Rabbi Moshe Reiss
HOSEA: A SCHIZOPHRENOGENIC PROPHET1
Rabbi Dr. Moshe Reiss
Abstract:
Hosea is the first prophet to use the metaphor of marriage to describe
the relation between God and Israel and the first (and only) prophet to
be requested my God to marry a whore, and name their children
'Jezreel',
‘Lo-Ruhamah and ‘Lo-Ammi'. Is his life and his children metaphors.
Maimonides, ibn Ezra, the Targum, the Talmud and midrashim reject the
prophets vision. The "I shall" constructs, symbolic representations of
God, suggest a person who may have thought of himself as being his own
higher authority. Hosea’s God is primarily a punishing God not a God of
Justice like Amos, Jeremiah and Job. Can Hosea’s vision be viewed as a
legitimate vision of God; or a cultural aberration?
If you talk to God, you’re holy; if he talks to you, you’re insane. 2
Hosea was a prophet in the Northern Kingdom of Israel in
the period shortly before it was conquered by Assyria. His activities
coincide with the reign of its powerful King Jeroboam II. Jeroboam II
died in 750 BCE and was succeeded by his son Zechariah, who reigned for
only six months before he was assassinated by Shallum who was himself
assassinated one month later by Menahem, who then reigned for
approximately ten years. Thus Hosea’s early prophetic activity came at
a time of extreme instability, when four kings reigned within a span of
one year. Shortly after the death of Menahem, the northern tribes --
the Kingdom of Israel -- were subjugated and scattered by the Assyrians.
The Book of Hosea can be divided into two parts, Chapters
1-3 and Chapters 4-14. The first three chapters relate to the life of
the prophet. The next eleven are a series of threats, pleadings,
arguments and even hopes. These do not relate to the prophet as an
individual. We will concentrate on Chapters 1-3.
Hosea is the first prophet to use the metaphor of marriage
to describe the relation between God and Israel. His message is stated
as a powerful metaphor; in his call to prophecy he is told to marry a
prostitute named Gomer, who perhaps later becomes the adulterous wife.
Hosea's life indeed is transformed into a metaphor; his wife and
children symbolize the people of Israel. His entire life can be viewed
as a metaphoric message depicting the relationship between God and
Israel. If God ‘married’ Israel at Mount Sinai, then idolatry can be
equated with adultery. (The alphabetic similarity does not occur in
Hebrew.) The metaphoric stories presenting Hosea and Gomer are so
intimately intertwined in the Book of Hosea as to be inseparable.
Though Jeremiah may have borrowed the metaphor of marriage
between God and Israel from Hosea, it is for him a minor symbol.
Jeremiah himself is by no means a metaphor, but a suffering messenger –
even the 'suffering servant' of God according to the great Jewish
commentator and philosopher the Saadia Gaon (892-942), whose palpable
suffering as a human being is intrinsically interwoven with the fabric
of his message. A great deal regarding Jeremiah’s life can be gleaned
from his book, but there is virtually no reliable information about
Hosea's life, with whom 'the theological imagery arises out of his
personal tribulation'. 3
The question arises: Why would Hosea or the author of the
book choose this particular imagery of Israel as a whore? Hosea is
commanded to marry a prostitute but also loves an adulterous woman --
who may or may not be identified with Gomer -- just as the Lord
loves the Israelites (3:1). The message of Hosea is that God may
repudiate His covenant with the people of Israel because of their
consistent violations of His commands. The people will be overrun by
other nations and ultimately dispersed from their land. While in theory
repentance always remains an option, based on God's mercy, it seems a
most remote possibility.
HOSEA’S STORY
The Book of Hosea opens with the marriage metaphor.
The prophetic call reads: ‘Go marry a whore. And get children with a
whore; for the country itself has become nothing but a whore by
abandoning the Lord’ (1:2). Hosea obeys. The first child is a son, and
when he is born God orders he be named Jezreel ‘for in a while I shall
punish the House of Jehu for the bloodshed at Jezreel and put an end to
the sovereignty of the House of Israel’ (1:4). The second child is a
daughter, and when she is born; God orders that she be named
‘Lo-Ruhamah [I shall have no pity] for I shall show no more pity for
the House of Israel’ (1:6). Another son is born, and God orders that he
be named ‘Lo-Ammi [not My people] for you are not my people and I do
not exist for you’ (1:9). Why would anyone give his children such
horrific and abominable names? (One wonders what the children's friends
called them.)
The idea of a marital union between a prophet of God
and a prostitute is understandably so extremely problematical that
commentators have struggled with it for centuries. Both Maimonides and
Ibn Ezra consider the entire story of Chapters 1-3 to be strange.
Maimonides (1137-1204) chose to regard the story of Hosea and his wife
as a vision and not as a reality. 4 Abraham Ibn Ezra (1092-1167)
considered it to be scandalous: "God forbid and forfend that the Deity
should command [anyone] to marry a wife of harlotry and beget children
of harlotry." He continues seeing the story as metaphoric, and that the
prophet saw visions in the "dream of the night." 5 Abe Lipshitz, a
scholar on the works of Ibn Ezra believes that the vision "should be
regarded as a psychological occurrence" or disorder. 6
The Aramaic Targum Jonathan simply rejects and
denies the marriage story, and the wife/prostitute motif becomes part
of Hosea's preaching to a city of idolatrous inhabitants "not pitied
because of their wicked deeds." A midrash, unable to envision what
Hosea claims to have heard from God, transforms the whore image to a
wife "looking disreputable, her house untidy, the beds not made." 7 In
the Talmud, Gomer's role is magnified, and given a greater significance
than in the text itself. Her name is seen as a pun on "g’mar [finish]"
implying a man completing his ejaculation: ‘Rab said that all satisfied
[gomerim] their lust on her. Diblaim, the name of her father, is
construed to mean pressed figs. Samuel said it means she was as sweet
in everyone’s mouth as a cake of figs, while R. Jonathan interpreted
that all trod upon her as a cake of figs BT Pesachim 87a-b). It is hard
to believe, even given our difference from their culture and time, that
the Sages where not having fun at Hosea's illusions.
In the Talmud Hosea is blamed for having failed to
respond to God’s statement ‘your children have sinned.’ This is placed
in contrast to Moses who, when faced with a similar accusation, replied
‘they are Your children.’ The Talmud proposes that Hosea's response to
‘exchange them for a different people’ is diametrically opposed to
Moses’ response. Consequently, God said marry a prostitute and love her
and see if you can send her away (BT Pesachim 87a-b). A midrash states
that whereas Moses is depicted as having loved Israel, Balaam, the
pagan prophet (Num. 22-25) is depicted as having hated Israel, and
Hosea's position is midway between them. 8 Thus, according to the
Talmud, God decided to "teach Hosea a lesson" (BT Pesachim 87a-b). God
then says to Hosea see if you can put away your wife. Is God
giving Hosea the power to determine His love of Israel? God tells Hosea
not to plead for himself and his bizarre life but for God’s people, and
that He God, will respond ‘I will not say to ‘Not for My People’ [but]
‘You are My People’ and he will say ‘You are my God’ (2:25; BT Pesachim
87a-b). Hosea is "callously indifferent to God’s love of the people of
Israel." 9
Israelite society was patriarchal, as was the norm
for the time and place. Hosea’s wife and children are entirely under
his care and control. He says to the children ‘take your mother to
court . . . She must either remove her whoring ways from her face and
her adulteries from between her breasts or I shall strip her and expose
her naked as the day she was born . . Let her die . . . I shall
feel no pity for her children’ (2:4-6). Are these not his children as
well? If indeed Gomer is a whore, can one be certain of the paternity
of the children? Can the ‘Lo’ mean that Hosea is not the father? Under
Israelite law the children might be a considered momzerim, who could
not marry other Israelites. 10 The wisdom of such parenting is
ludicrous. Is Hosea calling his son a ‘ben zonah [son of a whore]' and
his daughter a ‘bat zonah [daughter of a whore]' – that are expletives
in modern as well as ancient Hebrew? Hosea married Gomer for her status
as a prostitute, not despite it. Was she a cult prostitute?
Subsequently, he demands that his adulterous wife (if she is Gomer) or
adulterous mistress, whom he has purchased at God’s request become
celibate in relationship to himself as well as to other lovers (3:3)
These demands and expectations are unrealistic for a prostitue, and in
fact inappropriate for his chosen wife.
Why would Hosea choose a known prostitute/adulteress (Israel) and then
suddenly exact celibacy from her? Hosea heard the word of God
telling him to marry a harlot.
‘Plead with your mother, plead with her for she is no longer my wife
nor am I her husband’ (2:4). ‘I shall strip her. . I shall
make her bare . . . I shall make her as dry as the desert and let her
die of thirst. I shall feel no pity for her children. . . I shall
block her way with thorns (2:5-8).
Threats of sexual violence by a God-ordained figure can be found also
in the Book of Ezekiel. Were these threats ever actualized? Anderson
and Freedman suggest this might indeed be the case. 11 Weems writes:
'God is no longer like a husband; God is a husband. If God’s covenant
with Israel is like a marriage . . . then a husband’s physical
punishment against his wife is as warranted as God’s punishment of
Israel.' 12 Are we to understand God as a battering husband, as cruel
and full of rage toward Israel his wife?
God-intoxicated prophets having auditory
relationships with God were an accepted norm of the day; their ability
to hear and some to speak to God is part of their function. A limited
number of prophets experienced visual hallucinations (Ezekiel and
Isaiah) and only one is transported by God (Ezekiel). Some viewed their
enemies to be God’s enemies. While that can be defined as paranoid, in
fact Jeremiah and Amos were tried by their real enemies; the former
being arrested several times and sentenced to death and the latter
exiled after being tried. Thus their paranoia was indeed textually
based. Whether their enemies were also God’s enemies (as Jeremiah
claimed) is a question of faith, not fact. But some prophets deviated
from the norm more than others. This holds particularly true of Ezekiel
and Hosea. Both perform bizarre symbolic actions: Hosea marries a
prostitute and an adulteress, gives his children insulting names,
exposes and beats his wife, Ezekiel becomes a "dumb" prophet for 390
days, while continuing to be "dumb" lying on one side and then the
other for 40 days, eating a scroll and cake made with dung, and flying
to Jerusalem. The Book of Ezekiel was included in the canon despite the
Sages judging his work as problematic. The Talmud never deemed it
necessary to debate the merits of canonizing prophets such as Hosea;
they simply criticized him as seen above. The fact that the Sages of
the Talmud, who canonized the Hebrew Bible, deemed it necessary to
dispute the writings of Ezekiel and Hosea suggests that their behavior
was eccentric even for prophets.
HOSEA’S PERSONALITY
I shall strip her and expose her naked as the day she was
born, make her as dry as the desert and let her die of thirst. I shall
have no mercy on her children (2:5-6).
What kind of an author would create such a text? To Francis Landy one
who is obsessed with sexual sadism,13 and to T.D. Setel one who is
pornographic. 14 Given the lack of psycho-social-medical history,
analysis of such a personage is extremely difficult. However, in view
of the fact that this text is important and influential because it is
included in the Hebrew Bible, one must attempt to understand and
interpret it to the best of one’s ability. The language of the text can
be viewed as symptomatic of a personality. Thus it is the personality
beyond that text that we will attempt to analyze.
Schizophrenia has been defined as involving loose associations and
disturbances of language and thoughts, including hallucinations and
delusion of grandeur particularly of a sexual and religious nature.
Persons with such an illness have a disturbed image of self (and of
others) and consequently act on these images. 15 The actions tend to be
based on symbolic or metaphoric language.
In schizophrenia, . . . single images or whole combinations may be
rendered ineffective, . . . thinking operates with ideas and concepts
which have no [connection], or a completely insufficient, connection
with the main idea . . . The result is that thinking becomes confused,
bizarre, incorrect, abrupt. . . [The] schizophrenic experiences a
distortion of body image . . . {his] entire world changed . . . every
day events appear in a new light, everyday objects seem strange. . .
Many schizophrenics assume they have lost their former selves and have
taken on a new identity. . . some believe that they are now someone
else and attempt to assume the name and characteristics of the other
person. 16
The Talmud suggests that Hosea was besieged with
delusions of being Moses -- the prophet par excellence, the Servant of
God and the Man of God. Perhaps he even believed himself to be God.
Perhaps he became his own Higher Authority. Hosea becoming God, at
least as a metaphor, lives his life as in the metaphor. This is quite
different from Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who adopt various metaphors and
parables as symbols for the people of Israel. The self-image in Hosea
arises from his own delusions. He develops his own Divine message of
his marriage. God Himself may indeed have the power to transform a
whore into a madonna. Did Hosea believe that he too possessed such
power? In the very brief Chapter 3, it appears that Hosea’s grasp of
reality has disintegrated, as indeed happens with schizophrenics.
The "I shall" constructs, symbolic representations of God,
are repeated 21 times in Chapter 2. The chapter ends with the words
‘You are my God,’ uttered by the child Lo Ammi (2:25). Who indeed is
the father and who is the God? Distinction between the word (or world)
of God and the words (or worlds) of Hosea are very problematic in the
Book of Hosea.
Knowledge of God 17 is a central concern of Hosea.
The Hebrew word ‘da’ath’ means "to know," and particularly to know a
woman sexually. If we accept the notion that to know God is to love God
and to be loved by God, can one reconcile Hosea’s use of love a whore
with his violence towards her? In this metaphor, who is God’s
mother/wife? ‘And it shall be at that last day, says the Lord, you
shall say my man, and no longer say my master [ba’ali]’ (2:18). A
word-play appears embedded in this text. Ba’al denotes ‘master’ and
‘husband’ in Hebrew, and it is also the title of a pagan Canaanite god.
Thus Gomer’s husband, Hosea, once a ‘Ba’al’ [god] will become only a
man.
Schizophrenogenic . . . mothers have been
characterized as rejecting, domineering, cold, overprotecting, and
impervious to the feelings and needs [of their children] . . . [They
have] rigid, moralistic attitudes toward sex that cause the mother to
react with horror to any evidence of sexual impulses on the child’s
part. . . . {This] deprives him of a clear sense of his own identity..
18
At the end of Chapter 2, God takes pity on Lo-Ruhamah and tells Lo-Ammi
that you are My people. In the very short Chapter 3, after God has
adopted the children, Gomer is no longer present. God then tells the
prophet to find another woman to marry, an adulteress as opposed to a
prostitute. Hosea ‘buys’ this adulterous woman and informs her that
both of them must be single minded to one other (3:3). Is this
suggesting that God also was an adulterer? Is this not a series of
‘loose associations’? It is possible that this chapter is a
recapitulation or another sexually promiscuous story.
THE ROOTS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA
We, of course, know nothing of Hosea’s father and
mother or of his childhood. However, it is well documented today that
the father and/or mother image also figures prominently with
schizophrenics who have a ‘god’ complex. The following traumatic
relationships can contribute to the formation of a ‘god’ complex:
Immature, depressive and isolated parenthood, childhood rejections,
borderline mothering, passive dependent emotionally hungering father
and a socially deprived background. 19
Extreme anger toward the mother and/or father is
often identified in children who are raised in family situations as
described above. Hosea’s depiction of the mother/wife as quasi-demonic
suggests a massively hostile relationship with his mother. His father
may have been ritually an obsessive compulsive yet bound to formality,
lacking in vitality, with a blatant absence of the idea of a ‘living
God’. Hence, Hosea may reject the official religion and its God and
create his own living personal God. "God’s representational
characteristics depend heavily on the type of resolution and the
compromises the child has arranged with his Oedipal objects. . .
Half of God’s stuffing comes from the child’s capacity to ‘create’ a
God according to his needs.’ 20 Hosea’s God is primarily a punishing
God, a God of Law, not a God of Justice. Amos, Jeremiah and Job
believed in a God of Justice. Jeremiah and Job fought God for Justice
because they had a firm belief in Him as God of Justice. Hosea claimed
to believe in a God of "hesed [grace, mercy]," but his
descriptions contradict such a concept. Hesed is a key term for Hosea,
but one sees little of it in his words, such as I shall feel no pity
for her children since they are the children of her whoring (2:6).
Not all mental health professionals consider the
symptoms of schizophrenia to be mental illness. Some consider it a
"moral verdict" on certain forms of unacceptable or unintelligible
behavior. 21 This kind of behavior may indeed be judged according to
the norms of the culture. 22 William Blake, a great English poet,
artist and religious thinker, has been called schizophrenic. 23 What is
important to us is to determine whether Hosea’s vision can be viewed as
a legitimate vision of God; or a cultural aberration.
1 I would like to thank and appreciate my former
partners, April D. Reiss and Daniella B. Krause, both clinical Social
workers, for my understanding of mental health. Biblical exegetes, do
not necessarily require that knowledge by the nature of their studies.
The definition of the mental health quasi-diagnosis are defined within.
2 Quoted by Moshe Wisnefsky, 'As Someone Put It’ in
Farbrengen (a Chabad Publication) Passover 2000, pg. 9.
3 Anderson, F.I. and Freedman, D.N., 'Hosea, A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary', The Anchor Bible (N.Y.,
Doubleday, 1980) pg. 46 and also Moshe Reiss, JBQ Oct. 2004
4 Maimonides, Moses, 'The Guide of the Perplexed',
translated by Shlomo Pines, Vol. II, (Chicago, University of Chicago
Press, 1978) pg. 46
5 Mark Solomon, ‘Scandal or the Birth of a Prophet’,
European Judaism, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Spring 1999), pg. 56.
6 Lipshitz, Abe, 'The Commentary of Rabbi Abraham ibn
Ezra on Hosea', (N.Y., Sepher-Hermon, 1988) pg. 7
7 Quoted by Y. Sherwood in Brenner, Althea, ed., A
Feminine Interpretation of the Latter Prophets (Sheffield, Sheffield
University Press, 1995) pg. 106.
8 Midrash Rabbah Numbers, Vol. Pg. 55.
9 Solomon, pg. 58.
10 Gordis, Robert, Poets, Prophets and Sages
(Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1971) pgs. 230-254.
11 Anderson and Freedman, pg. 129.
12 Weems, R.J., Gomer: Victim of Violence or Victim
of Metaphor? Semeia 47 (1989( pg. 100.
13 Brenner, Althea, ed. A Feminist Companion to the
Latter Prophets, (Sheffield, Sheffield University Press, 2001)
pg.147-148.
14 Russell, L., ed. Feminist Interpretation of the
Bible (Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1985) Pgs. 93-94.
15 Buss, A., Psychopathology, (N.Y., John Wiley,
1966) pg. 31-32, 195-196.
16 Buss, pg. 188-191.
17 2:10,22; 4:1; 5:3; 6:3,3,7; 7:9,9; 8:2,4; 9:7;
13:4.
18 Coleman, J.C., J.N. Butcher and Carson, R.C., eds.
Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, (Glenview, Illinois, Scott,
Foresman, 1984) pg. 373
19 Rizzuto, A. M., Birth of the living God, (New
Haven, Yale University Press, 1998) pg. 151.
20 Rizzuto, pg. 178-179.
21 Sorbin, T.B. and Monuso, J.C., Schizophrenia:
Medical Diagnosis or Moral Verdict, quoted in Coleman, pg. 353.
22 T. Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness, in Schiff,
T., ed. Mental Illness and Social Process, (N.Y., Harper Row, 1967) pg.
211.
23 Coleman, pg. 379.