A Shocking Incident
It is one of the most shocking incidents in Tanach. The end of Melachim II 2 records that Elisha reacts angrily when a group of “Ne’arim Ketanim,” young lads, taunt him by calling him a “Keirei’ach,” “baldhead.” Elisha reacts angrily and curses them, which in turn leads to the gruesome death of these forty-two youngsters at the hands of fearsome bears (Melachim II 2:24). This seems a severe overreaction on the part of Elisha. Why does he react in this extreme manner to a petty insult? Why does Elisha not simply take the “high road” and ignore the taunt?
Moreover, we have presented Elisha as adopting a much softer approach in comparison to Eliyahu HaNavi. For example, in the incident preceding the confrontation with the taunting youngsters, Elisha cures the water of Yericho. Elisha’s first communal act as the successor to Eliyahu HaNavi is to provide water, whereas Eliyahu’s first act is to withhold water. The people of Yericho never approach Eliyahu HaNavi about the problem with the water in their area, because they find it too intimidating to do so. They do, by contrast, feel comfortable approaching Elisha.
Accordingly, how does the story of Elisha and the bears fit with his image of a much softer and more approachable Navi?
Elisha in Error
Da’at Mikra endorses the opinion (recorded in Sotah 47a) that Elisha’s overreaction is the result of a poor decision, for which he eventually suffers a considerable consequence.
This seems to be an inadequate explanation, for Elisha remains unrepentant to the end for this act. There is also hardly a hint in the text that Elisha errs in this incident. Moreover, if we say Elisha errs, then it is a grievous sin that should overshadow the many great things he accomplished during his eventful life. Causing the death of forty-two small children simply for their poking fun of his being bald? If this is understood as a sinful act, it renders Elisha as a terrible sinner. We are strongly inclined to discover an alternative approach.
Sotah 46b
Sotah 46b (cited by Rashi and Radak) offers four criticisms of the people who taunted Elisha:176Translation adapted from The William Davidson Talmud, www.sefaria.org/Sotah.46b.20.
1. They had previously earned their living by providing the city of Yericho with water. Elisha sweetened the city’s own water (Melachim II 2:22), rendering their services unnecessary.
The taunters are, accordingly, not hurling a personal insult but rather express an abhorrent and self-centered attitude.
2. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: ‘Young lads [Ne’arim Ketanim]’? One would have expected the verse to state either “young” or “lads,” but not both. R. Elazar says: The word “lads [Ne’arim]” means that they were shaken empty [Meno’arim] of the Mitzvot; the word “young [Ketanim]” means that they were of little faith [Ketanei Amanah], as they had no trust that they would be able to earn their livelihood by any other means. The Sages taught: They were lads, that is, already of age, but they disgraced themselves like young children.
This further softens Elisha’s actions. He does not curse small children. Rather, he curses adults who are, spiritually speaking, immature.
3. He saw their essential nature, that all their mothers became pregnant with them on Yom Kippur, when conjugal relations are forbidden.
According to this approach, these people never should have been born. Their conception was improper and thus they apparently do not enjoy a right to live.
4. He saw that Mitzvot would be found neither in them nor in their descendants, through all generations.
This final criticism, of course, reminds us of a similar highly controversial action that occurs in the early stages of Moshe Rabbeinu’s career, when he kills the Egyptian for abusing a Hebrew slave. In both cases, Chazal partially justify the actions by noting that not an iota of goodness may be associated with the person killed (see Rashi to Shemot 12:2 s.v. VaYar Ki Ein Ish).
Understanding Elisha
As uncomfortable as we may be with this, the fact is that Elisha is destined to be involved in some violent activity. Hashem at Har Choreiv tells Eliyahu HaNavi that Elisha, along with Chaza’eil and Yeihu, will eliminate the sinners in Israel (Melachim I 19:17). Rashi (ibid.) notes that this is fulfilled when the bears devour the forty-two taunters.177It should be noted that the Pesukim relate only that forty-two of the taunters were killed by the bears. It is possible that there were more than forty-two instigators. It is most reasonable to assume that Eliyahu HaNavi informs Elisha about this Nevu’ah. Presumably, given the severity of the insults, Elisha feels that this is the appropriate situation in which to fulfill this mission.
Moreover, even if we may assume that these are young children, as a Peshat approach to the term “Ne’arim Ketanim” seems to indicate, it is reasonable to suggest that the forty-two children only express the oft-repeated sentiments originally vocalized by their parents. Indeed, the Gemara (Sukkah 56b) states that a child’s statements in public reflect what they heard either from their father or mother. These children mirror the anti-Elisha sentiment prevalent in Beit El. Such intense negativity is intolerable to Elisha, and thus he feels that he must respond harshly.
Finally, Elisha does not kill these boys. He curses them. Hashem decides as to whether He will summon one of His agents to punish the taunters. This is similar to Moshe Rabbeinu who “kills” the abusive Egyptian man by uttering the Shem HaMeforash (Hashem’s ineffable name), as noted by Rashi (to Shemot 2:14 s.v. Halhargeini Ata Omeir). Had Hashem felt it unjust for the abusive Egyptian man to die or the taunters to die, they would not have died.178Although there is a traditional saying that “Tzaddik Gozer VeHashem Mekayeim,” “a Tzaddik decrees and Hashem fulfills,” it is inconceivable that Hashem would fulfill an immoral request simply because the person requesting it is otherwise a Tzaddik. TABC alumnus Binyamin Jachter (’17), however, counters that he finds this approach to be untenable. This is because, as Chazal express, Eliyahu HaNavi holds the keys to water. Of course, Hashem allows everything to happen, but He chooses to base His actions on human action. The connection between the Navi’s actions and Hashem’s reaction is more pronounced in regards to Eliyahu HaNavi, but it is still in effect during Elisha’s tenure as the spiritual leader. Elisha essentially puts a death warrant on the youngsters’ heads, and Hashem accepts Elisha’s terms. To say that Hashem reacts to mystical triggers only in a manner consistent with Avodat Hashem is disingenuous. Bala’am, Balak, the magicians in Mitzrayim, and possibly even Yeishu (according to Sanhedrin 107b), manipulated Hashem’s mystics for non-Godly means. Human choice is necessary and mistakes are inevitable, even for an authentic Navi.
Conclusion
In comparison to Eliyahu HaNavi, Elisha certainly adopts a softer and gentler approach in his mission to return Am Yisrael of the Northern Kingdom to Hashem. However, if he is to be taken seriously, Elisha must establish his authority and his intolerance towards abuse. The incident with the bears, which occurs at the beginning of his role as leader of the Nevi’im, firmly establishes much-needed respect for Elisha.
Thus, as uncomfortable as this story may appear at first glance, when delving into the incident, one may discern why Elisha’s reaction is reasonable and appropriate.
Postscript — Elisha’s Grief 179The following section was developed by Binyamin Jachter.
Alternatively, we may understand the bear incident as a presentation of Elisha’s grief. In order to understand Elisha’s emotional state, let us break down his story into the relevant parts. Elisha cuts himself off completely from everyone and everything that he knows to follow Eliyahu HaNavi. His mission is to be Eliyahu HaNavi’s successor and to serve Hashem to the best of his ability. His only guide through all of this, Eliyahu HaNavi, whom Elisha treats as a father, is ripped away from him suddenly, with only a day’s notice. He then is pressured during his period of mourning to accept people who deny Eliyahu HaNavi’s death/ascension (see Melachim II 2:15-17). Elisha then helps these deniers by restoring their water. The people of Yericho do not celebrate Elisha’s investiture, and they fail to acknowledge Hashem and Elisha’s role in their salvation.
At this point, Elisha is alone. No one gives him or Hashem the warranted gratitude. In this emotional context, a group of youngsters comes to taunt and berate Elisha. Thus, with a very large number of people taunting and screaming at him, about something so trivial as his appearance no less, our emotionally ragged Navi curses them with his newly received power from Eliyahu HaNavi. This outburst of anger may have influenced Elisha’s actions for the rest of his life. As a result of this incident, Elisha never turns his back on the Bnei Yisrael (unlike Eliyahu HaNavi, who runs away to Choreiv following the events at Har HaCarmel, see Melachim I 19). Elisha learns a powerful lesson when he directly witnesses his anger destroy forty-two children.
According to this approach, if we assume Elisha sins during this incident, Elisha does in a way repent for his egregious error. As recorded in Melachim II 3, Elisha is deeply disappointed with Yehoram ben Achav but still does as the king requests— he gives him Hashem’s Nevu’ah of victory. Elisha already, only a short while after the incident with the bears, is able to control his emotions and practice tolerance to the highest degree.180Similarly, the Gemara’s assertion that the “youngsters” are actually adults may be understood in a psychological sense. Elisha perceives them as adults due to his overwrought emotional state. We see that Elisha’s temperament has changed.