiguity but also makes Yahweh present here in a way that he is not in the Hebrew text. Milgrom, similarly, restores the Tetragrammaton as the subject of this verb.12 The LXX and Milgrom both bring the presence of Yahweh into the text where he is absent. Nadab and Abihu themselves finally face the presence of Yahweh. They bring offering before Yahweh (* nDS^) and, encoun tering the presence in the form of fire, they die before Yahweh (OS1?

mm).
There are gaps in the story, and when we pay close attention to these gaps by refusing to close it quickly or easily we discover that they exist for Nadab and Abihu themselves. The priests are not violating a specific commandment set forth by Yahweh. In fact, they are living within the gap, searching for the presence of Yahweh, stumbling blindly in the dark. They discover unfortunately that they are not prepared to find what they seek. Dangerous Sanctification After these events, we move to the center of the passage. Previously, the command of God was absent and this led to grave consequences. Now Yahweh speaks through Moses and seemingly provides an explanation for the events that have just occurred. Moses' introduction to the speech supposedly tells the reader how the speech is responding to the events that have just transpired. Moses says, m m " . It is not clear, however, to what antecedent the 81 refers. Does it only refer to the speech? ('This is what Yahweh said.') Or, does it refer back to some part of the event in order to illustrate the meaning of what Yahweh meant

12. Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp. 598-99.

The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

90

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

when he spoke? Did Yahweh ever speak such words in the past at some point? The words are not a quote of any divine speech that we have in the text Or as some rabbis and Milgrom have suggested, perhaps Moses is giving a new word of Yahweh for this immediate situation 13 If this is the case, the command of Yahweh that he had not given before is now implied in these new words spoken through Moses The presence of Yahweh that had eluded and then consumed the priests now appears, speaking words through Moses But what kind of words are they? Yahweh says that through (in or by) his CPinp, he will KTfpK The first word means that he will use the ones who are near to him According to Milgrom, this term is a permanent title for priests who may approach the presence of Yahweh directly It has an analogous meaning in Akkadian as a privileged member of a royal court14 In this case, the speech refers to the priestly class However, we have very recently encountered two priests bringing near (Dlp) their offering before Yahweh Thus, the words have something to do with the specific actions and punishment of Nadab and Abihu The niphal verb of ETfp may mean either that Yahweh will be sanctified or that Yahweh will sanctify himself There is much at stake in the choice of meanings here, particularly with reference to the role of the people in sanctifying God 15 In either case, however, the deaths of Nadab and Abihu serve the larger purpose of sanctifying Yahweh It seems that the deaths of these two priests have not been in vain after all By calling attention to the swift way that Yahweh responds to any violation of his sanctity, they have actually participated in the sanctification of Yahweh In the second part of his speech, Yahweh says, 'before all the people, I will be glorified (""DDK)' There are similar problems with the passive form of this verb, but the structures are in parallel, so the meaning here is closely related to that of the first What is different here is the mention of the people They are the onlookers who have witnessed these activities (cf 9 24), and in some way they have witnessed the glorification of Yahweh The principle at stake here, whatever it may be, does not concern only the priests but also has implications for the people and how they view Yahweh It seems that the public nature of the glorification helps to explain the sanctification m the first part of the doublet Milgrom says,
13 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, 600 14 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, pp 600-601 15 See Lev 20 3, 22 2 The people's disobedience actually profanes the name of Yahweh The adherence of the people to the holiness laws seems to have implications for Yahweh as well as for the people
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

91

'The deaths of God's intimate priests, Nadab and Abihu, perform the function of sanctifying Godproviding awe and respect for his power to all who witness the incident or who will subsequently learn of it' 16 The sanctification and glorification of Yahweh has something to do with Yah weh's status among the people 17 In any event, Moses presents this speech of Yahweh as some sort of explanation of the preceding events, but it comes across mainly as a double threat Both the near-ones and the whole people stand in the same tenuous situation that Nadab and Abihu confront Because there are gaps in their comprehension of 'the holy', they must reckon with the fate of Nadab and Abihu as a possible outcome In this speech the presence of Yahweh comes to Aaron, but it is not a comforting word It helps very little in rationalizing the events that have happened, but only sows further seeds of doubt In the face of this, Aaron is silent Therefore, the speech by Yahweh does not close any of the gaps m the story We could say that Nadab and Abihu are destroyed because they violate the rules of God's holiness That is certainly true The problem is, however, that we do not know what all of those rules are Nadab and Abihu offer their incense and are killed, while the only tangible reason is that Yahweh had not commanded them to do so There is always the threat of making some inadvertent transgression of the holiness of Yahweh, and then one may or may not be spared The severity of the mishap does not seem to correlate with the degree of punishment18 As the priest approaches the daunting task of attending to the sanctuary, gaps and ambiguities threaten to unravel the whole enterprise After this speech the presence of Yahweh recedes from the story, and Moses steps into the primary role

16 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, 602 He points out an interesting parallel m Ezek 28 22 17 The references to the actual profanation of Yahweh m the Holiness Code point in this same direction There are similar indications in the laws regarding the priests and their families in Lev 21 On the theology of the Holiness Code, see Israel Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School (Minneapolis Fortress Press, 1995), and Robert Kugler, 'Holiness, Purity, the Body, and Society The Evidence for Theological Conflict in Leviticus', JSOT 76 (1997), pp 3-27 18 For example, the priests in vv 16-20 do not receive such a punishment for a severe mishap
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

92

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001) Filling in the Gaps

The first thing that Moses must do is deal with the aftermath of the con suming fire. Like a political spin-doctor, he contains the situation and creates a way that the evidence can be disposed of without bringing fur ther destruction on the people. He calls forward two of the kinsmen of the slain priests and directs them to put the evidence of Yahweh's consuming fire outside the camp. They should banish all of the nagging remnants of their encounter with the unknown, and thus bury their fear and doubts with the pollution of the dead bodies.19 Moses tells the men, Mishael and Elzaphan, to go near ( ) and take up the remains of the slain priests. After Nadab and Abihu have brought their incense near pHpH), and after Yahweh has declared that he will be sanctified through his near-ones (Dmp), this seems like an astonishing request. The events around Nadab and Abihu call into question the safety of being one of Yahweh's near ones. Yahweh has not explicitly commanded that this procedure should be done in this way, although clearly it does need to be done. Yahweh has receded from the narrative completely, and now only Moses speaks and directs the priests. With the presence of Moses and his commands, are the people safe? The kinsmen muster up the courage to perform this task and they fortunately escape harm themselves. It is interesting that there are still remains to be removed because the narrator tells us that the fire consumes the priests. Even stranger is the notion that their tunics are still there. There are so many details missing in this narrative, and it is rather frustrating that the narrator chooses to tell us that they are buried with their tunics. Philo says that the tunics are still there because Nadab and Abihu had taken them off before entering the sancta.20 The rabbis reasoned

19 This interpretation of the burial scene does not contradict the fact that burial removes the impure bodies from the holy area Purity is certainly an issue m this acti vity It is not the only issue, and perhaps not even the most important one There is no account here of the purification of the area after the bodies have been removed, a fact that bothered the rabbis greatly 20 See Kirschner, 'The Rabbinic and Philonic Exegesis', pp 385-91 Philo says that the priests had stripped their tunics off and zealously presented their naked bodies before the Lord so that their souls could be freed by beneficent fire 'It is thus that the priests Nadab and Abihu die in order that they may live, receiving an incorruptible life m exchange for mortal existence, and being translated from the created to the uncreated Over them a proclamation is uttered betokening immortality, "They died before the
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

93

that the fire had entered their bodies through the nose and consumed them from the inside out, leaving their clothes. Milgrom has suggested that the mention of the tunics reflects a professional disagreement about whether a priest's clothing maintains contagious holiness after contact with 'the holy'.21 It is very interesting that interpreters feel that they must interpret this detail fully. Here the ambiguity in the narrative works not through omissions, but through the inclusion of an enigmatic note. When Moses tells the men how to dispose of the bodily remains, it is only the beginning of a flurry of activity on his part. He proceeds to give Aaron's sons some specific instructions about their need to refrain from mourning. He also tells the Aaronic priests that they should not drink while ministering, and that they should teach the people to separate the clean and unclean, the holy and profane (vv. 8-11). He also gives instruc tions about the ritual consumption of sacrifices (vv. 16-18), which has an ominous tone after the previous events. It seems that the deaths of these two priests have given new vigor to Moses the lawgiver. His instructions continue beyond this chapter into the next section of the book (chs. 11-15) concerning the laws of purity. Chapter 16 about emergency purification rituals comes as a direct result of the Nadab and Abihu incident (16.1). Chapters 17-26 define more clearly the nature of Yahweh's ETTp. In the narrative context of the book, the laws following this story are attempts by Moses to fill in the gaps that still plague their understanding of how to stand before 'the holy'. How does one guard oneself against a real pos sibility of consumption when one is not sure what causes it? In the face of ambiguity and fear of the unknown, Moses establishes a law code that provides security and protection from the dreadful presence of Yahweh. However, the seeds of doubt have already been sown. There have been many different attempts to provide a conceptual understanding of 'the holy'. It could be the awe-inspiring, mysterium tremendum (Otto), the dangerous force contained by the cult (Douglas), or the fundamental principles that order and give life to the community 22 (Durkheim). The law is often seen as an instrument that enables one to
Lord" (Lev 10 2), that is, "They came to life", for a corpse may not come into God's presence' (quoted m Kirschner, 'The Rabbinic and Philonic Exegesis', 386 ) 21 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, 606 22 See Rudolph Otto, The Idea of the Holy (trans J W Harvey, Oxford Oxford University Press, 1958), Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger (London Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966), Emile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (New York Free Press, 1995)
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

94

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

approach 'the holy', and this is true to a large degree. This story of Nadab and Abihu, however, shows that underlying the cultic apparatus is a sense of fear and doubt, with a nagging awareness of ambiguity and its dangers. These are the necessary precautions that one must use when 'the holy' is living in a tent in the middle of camp. This story, moreover, reveals the weaknesses of this apparatus. The cult must account for the stupidity and sinfulness of the people and of the priests, but it also must live with the fear that its armor is not total. Most have seen the story of Nadab and Abihu as the story of willful disrespect of Yahweh. The message then would be that the system is sound, and sinful people get what they deserve: 'Beware, all you priestsfollow these instructions carefully and you will be successful'. However, this version of events rings more like propaganda than true explanation. The extent to which the act was willful disobedience is highly questionable. The real problem is with the system itself. There are things that Yahweh has not commanded, but sometimes we have to fill in those gaps. Nadab and Abihu show that when we try to fill in the gaps of our protection against the 'holy', sometimes we expose the chink in our armor. Law and Narrative This story is pertinent to the discussion of law and narrative at both literary and hermeneutical levels. On a literary level, the law in Leviticus can be seen as the priests' attempt to come to terms with their fear and apprehension about dealing with 'the holy'. The fear is not a general awe such as that discussed by Rudolf Otto. It is much more concrete. The fear is related to the holy God who has delivered them from slavery in Egypt and has revealed himself to the people on the mountain at Sinai. Their apprehension is not before 'the holy', but rather before holy Yahweh. It is rooted in specific experiences where the people and priests come into dangerously close contact with Yahweh and realize the limits of their understanding. When the priests must minister in the presence of Yahweh, it is very important that they have complete instructions about how to conduct themselves during that process. Their instructions, however, can never be totally complete. Also, the story of Nadab and Abihu suggests that they should not expect to be able to plead ignorance or misunderstanding. They are never guaranteed to be eligible for probation, leniency, or clemency. The 'gaps', as I have been calling them, are inevitable but have the gravest consequences. The law, therefore, is an attempt to 'fill in'

The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

95

the gaps as much as possible The flurry of activity on Moses' part at the end of ch 10 as well as the law collections in the following sections func tion as the rounding off of gaps in their preparation This rounding off, however, is never complete and always maintains a hypothetical charac ter These are the provisions in certain circumstances, but one never knows what additional circumstances may arise that will not be covered within the system The literary gap-filling does not function in only one direction After the narrator has told us of the swift destruction of Nadab and Abihu, Moses says, 'This is what Yahweh was talking about when he said ' The narrative functions on a literary level as a piece of evidence that helps fill in gaps in our understanding of the cultic law In his speech, Yahweh reminds the people that the important thing is that he be sanctified and glorified His speech does not make the story any easier to understand, but it does cause the hearers and readers to contemplate the principles of holi ness at the root of the cultic system The deaths of Nadab and Abihu function at a level deeper than our own understanding, and despite the opacity of the events Yahweh reaffirms that there is a deep principle at work here This is a somewhat different point from Edward Greenstein's view that this passage asserts Yahweh's 'unpredictability and autonomy'23 He says that the cultic system 'reassures' that pollution can be purified, and 'renders God normative and predictable' Through these inexplicable actions, 'Yahweh breaks up the orderliness to show that he is above/be yond the cultic order' 2 4 I agree with the general insight that the cultic order cannot contain the sheer magnificence of Yahweh's transcendence However, I disagree with his notion that the cultic system is a 'veneer' 25 intended to hide the 'inscrutable Other' First, the cultic participants are more aware of the problem than Greenstem admits Indeed, the apparatus is necessary and continues to grow because of their realization that the system contains gaps that always leave them vulnerable to destruction Second, the cultic system struggles with God's otherness while still af firming that there is order within the seeming chaos Yahweh reminds the people that the problem is not that there is no order in his divinity The problem is that the limited understanding and ability of humans can only take a few steps toward comprehending the true reality, with its blessings and dangers The narrative not only exposes the depth of the problem, it
23 Greenstem, 'Deconstruction and Biblical Narrative', 63 24 Greenstem,'Deconstruction and Biblical Narrative', 64 25 Greenstem, 'Deconstruction and Biblical Narrative', 64
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

96

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

also motivates them to think more about the limitations of their cultic system The narrative events in thefirstpart of ch 10 lead Moses (and us) to contemplate the meaning of sanctification and glorification, and this reflection leads to positive statements about what purity (chs 11-15) and holiness (chs 17-26) are really about The narrative has exposed certain gaps and this leads to further constructive reflection, even if it is always provisional and ongoing The second level at which law and narrative interact is more hermeneutical in nature The relationship between these two is an important factor in how we interpret difficult passages in the Hebrew Bible, and has important implications for the process of interpretation in general A few abbreviated comments will have to suffice for the present discussion A prominent practice among interpreters of the Hebrew Bible is to use one genre of literature in order to provide a firm foundation for the inter pretation of other, more problematic genres Some readers tend to privilege the narrative in the Pentateuch, and often they ignore the legal collections completely or regard them as peripheral to the central concerns of the Pentateuch A better method is to interpret the legal material as a reflection of specific problems that arise in the narrative 2 6 For example, the laws regarding the inheritance of pioperty m Numbers are in their current posi tion because the people are about to enter the promised land and need to know how to divide their inheritance 2 7 This approach uses the story world created by the narrative to fill in the gaps in our legal knowledge

26 This is similar to the position taken to the extreme by Calum Carmichael m Law and Narrative in the Bible The Evidence of the Deuteronomic Laws and the Decalogue (Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press, 1985) The argument m this article, although concerned with the issue of law and narrative, does not advance the kind of tradition-historical conclusions advocated by Carmichael Another scholar working in this area is closer to the position taken here Nanette Stahl, in Law and Liminahty in the Bible (JSOTSup, 202, Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), argues that law appears at certain 'hminal' moments within the narrative of Israel's history At these decisive turning points (such as creation, the flood, and Sinai) law and narrative both reflect the 'dialogic tension' experienced in Israel's relationship with God Her chapter on the Sinai theophany (Chapter 4) is an excellent discussion of the tension within Israel's desired intimacy with God, yet required distance from God 27 See Dennis Olson, The Death of the Old and the Birth of the New The Framework of the Book of Numbers and the Pentateuch (BJS, 71, Chico, CA Scholars Press, 1985), pp 174-77
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

97

Other interpreters use the legal codes to explain specific developments in the narrative. Leviticus 10 is a perfect example of this tendency, since almost every commentator has attempted to find the hermeneutical key within a certain legal standard that has been transgressed. A growing trend in legal scholarship is to coordinate interpretive problems in the biblical narratives with specific legal requirements. Joe Sprinkle, a prominent prac titioner of the literary study of law, has presented a paper that reads the narrative of Jehoram's assault on Moab (2 Kgs 3) in light of the war laws in Deuteronomy 20.28 The assumption is that we are able to use the legal material to fill in our gaps of information in problematic narratives. On a hermeneutical level, this analysis has shown that both law and narrative have unavoidable gaps and ambiguity, and this often poses seri ous problems for interpretation. The hermeneutical process must be a complex interaction among the different levels within the literature, never a unilateral movement from one genre to the next. Furthermore, although unique problems arise when working with each genre, both function with the rules and limits of all communication. In the modern discussion, this issue is a point of debate between Stanley Fish and Richard Posner.29 Posner is a legal scholar and judge who has spent some time reflecting on the similarities and differences between law and literature as distinct genres of literary production. Although he concedes that there are some interest ing areas of comparison, law and literature are fundamentally different because legal language is (among other things) non-ambiguous, nonrhetorical, scientific and neutral, while literature is the opposite of all of these.30 Fish counters that all language is rhetorical and ambiguous. He says, 'The difference between science and law, on the one hand, and liter ary criticism, on the other, is not the difference between rhetoric (or style) and something else, but between the different rhetorics that are powerful 31 in the precincts of different disciplines'. There are many implications of

28 Biblical Law Section, Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, 1998 See Sprinkle's literary reading of the Covenant Code in The Book of the Covenant A Literary Approach (JSOTSup, 174, Sheffield JSOT Press, 1994) 29 See Stanley Fish, 'Don't Know Much About the Middle Ages Posner on Law and Literature', in idem, Doing What Comes Naturally Change, Rhetoric, and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies (Oxford Clarendon Press, 1989), pp 294-311, Richard Posner, Law and Literature A Misunderstood Relation (Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press, 1988) 30 See Fish, 'Don't Know Much About the Middle Ages', pp 296-97 31 Fish, 'Don't Know Much About the Middle Ages', 298
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

98

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 96 (2001)

this statement, but one is that neither the law nor the narrative provides an objective foundation for interpreting difficult texts 32 When we uncover the specific rhetorical devices that are operating within the texts (mcludeng gaps and ambiguity), then we are in a better position to see how they may interpret each other33 Conclusion The story does not just have gaps It is about gaps and how we deal with them In conclusion, this leads to some interesting conversation with the work of Meir Sternberg Sternberg says that ambiguity and gaps are standard features of all narratives 34 A clever reader will be able to discern the interplay of ambiguous elements, but the ambiguity will not hinder the path toward proper interpretation He says that the more opaque the plot is, the more transparent the judgment35 Readers can 'luxuriate' in the ambiguity of a passage,36 but the reader who misses it will still 'get the point' 37 Sternberg has a high degree of confidence in the biblical narrator's ability to lead its readers to the proper conclusion 'The wilder the play, m short, the wider the margin of safety '38 The point of Leviticus 10 is that even when there is incredible ambiguity, there is no margin of safety1 This story breaks through the easy assumption that understanding the narrative can be a simple, or even a safe, process The ambiguity in a story is not always constructive, but can be destructive Nadab and Abihu learn the 'point' when they stumble right through a gap, but they do not have any room to 'luxuriate' in the process The point I wish to make is this understanding is difficult and meaning is
3 2 Another interesting issue is the question of ' scientific ' models for interpretation A model such as structuralism, historical criticism, or even deconstructionism, has explanatory power to the extent that its rhetoric is persuasive to the audience hearing the interpretation 33 Christopher Smith uses the narrative sections of Leviticus to understand the structure and movement of the book in his interesting article, 'The Literary Structure of Leviticus', JSOT70 (1996), pp 17-32 34 See Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington Indiana University Press, 1985) Sternberg is not interested here in the legal material In fact, he never even cites Leviticus 35 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 54 36 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 228 37 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 234 38 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 234
The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

BIBB Nadab and Abihu Attempt to Fill a Gap

99

elusive, but sometimes these matters are deathly serious. Nadab and Abihu cannot simply ignore the gap created by the non-command of Yahweh. Moses and the priests around him feel the acute need to sort out these events and to implement some way of dealing with the ambiguity that they see. Finally, contemporary readers in politically charged situations do not have the 'luxury' to enjoy the narrative play of a clever gap or ambiguity. Filling in gaps is always necessary, never complete, and sometimes quite dangerous.

ABSTRACT The narrative concerning Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10 contains many 'gaps' that complicate the process of interpretation The story demonstrates that filling in gaps is always necessary, never complete, and sometimes quite dangerous When one pays close attention to the gaps by refusing to close them quickly or easily, it is revealed that they exist for Nadab and Abihu themselves There are many things concerning which God has made no command, but sometimes one must fill in these gaps This has important implications for the study of law and narrative The law functions as the priests' attempt to stand safely before 'the holy' In addition, the narrative fills gaps in the knowledge of God's requirements, which is always provisional and limited

The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2001

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.