Outros artigos deste número | Versão em inglês | Versão em Francês

Blessed are the Meek
C. Hall

This brief survey points up the variety of Christian attitudes towards the earth, as well as suggesting the close relationship between these attitudes and the meaning of the kingdom of heaven.

Note on recent commentaries of Matthew 5:4 or 5 — Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.

In recent exegeses of this beatitude there are three problems: the placement of the verse, which will affect the understanding of it; the meaning of the meek, particularly in relation to the poor in spirit of v. 3; and the interpretation of they shall inherit the earth, with emphasis on the earth as related to v. 3's kingdom of heaven. The various commentaries take these more or less into account.

J. Dupont summarizes the first two problems in relation to the first beatitude (Les Beatitudes: le probleme littêraire, revised edition, 1958). The promise of Jesus to the meek that they will inherit the earth is taken from Psalm 37:11, the Greek version of the psalm being identical with the words of the Gospel. But in the Hebrew the poor in spirit and the meek are etymologically and graphically almost the same; thus the second beatitude repeats the first. The Qumran texts leave no doubt that poor in spirit, anawim, can also mean the meek. T.H. Gaster notes in the Dead Sea Scrolls midrash of Ps. 37, that in the Aramaic dialect of the early Palestinian Church anawim is used specifically in the sense of ascetic (The Dead Sea Scriptures in English Translation, 1956). Thus, these two words which are distinct in the Greek text are only one in the original Hebrew, and the two verses parallel one another: the poor and the meek as well as kingdom of heaven and the earth, this latter parallel noted by J.C. Fenton (Saint Matthew: Pelican Gospel Commentary, 1963). Most of the commentators emphasize the first parallelism; however, there is the problem of placement in the oldest manuscripts. As Dupont carefully explains, this is basically a question of language, for the fundamental relation in Hebrew would not be apparent to the Greek scribes. For them it would be more logical to put the afflicted with the poor, and thus bring together the meek with those who hunger after righteousness and the merciful.

David Flusser, professor of comparative religion at Hebrew University, analyzes Matt. 5:3-5 in the light of the Qumran texts (Israel Exploration Journal 10, 1960). It is more than likely that Matthew faithfully preserves the sayings of Jesus while Luke 6:20 is an abbreviated version. The first three beatitudes of Matthew reveal a complex network of biblical reminiscences and midrashic exegesis: the poor in spirit, founded on Isaiah 66:2 is combined with the meek of Ps. 37:11; the words of this verse form the second beatitude; they shall inherit the earth in the first is interpreted in the midrashic manner as theirs is the kingdom of heaven; the poor in spirit, 5:3, and the meek, Ps. 37:11, are understood as identical with the meek of Is. 61:1; consequently, a variation of Is. 61:2, to comfort all who mourn follows, becoming the third beatitude.

Before the discovery of the Scrolls, the closestparallel to these verses was in the tannaite Midrash Mekhilta:

But Moses drew near unto thick darkness (Ex. 18:9). What brought him this distinction? His meekness. [Midrash depends on Ecclesiasticus 45:4-5: For his faithfulness and meekness He chose him out of all flesh, and He caused him to hear His voice and let him draw near unto thick darkness]. For it is said: Now the man Moses was very meek (Num. 12:3). Scripture states that whoever is meek ends by having the Shekhinah dwell with him ( the man) on earth, as it is said: For thus saith the high and lofty One Who inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also who is of a contrite and humble spirit (Is. 57: 15). And it also says: The spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings to the meek (Is. 61: 1). And it also says: For all those things hath mine hand made... but to this man will I look, even to him who is poor and of a contrite spirit (Is. 66:2). And it also says: The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart, 0 God, thou will not despise (Ps. 51:17 or 19).

There is a short parallel to this in the Babylonian Talmud:

R. Johann said: The Holy One, blessed be He, causes the Divine Providence to rest only upon him who is strong, wealthy and wise, and meek, and all these are deduced from Moses (Nedarim 38a).

This, perhaps, refers to Ecclus. 3:20: For many are the mercies of God and to the meek He revealeth His secret. The midrash combines Is. 61:1 and 66:2, as Matt. 5:3-5 does: it declares, as does Jesus, that meekness is a quality of the spirit that God cherishes, and it identifies the Shekhinah with the Holy Spirit in showing the nearness of meekness, contrition, poverty to God's presence.

The Thanksgiving Scroll (Hodayot 18:14-15) is near the three beatitudes both in general thought and in its literary pattern. The poor in spirit is a title which the Qumran community applied to itself, and in both the Gospel and IQH, the meek, the poor are given the blessings of God. Jesus and the Dead Sea community saw in voluntary poverty a way to salvation: it is the eschatological group of anawim who will be given the kingdom of heaven. Flusser finds it difficult to escape the conclusion that there is a historical connection between the teaching of Jesus and that of the Qumran sect. This connection between the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount and the doctrine of the community must have been clear to those who heard Jesus' words. It is probable that in his opening words Jesus deliberately alluded to the teaching of the sect in order to stress the points of contact between his message and the radical social claims of Qumran, the promise of salvation for the poor, the afflicted, and the persecuted.

The eschatological kingdom of heaven in Jewish thought is generally understood as a future age of the world free from the taint of sin and suffering. Originally it was not identified with the messianic idea, but later it was fused with no distinction between the two. The believers of Qumran declared that by joining them in voluntary poverty one would become a member of the elect destined to inherit the kingdom of heaven, now at hand, and they saw themselves as active participants in its coming. In contrast to the acute apocalyptic mood of the sectarian circles, the Pharisees believed that they were still living in Olam ha-Zeh, this age or this world. Olam originally meant age, but later acquired the spatial sense of world. Olam ha-Ba, the kingdom of God, is different in concept from heaven or paradise, which is the resting place of souls before the advent of the kingdom. In talmudic literature its conception is vague and ambiguous. In many cases it is the same as the Days of the Messiah, but in others it is distinct from the messianic age. The reign of the Messiah, preceded by messianic birth pangs, eschatological war, still belongs to Olam ha-Zeh, and the kingdom of heaven will succeed it. After the messianic era has ended, there will be a general resurrection of the dead, followed by the great judgement of all men and the establishment of a new creation cleansed of all unrighteousness. Significantly in talmudic literature the political and social redemption of Israel and all nations is considered as the penultimate, not ultimate, goal of history. The concept of Olam ha-Ba connects the final perfection of the world with a radical transformation of the whole cosmos.

The precise meaning of this eschatological hope for the Qumran community is revealed in its midrash of Ps. 37, particularly vs. 11, which Flusser believes interpreted they shall inherit the earth in a material-political sense. It is well-known that they wanted to seize power in the Land of Israel and particularly to become masters of the Temple. However, in the Mishnah the rabbis understood the promise as did Jesus, that earth symbolizes the earth of the kindgom of heaven:

The whole of Israel has a part in the world to come, because it is said: The people shall all be righteous; they shall inherit the earth forever (Is. 60:21).
(Sanhedrin 10:1)

The apocalyptic Book of Enoch is in the same vain:
And for the elect there shall be light and joy and peace, and they shall inherit the earth, but for you, you ungodly, there shall be a curse (5:7).

R.C.H. Lenski, American Lutheran Conference, remarks that it is paradoxical that people "of this kind shall inherit the earth". But he insists on the promise meaning literally the earth. Jesus does not say the new earth, although many regard his words as referring to Rev. 21:1. The idea that in Ps. 37 the earth means Canaan —and thus the heavenly Canaan in Jesus' sermon — is specious, for he indicated no difference of this kind. To support this view Lenski notes Luther's agreement with Chemnitz that this beatitude adds the promise of "temporal life and goods on earth". (The Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel, 1943).

In contrast, P. Benoit of L'Ecole Biblique de Jerusalem says that the earth of Palestine promised to the powerless, the weak, the oppressed, who support their condition with resignation and meekness in Ps. 37, is in Jesus' words a metaphor for the kingdom of God (L'Evangile de S. Mattbieu, 1950, revised edition, 1961, with the same commentary). Similar is the interpretation of A. Jones (A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, 1951), that the reward in its original setting is prosperity in the promised land, but in the context of the Sermon on the Mount the land is as spiritual as the kingdom of heaven, v. 3, or the vision of God, v. 8, for "the qualities our Lord demands... are unlikely to win political success". R.A. Knox does not consider •the implications of inheriting the earth:

The beatitudes are a new set of values, which are only those of God's approaching kingdom, the Christian Church. Poor in spirit refers... to an attitude of dependance on God and detachment from earthly supports.
(A New Testament Commentary, 1953)

In the commentary of J. Dupont (Les Beatitudes: le message doctrinal, 1954) the meaning of the promise in Ps. 37:11 is of little importance to the understanding of they shall inherit the earth, for obviously in the Sermon on the Mount it is not a question of inheriting the land of Canaan or another territory. Nor does Jesus promise a kind of moral conquest of the earth, that the attitude of meeknes will assure influence and success on the earth. The promise of Jesus, as in the other beatitudes, can only be understood as the promise of the kingdom of heaven. Thus the heritage awaited by Christians is in the worldto-come. Instead of to inherit the earth, generally to inherit the kingdom of God, or to inherit eternal life are preferred. The promise to the meek is only another expression of eschatological hope: to possess the kingdom, to be called son of God, to see God. F.V. Filson (A Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew, 1960) contrasts Ps. 37: 11 with Matthew. The psalmist meant the inheritance of the promised land, Canaan, "although the setting of faith and worship of God were not absent". But in Matthew the phrase is figurative: the meek will enter the kingdom as God's people and will "know all the privileges of fellowship with God".

The exegesis of The Interpreter's Bible (1951) is more hesitant about the meaning of to inherit the earth: "The poor will inherit the (promised) land or perhaps the restored earth of the messianic age". In the exposition of Matt. 5:4, G.A. Buttrick remarks that meekness has an astonishing reward: it inherits the earth, the heir being the true child of the possessor. Thus God gives the earth to the sons of His own spirit, the reward a gift, for the meek would never seize it. By this judgement of God the meek inherit the earth "not merely in some distant heaven, but now in spirit, and continuingly in very fact". To possess the land explains what is meant by theirs is the kingdom of heaven in the commentary of J.C. Fenton. The poor, the meek, will be set over the earth as rulers under God. To support this he refers to Matt. 25:21,23 — I will set you over much — and 24:47 — he will set him over all his possessions: this is the reward Christ will give to his disciples who are to share with him God's rule over the world.

A. Colunga believes that the promise of the meek inheriting the earth should be interpreted against the background of the Pentateuch. The earth or promised land is where God dwells with His people. (Salamanticensis 9, 1960). In a certain sense H. Troadec approaches this interpretation (L'Evangile selon S. Matthieu, 1963). The quality of meekness is the same as poverty of spirit, but whereas the first beatitude is directed towards God (theirs is the kingdom of heaven), the second is towards one's brother (they shall inherit the earth). The promised land is the symbol of the messianic kingdom, the new earth (Rev. 21:1). Abraham received the promise of the land because of his meekness with Lot:

There were disputes between the herdsmen of Abram's stock and those of Lot's stock. So Abram said to Lot, "Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and mine, for we are kinsmen. Is not all the land open to you? Then separate from me: if it is to the left, I will go to the right; and if it is to the right, then I will go to the left". Lot looked about and saw how thoroughly watered was the whole Jordan Plain, all the way to Zoar... like Yahweh's own garden, or like the land of Egypt. So Lot chose for himself the whole Jordan Plain... After Lot had parted, Yahweh said to Abram, "Glance about you and from where you are look to the north and south, to the east and west; for all the land that you can see I give to you and to your offspring forever. I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if one could count the dust of the earth, then your offspring too might be counted. Up, walk in the land, through its length and breadth, for I give it to you".
(Genesis, trans. by E. A. Speiser, 1964, 13:7-11, 14-17)