THE JPS BIBLE COMMENTARY HAFTAROT mnttDH
T H E JPS T O R A H COMMENTARY NahunM.
GENERAL EDITOR
ChaimFotok
LITERARY EDITOR
NahumM.
GENESIS
NahumM.
EXODUS
Sama
Sama Sama
BamehA.Levine
LEVITICUS
JacobMilgwm
NUMBERS DEUTERONOMY
JeffreyH. Tigay
T H E JPS BIBLE COMMENTARY THE HAFTAROT
MiehaelFishbane
THE FIVE MEGILLOT AND J O N A H GENERAL EDITOR
JONAH
Uriel Simon
ESTHER
Adele Berlin
MiehaelFishbane
THE JPS BIBLE COMMENTARY HAFTAROT fillPSn The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation CommentarybyMICHAEL
1
THE
JEWISH
PHILADELPHIA
FISHBANE
PUBLICATION 2002
/
5 762
SOCIETY
Commentary © 2002 byMichael Fishbane English translation ofthe TANAKH1962,1985,1989,1999 by Thejewish Publication Society Masoretic Hebrew text, Codex Leningrad B19A, taken from Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) © 1967/77,1983, by the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart Synagogue adaptation and revisedformat © 1962,1985,1989,1999
by Thejewish Publication Society
First edition.All rights reserved Nopart of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in anyform or by any means, electronic or mechanical, includingphotocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, exceptfor briefpassages in connection 'with a critical review, withoutpermission in writingfrom thepublishen Thejewish Publication Society 2100Arch Street, 2nd floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Composition by Vhrda Graphics Design byAdrianne Onderdonk Dudden Manufactured in the United States ofAmerica 02 03 04 05 06 0708 09 10 10 9 8 76 54 3 2 1 Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Haftarot. English &Hebrew. Haftarot: the traditional Hebrew text -with the newJPS translation/commentary byMichaelFishbane. — 1st ed. p. cm. — (TheJPS Bible commentary) Text ofthe Haftarot in English and Hebrew; commentary in English. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8276-0691-5 1. Haftarot—Commentaries. I. Fishbane, MichaelA. II. Title. III. Series. BM670. H3 F572002 224'. 077—dc21 2002000303
ISBN 0-8276-0326-6 EXODUS ISBN 0-8276-0327-4 LEVITICUS ISBN 0-8276-0328-2 NUMBERS ISBN 0-8276-0329-0 DEUTERONOMY ISBN 0-8276-0330-4 Five-volume set ISBN 0-8276-0331-2 JONAH ISBN 0-8276-0672-9 ESTHER ISBN 0-8276-0699-0 HAFTAROT ISBN0-8276-0691-5 GENESIS
Thispublieation "was 'made-possible
throughgenerousgrantsfrom
THE LEONARD AND MADLYN ABRAMSON FOUNDATION and THE ARETE FOUNDATION
for MONA •nna^ x m n n
x n n
CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS XV OVERVIEW OF THIS BOOK Xvii INTRODUCTION x i x ABBREVIATIONS AND OTHER CONVENTIONS XXXV
T H E COMMENTARY TO T H E H A F T A R O T
Haftarot for Weekly Readings GENESIS N^WM Bere'shit rp^tf-Q
Noah m
3
8
LekhLekha
Hayyei Sarah mw "n
Va-yetze} X^l
28 34 34
Va-yishlah
39
Va-yeshev nwi Mikketz fpQ VII
SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 42:5-21
ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH 54:1-55:5
SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 54:1-10 ISAIAH 40:27-41:16
ASHKENAZIM
2 KINGS 4:1-37
SEPHARDIM
2 KINGS 4:1-23
20
1 KINGS 1:1-31
24
Va-yishlah Va-yetze} N^l
ISAIAH 42:5-43:10
12
Va-yera} NT1 16
Toledot mf^n
ASHKENAZIM
43 48
MALACHI 1:1-2:7 ASHKENAZIM
HOSEA 12:13-14:10
ASHKENAZIM
HOSEA 11:7-12:12
SEPHARDIM
HOSEA 11:7-12:12
SEPHARDIM
OBADIAH 1:1-21 AMOS 2:6-3:8 I KINGS 3:15-4:1
Va-yiggash
51
Vayehi 'ITI
EZEKIEL 37:15-25
54
I KINGS 2:1-12
EXODUS N W Shemot maw
58
ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH 27:6-28:13; 29:22-23
Shemot maw
62
SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3
Va-'em'
62
Bo3xn
EZEKIEL 28:25-29:21
67
JEREMIAH 46:13-28
Be-shallah
Titro •nrp
70
75
Mishpatim
ASHKENAZIM
JUDGES 4:4-5:31
SEPHARDIM
JUDGES 5:1-31
ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH 6:1-7:6; 9:5-6
SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 6:1-13
81
JEREMIAH 34:8-22; 33:25-26
Terumah nann
86
1 KINGS 5:26-6:13
Tetzavveh msn
88
EZEKIEL 43:10-27
Ki Tissa3 X^n ^
Va-yMel Vnp^l
92
ASHKENAZIM
97
Pekudei (Va-yak-hel—Pekudei) mpo Va-yak-hel Vnp^l
lKINGS18:l-39
SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 18:20-39
ASHKENAZIM
1 KINGS 7:40-50
SEPHARDIM
1 KINGS 7:40-50
SEPHARDIM
1 KINGS 7:13-26
ASHKENAZIM
1 KINGS 7:51-8:21
97 100
Pekudei (Va-ya-k-hel-Pekudei) mpo
102
LEVITICUS XNP^L Va-yikm' Nip1! Tzav
111
106
ISAIAH 43:21-44:23 JEREMIAH 7:21-8:3; 9:22-23
CONTENTS
viii
Shemini Ta^
116
Tazria' ynm Metzom'
ASHKENAZIM
2 SAMUEL 6:1-7:17
SEPHARDIM
2 SAMUEL 6:1-19
121
2 KINGS 4:42-5:19
(Tazria'-Metzora')
fym^-y-iTri)
ym^a
125
AhareiMot mannx
128
Kedoshim (:AhareiMot-Kedoshim) (••^-ip-ma
•nnxj Q^ip
(nwip-omwinfynwip Emor "IBN
ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL22:1-19
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 22:1-16
ASHKENAZIM
AMOS 9:7-15
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 20:2-20
132
Kedoshim ('.'AhareiMot-Kedoshim)
}
2 KINGS 7:3-20
135
139
Be-har inn
EZEKIEL 44:15-31
144
JEREMIAH 32:6-27
Be-hukkotai (Be-har-Be-hukkotai) ,
C mpnn--in:p Tnpnn
JEREMIAH 16:19-17:14
148
NUMBERS -Q1D3 Be-midbar "Q1QD 153
HOSEA2:l-22
Naso> NWJ
JUDGES 13:2-25
158
Be-ha'alotekha irfrynn Shelah-Lekha lb n^ Korah m p Hukkat npn Balak p^n
162
Z E C H A R I A H 2:14-4:7
168
JOSHUA 2:1-24
171
1 SAMUEL 11:14-12:22
174
JUDGES 11:1-33
178
M I C A H 5:6-6:8
Pinhas (before 17th ofTammuz) onro
1 KINGS 18:46-19:21
182
Mattot (Pinhas, after 17th ofTami mm
ix
JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3
186
Mase'ei (Mattot-Mase'ei)
ASHKENAZIM
JEREMIAH 2:4-28; 3:4
pvoB-mttB)
SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 2:4-28; 4:1-2
a
CONTENTS
191
DEUTERONOMY D'131 Devarim (Shabbat Hazon) •''"Ql
197
ISAIAH 1:1-27
Va-'ethannan (Shabbat Nahamu) •pnnxi
ISAIAH 40:1-26
201 ISAIAH 49:14-51:3
'Ekev npy
205
Re'eh
209
ISAIAH 54:11-55:5 ISAIAH 51:12-52:12
Shofetim D'ttDW 211 ISAIAH 54:1-10
Ki Tetze' X^n ^
215
Ki Tavo' Xnn ^
217
ISAIAH 60:1-22
Nitzavim (Nitzavim-Va-yelekh) ClVn"^^^^]
ISAIAH 61:10-63:9
220
Va-yelekh l^l See Shabbat Shuvah Ha'azinu (on Shabbat Shuvah) "irTXH See Shabbat Shuvah Ha'azinu (between Tom Kippur and Sukkot) irmn
2 SAMUEL 22:1-51
225
Ve-zo'tHa-berakhah
flXTI See Simhat Torah
HAFTAROT FOR SPECIAL SABBATHS Shabbat Rosh Hodesh ^in MaharHodesh
ma
raw 236
Shabbat Shekalim n^pw nn^ Shabbat Zakhor
240 TOT RIJW
ShabbatParah HID rQW
Shabbat ha-Hodesh winn nn^
254
231
243
249
ISAIAH 66:1-24 1 SAMUEL 20:18-42
ASHKENAZIM
2 KINGS 12:1-17
SEPHARDIM
2 KINGS 11:17-12:17
ASHKENAZIM
1 SAMUEL 15:2-34
SEPHARDIM
I SAMUEL 15:1-34
ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL36:16-38
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 36:16-36
ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL 45:16-46:18
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 45:18-46:15
ix CONTENTS
Shabbat ha-Gadol ^ran nn^
257
MALACHI 3:4-24
First Sabbath ofHanukkah nnun ^
nn^
ZECHARIAH 2:14-4:7 262
Second Sabbath ofHanukkah nnun ^ ^
nn^
L KINGS 7:40-50
263
Haftarot for the Days of Awe First Day ofRosh Hashanah mwn
bw -p^N"! or
L SAMUEL 1:1-2:10 265
Second Day ofRosh Hashanah mwn
bw
or
JEREMIAH 31:2-20
271
Shabbat Shuvah (Sabbath before Tom Kippur) NMWROW
276
ASHKENAZIM
HOSEA14:2-10;JOEL2:15-27
SEPHARDIM
HOSEA 14:2-10; MICAH 7: 18-20
Tom KippurMorning
mon or ^ rmnw
ISAIAH 57:14-58:14
281
Tom KippUrAfternoon TIDD o r ^
nma
JONAH 1:1-4:11; MICAH 7:18-20 284
Haftarot for the Festivals First Day ofSukkot m m o bw TMN-I nv
ZECHARIAH 14:1-21 285
Second Day ofSukkot mmo ^ ^
or
1 KINGS 8:2-21
289
Intermediate Sabbath ofSukkot mmo bw i n a n Vin nn^ SheminiAtzeret
rray Ta^
Simhat Torah mm flTO^
ix CONTENTS
EZEKIEL 38:18-39:16
290 293 296
1 KINGS 8:54-66 ASHKENAZIM
JOSHUAL1-18
SEPHARDIM
JOSHUA 1:1-9
First Day ofPassover
JOSHUA 5:2-6:1; 6:27
noD bw T^X-I or
300
Second Day ofPassover noD bw ^
or
2 KINGS 23:1-9, 21-25
303
Intermediate Sabbath ofPassover noD bw i n a n Vin ro^
EZEKIEL 37:1-14
307
Seventh Day ofPassover noD bw
or
2 SAMUEL 22:1-51
310
Eighth Day ofPassover noD bw T E W or
ISAIAH 10:32-12:6
311
First Day ofShavuot nwm ^
EZEKIEL 1:1-28; 3:12
or
315
Second Day ofShavuot mn
bw
nv
321
ASHKENAZIM
HABAKKUK 3:1-19
SEPHARDIM
HABAKKUK 2:20-3:19
Haftarot for Weekday Occasions Tisha b'AvMoming nxn ny^n ^
JEREMIAH 8:13-9:23
rmnw
327
TishabAvAftemoon nxn ny^n ^
nma
lSAlAH 55:6-56:8
331
Fast DayAfternoons ms 'Q1 ^
nma
ISAIAH 55:6-56:^
331
Israeli Independence Day mXQ^yn •V SeeEighth Day ofPassover
Notes to the Commentary to the Haftarot
336
ix CONTENTS
O V E R V I E W OF B I B L I C A L B O O K S IN T H E H A F T A R O T C Y C L E INTRODUCTION TO THE OVERVIEW
Joshua
384
Judges
387
Samuel Kings n^
1
EXCERPTED
381
391 398
Isaiah: Chapters
1-39
404
Isaiah: Chapters ma-p ^pm
1
win
Jeremiah Ezekiel Joel
oiay
Amos
HTB
420
Hosea
^v nnny
414 425
428 430
Obadiah Micah
432 433
pipnn
Habakkuk
436
,-
Zechariah
439
n Qi
Malachi
443
Notes to Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle
GUIDE TO HEBREW FOOTNOTES TABLE OF TORAH READINGS
459 461
INDEX OF HAFTAROT IN ENGLISH ALPHABETICAL ORDER INDEX OF BIBLICAL PASSAGES
ix CONTENTS
465
463
449
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS As I finish this work of many years, I first give thanks to God, El Hey ha-'Olamim, the source of all life, for the strength and vigor to complete this large project to the best of my abilities. It is then with much love and gratitude that I give special thanks to you, Mona, my dearest friend and companion for a lifetime, for your love and kindness and unfailing involvement in all aspects of this labor, both theoretical and practical. You helped clarify ideas and issues as they arose, you provided editoriai judgment and ciarity whenever asked, and you unstintingiy gave me the time to write and revise this commentary again and again, with unflagging support. And so, for these reasons and more this book is dedicated to you. The biessings of my life include our two sons, Eitan and Elisha, who have set forth on the paths of Torah and scholarship, each one in his own way. You are my three favorite readers. It is also a particular pleasure and blessing to anticipate that my mother, Bernice Fishbane, will receive this volume in physical health and clarity of mind and spirit, and I hope that it adds to her joy and knowledge of Torah for many years to come. This commentary expresses my loving thankfulness for her model of silent resourcefulness and for the gift of life, given me together with my late father, Philip Fishbane. In this context, I happily add further words of thanks to my parents-in-law, Herman and Janet DeKoven, who have supported me and this project in many caring ways over the years. May they also continue to find in Torah sustenance and new meaning. From its inception, many other individuals have had a share in helping to determine the nature and shape of the task. I first thank my teacher and friend, Nahum Sarna, then editor-inchief of The Jewish Publication Society's Bible Commentary Project, for inviting me to write this commentary many years ago, when its form and scope were thought to be much different. With a youthful and unrealistic boldness I accepted the intellectual and religious challenge of such a project, motivated by a desire to give something of my work and abilities to the Jewish people—and thus to realize in some small measure the ideal of knowledge as service. Commitment to this goal has stayed my course as the work mounted, and as I made my way through what seemed like virtually all the traditional and critical commentaries on the subject, from antiquity to the present. About a decade ago, I was encouraged to widen the scope of the commentary by an old friend, Michael Monson, past executive vice president of The Jewish Publication Society, and I am very grateful for that support. In recent years, I have had the benefit of the involvement of Ellen Frankel, CEO and editor-in-chief of JPS. Her active engagement and good counsel have shown her to be a faithful editor and friend. JPS publishing director Carol Hupping merits special praise. She has given beyond measure of her goodwill and expertise and has kept this complex project on course. She has my sincere thanks. My gratitude also goes to Debra Hirsch Corman for her skill as a copyeditor; the present work has benefited greatly from her expert hand and fine suggestions. I also wish to extend thanks to David E.S. Stein of the JPS staff for preparing the "Overview of This Book" and the back matter, and for his keen editorial eye during proofreading. My successive interactions with him have only increased my admiration for his exacting skills; the Masoretic tradition is alive and well in his hands. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Finally, it is my pleasure to add words of appreciation to various students who, over the years, read portions of the manuscript in draft form and provided helpful observations and responses. They probably would not recognize the work at this stage, since it has gone through so many changes and reformulations since then; nevertheless, their active interest is gratefully acknowledged. Particular thanks to Jonathan Schofer, Benjamin Sommer, and Elsie Stern. In the final stages, I was assisted by my students Elliot Cosgrove, Deborah Green, and especially Laura Lieber, who has also prepared a study guide to enhance the use of this work. Many thanks. Michael Fishbane Shabba-t Va-yehi, 5762
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
xvi
OVERVIEW OF THIS BOOK Traditionally when studying sacred Jewish texts, knowledge arises out of a series of encounters; the understanding of a subject grows by approaching it over time, again and again, from many directions. Correspondingly, this book is complex. It pulls together a wide range of aspects of the haftarah as a subject of study. That is so partly because those aspects overlap and interlock (like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle). Moreover, this book is intended for a disparate audience of readers, each of whom will forge a unique path into the material. To assist readers in charting their own explorations, the following table of topics may serve as a guide. TOPIC
WHERE ADDRESSED
GENERAL ORIENTATION
Origin and history of the custom of reciting a hafta, rah
. Introduction
T
Practices and regulations regarding the recitation of D . r haitarot
. . Introduction
Profile of overall characteristics of the haftarot in the Annual Cycle
Introduction
SCOPE OF A PARTICULAR HAFTARAH
Biblical passage (s) typically recited as the haftarah on P i. ,•• ,• r a given occasion, according to the traditional rites or . . ' . .. Ashkenazim and Sephardim
„ .. . ~n r lable or Contents; or TIndex orr Haitarot . _ .. . .. . . . . „ . mhnglishAlphabeticalOrder r °
THE HAFTARAH AS A SAMPLE FROM THE PROPHETS
Origin and overall character of the prophetic literature from which these haftarot were taken
Introduction to the "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle"
A haftarah as an exemplar of the prophetic book from which it was drawn
"Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle"
Which (and how many) haftarot are taken from each prophet or biblical book
Introduction; Index of Biblical Passages
Historical setting in which a given prophetic passage (now recited as a haftarah) originally arose
Discussion of that book in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" continued
xvn
TOPIC
W H E R E ADDRESSED
THE HAFTARAH ON ITS OWN TERMS
A haftarah's basic characteristics as a document—its authorship, setting, and overall character
Each haftarah's introduction (first part)
A haftarah's literary structure, theme words, rhetoric, and content; how these elements interact to yield the concerns of the passage, understood on its own terms
Each haftarah's introduction (outline; Content and Meaning)
H o w the ancient Sages implicitly altered the meaning of biblical texts (by excerpting, or by collecting passages into an anthology) when creating this haftarah—a new literary work of art
Each haftarah's introduction (Content and Meaning); or comments (on the opening or closing words of the haftarah)
Hebrew text itself as it has come down to us (masomh and "lower criticism"); lexical or other difficulties in establishing what each haftarah text actually says
The footnotes to the Hebrew text; Guide to Hebrew Footnotes; and the comments on pertinent words or phrases (in Comments)
H o w commentators have addressed problems in establishing the plain sense of the text; theological and historical meaning, as dependent upon the competing solutions to the textual problems
The comments on pertinent words or phrases (in Comments)
THE HAFTARAH'S UNITS OF MEANING
Meaning of terms and phrases that don't translate easily because they differ radically from those in contemporary usage
The translators' notes (in Comments)
Meaning of ancient Near Eastern practices and conventions mentioned in the haftarah
The comments on pertinent words or phrases (in Comments)
Translation alternatives for a particular word or phrase, and the traditions of interpretation that underlie strategies of translation
The comments on pertinent words or phrases (in Comments)
Meaning of a featured idea, belief, or motif, as treated elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible
The comments on pertinent words or phrases (in Comments)
THE HAFTARAH IN ITS LITURGICAL CONTEXT
Torah passage that is recited on the same occasion as each haftarah
Table of Torah Readings
H o w each weekly haftarah relates to its associated Torah passage; what led the ancient liturgists to conjoin the two biblical passages
Connections between the Haftarah and the Pamshah (after that haftarah's text)
H o w a special occasion is enhanced by its haftarah; what led the ancient liturgists to link the haftarah passage with that occasion
Connections between the Haftarah and the Special Sabbath / Holy Day / Festival / Fast Day (after that haftarah's text)
Note: For references to further literature, see the endnotes that follow each major section of the book. And for related passages not treated in the comments on a haftarah, see Notes to the Commentary OVERVIEW OF THIS BOOK
XVlll
INTRODUCTION The haftarot (sg., haftarah) are the prophetic selections recited publicly on Sabbaths, festivals, and certain fast days after the required portion from the Torah (Pentateuch; Five Books of Moses). These communal readings developed as a component of classical Judaism—in both form and function. First and foremost, they are one of the three basic features of the ancient institution of the synagogue, wherein the sacred Scriptures were read aloud and interpreted. Primary among these features is the recitation of the Torah in a continuous sequence, from beginning to end during a fixed cycle, interrupted only when a holiday (or the intermediate festival week) falls on the Sabbath. Next in importance is a recitation from the prophetic literature, selected to complement the Torah reading in one way or another or to highlight the theme of a specific ritual occasion. For this reason, these prophetic readings are discontinuous and selective. And finally, the two recitations from Scripture were enhanced by a demshah, or homily, that variously interpreted the readings in the light of tradition, theology, or historical circumstance. The foregoing triad (Torah, prophecy, and homily) represents three levels of authority in Judaism and three modes of religious instruction. Of these, the Torah is the most important—being divine revelation and the teaching of Moses, the foremost of the prophets, with whom we are told God spoke directly and not in any mediated fashion. Scripture states that the Lord spoke to Aaron and Miriam, saying, "Hear these My words: When a prophet of the LORD arises among you, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses; he is trusted [ne'ema-n] throughout My household. With him I speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles, and he beholds the likeness of the L O R D " (Num. 12:6-8). According to later rabbinic tradition, this difference between the divine revelations to Moses and those granted other prophets was somewhat qualified—so that the distinction was not between a direct or indirect encounter with God, which seemed much too stark and bold, but between two modes of refraction: Moses saw God clearly, through a shining mirror ('ispeklarM' me'irah), whereas all the others perceived Him through a glass darkly, as in an unclear or unpolished mirror (cf. B. Yevamot 49b). 1 The more mediated revelation of God to the prophets does not diminish the authority of their message, since this was also recited through divine inspiration. Nevertheless, by making such a formal distinction, the ancient Sages differentiated between the primary teachings of Moses—the Decalogue and the Law—and the secondary teachings of the prophets, whose purpose was to exhort the people to return in faithfulness to the covenant or to announce the consequences of sin and the future fate of the people. The synagogue preacher could see his task as explicating the one or the other (the teachings of Moses or the prophets), or both, on those occasions when God's message was recited before the congregation. The da-rsha-n (interpreter) thus added his human words of interpretation to the divine ones received in order to make their ongoing relevance and significance clear and immediate. Hence, even though he spoke on behalf of Moses and the prophets, the da-rsha-n's authority came from the class of Sages and their role as mediators of the divine word. In the synagogue, as in the study hall, their self-appointed task was to make Scripture a living word for the people. For these reasons, the Sages also saw themselves as the heirs of prophecy ("Since the day when the Temple was destroyed, prophecy has been taken from the prophets and given to the Sage" [B. Megillah 17b]). As teachers in the present, the Sages thus gave institutional stability to the ancient words of Moses and consoled their community with the future hopes and promises of the prophets of Israel.2 INTRODUCTION xxii
Public /Recitation ofthe Tomh Evidence for the earliest recitation of the Torah at communal gatherings is scanty and often obscure. Iwo biblical passages are of note. The first is Deut. 31:10-13. Here Moses instructs the priests, into whose keeping he has given a written copy of "this Teaching" (ha-tomh ha-zo't:, namely, the Book ofDeuteronomy), to "read" it "aloud in the presence of all Israel," "every seventh year," when they come before the Lord during the pilgrimage Feast of Booths (Sukkot). As this occasion also appears to coincide with the sabbatical year of debt remission (cf. Deut. 15:1), 3 the technical dating of the gathering mi-ketz sheva' shanim would originally seem to have meant "at the beginning" or "onset" of "every seventh year" (ketz having the special sense of "topmost"; cf. 1 Kings 12:31). 4 The purpose of this septennial recitation was to inculcate both reverence for and observance of the precepts of the Torah in the entire community (Deut. 31: 12-13). We may assume that the event was something of a covenant renewal ceremony, replicating the event outlined in Deut. 29:9-14. On the basis of Moses' injunction to "Gather \hak-hel\ the people" together to hear the Law (Deut. 31:12), this occasion has been known traditionally as the mitzvah ofhak-hel. However, we shall see that the early Sages construed the event and its date quite differently. The other reference to an occasion of public Torah recitation in Scripture is found in Nehemiah 8. It is reported there that Ezra the scribe, having recently returned to the Land of Israel from Babylonia, gathered the people on the first day of the seventh month (Rosh Hashanah) and presented the "scroll of the Teaching [tomt] of Moses" (Neh. 8:1) before the assembled people. The event is of interest for several reasons. First, we have a public reading lasting from dawn to midday, with Ezra standing upon a wooden platform surrounded by various Levites. Second, when the scroll was opened, Ezra first blessed "the LORD, the great God," and the people responded "Amen, Amen," with hands upraised, and then bowed down (v. 6). And third, the recitation from the scroll was accompanied by the Levites' providing meaning to the reading—presumably through various forms of clarification and explication (v. 8). Rabbinic tradition located references to the Aramaic vernacular translation (Targum) in this procedure, as well as the fixing of the cantillation tradition to facilitate comprehension (B. Megillah 3a). 5 However, from the ensuing report (in Neh. 8:13-18) that a smaller group gathered on the next day to understand the Torah and then read from the laws of the Feast of Booths and enacted them in a distinctive way, it may be inferred that a certain amount of interpretation of the text was involved. 6 In this regard, we may even infer from the fact that the public recitation of the Torah occurred both at the beginning of the year and during all seven days of the Sukkot festival (Neh. 8:18) that Ezra and his colleagues were enacting the commandment of hak-hel according to their understanding of the Deuteronomic prescription. At any rate, it is clear from the overall account that this assembly of reading and understanding, with the aid of official levitical teachers, continues a practice that must go back to the exile—if not earlier. The reference to the scroll of the Teaching of Moses does not specify whether only the Book of Deuteronomy or the entire Torah was read from morning to noon, but the indication (from Neh. 9:15) that laws like those found in Lev. 23:25-27 for celebrating the Feast ofBooths were also examined suggests that the community was instructed from a scroll larger than the Book ofDeuteronomy or from traditions somewhat different from those found there. According to old traditions preserved in Philo, losephus, the New Testament, and the Mishnah, the weekly readings from the Torah are ascribed to Moses; 7 whereas the recitation of a Torah portion on Monday and Thursday morning and on Sabbath afternoon is considered to be one of the ten takkanot (or legal innovations) instituted by Ezra. 8 From the biblical record, as we have seen, there is no confirming evidence for either of these two latter practices. The earliest evidence for a continuous reading cycle is found in the Mishnah, where we are explicitly told that on the four special Sabbaths between the first of Adar and the first ofNisan, the regular Sabbath reading is interrupted (mafsikin), and "on the fifth [Sabbath] one returns to their [regular] sequence [hozrin li-kh-sidran]n (M. Megillah 3:4). Interruptions also occurred INTRODUCTION xxii
when a feast or other special day fell on the Sabbath, and on all these occasions, a fixed number of readings with requisite lengths was prescribed (M. Megillah 4:2). 9 We also learn that during the Sabbath afternoon service and on Monday and Thursday morning, one was obliged to read from the upcoming Sabbath portion, "according to its sequence; and [that these readings] are not accounted [part of the total]." That is, on a given Sabbath morning, the whole fixed portion is read, and one does not deduct the selections read in anticipation of it (during the prior Sabbath afternoon reading or on Monday and Thursday; thus, the portion recited on the Sabbath is always the full portion). By contrast, however, the Jerusalem Talmud records an anonymous opinion of "some" who read continuously from the prior Sabbath afternoon to the weekly Sabbath portion, so that the scriptural readings were cumulative and the recitation for the Sabbath day continued from the point where the three prior incremental readings of the portion left off. This appears to be the position rejected in our Mishnah. In the discussion found in the Babylonian Talmud, the accepted practice is attributed to Rabbi Judah and the rejected one to Rabbi Meir. 10 From the preceding account, we can see that a continuous cycle of Torah readings (with many specifically designated ones) was in practice in the Land of Israel near the beginning of our era—possibly already in the first century c.E. But we also observe that customs varied with respect to the meaning of this continuity, with some Sages holding the position that continuity meant reading portions from the Torah continuously each Sabbath morning (with the intervening readings on Sabbath afternoons and the market days of Monday and Thursday being merely anticipations of the next Sabbath morning portion); whereas others were of the opinion and practice that a continuous reading was an incremental reading over the course of the week, with each reading continuing where the last stopped (for a total of four public readings each week). Far more complicated was the matter of how the continuous recitation should be subdivided, thereby determining when the cycle of readings from the entire Torah would be completed. If one reads twenty-one verses per portion, as formulated in M. Megillah 4:2 (seven readers, three verses each), it would take about five and a half years to complete the Torah. This flatly contradicts the (Babylonian) tradition that "Westerners [i. e., Jews in the Land of Israel] finish the Torah in three years" (B. Megillah 29b), as well as the later gaonic statement that one of the differences in religious practice between the communities of Babylonia and the Land of Israel was that the "Easterners [i. e., Jews in Babylonia] celebrate Simhat Torah [at the end of their reading cycle] every year, [whereas] residents of the Land of Israel [do so] every three and a half years." 11 Among this diverse evidence, it is interesting to note that if one takes the custom given in M. Ta'anit 4:3 as a norm, whereby the first portion (or seder) of Genesis (1:1-2:3) was thirty-four verses, it would have taken as many as 172 Sabbaths to complete the entire reading (taking into consideration the supplements due to festivals, Hanukkah, New Moons, and the four special Sabbaths)— or a bit more than three and a half years. Such an allocation accords with the gaonic tradition noted above. 12 It is thus abundantly clear that the so-called Triennial Cycle of Torah readings in the Land of Israel is a generalized notion and does not accord with all the evidence. Nevertheless, scholars have attempted to reconstruct just such a cycle of readings—using all available evidence for ancient Palestinian practices,13 particularly as preserved in lists of ancient and medieval practices, 14 in the subdivisions of ancient Palestinian midrashic collections (like Genesis Rabbah), 15 and in the anthologies of ancient synagogue hymns (piyyutim) by such poets as R. Yannai and R. Eliezer be-Rabbi Kallir.16 But the overall results have been contradictory and confusing, since quite apart from the inner variations of particular Sabbath portions, the lists of reading portions {sedarim) number such diverse cycles as 141, 154, and 167. 17 This has led to the common conclusion that practices varied widely in the Land of Israel and that no unified practice is evident. 18 Bits of evidence have even led others to conclude that there was also an Annual Cycle reading tradition in this mix; 19 but most scholars regard the one-year cycle of fifty-three or fifty-four portions (pa-mshiyyot) as a derivative Babylonian practice, which took dominance in the Jewish world after the transfer of the hegemony of the Babylonian academy to Spain in the eleventh and twelfth centuries c.E., and especially because of the authoritative backing of Maimonides. In this regard, INTRODUCTION xxii
it is noteworthy that a significant interrelationship between the two cycles exists; in fact, fortythree of the fifty-four portions of the Annual Cycle are identical (in title and beginning, though not in length) with those of the so-called Triennial Cycle.20 An old opinion of Leopold Zunz tried to give coherence to the evidence by observing that two three-and-a-half-year reading cycles would have concluded on the sabbatical year of release.21 His brief observation has now been analytically confirmed on the basis of computations of the possible variations (high and low) of Sabbath portions during a seven-year period, taking into account various interrupting festival days, New Moons, the special Sabbaths, and so on. The result correlates with the preserved lists of 141, 154, and 167 Sabbath portions, with these latter representing the low, middle, and high number of portions that might be projected, given the complications that could arise in any one annual cycle of reading. The conclusion thus imposes itself that the Sages sought to regulate the readings over a septennial period and did so by combining or expanding portions in each of the two reading cycles of such a period in order to finish in seven years.22 It is reasonable to suppose, moreover, that the aforementioned Deuteronomic tradition of hak-hel was the model for the later Palestinian Sages.23 However, it must be noted that this required a different understanding of the operative phrase mi-ketz sheva' shanim (Deut. 30:11) than the one suggested earlier. If a gathering or celebratory conclusion of different communities would be held at the end of a double reading cycle (each extending for three years or more), this could only mean that the event occurred "at the end of seven years"— not at the beginning; that is, on the Feast of Booths occurring just after the completion of the septennial (double) cycle (i. e., at the onset of the eighth year). Thus Moses' ancient injunction would have been applied by the Rabbis on the basis of their reinterpretation of his words. According to late Second Temple halakhah, the recitation was prescribed for the second day of Sukkot (M. Sotah 7:8; cf. the later summary of Maimonides,.Mw^w^ Torah, Hilkhot Hagigah 3:1). The determination of the various Sabbath portions was also the necessary prerequisite for the selection of readings from the prophets as a haftarah—insofar as these were correlated with the Torah portion by word, theme, or place in the liturgical cycle.
Public /Recitation ofthe /Haftarah The origin of the haftarah recitation is obscured both by the paucity of ancient evidence and by later medieval legend. According to the latter, the custom of reciting several verses from the prophets in the synagogue service is said to go back to the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes at the beginning of the second century B.C.E. When he issued an edict prohibiting the reading of the Torah, the lews were said to have evaded this proscription by reading a passage from the prophets and to have continued the custom after the persecutions ceased. This account is recorded by the fourteenth-century Spanish liturgical commentator Abudarham 24 and received its present form through the subsequent elaborations of Elijah Levita (1469-1549) in his talmudic lexicon Tishbi.25 This explanation still enjoys popular currency, though it is without any corroborating evidence. Nevertheless, a persecution (called shamd^') by the Persians does seem to have led to the abolishment of the Babylonian practice of reading portions from the prophet Isaiah as a haftarah during the Sabbath afternoon (Minhah) service. For this we have the testimony o f R . Natronai Gaon 26 and its partial citation by Rashi. 27 This custom was quite old, however; for when Rav returned to Babylon at the beginning of the third century B.C.E., he refers to it as an established practice (B. Shabbat 24a). It is a custom of just this sort that the Mishnah explicitly prohibits: "On Monday and Thursday [morning], and at Minhah on the Sabbath, there are three readers [from the Torah] . . . and one does not conclude with a prophet[ic reading] [ve-'ein maftirin be-navi'Y (M. Megillah 4:2). One may therefore presume that this practice had adherents in the Land of Israel in the first centuries of our era. The Babylonian custom was not reinstituted after the persecution, although there are references to its continued practice as late as the time of Hai INTRODUCTION
xxii
Gaon (eleventh century) by outlying congregations in Elam and in the islands of the Persian Gulf. 28 Elsewhere in Babylon, it was even the practice to recite a haftarah on Sabbath afternoon from the Ketuvim (or Writings). 29 Other indications of the ancient recitation of a prophetic selection in the synagogue are preserved in two New Testament passages. In the first, Luke 4:16-19, we are told that when Jesus returned to Nazareth and visited a synagogue there, "the book of Isaiah was given to him to read," whereupon he "opened the book and found the place that was written" (Isa. 61:1-2). However, the most one can infer from this evidence is that the specific prophetic book read on a given occasion was established by local custom and that the reader could choose whatever passage he liked for recitation. 30 We cannot be sure if the length (two verses) noted here is significant. Later rabbinic (amoraic) practice preferred an ideal of twenty-one verses (thus paralleling the total minimal number of verses for a Torah portion); 31 but shorter readings are recorded in tannaitic sources, as well as in later ones, all depending on the topic or specific circumstance. 32 The second New Testament passage, the report of Paul's involvement in the Sabbath service in Antioch, provides no help on this score, for we are only told that, upon the conclusion of the recitation from the Law and the prophets, he delivered a sermon. There is, however, no way to determine if Paul's sermon was based upon the haftarah selection (Isa. 55:3 is cited, among various verses from the Psalms, and a concluding discussion o f H a b . 1:5) (Acts 13:13-41). 3 3 Already in antiquity, the selection of the haftarah varied greatly from community to community. This is clear from the diverse lists of prophetic readings for the so-called Triennial Cycle found in the Cairo Geniza and in many other collections of customs; 34 from the references to a given haftarah found in the third stanza of the Kedushta' (or Shiv'Ma:>) piyyut recited on Sabbath morning by the hazan in the old Palestinian synagogues, and especially where alternative prophetic readings for the same Sabbath service are also indicated; 35 from halakhic statements and Annual Cycle lectionaries of the Romanian and Karaite rites, which preserve haftarot of the old Palestinian synagogues; 36 and finally, from the references to haftarot (both explicitly and implicitly, and known and unknown from the preserved lists) found in the Midrash. There have also been different attempts to locate references to these prophetic readings within the midrashic homilies; 37 but certainly one of the most successful has been the recognition that, even as many homiletical units conclude on a note of promise, 38 the prophetic verse cited at the end of the homily is often the opening part of a haftarah for the Torah portion recited on that occasion. 39 Let us note two examples.40 According to M. Megillah 3:5, the Torah reading for Rosh Hashanah is Lev. 23:24, wherein God says to Moses: "Speak to the Israelite people thus: In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall observe complete rest, a sacred occasion commemorated with loud blasts \tem'ahY The homily for this day according to Midrash Pesikta Rabbati 40 ends with these words: The Holy One, blessed be He, said [to Israel]. "In this world I show you mercy by means of the shofar; just so, in the world to come I shall show you mercy by means of the shofar and draw near your redemption." Whence [do we know this]? From what was read on the topic in the Prophet \mi-mah she-kar'u be-'inyan ba-navi'Y- "Blow a horn [shofar] in Zion, sound an alarm [hari'u] on My holy mount! [ . . . ] For the day of the L O R D has come, it is close" (Joel 2:1). 41 The verbal tally between the Torah reading (teru'ah) and the Prophetic reading (hari'u) aligns the passages and marks a double interpretation: the shofar blasts marking the New Year is here understood (in accord with a common tradition) to arouse divine mercy on behalf of Israel; and this provides a transition to future hope, whereby the shofar blasts will inaugurate the advent of divine redemption. The ensuing homily in Pesikta Rabbati 41 is also based upon Joel 2:1. It is certain beyond doubt that this passage served as the haftarah in both cases, since in section 40 the preacher comments: "From what was read on the topic in the Prophet." xxiii
INTRODUCTION
Midrash Leviticus Rabbah 16:9 is the concluding section of a homily generated by Lev. 14:2, the second verse of theTorah portion in the Triennial Cycle beginning at Lev. 14:1 (the seder of Metzora', dealing with leprous diseases; it also begins the weekly portion of the same name, according to the Annual Cycle). This conclusion is a detailed and extensive interpretation of Isa. 57:17-19. Significantly, this last passage, which refers to divine healing in the future, is a haftarah marked by Yannai in his Kedushta} on this seder. As in the preceding case, so here as well, the synagogue sermon mediates and explicates the link between the Torah instruction and the prophetic hope. The preceding examples also illustrate how the correlation between the Torah and haftarah readings could be established on the verbal or thematic level—on the basis of verbal tallies and topical relations. In rabbinic literature, the first type highlights a point of lexical similarity (dedamei leih) between the two texts, whereas the second stresses issues of content (left cinyan).^2 The so-called Triennial Cycle as well as the Annual Cycle exhibit both features. This said, the element of verbal relationships occurs primarily on regular Sabbaths, where the main concern is the lesson of the Torah portion (e. g., "creation" in the portion of Bere'shit, which begins with Gen. 1:1; or the "Flood" in the portion of Noah, which begins with Gen. 6:1). And the element of thematic relationships appears primarily on special Sabbaths, where the main issue is the ritual or religious topic of the day (e. g., "divine consolation" on Shabbat Nahamu, the first of seven successive Sabbaths of consolation after the fast of Tisha b'Av, which begins with Isa. 40:1; or "human repentance" on Shabbat Shuvah, the Sabbath that falls between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the ritual period officially known as the "Ten Days ofPenitence"). 43 The haftarot in the so-called Triennial Cycle exhibit some distinctive and noteworthy features. First, the relatively brief portions usually establish a verbal tally right at the outset; and second, this tally is usually marked by a shift to the eschatological or messianic level. Thus, the seder in which Noah is told to "come out \tz&iy\ of the ark" (Gen. 8:15) is complemented by the haftarah in which God instructs his prophetic servant to go the exiles and "to bring out [ l e - h o t z i t h e prisoners from confinement" (Isa. 42:7). 4 4 The reading of the episode of the Tower of Babel, which begins with the phrase "Everyone on earth had the same language [safah]" (Gen. 11:1) and goes on to describe its diffusion, is complemented by the prophecy of hope in which God promises a restoration of this division, "For then I will make the peoples pure of speech [safah], so that they all invoke the L O R D by name and serve Him with one accord" (Zeph. 3 : 9 ) . 4 5 Moreover, an analysis of the distribution of the prophetic books used for haftarot in the so-called Triennial Cycle shows that nearly half of these readings were taken from the Book of Isaiah, and of these, roughly two-thirds were selected from chapters 40-66, which emphasize national return to the homeland. This feature may be precisely the reason the Persians banned the recitation of haftarot on Sabbath afternoon in Babylon, since we are informed that the scriptural readings were taken from the Book of Isaiah. 46 In any event, it is also notable that comparatively few of the prophetic readings in this cycle are taken from the Former Prophets (the Books of loshua, ludges, 1 - 2 Samuel, and 1 - 2 Kings), which contain historical and archival material. 47 Clearly, the evidence of the haftarot shows a marked messianic emphasis in the old Palestinian synagogue theology. Thematic links between the Torah and Prophets in the tannaitic sources of the Land of Israel appear, as noted above, in those instances where the Sabbath or another day commemorates a special ritual or religious occasion. In this respect, the Mishnah mentions several days when a special selection from the Torah is recited. These include the four Sabbaths between the first of Adar and the first ofNisan (M. Megillah 3:4); the three pilgrimage festivals of Passover, Pentecost (Shavuot, called Atzeret), and Tabernacles (Sukkot, called Hag); the holidays ofRosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur (M. Megillah 3:5); as well as Hanukkah, Purim, and the New Moon (M. Megillah 3:6). An important ba-mita} (a tannaitic teaching not included in the Mishnah) preserved in the Babylonian Talmud supplements this list with a catalogue of the corresponding haftarot, chosen because they are like the occasion commemorated (B. Megillah 31a-b). 48 For example, on the first special Sabbath, Shekalim, when theTorah portion refers to the donation of a half-shekel by INTRODUCTION
xxii
all the Israelites polled in the desert just prior to the construction of the Tabernacle, the prophetic portion begins with 2 Kings 12:1, which describes the public donations given for the repair and upkeep of the Temple in the time o f K i n g Jehoash. 49 Similarly, to correspond to the Torah portion for the first day of Rosh Hashanah, which reports how Sarah's barrenness was remembered by God and she was granted a son, the haftarah gives a report of Hannah's barrenness and how God remembered her and gave her a son as well (1 Sam. l:lff.). 5 0 These and the other prophetic readings in this talmudic list have been taken over into the Annual Cycle. In addition, just as the old rabbinic tradition was discrete and restricted the public translation of certain Torah passages into the vernacular (the Aramaic Targum) that it deemed improper for popular knowledge (like Reuben's relationship with Bilhah [Gen. 35:22]), so also did it rule that "the episodes of David and Amnon" (who each seduced a woman forbidden by law) are "not read and not translated" (M. Megillah 4:10). Moreover, the Sages add that one may not recite the throne or chariot vision of Ezekiel 1 as a prophetic portion (}ein maftirin be-merkavah) —although R. Judah permits this practice; and R. Eleazar rules that one may not recite "Proclaim Jerusalem's [abominations to her]" (Ezek. 16:2) as a prophetic lection. Of these three passages, the episode of David and Amnon has remained a censored text for synagogue recitation. Though the Sages sought to restrict the popular recitation of Ezekiel's mystical vision (undoubtedly because of its esoteric content and strict rabbinic limitations regarding its study; cf. M. Hagigah 2:1), R. Judah permitted it, and his view is confirmed in the aforenoted talmudic ba-mita\ where "The Chariot" is given as the haftarah for the first day of Shavuot—a practice continued to the present day. Ezekiel 16:2ff., which provides graphic and lewd accounts of Jerusalem and its sins, was recited in some communities, including the Yemenite rite, 51 apparently influenced by the Targum, in which the various episodes are transformed into an allegory of Israel's sacred history.
Comparisons and Connections between the Cycles As noted earlier, the Annual Cycle overlaps with the old so-called Triennial Cycle in many respects, particularly with respect to the common beginnings of many Torah portions. In addition, there are a number of haftarot that the two cycles share in common—notably where they both begin their Torah readings at the same point (e.g., Noah, Shemot, and Va-'era'). All this suggests that the Annual Cycle has roots in the older multiyear cycles and that its choice of prophetic readings may be (in part) a derivative selection from all the available haftarot in those cycles.52 This is particularly evident where the link between the Torah portion and the haftarah in the Annual Cycle occurs somewhere in the middle of the weeklypamshah, and not at the beginning—a quite striking phenomenon, explainable only by the fact that the length of any given pa-mshah of the Annual Cycle could embrace about three seda-rim of the Triennial Cycle and thus a haftarah for the Annual Cycle could have been chosen from a number of possibilities. The haftarah in the Annual Cycle for the Torah portion of Lekh Lekha (Genesis 12-17) is a case in point. The prophetic reading in common use is Isa. 40:27-41:16, whose stated purpose is to arouse the exiles to the hope and reality of redemption. On first view, the connection between this haftarah and the parashah seems far-fetched at best—leading one to suspect that its selection was designed to suggest a broad analogy between the journey of Abraham to the land of Canaan at divine direction (Gen. 12:lff.), and the anticipated return of the nation from Babylonian exile at divine behest. However, upon closer inspection, one notes that Isa. 41:2 ("Who has roused a victor from the East, summoned him to His service? Has delivered up nations to him, and trodden sovereigns down?") has a close link to Abraham's victory over the military coalition mentioned in Genesis 14 and that precisely this biblical chapter began a Palestinian seder for which Isa. 41: 2 constituted a haftarah, according to diverse evidence (xhcpiyyutim of Yannai; Midrash Aggadat Bere'shit; and a homily in Midrash Genesis Rabbah 44:7). The inescapable conclusion to be drawn, in this case, is that the Annual Cycle has retained or chosen as its haftarah a prophetic passage from the old Triennial tradition that celebrates God's arousal of Abraham to perform INTRODUCTION xxii
a heroic act in the land of Canaan—but not from the opening episode, in which the patriarch responds to God's call to leave his homeland. The Annual Cycle also conforms to old Palestinian traditions in its overall liturgical structure. For alongside the weekly core of regular Sabbath readings—constituting a perpetual recitation of God's word—there included interruptions of various kinds. As noted earlier, these included the four special Sabbaths between the first of Adar and the first of Nisan, mentioned in the Mishnah; the holidays o f R o s h Hashanah and Yom Kippur, and the three pilgrimage festivals; and the commemorative occasions ofHanukkah, Purim, and the New Moons. All these sacred days had special Torah readings, and pertinent haftarot were recited on the special Sabbaths, on the holidays and festivals (and the Sabbath of the festival week ofPassover and ofTabernacles), the Sabbath of the feast ofHanukkah, and when the New Moon coincided with the Sabbath or occurred on the day following. In addition, special haftarot were recited on ten successive Sabbaths during the summer, beginning with the Sabbath after the fast of the seventeenth of Tammuz, which commemorates the first breach in the walls of lerusalem during the final siege of the First Temple. The first three weeks are known as Sabbaths of Admonition, and various warnings and exhortations are read from the first two chapters of leremiah and the first chapter of Isaiah. The subsequent seven weeks, beginning with the Sabbath after the fast of Tisha b'Av, are known as Sabbaths of Consolation and commemorate the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the people. During this period, words of comfort and hope are recited from Isaiah 40ff. This full liturgical structure (and more) forms the basis of the Midrash collection ofPesikta de-Rav Kahana, which is an anthology of homilies and teachings from the Land of Israel from late amoraic times (ca. fifth century c . E . ) , and a similar liturgical range is preserved in the later collection known as Pesikta Rabbati. These two works are of special interest in the present context, insofar as they preserve homilies and discourses around the haftarot for the weeks of admonition and consolation. In addition, special haftarot were recited for the Sabbath prior to Passover, known as Shabbat ha-Gadol; on the Sabbath prior to Yom Kippur, known as Shabbat Shuvah; and on public fast days—in the afternoon service of special public fasts (e. g., during times of drought), and in the morning and afternoon services of the fast ofTisha b'Av. All told, one can see that any year could have almost half as many special haftarot (twentyone or more) as haftarot for regular Sabbaths (fifty-four or less). This ratio would increase if the holidays and festivals fell on the Sabbath or if there were two Sabbaths during the feast of Hanukkah. All such occasions would interrupt the regular Torah cycle and require the combination of Torah portions, resulting in the reduction of regular haftarot (when two portions are joined, only the second one haftarah is recited). 53 The combined total ensures that the teachings and topics preserved in the prophetic literature have a dominant place in the public instruction of the community—an instruction aided and furthered by the homiletic use of these passages in the synagogue, as we have noted, as well as by the targumic translations and paraphrases that accompanied them. The latter were regulated by law (translation after every three lines) and were thus a somewhat simultaneous rendition during the liturgical recitation. In addition, there was a rich tradition of targumic supplements (called Toseftot Targum), in which portions of the Aramaic rendition are interfused with material from the exegetical and midrashic tradition—a feature that further ensured the adaptation of the prophetic selection to the norms and theology of rabbinic ludaism. 54 Introductory hymns in Aramaic have also enhanced the haftarah service.55 The broad base of instruction through the prophetic literature is also clear from the distribution of the books from which the haftarot are derived in the Annual Cycle. Of the fifty-four pa-mshiyyot, the largest cluster is from the Book of Isaiah (fourteen), with smaller amounts from leremiah (eight), Ezekiel (six), and the Minor Prophets (nine). These compose two-thirds of the whole. But whereas in the so-called Triennial Cycle two-thirds of the haftarot were from Isaiah 40-66 (dealing with redemption and ingathering) and fully four-fifths had a messianic or eschatological dimension, the smaller percentage of material from the late chapters of Isaiah is notable in the Annual Cycle, as is the lesser emphasis on messianic features. INTRODUCTION
xxii
Indeed, the latter are not at all the dominant element in the haftarot taken from the Books of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets and in many cases do not appear at all; moreover, the percentages hardly change if one factors in the haftarot for the pilgrimage festivals. A high proportion of the latter provide historical depictions, and this tallies with the relatively high number of Sabbath haftarot taken from the Former Prophets (eight derive from the Books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel; and eleven from the Book of Kings). Similarly, three of the four haftarot for special Sabbaths provide historical or archival material. In sum, the theme of national redemption and redemption is noticeably downplayed in the Annual Cycle—a point that is even more obvious if we factor out the seven haftarot of consolation, which derive from the old Palestinian rite. One wonders whether this distribution of emphasis reflects any significant aspect ofjewish Diaspora consciousness in Babylon. Viewed more thematically, we may observe that in addition to the interest in the national future and the restoration of the people, the haftarot in the Annual Cycle reflect a strong interest in historical parallels or symmetries, as detailed below. First, on the national level: (1) the celebratory song of Moses after the crossing of the Red Sea (Exodus 15) in the portion of Be-shallah is balanced in the haftarah by Deborah's song of victory in the time of the Judges (Judg. 4:4-5:31 for Ashkenazim; 5:1-31 for Sephardim); (2) the apostasy with the Golden Calf (Exodus 32) in Ki Tissa' is balanced in the haftarah by the apostasy of the people in the time of Elijah (1 Kings 18:1-39 for Ashkenazim; 18:20-39 for Sephardim); (3) the account of the celebration of the paschal meal in Egypt (Exod. 12:12-51), recited as a special Torah reading on the first day of Passover, is balanced in the haftarah by the celebration of the first paschal offering in the land of Canaan (Josh. 5:2-6:1, 27); and (4) the account of the first reconnoitering of the Land by the spies and their failure (Numbers 14), found in the portion of Shelah-Lekha, is balanced in the haftarah by the second wave of spies and their successful collusion with Rahab in Jericho (Josh. 2:1-24). Second, on the personal level: (1) the ageing of Abraham and the gifts of inheritance before death, found in the portion of Hayyei Sarah (Gen. 25:5-8), is paralleled in the haftarah by the ageing ofDavid and the transfer of royalty before his death (1 Kings 1:1-31); (2) the dream and awakening of Pharaoh and the recognition that Joseph has divine wisdom in Mikketz (Genesis 41, esp. w. 33, 38) are paralleled in the haftarah by the dream and awakening of Solomon at Gibeon and the recognition that he has divine wisdom (1 Kings 3:15-4:1, esp. 3:15,28); (3) the final song of Moses, depicting divine favors to the people, found in Ha'azinu (Deuteronomy 32), is paralleled in the haftarah by the final song of David, in which he thanks God for all his victories (2 Sam. 22:1-51); and (4) the account ofMoses' death, with the reference to the transfer ofleadership to Joshua in the portion Ve-zo't Ha-berakhah (especially Deut. 34), is paralleled in the haftarah for Simhat Torah by the account ofMoses' death and the statement that God will be with Joshua just as he was with Moses (Josh. 1:1-18 for Ashkenazim; 1:1-9 for Sephardim; see especially v. 5). Third, on an institutional level: (1) the preparations and depictions of the building of the Tabernacle in the Torah portions of Terumah (Exod. 25:1-27:19), Va-Yak-hel (Exod. 35:1-38: 20), and Pekudei (Exod. 38:21-40:38), and in the added Torah reading for the special Sabbath of Shekalim (Exod. 30:11-16), are complemented by haftarot that give related depictions of the Temple—in 1 Kings 5:26-6:13, 1 Kings 7:40-50 (Ashkenazim) or 7:13-26 (Sephardim), 1 Kings 7:51-8:21 (Ashkenazim) or 7:40-50 (Sephardim), and 2 Kings 12:1-17 (Ashkenazim) or 11:17-12:17 (Sephardim), respectively; (2) the account of the altar for the priests in the Tabernacle found in the portion of Tetzaweh (Exodus 27:1-8) and its purification (29:6-7) is complemented in the haftarah by references to the altar for the new (postexilic) Temple and its purification (Ezek. 43:10-27); (3) the regulations of the personal status and couture of the priests in the wilderness Tabernacle described in the portion of 'Emor (Lev. 21:1-15, especially) are complemented in the haftarah by regulations of the same order for the postexilic priesthood (Ezek. 44:15-31); and (4) the account of lighting the lamps in the desert Tabernacle and the purification of the Levites found in the portion ofBe-ha'alotekha (Num. 8:1-22, especially), is complemented in the haftarah by a figurative use of the image of lamps and the purification of the High Priest in the postexilic Temple (Zech. 2:14-4:7). xxvii
INTRODUCTION
It is clear from these examples (and many others) that a dominant concern in the haftarot of the Annual Cycle is to establish historical symmetries between events, persons, or institutions and thus to show various types of continuities and correlations within Scripture. 56 These diverse correlations also indicate a certain cast of mind or concern behind the selection—what appears to be a certain typological reading of sacred history. It may be added that, in this process, haftarot were chosen that do not have the personal voice of a prophet, but the narrative voice of a historian or the archival tone of a catalogue. This is significant, for it indicates that the haftarah was believed to instruct by means of comparison or analogy with the Torah portion. Moreover, the relative absence of the prophet's voice also results in the virtual absence of the prophetic tone of rebuke or criticism for personal or social evils— of commission or omission. 57 The haftarot for Balak (Micah 5:6-6:8) or for Yom Kippur morning (Isa. 57:14-58:14) are thus exceptional in this regard, together with the haftarot for the three Sabbaths of Admonition (ler. 1:1-2:3; 2:4-28 and 3:4 [Ashkenazim] or 2:4-28 and 4:1-2 [Sephardim]; and Isa. 1:1-27, respectively). One cannot speak of any common literary style or feature among the haftarot; each reading sculpts its discourse out of a larger literary context and establishes its own rhetorical emphases and features. Frequently, in fact, the beginning or end of a haftarah selection interrupts a biblical speech unit—with striking and new effects. The various literary and rhetorical forms are fully discussed in the ensuing commentary, and there we shall observe patterns of symmetry, argumentative dialectics, climactic emphases, and other features showing that the haftarot constitute a distinct stage in the reception of ancient Israelite prophecy—a re-presentation and reuse of it for the synagogue and its own ideals of religious instruction through Scripture. For that religious community, the haftarah marked the "leaving off" ( , aftarta : ') or "completion" ('ashla-mta') of the official Torah service58 and is formally set off from it in several ways. First, the haftarah service, so to speak, begins after the reading from the Torah portion has been completed and a half-Kaddish (doxology) recited to mark a break between it and what follows. And then, after the doxology, a nominal portion (three verses or so) from the end of the Torah portion is repeated, and the haftarah is ritually recited. Blessings before and after that recitation enhance its lesson and give it a sacred framework. The blessing traditionally recited before the haftarah reads as follows: Blessed are You, O L O R D our God, king of the universe, who chose good prophets, and found their words acceptable, which were said in truth. Blessed are You, O L O R D , who chooses the Torah, His servantMoses, His people Israel, and true andjustprophets. 5 9 The shift from the past choice of prophets in the first part to the ongoing choice of prophets in the concluding eulogy underscores God's ongoing support for the prophets— who continue to instruct the people, as does the Torah ofMoses. After the completion of the haftarah, four blessings are then recited. The first of these shifts the focus from the prophet's words to those of God—which are declared both reliable and effective. This blessing reads: Blessed are You, O L O R D our God, king of the universe, rock of all the universes, righteous throughout all the generations—who speaks and does, (and) who declares and fulfills: for all His words are true and just. You are He, O L O R D our God, who is reliable, and whose words are reliable, and not even one of your words shall return empty—for you are a reliable and merciful king. Blessed are You, O L O R D , the God who is reliable in all His words. The repetition of the phrase "true and just" in this part echoes and extend its usage in the first blessing. There, the persons who speak acceptable words are deemed "true and just prophets"; here, on the other hand, the prophetic words are treated as very words of God, "for all His words are true and just." 60 Hence all the teachings and promises are reliable, godly instruction. 61 Imbued with this assurance, the people of Israel has kept the ancient words of the prophets alive to this very day through ritual recitation in the synagogue—and through their ongoing study and INTRODUCTION
xxviii
interpretation, in light of the strictures of philology and in faithfulness to the values of Scripture and Jewish tradition.
The Present Commentary For two millenia, Jews have been reading haftarot and commenting upon their content through midrash, homily, and various types of textual exegesis. It is therefore most striking to observe the virtual absence of a genre of commentaries specifically devoted to this liturgical corpus—as distinguished from lexical annotations to the prophetic books or occasional homiletical allusions. Those that do occur are therefore of much interest. Notable, in this regard, is a Judeo-Arabie commentary, arguably from the twelfth or thirteenth century.62 Only portions have survived, and these evince a striking Maimonidean tone with Sufi leanings. In early modern times, there is the important work known as Ahava-t Yehona-ta-n, by the great eighteenth-century Talmudist and sage Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz. It is filled with comprehensive learning, in the rabbinic style and with the rabbinic concerns characteristic of the times, but without going into philological or literary matters or into theological considerations bearing on the plain sense of the haftarah. 63 A more popular collection, KokhavMi-Ya'a-kov by R. Jacob Dubno, the famous nineteenth-century "Dubner Maggid," turns its particular attention to parables and homilies designed to motivate faith and action and thus uses the prophetic readings as starting points for contemporary theology and exhortation. 64 The same can be said of the fragments of homilies of the Hasidic masters, preserved in different degrees in their books, as for example in the highly theosophical discussions found in R. Aharon Halevi of Staroselye's Avoda-t Halevi. Among more contemporary treatments, the volumes of R. Issachar Jacobson, Hazon Ha-Mikm\ have had broad distribution. The particular focus of his concern is with religious or ethical themes in the haftarot, which he treats in a synthetic manner and via his own evaluation of traditional commentaries (medieval and modern). Moreover, he limits his discussion of literary features to brief outlines of the prophetic content; somewhat more expansive are his comments on the relationship between the Torah and prophetic readings. He is not concerned to provide a critical evaluation of the haftarah selections on their own terms and the various philological, stylistic, or theological issues they raise.65 The present commentary has been written to help fill this striking cultural gap and thus serve the liturgical, intellectual, and religious interests of the contemporary Jewish community. My concern is to foster and develop a mode of biblical literacy that might transform the words of the prophets and the ancient prophetic literature read on Sabbaths and other sacred occasions into words ofliving instruction. Three levels and types of commentary serve this purpose. 1. The first level focuses on thepeshat, or plain sense of the haftarah—understood in its own context. By this I mean two things: the prophetic passage is first introduced as a document from a particular time and place within ancient Israel, spoken by a specific person on a specific occasion, or written in a certain historical text with certain theological or historiographical tendencies; then, after that, the particular haftarah is analyzed in terms of its literary structure and form, its theme words and content, and how both the form and the key terms interrelate so as to produce a given message, theology, or emphasis. The inner dynamics and dialectics of the passage are thus examined in order to reveal the spiritual, ideological, or instructional concerns of the haftarah. In quite remarkable ways, as we shall see, the plain sense of the text has its own religious power. To bypass or short-circuit this level for the sake of some other allegorical or metaphorical sense would be to deprive us of the instruction of the ancient biblical text itself, understood on its own terms. Such a move would also obscure the way the ancient Sages have sculpted these liturgical units out of their original context and given them new literary or rhetorical shapes. In this regard, one must note that the biblical unit of the haftarah has become a rabbinic unit—reflecting rabbinic sensibilities and concerns. The reader will profitably bear both historical and literary considerations in mind. 2. The second level (labeled "Text and Comments") both complements and extends the focus on thepeshat. It complements the first level insofar as the lexical and textual comments that are added try to explore the difficulties of the passage and examine how it has been treated by rabbinic and modern commentators. Indeed, the solutions to many of these textual problems have often INTRODUCTION xxii
been guided by theological or religious strategies that further complicate the issue, and the reader is shown how the theological or historical meaning of the prophetic passage changes depending upon the solution one adopts. This level of analysis also complements the first one by adding information about the rhetoric of the piece or aspects of its thought or style not mentioned before. But beyond this, there is a concern to extend the topics of thepeshat beyond the specific context of the haftarah to the Hebrew Bible as a whole. The pedagogical purpose here is to widen the lens of biblical literacy, in order to see both how a given idea or belief changes in different contexts and how these various contexts may differ from that featured in the haftarah. In this way, the rich tapestry and texture of biblical literature, thought, and theology are represented—and any sense that "the Bible" is a monolithic whole, with one voice or theology, is implicitly challenged. The phenomenon of Scripture as a multicontextual and multivalent anthology of teachings and traditions is thus indicated in many ways. 3. The third level of this commentary is that of the demsh, or creative interpretation and theology. Since antiquity, rabbinic midrashists and homilists have sought to understand the link or relationship between xhcpa-mshah of the Torah and its corresponding haftarah—not solely as an attempt to reconstruct the associations of the old liturgists who established these connections, but as an impulse of creative religious inquiry (another meaning of demsh). I have tried to do the same, being sensitive to literary connections, meanings, and views found in the voluminous midrashic literature (or other rabbinic sources, as pertinent), but also by trying to discover new correlations between the liturgical readings on the basis of my own insights and interests. The result is a series of concise theological essays inspired by these diverse intertextual nexuses—a mode of traditional midrash in keeping with my own spiritual and stylistic sensibilities. The concern here again is to let the biblical texts speak—though now as a dialogue of voices within the canon as a whole. My interest in this part of the commentary is thus to mediate a type of theological intertextuality, and in so doing to demonstrate how an interpreter (ancient or modern) may facilitate the interlocution of diverse scriptural sources. I close with a final point and a plea. The point is that ludaism is a text culture, which has been ever nurtured by study and interpretation. The interpreter and the text interpenetrate in dynamic ways: the individual finding that the layers of his or her deepest self have been textualized by study, so that the sacred texts provide a new language for ongoing life experience and inspiration; whereas, in turn, the text reveals itself as marked by the accumulated readings of its many seekers and learners. Every renewal of the self is likewise a renewal of the text—and every deadening of human sensibility is a simultaneous deadening of the vitality of the text. Thus if the biblical text is itself a shaping of the divine spirit by the human breath of Moses and the prophets, we must repeatedly respond to the realization that its ancient and enduring truths now speak through the spirit and breath of its latter-day interpreters. My plea is related to this point. Martin Buber once said that the task of the translator is to overcome the "leprosy of fluency"—that disease of the spirit whereby one presumes to know from the outset what one is reading and therefore blithely reads past the text and its distinctive meaning. The effective translator must therefore reformulate the words of the text so as to produce a new encounter with its language and thus facilitate a new hearing and understanding. I would add that the spiritual task of the commentator is likewise to mediate and influence the pace of reading, so that the reader can be addressed anew by the innate power of the text. The pace of modern technology and information retrieval interrupts this vital task. To hear the voice of ancient Scriptures, the rhythm of reading must therefore be restored to the rhythm of breathing—to the cadence of the words and speech patterns that characterize the sacred text. Only then may one encounter each literary unit with his or her life-breath and begin to read with a heightened alertness to nuance and significance; and only then may the modern idolization of technique and fact also be challenged, and the ancient text retrieved with all its inherent vitality and force. The commentator must try to facilitate this process, through carefully chosen explanations and annotations; but the work and readiness of the reader are also much required—every step of the way. INTRODUCTION xxii
NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION 1. The terms 'ispiklaria'metzuhtzehet (a polished mirror) and melukhlekhet (murky) occur in Lev. R. 1:12; cf. in the edition of Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: WahrmannBooks, 1972), 1:31. A 2. On the complicated question of the so-called end of prophecy after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, see the important study of Ephraim E. Urbach, "Matai Paskah Nevu'ah," Tarbiz 17 (1946): 1-11; and the recent reconsideration and synthesis of positions in Benjamin D. Sommer, "Did Prophecy Cease? Evaluating a Reevaluation,"/BZ 115 (1996): 31-47. And see also Nahum N. Glatzer, "A Study of the Talmudic Interpretation of Prophecy," Review of Religion 10 (1945-46): 115-37. < 3. The same Hebrew expression (mi-ketz) occurs here. Targ. Onk. and old rabbinic tradition (Sif. Deut. I l l ) already assume thatketz means "end"; but this is hard to square with the explicit statement in the law itself (v. 9) that the onset of the seventh year is anticipated. LXX also understands Deut. 15:1 as indicating the arrival of the seventh year (di'hepta eton). Cf. also the discussion of Samuel R. 'Driver, Deuteronomy, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1895), 174. NJPS silently ignores the problem by translating mi-ketz as "every" (this is also the view of Saadiah Gaon). A variant expression is mi-ketzeh in Deut. 14:28. A 4. This understanding of the plain sense was also argued by Ibn Ezra here and elsewhere (but see Ramban's attempt at a grammatical as well as traditional rebuttal). Moreover, it is impossible to think of the gathering on the fifteenth of the seventh month as the "end" of the year. Driver, Deuteronomy, 335, also understand Deut. 30:10 like 15:1; i. e., atthe beginning of the year (see above, n.3). A 5. For an analysis of the terms in Neh. 8:8, see my Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 108-9. < 6. See my discussion, ibid., 109-12. A 7. See, respectively, Philo,.Dg OpificioMundi 128; Josephus, ContmApionen, 2:175; Acts 15:21; and M.Meg. 3:1. < 8. See J. Meg. 1:3, 70b; B. BK 72a. < 9. The numbers given are ideal. For example, the Mishnah rules that seven readers be called to read from the weekly portion, three verses each, for a total of twenty-one. However, during the portion of Amalek, the Sabbath before Purim, Exod. 17:8-16 did not reach the required number. A 10. See B. Meg. 31b. < 11. See Mordecai Margulies, Ha-hillukimshe-bein 'Anshei Mizrah u-Benei 'Eretz-Yisrael (Jerusalem, 1938), 88. < ' XXX11I
12. See the determination made by Ben-Zion Wacholder, in his "Prolegomenon" to the reprint of Jacob Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue (1940; reprint, New York: Ktav, 1971), l:xviii, xxi. A 13. See the innovative and influential early researches of Adolf Buchler, "The Reading of the Law and the Prophets in a Triennial Cycle,"/jQR, n. s., 5 (1893), especially 420-68. < 14. Note, for example, the various lists collected by Wacholder, in his appendices to the "Prolegomenon." A 15. This has been established by the pioneering and important researches of Julius Theodor, "Die Midraschim zum Pentateuch und der dreijarige palastinensische Cyclus," Monatschrift fur die Geschichte und Wissenschaft desludenthums 34 (1885): 351— 66, 405-21, 454-67; 35 (1886): 212-18, 252-65, 299-313, 406-15, 443-59, 558-64; 36 (1887): 35-48, 357-61. < 16. For Yannai, see Zvi M. Rabinovitz, Mahzor PiyyuteiR. Yannaila-Torah ve-la-Mo'adim (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik; Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 1987), 1-2. < 17. See now the discussion and synoptic presentation of the lists in Yissachar Yo'el, "Keter H ' 'Alafim ve-'Esrim li-vriyat ha-'Olam," I&ryat Sefer 38 (1963): 126-32. < 18. So the summation of Joseph Heinemann, "The Triennial Lectionary Cycle,"i7S 19 (1968): 41-48. < 19. See Ezra Fleischer, "Keriyah Had-Shenatit ve-Tlat-Shenatit ba-Torah be-Veit ha-Kenesset haKadum," Tarbiz 61 (1992): 25-43, among many other of his researches on the subject. A 20. See Wacholder, "Prolegomenon," xxiii, and appendix 1. A 21. See Yom Tov Lipmann Zunz, Ha-Derashot be-Yisra'el ve-Hishtalshelutan ha-Historit, ed. Hanoch Albeck (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1975), 2. < 22. For the foregoing theory and proof, see Shelomoh Na'eh, "Sidrei Keri'at ha-Torah be-'Eretz-Yisra'el: 'Iyyun Mehudash," Tarbiz 67 (1998): 167-87. < 23. See ibid., 183-87. < 24. See his Peirush ha-Tefillot, ed. Prague, 52b. A 25. Tishbi (Grodno, 1805), 5. v.ptr, 45a. < 26. See Louis Ginzberg, Ginzei Schechter. Geonica (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1929), 2:302, no.xxvi. < 27. Commenting on B. Shab. 24a, s. v. hiftir (he cites it anonymously). A
NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION
28. See Hai Gaon's responsum in Benjamin Stone to the second volume of Mann's work, which Lewin,'OtzarHa-Geonim, 2 (Haifa, 1930), i, 26-27. he brought to completion (1966), xxi-xxxviii. A It is also cited in Judah bar Barzillai's Sefer ha-1ttim, 38. On this point, see Edmund Stein, "Die ed. J. Schor, Mekize Nirdamim (Berlin: J. Kaufmann, homiletische Peroratio im Midrasch," HUCA 8-9 1902), 271. And see also the wider discussion of (1931-32): 353ff. < Jacob Mann, "Changes in the Divine Service of the 39. See the important study of Marc Bregmann, Synagogue due to Persecution," HUCA 4 (1927): "Triennial Haftarot and the Perorations of the Mid284-86. < rashic Homilies"JJS 32 (1981): 74-84. < 29. See B. Shab. 116b; and also the comments in 40. See ibid., 76, 78. < the Tosafot to B. Shab. 24a, s. v. she-'ilmalei'. A 41. See in the edition ofMeir Ish Shalom (Vienna, 30. Cf. also Wacholder, "Prolegomenon," xvi. One 1880), 172a. Against NJPS, perhaps read, "for the must also be cautious about linking the practice here day of the LORD is coming." A with the so-called Triennial Cycle; see on this score 42. Cf. B. Meg. 29b. < the judicious remarks of Larrimore Crockett, "Luke 43. See the extensive discussion on these haftarot iv. 16-30 and the Jewish Lectionary Cycle: A Word for details. A ofCaution,"i7S 17 (1966): 13-46. < 44. NJPS translates "rescuing"; but I have rendered "to bring out" to show the link with the seder 31. See B. Meg. 23a. < 32. See Tosef. Meg. 4:18, where no fixed limit is and also to capture the innovative aspect of the infinigiven, though it refers to some of four or five verses tive, which is lost by the gerundive form. A and even one of a single verse (Isa. 52:3). The hafta45. Wacholder, "Prolegomenon," xxxi, rightly emrah selections in the Triennial Cycle lists indicate the phasizes the verbal tallies of these and other cases but first and last verses and sometimes mention "two does not take up their eschatological aspect, invoking verses only." In the Annual Cycle, a reading could other examples for that purpose. A also be less than the requisite if the topic came to an 46. See previous note for the list. A end (cf. the haftarot for Va-yetze', Yitro, Tetzaweh, 47. See Wacholder, "Prolegomenon," xxxii-xxxiii orVa-yalchel). A for charts, statistical distributions, and evaluation. 33. For an attempt to locate old haftarah readings My discussion is indebted to his work. A in Philo, see Naomi Cohen, "Earliest Evidence of the 48. These readings are also mentioned by R. Haftarah Cycle for the Sabbaths between Y"Z be-Tam- Obadiah Bartenura in his commentary on M. Meg. muz and Sukkot in Philo,"]JS 48 (1997): 225-49. < 3:4-5, who uses the expression me'ein ha-me'orac to 34. Cf. the material listed in Joel, op. cit., and indicate haftarot chosen because they are "like the in the appendices provided by Wacholder, "Pro- occasion." A legomenon." See also the material in Buchler, "The 49. See the full and striking correspondence beReading ofthe Law," 6 (1983): 39-42, and Mann, tween the passages in the discussion of the haftarah The Bible as Read, 561-74; and also the material col- for Shabbat Shekalim. It should be noted that there lected by Yosef'Ofer, "Sidrei Nevi'im ve-Ketuvim," in were many other haftarot chosen for this Sabbath: Tarbiz 58 (1989-90): 155-89; and by Marvin Luban, the Romanian rite, preserving a Palestinian practice, "Triennial Haftarot," in Samuel K. Minky Memorial reads Ezek. 45:12; according to Pesikta Rabbati, the Volume, ed. Gerson Appel (Jerusalem: Sura Institute reading was 1 Kings 4:20; and according to Kallir, for Research; New York: Yeshiva University, n. d.), Hos. 2:1 and Isa. 43:3 were also recited. A 191-203. < 50. There is no indication here how long the read35. This feature of the Kedushta' reference was ing was, and traditions vary widely—with perhaps the first recognized and studied by Menahem Zulay, in longest being the customary reading of the Annual Zur Liturgie der babylonischenjuden (Berlin, 1933). Cycle among Ashkenazim and Sephardim, who read The phenomenon of alternate haftarot in the corpus 1 Sam. 1:1-2:10. The echo of remembrances in these ofYannai and others has been studied in the impor- cases—pakad in Gen. 21:1 and zakhar in 1 Sam. 1: tant study of Natan Fried, "Haftarot 'Alternativiyot 19—was already noted in the Talmud. A be-Fiyyutei Yannai ve-She'ar Paytanim Kedumim," 51. Natan Fried, s. v "Haftarah" and appendix tables, Sinai 61 (1967): 265-90; 62 (1967): 50-66; 62 Entziklopedyah Talmudit, vol. 10 (Jerusalem, 1961), lists (1968): 127-41. < a number of rabbinic authorities and communities who 36. See the research of Louis Finkelstein, "The mention haftarot for Shemot and for Kedoshim that have Prophetic Readings according to Palestinian, By- beendrawnfromEzek. 16:lff. A zantine and Karaite Rites," HUCA 17 (1942-43): 52. The Annual Cycle also inherited the diversity 423-26. < of the older multiyear cycles. For a tabulation of the 37. The most bold and innovative is that of Mann, rich variety of Annual Cycle readings—culled from The Bible as Read I, where he attempts to show how many books and manuscripts—see Natan Fried, the prophetic reading may be implied from the Torah "Haftarah." A consideration of this traditional diverhomily; but he repeatedly produces unknown or er- sity, with its impact upon and implications for conroneous readings, and his work has been repeatedly temporary practices, is presented by David E. S. Stein, criticized. Cf. Saul Lieberman, in Studies inMemory of "The Haftarot ofEtzHayim: Exploring the Historical Moses Schorr", ed. Louis Ginsberg (New York, 1944), Interplay of Customs, Humashim, and Ha^^ab^ 186ff; and the introductory comments of Isaiah Conservativejudaism 54/3 (Spring 2002). A XXX11I
NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION
53. This is present practice; but in the Middle Ages, the community of Worms recited the haftarah for the first lesson on such occasions. A 54. See now collection of Toseftot Targum laNevi'im, edited, explained, and translated into Hebrew by Rimon Kasher (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1997). < 55. See, for example, the material published by Ginsburger, in ZDMG 54 (1900): 113; and in REJ 73 (1921): 97-98. See further, Paul YjMc,Masoreten des Western (Stuttgart: W Kohlhammer, 1927-30), 2:49-62. < 56. One could also refer to such categories as exemplification or actualization. In the first, events in or aspects of the life or interrelations of Jacob and Esau, or ofBalaam, in the Torah are referred to in an exemplifying way in several prophetic lessons (see the haftarot for the portions of Noah; Toledot; Va-yetze'; Va-yishlah; and Balak); in the second, laws in the Torah are actualized or alluded to for one purpose or another in the prophets (see the haftarot for the portions of Mishpatim; Metzora'; Naso'; and the special portions for Shabbat Shekalim and Shabbat Parah). A 57. Cf. the observation on this point by Moshe Greenberg, Ha-Sejyulah ve-ha-Koah (Tel Aviv: HaKibbutz ha-Me'uhad, 1987), 66 n. 1. < 58. For the etymology of the word haftamh/'aftarta' as meaning "to take leave," see the comments of Solomon Judah Rapoport, inKcremHemed 3 (1838): 42f., and in his rabbinic encyclopedia Trekh Millin (Prague: M. L. Landau, 1852), 1:163-67. Another interpretation is based on the synonym 'ashlamta\ "completion"; see J. Sanh. 1:2, 19a. A 59. The eulogy before the haftarah has significant variants in Geniza and other fragments. In particular, the difficult phrase ha-ne'emarim be-'emet ("which were said in truth") occurs in Cambridge MS. Or.
XXX11I
NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION
1080,13/55 simply as 'emet. This has led to the proposal that the term was a public proclamation, emphasizing veracity, and thus similar to other liturgical assertions of this kind. See Naftali Wieder, "Nushah Atikah be-Virkat ha-Haftarah she-Nishtake'ah: HaShimush be-Tevat 'Emef le-'Amitut 'Ekronot-Dat Hashuvim," in Keneset 'Ezra: Sifrut ve-Hayyim beVeit ha-Keneset (Festschrift for Ezra Fleischer), ed. S. Elitzur, M. D. Herr, G. Shaked, A. Shinan (Jerusalem: Ben Tzvi Institute, 1994), 35-46. < 60. The reference in the blessing to "true" prophetic words that "do not return empty" has a remarkable parallel already in the Qumran scrolls, notably in the so-czllcdMegillat ha-Razim, as pointed out by David Flusser, "'Megillat ha-Razim' me-Qumran u-Tefilat ha-Yamim ha-Nora'im," Keneset 'Ezra, 5-6 (nn. 14-15), 19-20. The phrase is found in D. Barthelemy and J. T. Milik, Dead Sea Scrolls: Discoveries in thejudean Desert, I (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955), 103,1. 8. < 61. The conclusion to the blessing—which emphasizes that God is "reliable [ne'eman] in all His words"—has been proposed as reflecting the missing verse starting with the letter nun in Psalms 145. See See Yehoshua Amir, "Safiah le-Pasulc she-'Avad V Beth Mikra 38 (1993), 80-82.The verse is found in the Septuagint and Syriac versions. A 62. See the publication and discussion by Paul B. Fenton, "A Judeo-Arabic Commentary on the Haftarot by Hanan'el ben Semu'el (?), Abraham Maimonides' Father-in-Law," Maimonidean Studies 1 (1990), 27-56. < 63. See the edition of Sefer 'Ahavat Yehonatan (Warsaw: Nathaniel David, 1875). < 64. See the edition ofKokhavMi-Ta'akov (Warsaw: Y. Elefin, 1880). < 65. HazonMikm' (Tel Aviv: Sinai, n. d.). A
ABBREVIATIONS AND O T H E R CONVENTIONS
Abbreviations AB AfO AJSL ANET AOAT AOS Av. Zar. B. BA BASOR BB BBB BibOr BIES BJRL BK BKAT BM BWANT BZ BZAW CAD CBQ ConBOT Deut. R. EI EM Encjud ET Exod. R. FRLANT Gen. R. Git. Hag. HAR
Anchor Bible Archivfur Orientsforschung Americanjournal ofSemitic Languages andLiterature J. B. Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. Alter Orient undAltes Testament American Oriental Society Avodah Zarah Babylonian Talmud BiblicalArchaeologist Bulletin oftheAmerican Schools ofOriental Research Bava Batra Bonner biblische Beitrage Biblica et Orientalia Bulletin ofthelsraelExploration Society Bulletin ofthejohn RylandsLibmry Bava Kamma Biblischer Kommentar: Altes Testament Bava Metzia Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte fur die Zeitschrift fur die alltestamentlicher Wissenschaft The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Catholic BiblicalQuarterly Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament Deuteronomy Rabbah Eretz Israel :EntziklopedyahMikm'it (Jerusalem: MosadBialik, 1950-88) Encyclopaediajuda-ica (1971) Evangelische Theologie Exodus Rabbah Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Genesis Rabbah Gittin Hagigah HebrewAnnual Review
ABBREVIATIONS
HKAT HSM HTR HUCA ICC IDB IEJ IOS ITQ J. JAAR JAB JAKES JAOS JBL JBLMS JCS JJS JNES JNSL JPOS JQR JSJ JSOT JSOTSup JSQ JSS JTS Lev. R. LXX M. Ma'as. Sh. Mak. MdRSbY MdRY Meg. Mekh. Men. Mid. Mid. Hag. Milgrom, Numbers MK MT NAB NEB Ned. NJPS
Handkommentar zur Alten Testament Harvard Semitic Monographs Harvard Theological Review Hebrew 'Union College-Annual International Critical Commentary Interpreter's Dictionary ofthe Bible IsraelExplorationJournal Israel Oriental Studies Irish TheologicalQuarterly Jerusalem Talmud Journal oftheAmericanAcademy ofReligion Journalfor theAmmaic Bible Journal oftheAncient NearEastern Society of Columbia University Journal oftheAmerican Oriental Society Journal ofBiblicalLiterature Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Journal ofCuneiform Studies JournalofJewishStudies JournalofNearEasternStudies Journal ofNorthwest SemiticLanguajje Journal ofthe Palestine Oriental Society JewishQuarterly Review Journalfor the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and 'Roman Period Journalfor the Study ofthe Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series Jewish StudiesQuarterly Journal ofSemitic Studies Journal ofTheological Studies Leviticus Rabbah Septuagint Mishnah Ma'aser Sheni Makkot Mekhilta de-Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael Megillah Mekhilta Menahot Midrash Midrash Ha-Gadol J. Milgrom, TheJPS Torah Commentary: Numbers Mo'ed Katan Masoretic text NewAmerican Bible NewEnglish Bible Nedarim New Jewish Publication Society translation (1985) ABBREVIATIONS
XXXVI
Num. R. OBO OJPS OTL OTS PdRK PEQ Pes. Pesh. 1Q, etc.
Numbers Rabbah Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Old Jewish Publication Society translation (1917) Old Testament Library Oudtestamentische Studien Pesikta de-Rav Kahana PalestineExplomtion (Fund) Quarterly Pesahim Peshitta Sigla for Qumran texts: the number preceding Q refers to the cave in which the text was found; the word or number following it refers to the composition; raised letters identify different manuscripts of the same work. Thus 1QS = text 5 from Qumran cave 1; 4QDeut c = third manuscript of Deuteronomy from Qumran cave 4. 1QS Rule of the Congregation, from Qumran cave 1. lQSa Appendix to 1QS. RB Revue biblique REJ Revue desEtudesJuives RHR Revue de PHistoire des Religions RSR Researches de Sciences Religieuse Sam. Samuel Sanh. Sanhedrin Sarna, Genesis N. M. Sarna, TheJPS Torah Commentary: Genesis SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series SBT Studies in Biblical Theology Shab. Shabbat Shek. Shekalim Shev. Shevi'it Sif. Deut. Sifre Deuteronomy Sif. Zut. Sifre Zuta SOR Seder 'Olam Rabbah Sot. Sotah SOTSMS Society for Old Testament Study Monograph Series Suk. Sukkah SFT Supplements to Vetus Testamentum Syr. Syriac Ta'an. Ta'anit Tanh. Tanhuma Targ. Targum Targ. Jon. Targum Jonathan Targ. Neof. Targum Neofiti Targ. Onk. Targum Onkelos Targ. Yer. Targum Yerushalmi TBu Theologische Bucherei Ter. Terumot Tigay, Deuteronomy J . H . Tigay, TheJPS Torah Commentary: Deuteronomy Toh. Tohorot Tosef. Tosefta
xxxvii
ABBREVIATIONS
Transl. Translators' note TZ Theologische Zeitschrift Ugarit-Forschungen UF UT C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (1965) VT Vetus Testamentum Vulgate Vulg. WCJS World Congress of lewish Studies, Papers Weinfeld, DDS M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School Weiss I. H. Weiss, Sifra De-Vei Rav (Vienna, 1862; reprint, New York: Om, 1946) WMANT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Yadayim Yad. Yal. Yalkut Shim'oni Yeb. Yevamot ZA ZeitschriftfurAssyriologie ZAL Zeitschriftfur alttestamentlischenLitemtur ZAW Zeitschriftfur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft ZDMG Zeitschrift des deutschen Paliistina-Vereins ZDPV Zeb. Zevahim ZS Zeitschriftfur Semitistik ZTK Zeitschriftfur Theologie und Kirche
Hebrew Textual Variants (Ketiv and Keri) As the reader may know, the Masoretic text's ketiv (written tradition) and keri (recited tradition) differ from each other for occasional words; and when reading the text aloud, the keri is what is traditionally followed. Where differences exist, this edition first prints that word's ketiv letters in small type, followed by the vocalized keri letters in normal text type. (This edition's biblical text is excerpted from TheJPS Hebrew-English Tanakh [1999], as corrected in printings through 2001. For more information on the provenance and preparation of the Hebrew text, see the Preface to that volume.)
Transliteration We have adopted a popular system for transliteration of Hebrew, except for the following letters, which have no English equivalent: }
alef = } (silent or a break in sound) het = h (pronounced as the guttural "ch" in German) khaf = kh (pronounced as the guttural "ch" in German) 'ayin = f (silent or a break in sound) tzadi = tz (pronounced as in "blitz") Where the letters kh are meant to be read as two distinct consonants, we have separated them by a raised dot (e. g., Va-yak-hel). In general, the letters kaf and kof are both rendered by the letters tet and tav are rendered by t; the letters samekh and sin are rendered by y; and the letters -pet and va-v are rendered by v. However, we represent those letters distinctly where needed for contrast within a word, or to clarify a stem; in such cases, the 'tet is rendered by t and the va-v by w (e. g., lintot; b-w-:'). Where needed ABBREVIATIONS
xxxviii
to highlight the link between the hard and soft (spirantized) sounds represented in Hebrew by peh andfeh, respectively, we have rendered the soft sound as ph (pronounced as "f"). We have tended to double the transliterated letter when a strong dagesh in Hebrew either characterizes a verbal conjugation or indicates that a stem sound has been assimilated. However, a single letter is used for strong dagesh when its equivalent English letter either follows a hyphenated prefix, is the first or last letter of the word, follows or precedes another consonant in transliteration, or involves a letter pair (e. g, "sh"). For other Semitic languages, the following characters are sometimes used: h for velar het, t for tet, t for th (as in "thin"), s for shin, s for sin, and s for tzadi.
Verse notation Where verses are subdivided into parts, a and b following the verse number signify the part of the verse before and after the 'etnahta, respectively.
Chronology For purposes of consensus and consistency, the chronology of Kings £o]lowsEncyclopaediaJudaica, vol. 8, in the chart following column 766. For other possibilities, see 'Entziklopedia Mikm'it, vol. 4, p. 262.
XXXIX
ABBREVIATIONS
THE COMMENTARY TO THE HAFTAROT
HAFTAROT FOR WEEKLY READINGS GENESIS
m^Nin
Haftarah for Bere'shit
TONnn
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH 42:5-43:10 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 42:5-21
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see the "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). Isaiah 42:5-43:10 is part of a collection of prophecies addressed to the Judean community in Babylonian exile (mid-sixth century B.C.E.). It attempts to inspire national awareness and confidence in their divine destiny. The haftarah is composed of several speeches and prophecies. These emphasize the universal dominion of God and His special concern for the redemption of Israel, created to be "My witnesses" among the nations. God's power to create or destroy is combined with His will to strengthen Israel and protect her in travail. Israel's own liberation is a light that radiates God's redemptive purposes to all people. PART 1. CREATION AND ITS ENDS (Isaiah 42:5-9) The haftarah begins with a pronouncement by God that He is the creator of all things and that He has "created" and "appointed" His servant to open blind eyes and rescue prisoners in confinement. This is His glory as God, far transcending mute and impotent idols. To underscore this point, the section concludes with a prophecy that these "new things" will come to pass just as former predictions have already been realized. PART 2. GOD'S ADVENT AND ISRAELS JOY (Isaiah 42:10-13) In response to God's power and predictions, there follows an invocation to the people (presumably by the prophet) to sing His praises throughout the earth (v. 10-12). This call to "tell" iyaggidu) God's "glory" (kavod) responds thematically to God's pronouncement (v. 8-9) that His own "glory" (kavod) includes "foretelling" (maggid) salvation. The prophet then envisages the realization of this prophecy in the form of a divine warrior rising to battle (v. 13). PART 3. GOD'S PURPOSE AND PUNISHMENT (Isaiah 42:14-25) a. Isaiah 42:14-17 God arises in passion to "lead the blind by a road they did not know" and to "turn darkness before them to light." Thus begins the realization of the pronouncement in verse 7, where the Lord promises to open "eyes deprived of light." The threat to punish those who believe in "idols" (v. 17) counterpoints God's earlier promise that He "will not yield [His] . . . renown to idols" (v. 8). b. Isaiah 42:18-21 God turns directly to the deaf and blind, calling upon them to "listen" and "see." They include His servant who, though having ears and eyes, hears and sees nothing (v. 18-20). The prophet then apparently speaks—concluding the section with the assurance that God desires His servant's vindication, so that His own Teaching (torah) of salvation may be magnified (v. 21). 3
HAFTARAH FOR BERE'SHIT
c. Isaiah 42:22-25 The prophet goes on to reflect that the people are despoiled, yet remain inattentive to God's call, continuing the disregard for God's Teaching (torah) that resulted in their punishment. "It burned among them, but they gave it no thought" (v. 25). Deafness to the former Teaching continues with obdurateness to the new one. PART 4. GOD T H E CREATOR AND REDEEMER (Isaiah 43:1-10) a. Isaiah 43:1-8 God renews His address to the people, strengthening them with the statement that He is their creator and redeemer and the promise that He will be with them through fire and flame. The divine assurance that the people will not be burned (v. 2) echoes the earlier reference to the burning of punishment (42:25), marking an end to divine wrath. There is even a suggestion that the redemption will be unilateral—a redemption of Israel "created . . . for My glory," "blind though it has eyes and deaf though it has ears" (v. 7-8). Earlier themes are thus underscored and affirmed. b. Isaiah 43:9-10 In conclusion, the nullity of the nations' power is contrasted with absolute divine might, "I am He: before Me no god was formed, and after Me none shall exist" (v. 10). Only God can foretell the future. Israel is God's proof—His living witness, attesting through their history to the providential glory of God.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is composed of several distinct prophecies; nevertheless, a certain thematic consistency can readily be discerned. Overall, the prophet's concern is to convince the people of the power of God and His promise of redemption. The opening part thus begins with a proclamation by God that He is the creator of the world and its inhabitants, and goes on to pronounce His redemptive plan to release the people from servitude. God summons Israel forth by His "grace" (tzedek) (Isa. 42:6) —and this call may be trusted because of God's fulfillment of prior promises. Despite the good news, Israel remains "blind" and unresponsive to the divine initiative (v. 18-20). As a counterpoint, the people are told that "the L O R D desires His [servant's] vindication [tzidko], that he may magnify and glorify [His] Teaching [torah]" (v. 21). The Sephardic tradition concludes its haftarah reading here, framing its message with the terms tzedek and tzidko. It is also likely that closure at this point was influenced by a reinterpretation of the word torah. In its original context, the word strictly refers to a prophetic instruction (as in Isa. 2:3, "for instruction [torah] shall come forth from Zion"). But once it was assumed to refer to the Torah of Moses as a whole, 1 the prophet's word could be taken to foretell the glorious magnification of God's Law. Such a promise would seem a fit conclusion to the liturgical reading. The longer Ashkenazic tradition extends the theological counterpoint. After stating that the people do not see or hear the prophecies of hope addressed to them (Isa. 42:18-20), the prophet announces that God will nevertheless restore Israel to its homeland (43:3-6). God's deliverance of Israel from blindness (43:8) provides a triumphal echo to the role of the servant at the outset of the haftarah, where his task is specified as leading the blind into the light of freedom (42:6-7). A further reference to the opening oracle is heard in the concluding address to the nations. God's power to predict events is the reason to believe His new word of hope (43:9; cf. 42:9). The celebration of the Lord as creator further highlights the framing character of parts 1 and 4. Other connections among the parts of the haftarah may be observed. Notable are references to God's "glory," "renown," and "honor" (kevodi/kavod; tehillati/tehillato) in parts 1 and 2 (Isa. 42:8 and 12); God's silence ('aharish) and the people's deafness (heresh, hareshim) in parts 2 and 3 (42:14 and 18-19); God's "Teaching" (torah, torato), also in parts 2 and 3 (42:21 and 24); and the burning (va-tiv'ar) of divine judgment and the people's travail (tiv'ar) in parts 3 and 4 (42:25 and 43:2). It may have been these close verbal connections that guided the ancient editors to collate this series of oracles. Read continuously in the haftarah, the repetitions reveal unexpected counterpoints that deepen the overall message. For example, the references to God's glory and honor 4 HAFTARAH FOR BERE'SHIT
juxtapose divine action and its human response, even as the recurrence of divine glory at the conclusion reinforces the prophet's emphasis on God's salvation of Israel. By contrast, a tone of sarcasm and irony marks the correlation between God's assertion that He will no longer hold His silence and the people's deafness to divine redemption. Similarly, references to God's grace and the vindication of His prophecies stand in marked opposition to the nations' inability to "be vindicated" by producing their own valid predictions. This juxtaposition is of central importance to Isaiah, for whom God alone can fulfill predictions and is worthy of trust. Finally, the references to God's destructive burning and His protection of Israel from fire during their return from exile turn the image of fire from a sign of divine judgment into one of mercy. The theme of the "servant" and the motif of Israel's "blindness" also integrate the parts of the haftarah. At the outset, there is an address to an unnamed "you" (singular) whom God has summoned to open "eyes deprived of light" (Isa. 42:6-7). On the basis of 42:1-4 (which precedes the haftarah), the addressee is God's messenger-"servant" (v. 1). His task is to go to the nation in exile and be a light of hope and consolation for them. 2 However, because the haftarah begins at 42:5 and it is the nation as a whole that is addressed in parts 2 and 3, the unmarked addressee in part 1 is to be understood as the nation as well. From this perspective, the opening task assumes a universalist tone. It is the people of Israel who are to be a light to all nations and call them forth from servitude and darkness. That this was not necessarily the original intent of the prophecy is suggested by parts 3 and 4, where the focus is on God's attempts to deliver "blind" Israel from its own darkness (Isa. 42:16; 43:8), with no mention of a promise of liberation to all nations. In the words of Ibn Ezra, the prophetic messenger has been sent to Israel "to establish a covenant people" and to proclaim "that they shall be delivered from the Babylonian exile" (comment on 42:6-7; cf. Kimhi). Nevertheless, a universalist reading of this passage has been a recurrent feature of Jewish thought. In modern times, the challenge to Jews to be a beacon of light for all the downtrodden has been regarded as the moral imperative of the passage (Hermann Cohen). The literary framework of the haftarah supports this universalist understanding of Israel's prophetic mission and covenantal identity. The promise of redemptive enlightenment of Israel from its blindness recalls Israel's God-given blindness before the exile (Isa. 6:10) —and reverses it. God will now unilaterally vindicate His servant and change the whole course of empires for the sake of Israel (43:1-6). God boldly challenges the nations and their idols to match such a prediction (43:9). This rhetorical feature was a strategic part of the prophet's style and is repeated several times (see 41:26; 44:7-8). Claiming that the first things (presumably the decree of Cyrus or the prophecies of exile) have come to pass, the prophet challenges the people to believe in God's new prophecies of restoration. But the prophet goes further. Stating that Israel is God's own witness to His power and uniqueness (Isa. 43:10), Isaiah states that this nation testifies in its very history to the truth of divine predictions. 3 Thus Israel should "take thought and believe in Me, and understand that I am He: before Me no god was formed, and after Me none shall exist" (v. 10; cf. 44:8). The prophet considered the truth of prophecy to be an argument for God's incomparable power. But for Israel in exile, such statements fell on deaf ears. History was experienced as dark and hopeless, and so the people remained spiritually blind. The haftarah reveals this tension.
COMMENTS Isaiah 42:5. There is a recurrence of terms from Genesis 1 - 2 in this verse. The creation account speaks of how God "created" (bam') the "heaven" (ha-shamayim) and the "earth" (ha'aretz), of a "wind" (ruah) from God sweeping over the water, of an "expanse" (mkia c ) in the midst of the water, and of the "breath of life" (nishmat hayyim) that enlivens the first creature. Correspondingly, our prophet speaks of God "who created [bore'] the heavens \ha-shamayimY and "spread out \rokac\ the earth [ha-'aretz]" and "who gave breath [neshamah] to the people upon it and life [ruah] to those who walk thereon." 4 6-7. A direct summons to God's servant to proclaim the word of redemption (cf. 42: 1). The formulation derives from prophetic commission scenes. As in Jer. 1:5, the messenger 5
HAFTARAH FOR BERE'SHIT
has been "created" and "appointed" to bring God's word to the "nations." 5 In the present case, God also calls upon His servant to serve as a "covenant people" and a "light of nations." 6 These expressions are difficult. Rashi understood the addressee in Isa. 42:5 to be the prophet himself, who was called to restore the nations to God's covenant; these nations are the tribes of Israel. On the other hand, it is possible to interpret the messenger as an individual whose task is to reestablish Israel so that they may serve as a beacon of light for all peoples (Ibn Ezra). If, however, the messenger is Israel, then the phrase would mean that God has established the entire people for a universal mission (Kimhi). 7 Commission language also occurs in Isa. 43:1-2, where the nation is called upon to follow God to their homeland. The language of support used there ("fear not," "I will be with you") is a hallmark of the divine response to prophetic expressions of fear or unworthiness (see ler. 1: 8). 8 The language of divine assistance through grasping the prophet's hand ahzeik be-yadekha) occurs in Isa. 42:6, and similar terminology is found in 41:13 and 45:1. The idiom is arguably influenced by Babylonian hymns, where a god "takes the hand" of his servant and "supports the hands of the weak." 9 6. ItheLoRD Hebrew }ani YHWH. The phrase recurs in Isa. 42:8;43:3; and elsewhere in Isaiah (e. g., 41:13; 45:5, 7, 21). 10 This divine self-naming emphasizes God's creative power and singularity. This emphasis on the name Y H W H occurs first in Exod. 6:2, in God's special disclosure to Moses. The focus on this name in Isaiah goes together with his emphasis on an absolute and exclusive monotheism. The theological point is that Israel's particular and personal LORD is the universal God of all creation. Elsewhere, the name-formula serves other theological purposes. For example, the Pentateuchal instruction "You shall be holy, for I, the L O R D ani YHWH] your God, am holy" (Lev. 19:2) stresses the ideal of imitating God; it stands in marked contrast to Isa. 43:3, where God Himself proclaims that "I the LORD ['ani 'YHWH] am your God, the Holy One oflsrael, your Savior." Here God's transcendent power is emphasized. inMyjjmce Hebrew be-tzedek; literally, "with grace." The meaning of tzedek varies. In many cases it refers to divine righteousness (Isa. 1:27; Ps. 9:9). The term can also bear the sense of God's acts of legal vindication (Isa. 45:21), righteousness (Isa. 5:16) and righteous judgment (Ps. 99:4), andespeciallymilitaryvictory (1 Sam. 12:7; Isa. 46:13, 59:17). 11 a light of nations That is, the agent of good fortune; compare Isa. 42:1-4; 49:6; and 51:4-5 [Transl.]. 7. Opening eyes deprived of light An idiom meaning "freeing the imprisoned"; compare Isa. 61:1 [Transl.]. 9. the things once predicted Literally, the "former things" (ri'shonot). The term is often juxtaposed to prophecies to come, here called the "new things" (hadashot). The former prophecies are those that have already been fulfilled, probably a reference to the fall of Babylon. 12 Reference to early prophecies is a major motif of the prophet (see Isa. 41:22; 44:7; 45:21; 46:10; 48:3) and regularly used to motivate the people to trust the new prophecies of restoration. Distinctive to Isaiah 40-48 is the argument that the fulfillment of prophecy is proof of God's unique nature. Compare Isa. 43:9-10; 44:8; 45:21; and46:9-10. 10. SING to the LORD The exhortation in Isa. 42:10-12 echoes the liturgical formulations in Ps. 107:2, 8, 21-22. Other linguistic affinities may be observed between the prophet and this psalmist. Compare Isa. 42:7 and Ps. 107:7, 10, 14; Isa. 43:19-20 and Ps. 107:4; and Isa. 41: 18 and Ps. 107:33. The precise direction of influence is difficult to determine.
14. I have kept silent Traditionally, since the destruction of the Temple and during the exilic sorrows of the nations (Rashi; Kimhi). 18-25. These verses contain a complex and varied expansion oflsa. 30:9-14. 1 3 By contrast, Isa. 42:1-9 is taken up and reinterpreted in 61:1-9. In these and other cases, the Book of Isaiah shows itselfto be the product of ongoing prophetic tradition. 6 HAFTARAH FOR BERE'SHIT
The LORD desires His [servant's] vindication The reference of the pronoun follows the context. Nevertheless, Luzzatto suggested that God desires His own vindication. When torah ("Teaching") came to be understood as the Torah of Moses, the Sages used this passage to support their view that it is through the magnification of the Torah and commandments (the written Torah with its oral expansions) that Jews are vindicated before God (see M. Avot 6:11; B. Makkot 23b; Yalkut Shimoni 1:750). The phrase concludes the eschatological Uva' le-Tziyon prayer, recited weekday mornings and on Sabbath afternoon. 21.
Isaiah 43:1. But 'now Hebrew ve-'atah. According to Ibn Ezra, the confession of sin in Isa. 4 2 : 2 4 is the link to the new proclamation of redemption in 4 3 : 1 - 7 . He thus understands this opening phrase in a conjunctive sense (i. e., "and now," since you have confessed). The language of creation and the references to Israel's being "singled out" or "linked" to God's name frame the speech ( 4 3 : 1 , 7 ) . The proclamation "thus said the L O R D " appears here and in the opening line of the haftarah ( 4 2 : 5 ) . The phrase authorizes the prophecies. 3. Egypt as a •ransom Traditionally understood as the firstborn of Egypt, who died instead of the Israelites (Rashi). Others have sought to identify later historical events (Kimhi). The theological image is that Israel's redemption from Babylon requires the subjugation of other nations in recompense. This idea is again asserted in Isa. 43:4, in the context of Israel's special divine status. 7. are linked Hebrew nikm\ Ibn Ezra stressed the passive construction here and argued that the verse must refer to all those "who are called" (or: "have been called") by God's name; that is, those who are called "Isra-el." By contrast, Isa. 44:5 refers to people who actively call themselves by God's name ("I am the L O R D ' S " ) or "use the name of'Jacob.' " The prophet even refers to the custom of marking one's arm with the phrase "of the L O R D . " 9. It is true That is, that the other nations' gods are real [Transl.]. 10. My witnesses are you Israel's historical existence is proof of God's incomparable existence, by virtue of the fulfillment of divine prophecies made about them. This point is proclaimed in the context of the nullity of the nations' witness (Isa. 43:9). These issues are combined in 44: 6 - 9 as well. In rabbinic times, the Sages extended Isaiah's insight and formulated it with more paradoxical and daring rhetoric: " 'So you are My witnesses—declares the LORD—and I am God' [Isa. 43:12]; and when you are not My witnesses then I, as it were, am not God" (Sifre Deuteronomy 346). 14 The formulation of an absolute monotheism is articulated here by the phrase "Before Me no god was formed, and after Me none shall exist." God is thus the beginning and end of all things, as stated explicitly in Isa. 44:6 and 48:12. The theme of divine incomparability finds many expressions in Isaiah's prophecies, but none occur in this haftarah (cf. Isa. 45:5-6, 18, 22). This theme is found in the Torah in Deut. 32:39, where God's uniqueness is linked to the redemption from Egypt (v. 12). See also the formulation in Hannah's prayer. She adds that even the "holy ones" in heaven (angels) cannot be compared to God (1 Sam. 2:2).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The theme of creation links the liturgical readings and shows something of the range and purposes of creation theology in the Bible. Over against the exalted and impersonal narrative style in Gen. 1:1-2:4, the references to the creation in the haftarah (Isa. 42:5) are marked by a more engaged personal tone. Indeed the depiction of God as creator is not an abstract teaching (as in Gen. 1:1, "When God began to create [bere'shit bam'] heaven and earth"), but an expression of an active and engaged theology within history. Thus, for Isaiah, God is not only the one "Who created [bore'] the heavens and . . . spread out the earth" (42:5), but the Lord "who created you [bora'akha], O Jacob"—and "will redeem you" (43:1). In all these cases the prophet uses verbs in 7
HAFTARAH FOR BERE'SHIT
the participial form (thus expressing the continuity of action or its effects). This stands in marked contrast with the verbs in Genesis 1, which indicate past, completed action. 15 For the prophet Isaiah, the theme of creation serves as the basis for theological reflection on God's ongoing concern for the world. In the Middle Ages, Maimonides stressed the close relation between a theology of creation and belief in prophecy and providence. A God free to create can also enter history in new and unexpected ways. Among modern thinkers, Franz Rosenzweig taught that humankind may renew creation daily through personal affirmations of it, as well as by means of interpersonal responsibility. Such acts transform the world from mute nature into a sphere of God's creative presence. In the course of the prophet's creation theology, the images of "light" and "darkness" undergo a significant shift. In thcpa-mshah, darkness is a primordial state that is transformed by the reality of light on the first day of creation. Breaking into the undifferentiated void, light ('or) is a marker of difference, clarity, and order. The polarity of day and night marks a primordial rhythm, manifesting daily the renewal of the created world. In the haftarah, the images of darkness and light symbolize human realities. The darkness of exile is both the physical oppression of servitude, to be transformed by divine liberation, and the inner void of despair that is redeemed by God's call for renewal. This situation is challenged by the promise of redemption by God, the peoples' "creator" (Isa. 43:1); and Israel, so transformed and renewed, will be the light ('or) of hope in the eye ofall (42:6-7). With striking simplicity, the prophet speaks of the mission of redemption as "opening eyes [lifkoah 'einayim] deprived of light" (Isa. 42:7). N o metaphor could be more apt—capturing both the enlightenment of the external eye and inner vision, along with the expansion of the whole being of those "who sit in darkness." The redemptive gesture is a gift of new perspective and possibility. By contrast, the Torah warns against the temptation (voiced by the serpent) that one's "eyes will be opened [nifkehu 'eineiyhem] and you will be like God" (Gen. 3:5). Here self-interest and visions of power rule supreme. The differences between the haftarah and the pa-mshah thus challenge the reader to reflect upon the nature and purpose of"opening the eyes."
Haftarah for N o a h nj ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 54:1-55:5 ISAIAH 54:1-10
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see the "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah contains a series of promises and assurances to Zion and her inhabitants, destroyed and decimated since the Babylonian conquest in 586 B.C.E. The prophet now prophesies the restoration of divine mercy and covenantal promises. God swears an end to His wrath and compares this oath to the one sworn after the Flood in the time of Noah. This comparison links the renewal of creation in xhcpa-mshah to the restoration of Zion in the haftarah. PART 1. PROCLAMATION OF RESTORATION (Isaiah 54:1-10) a. Isaiah 54:1-8 The prophecy opens with an exhortation to personified Zion to rejoice, "for the children of the wife forlorn shall outnumber those of the espoused \be'ulahY (v. I). 1 With the expansion of Zion's population will go the expansion of her dwelling and territory. A glorious transformation will replace the shame of widowhood, as the Holy One of Israel will again "espouse you [bocalayikh]n (v. 5). "Anger [ketzef]" will be replaced with "kindness [hesed] everlasting" (v. 8). HAFTARAH FOR NOAH
8
b. Isaiah 54:9-10 The affirmation that anger has passed is reinforced by a vow. The permanence of God's oath, that He will nevermore "be angry [mi-ketzofY with Israel (v. 9), is compared to His oath after the Flood, when He swore never again to destroy the world. The people may trust that the promise of divine "loyalty [hesed]" will similarly endure (v. 10). Sephardic tradition concludes the haftarah at this point. 2 PART 2. RENEWAL AND PROTECTION (Isaiah 54:11-17) This unit promises a spectacular rebuilding of Zion and the religious devotion of its inhabitants. "Righteousness [tzeda-kah]" will be the basis of renewal (v. 14), and God's own protection will be His servants' "triumph [tzidkatam]" (v. 17). PART 3. GOD'S CALL AND N E W PROMISE (Isaiah 55:1-5) A call to the people to "heed" the Lord and partake of His sustenance (v. 2); to "hearken" and be revived with the covenantal "loyalty promised to David [hasdei David]" (v. 3). Thus will Israel be glorified among the nations.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah opens with promises of God's unilateral mercy and kindness (parts 1 and 2) and concludes with references to reciprocal responsibilities between the people and their Lord (part 3). The shift is unexpected. At the beginning, Zion (the feminine embodiment of the city) is both childless (lo'yaladah) and uncomforted (lo} 'nuhamah) —but is promised children and mercy by God (Isa. 54:1-2). She is "called back" (v. 6) by God's unconditional love and promised both "kindness everlasting [hesed }olam]" (v. 8) and "covenant of friendship [berit shelomi]" (v. 10). At the end, God calls to the people to "give heed" and "hearken"—that they "be revived" and receive His sustenance (55:2-3). The reward for the people's loyalty is now called God's gift of an "everlasting covenant \berit 'olam], the enduring loyalty promised to David [hasdei David ha-ne'emanim]" (55:3). A renewal of spirit is thus envisioned for the nation, stimulated by the restoration of divine compassion. Figures of assurance dominate the prophet's style. In part 1 this is dramatized through expanding expressions of God's attributes. Thus the opening proclamation ends simply with the words "said the L O R D " (Isa. 54:1); but after several oracles of renewed kindness, the conclusion states, "said the LORD your Redeemer" (54:8); and the finale to God's oath of permanent loyalty triumphantly proclaims, "said the LORD, who takes you back in love" (54:10). In a striking manner, the divine attributes are also progressively more transitive, complementing the drama of God's outreach to the people. The nation successively learns that "the L O R D " who speaks (54:1) is the " L O R D of Hosts" and that "The Holy One of Israel" who "redeems" Zion is none other than the "God of all the Earth" (54:5). Intimate love is expressed by the universal God. The prophet uses words such as hesed and lo} with changing emphases in order to highlight movement from negative states to promises of glory. Thus, in part 1, the people are promised both "kindness everlasting [hesed}olam]" (Isa. 54:8) and that neither "My loyalty [hesed] . . . nor My covenant [berit] of friendship be shaken" (54:10). These legal terms are reconfigured in part 3, where the nation's renewal is guaranteed by "an everlasting covenant [berit 'olam], the enduring loyalty promised to David [hasdeiDavid ha-ne'emanim]" (55:3). These transformations are reinforced by a series of dramatic juxtapositions. In addition to uses of the particle lo} (no) to express the negative state of Zion "who bore no [lo}] child" and "did not [lo}] travail" (Isa. 54:1), the particle also reinforces the positive and permanent changes of divine love. Zion is told that she will "not [lo}] be shamed" or disgraced and that she will "remember no [lo}] more" the reproach of her past (54:4). Part 1 also concludes with the statement that God's covenant shall "never [lo}] move from you" (54:10). A similar progression is found in part 3, where the negative depiction of Zion as one "storm-tossed" and "uncomforted [lo} 'nuhamah]" (54:11) is reversed by promises that the city shall have "no [lo}] fear" (v. 14) and that "no [lo}] HAFTARAH FOR NOAH 9
weapon formed against" her "shall succeed" (v. 17). In part 3, the particle lo} also documents the promised transformation of Zion from a state of need to one of glory—linking the question "Why do you spend . . . your earnings for what does not satisfy \be-lo} le-sor'ah])" to the promise that "a nation that did not [lo7] know you shall come running to you" (55:2, 5). Another rhetorical strategy of comfort is the use of the particle ki (not always reflected in the translation) to express justification or emphasis. Thus the barren one is bidden shout, "for [ki]n her children shall multiply (Isa. 54:1); and she is told not to fear or cringe, for (ki) she shall not be shamed or disgraced (v. 4), since (ki) her maker will espouse her (v. 5). God will call her back, for she is truly (ki) His forsaken wife, and how then (ki) could one cast off the wife of his youth (v. 6)? Though (ki) the mountains may move, God's loyalty is forever (v. 10). The people may thus rest assured, for (ki) fear shall not come (v. 14); and they may also expect greatness, because the Holy One of Israel has surely (ki) glorified them (55:5). Like an insistent exclamation point, the word ki proclaims that the divine prophecies may be trusted. A final stylistic feature of the haftarah is its use of comparisons to convey rhetorical emphasis. Iwo instances dominate. In the first, the prophet imagines the desolation and restoration of Zion as a marriage relationship—ruptured and healed. He states to the people, "The L O R D has called you back as a wife forlorn [ke-'ishah 'azuvah] and forsaken" (Isa. 54:6). She who was once "espoused \be'ulahY (54:1) will be espoused anew by her redeeming and loving Lord (bo'alayikh) (54:5). This language is chosen strategically, and draws upon older legal usage (Deut. 24:1) and prophetic tradition (Hosea 2 and leremiah 2:2 and 3:1, especially). In those cases, too, God's relation to Israel is portrayed as that of a husband to his wife. Indeed, Isaiah's emphasis that God will take His bride back in "love [riha-mtikhY and "kindness everlasting [hesed colam]n (Isa. 54:8) echoes the vows of new espousals enunciated by Hosea generations earlier ("And I [God] will espouse you forever [le-'olam\\ I will espouse you with . . . goodness and mercy [hesed ve-mhamim].n Hos. 2:21). In both cases, the language of renewed matrimonial vows is used to articulate the promise of a covenant renewal. The notable difference is that, in the present case, Isaiah speaks of a marriage between God and Zion, not between God and the people of Israel. To be sure, the city is a mystical embodiment of its inhabitants—a connection underscored by the imagery of barrenness and repopulation found throughout the prophecy.3 Nevertheless, the wider Near Eastern theme of a bond between a deity and his city is maintained here. In a similar vein, references to a "forsaken" and "espoused [be'ulahY wife recur in Isa. 62:4, where they are extended to include the land along with the city. Evoking earlier marriage motifs, this new prophecy is altogether dramatic and explicit: "As a youth espouses a maiden, your sons shall espouse you; and as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God rejoice over you" (62:5). It expresses the complexity of the relationships between Zion, the people, and God through the figure of a double marriage—in which Zion is wife both to the people and to God. Human emotions and mythic motifs are transformed in the prophet's projection ofhope and faithfulness. Beyond abandonment and wrath, the people may rest assured of divine constancy and care.
COMMENTS Isaiah 54:1. children ofthe wifeforlorn The juxtaposition in w. 1 and 2 - 6 of a "forlorn" (shomemah) or "forsaken" ('azuvalo) wife with an "espoused" bride (he'ulah) is a motif also found in Isa. 62:4-5 and 12. The presentation of God as bo'ala-yikh, the one who "will espouse you" (54:5), is echoed in 62:4-5. The terminology has roots in the Pentateuchal law (Deut. 24:1) and was used by other prophets as well (see ler. 3:14, following the marriage imagery in 3:1, 6-10). 4 The form bo'ala-yikh is a plural with the sense of a singular (Ibn Bal'am). 5 3. nations That is, the foreigners who had occupied regions from which Israelites had been exiled (cf. 2 Kings 17:24) [Transl.]. 6-8. The reference to Israel as "wife of his youth" (ne'urim) recalls the terminology in other uses of the marriage motif (Hos. 2:17; ler. 2:2; Ezek. 23:8, 19). The word hesed alludes to the covenant response found also in Hos. 2:21 and ler. 2:2. The word conveys the idea of HAFTARAH FOR NOAH
10
"loyalty" and commitment (cf. Isa. 54:10; 2 Sam. 7:15; Ps. 89:34). Through hesed, one deals faithfully or keeps faith with another; it is so used of divine-human and interpersonal relationships (Deut. 5:10; 1 Sam. 20:8). 6 7. For a little while Hebrew be-rega' katon. The brief (baton) abandonment is juxtaposed to the length (gedolah ) of reconciliation (Kimhi). But this leaves a broken parallelism ("little while" / "vast love"). Possibly the word should be read be-roga"with anger." Ibn Ezra supported this solution based on the resulting parallelism: "with a little anger" contrasted to "vast anger."7 This would yield a symmetry between verses 7 and 8, in accord with Kimhi's sense that in verse 8 the prophet "repeated the theme in different words." 8. In slight a^ger.,for a moment The Hebrew be-shetzefketzef is difficult. The word ketzef is unknown and interpreted by context. "Slight anger" follows the Targum. Rashi adduces R. Menahem ben Helbo's interpretation of "fury" 8 and the rendering of Dunash ibn Labrat as 'for a moment," which is "just like 'for a little while I forsook you.' " The same point is made by Kimhi. 9 NJPS produces a double rendition. 9. like the -waters ofNoah This follows the received text, which has two separate words: ki mey. Kimhi notes that other manuscripts read one word, ki-ymey, "like the days of [Noah]." This reading is presupposed by the Targum and Septuagint. Ibn Ezra and Kimhi blend both readings when they observe that the oath refers to the Flood in the days ofNoah. Rashi correctly notes that the second half of the verse is explanatory. This understanding supports the Masoretic reading. 13. disciples Hebrew: limmudei, a technical term (see 8:16, 50:4). your children Hebrew: banayikh, spelledT'n. In a well-known midrash, the second instance of this word in v. 13 is reread as bonayikh (your builders); it became the basis for teaching that knowledgeable children are the culture builders of the next generation (B. Berakhot 64a). The spelling is in the large Isaiah scroll from Qumran (the "Dead Sea Scrolls"), which supports the midrashic vocalization bonayikh. However, this spelling may equally indicate that the original sense was "your learned ones" (from the root T], "to know"). 10 If so, this noun would parallel "disciples of the LORD" in the first part of the verse. 14. You shall be established thromyh righteousness This phrase recalls Isa. 1:27, "Zion shall be saved by justice, her repentant ones by righteousness." 11 The divine word established a condition to be fulfilled in the future; the ensuing imperative rahaki ("be far" or "safe from oppression") reinforces this predictive aspect.12 15. Surely no harm can be done Understanding Hebrew gor yagur from the root sense o f g u r , meaning "be afraid." Alternatively, "Behold they may gather together, but not by Me" (OJPS), understandinggur in the sense of "to gather" (cf. Hab. 1:15). See the paraphrase of Ibn Janah 13 and the comment o f l b n Ezra. 17. their triumph Hebrew tzidkatam. The meaning of the noun is justification in court and counterpoints the opening clause (cf. Exod. 23:7; 2 Sam. 15:4; Isa. 5:23; Prov. 17:15). God is the vindicator of Israel and thus the One who brings them triumph. Both senses recur in Isaiah 40-66 (cf. 42:21; 45:25; 50:8; 58:2, 8; 63:1). Isaiah 55:1. all who are thirsty The appeal is either to those of Israel who yearn for the Lord (Ibn Kaspi), or to the nations who desire God's teaching (Ibn Ezra). The imagery of hunger and thirst indicates a state without divine sustenance or instruction, as in Amos 8:11 (cf. Kimhi). 3. The enduring loyalty promised to David The royal covenant given to David (2 Samuel 7) is now transferred to the entire people. The phrase employs hesed in the sense of covenant faithfulness (see Comment to Isa. 54:6-8). The divine pact with David promised unconditional commitment. 14 HAFTARAH FOR NOAH 52
4. a leader of peoples Hebrew 'ed, "witness." The figure combines images of Israel's mission as a "light of nations" and "witnesses" to God's power for all (cf. Isa. 42:7; 43:10). 15 5. a nation that did not know you / Shall come running to you Compare 2 Sam. 22:44 (Ps. 18:44): "Peoples I knew not must serve me" [Transl.]. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The primary connection between the haftarah andpa-mshah is their common reference to the flood in the days ofNoah—the result of divine wrath. That primordial event is invoked by Isaiah as part of God's promise of renewed loyalty to His people. A series of verbal links connects the present situation to the original event. Just as formerly, when God made a "covenant" (berit) with Noah and his descendants (Gen. 9 : 9 , 1 1 , 1 5 ) and swore that there will "not again" (lo}. . . 'od) be a destruction of the earth and its inhabitants (Gen. 9:11, 15), so now the nation is promised a renewed "covenant" (berit) from God (Isa. 5 4 : 1 0 ; 5 5 : 3 ) and the hope that their shame will "no more" (lo} 'od) be recalled (Isa. 5 4 : 4 ) . 1 6 The prophet transforms the language of the older narrative in two respects. First, a covenant guaranteeing the stability of nature becomes a guarantee of the permanence of divine loyalty toward Zion and Israel. Second, a pact made between God and all humans becomes a covenant with a particular people. These asymmetries only heighten the mythic proportions by which the nation understood its destruction and restoration. Another version of the divine oath in Genesis contributes an additional dimension. In it, God swears: "Never again [lo}. . . 'od\ will I doom the earth because of man, since the devisings of man's mind are evil from his youth; nor will I ever again [ve-lo}. . . 'od\ destroy every living being, as I have done" (Gen. 8 : 2 1 ) . According to the prophet Isaiah, the divine oath of restraint is not motivated by this realization of the human propensity for evil, but by God's decision to transform His love for His creatures into an everlasting covenant. The final section of the haftarah suggests that the human heart may be reciprocally transformed through heeding the call for spiritual living that is God's gift to "all who are thirsty" (Isa. 5 5 : 1 - 3 ) . Two models of piety are offered by xhcpa-mshah and haftarah. One is the example o f N o a h , who is characterized as a tzaddik, a "righteous man" who was "blameless in his age" and "walked with God" (Gen. 6:9). This is a model of righteousness focused on inner purity. It is the way of spiritual aloneness, with all its inner demands and mysteries. The other example is that of the "disciples of the L O R D " who "establish" their city "through righteousness (bi-tzdakah)" (Isa. 5 4 : 1 3 - 1 4 ) . This model is focused on the community and its collective transformation. Here the tasks are public and the demands are in full view. Maimonides perceptively found a scriptural source for the duty of charity (tzedakah) in Isa. 54:14—and underscored the importance of such piety for collective religious life. 17 Uniquely, charity trains the heart in selflessness and thus reveals how social piety may nourish spiritual inwardness. It is an example of how interpersonal and individual models of religiosity may interconnect.
Haftarah for Lekh Lekha "J1? "J1? ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH 40:27-41:16 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 40:27-41:16
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 4 0 - 6 6 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 4 0 - 6 6 " in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). This haftarah is an appeal to the nation, seed of Abraham, to "trust in the L O R D " and return from exile to their homeland. The exhortations were delivered in Babylon, sometime in the HAFTARAH FOR LEKH LEKHA
12
mid-sixth century B.C.E. God's power and providential guidance are emphasized in order to assuage the nation's fear that their "way" is hidden from God. Through their faithful response, the people would thus renew a redemptive journey undertaken by their ancestor Abraham a millenium earlier. Isaiah 40:27-41:16 is composed of several passages of confidence and support. Read as a sequence, there is an incremental progression from a divine word encouraging the renewal of trust to bold promises of triumph against oppressors. PART 1. DIVINE SUPPORT TO THE WEARY (Isaiah 40:27-31) The divine word seeks to counter the people's sense of despair and abandonment. The nation is asked why they say, "My way is hid from the LORD." This rhetorical question is answered with a bold assertion that the L O R D is the creator "from of old"—great in wisdom, who "never grows faint [lo'yi'af] or weary." Thus even youths who "may grow faint [ve-yi'afu] and weary" may be renewed through "trust in the LORD"—and "not grow faint [ve-lo'yi'afu]." PART 2. THE FEAR OF THE NATIONS (Isaiah 41:1-7) a. Isaiah 41:1-4 This speech is addressed to all the nations, who are challenged to state their case against God's superior dominion. For indeed, He has "delivered up nations" to a "victor from the East," the one he has "summoned . . . to His service [le-raglo]" proceeds "unscathed; no shackle is placed on his feet [be-mglav]." The last verse recoups the theme of God's universal power "He who . . . was first and will be with the last." b. Isaiah 41:5-7 The nations respond with fear at the advent of God's victor and take courage through recourse to idols of their own making. PART 3. GOD'S GUARANTEE (Isaiah 41:8-16) a. Isaiah 41:8-13 The fear of the nations is countered by an oracle of confidence to Israel. God promises the "Seed of Abraham My friend" His help and support against its enemies. This promise of doom to Israel's foes (v. 11-12) is encased in God's repeated word of protection ("Fear not" [v. 10]; "Have no fear" [v. 13]). b. Isaiah 41:14-16 A second oracle of confidence repeats the exhortation not to fear and the promise of divine aid. Israel's victory over her enemies is pictured in images of threshing and winnowing. The haftarah concludes with the promise of joyful celebration "in the L O R D . "
CONTENT AND MEANING Utilizing distinct styles and concerned with diverse themes, the oracles of the haftarah were presumably uttered at different times. They were anthologized together on the basis of external verbal links. For example, the language of God's proclamation to Israel in part 1, calling upon them to "renew their strength" (yahalifu koah) through trust in the Lord (Isa. 40:31), is repeated more ironically in part 2, where this call for renewal is part of a challenge to the nations (41:1). 1 Similarly, parts 2 and 3 are linked by references to God's "summons" or "call" (kara') (41:2, 4, 9); by diverse uses of the verbs "strengthen" (hazak) (41:6, 9, 13) and "help" ('azar) (41:6, 10, 13, 14); and by repetitions of the noun "victory" (tzedek) (41:2, 10). These two parts are also characterized by the repeated self-reference of God as "I" (41:4, 10, 13-14). 2 Read as part of a larger whole, these verbal connections take on thematic substance. Thus, the repetition of the term for "summons" brings into association the themes of God as creator and redeemer—who "announces" the generations from the beginning (Isa. 41:4), "summons" His victor from the East (v. 2), and "calls" Israel from the ends of the earth (v. 9). Similarly, the recurrence of the verb "strengthen" ironically contrasts the folly of the idolators (41:7) and God's support and restoration of Israel (v. 9, 13). And finally, the repetition of the phrase ketzot loa-'a-retz in parts 1-3, alternatively describes God as creator "of the earth from end to end" (40:28); the foreign nations themselves ("ends of earth"), who behold God's victor in fear and trembling (41: HAFTARAH FOR LEKH LEKHA 13
5); and God's act of liberation of Israel from "the ends of the earth," to be His servant (41:9). In the repetition of this phrase all the themes of the haftarah are encapsulated—God as creator, victor over the nations, and redeemer oflsrael. A deeper psychological sequence can also be discerned among the parts. Beginning with Israel's statement of despair and the prophetic encouragement that God will renew the nation's strength, the speeches go on to announce how God uses history for His own ends. Starting from the depths of impotence, hope is emboldened by the promise that God will unilaterally initiate a triumph over the nations. From there the stress is put on divine support for Israel in the triumph over her enemies and her restoration to the homeland. The final vision returns to the imagery of destruction and envisions Israel as a threshing board that will winnow the mountains: "the wind shall carry them off; the whirlwind shall scatter them" (Isa. 41:16). The haftarah moves progressively from the realism of despair to a near surreal vision of victory. In the process, Israel's speech moves from lament to exhilaration. Israel's opening words, "My way is hid from the LORD" (Isa. 40:27), and the final divine promise, "but you shall rejoice in the LORD" (41:16), mark these two poles. In between is formulated the proof: God will arouse a victor (Cyrus the Mede, according to Ibn Ezra) who will destroy the nations and thereby help prepare the fulfillment of the divine promises. The initial cry of disbelief is countered with reasons for trust, offering encouragement to the weary and forlorn among the exiles and promising that God will help them and bring their enemies to ruin. In an attempt to motivate the people, the prophet alludes to earlier moments of divine support. In the opening oracle, the sense of being forgotten in exile is countered by the promise that the faithful will renew their strength and soar homeward like eagles (Isa. 40:31). This promise echoes the people's redemption from Egypt, when God first "bore you [the Israelites] on eagles' wings" (Exod. 19:4). "Like an eagle . . . did He spread His wings and take [Israel], bear him along on His pinions" (Deut. 32:11). An even earlier event of divine guidance is alluded to in the reference to the nation as the "Seed of Abraham My friend" (Isa. 41:8). As this patriarch faithfully followed God and was promised the blessing of the land for his "seed" (Gen. 15:5), so may Israel, "the Seed of Abraham" confidently anticipate its own restoration to the homeland. The special status of the nation is also underscored by its designation as God's "servant" whom He has "chosen" (41:8-9).
COMMENTS Isaiah 40:27. ccMy way is hidfrom the LORD" This is a quote from a communal lament, bemoaning the lack of divine knowledge. 3 Hence the prophet counters that God's "wisdom cannot be fathomed" (v. 28). This allegation of hiddenness is different from the theological motif that God deliberately hides His face from His creatures as an expression of anger or rejection (cf. Deut. 31:18; Ps. 44:25). Rashi's view—that God has hidden from His eyes how Israel has served Him—blunts the force of the lament. 28. Do you not know? The questions introduce a glorification of God as creator, and a subsequent section mocks idol making (Isa. 41:6-7). Note the similar cluster of elements in 40:18-25 (anti-idolatry; the question "Do you not know?"; God the creator). This is part of a pattern of rhetorical elements characteristic of the prophet. 4 31. new plumes Alluding to a popular belief that eagles regain their youth when they molt; compare Ps. 103:5: "your youth is renewed like the eagle's" [Transl.]. Isaiah 41:2. Who has •roused a victorfrom the East The syntax is difficult. The cantillation notes divide the phrase so that the first words (mi he-'ir mi-mizmh) imply the arousal by God ("Who") of a champion ("from the East"), and the word tzedek refers to his deeds (i. e., "victory"). Rashi follows this reading. Another interpretation construes the phrase to indicate God's arousal of a "victor" from the East who is "summoned" to divine service. The Targum follows this approach, interpreting tzedek (victor) as an epithet of the "righteous one" (tzaddik ) aroused from the East. An ancient midrashic tradition identified this individual as Abraham. 5 The Targum, HAFTARAH FOR LEKH LEKHA
14
Kimhi, and Abravanel continue this tradition. Ibn Ezra understood the passage to refer to Cyrus the Mede (conqueror ofBabylon), who is mentioned explicitly in Isa. 45:1. 4. He who announced thejyenerations The prophet stresses God's knowledge of all events "from the start" (me-rosh). This is a common motif. Compare Isa. 41:25-26, where again God speaks of rousing a victor to battle and asks, "Who foretold this from the start [me-rosh]}"6 Control of history and foreknowledge of events are crucial elements in Isaiah's theology. Israel's history is living testimony to God's prophetic power (43:9-10). 8-13. An oracle of confidence, similar in language and form to those used elsewhere to motivate leaders (Deut. 31:3-8) and prophets (ler. 1:8, 17). The pattern regularly includes divine exhortations not to be afraid and divine encouragements to be strong. The technical terms of strength and courage are reused here and radically transformed. 7 Normally, the addressee is himselfurged to be strong. Here God unilaterally strengthens His people. The transfer of the literary form of commissioning an individual to the nation as a whole signals Israel's collective mission and destiny. The language and ideology of divine support in Isa. 41:8-10 and 13 are strategically juxtaposed to a polemic against the nations (in w. 6-7). Idols cannot save the nations from Cyrus (Ibn Ezra), for he is God's agent of salvation. The ring form, in which the divine assurance is mentioned at the beginning and end of the oracle (v. 10a and 13b), is a common stylistic pattern. See also ler. 1:8 and 19. 8. Israel, .My servant This is a national explanation of the "servant," as apparently also in Isa. 42:19; 43:10; 45:4; and 48:21. The prophet transfers to the nation as a whole a designation used in older sources for specific individuals (e. g., Abraham [Gen. 26:24], Moses [Deut. 34:5], and David [Ps. 89:4]). The true prophets are also called "servants" of God (ler. 7:25), and this term is also applied to the faithful remnant of Israel (Isa. 65:13-15). In this context, the title "My servant" has a strong covenantal aspect. The thematic cluster of a "chosen" remnant of "servants" who are not "despised" also occurs in the restoration prophecy found in ler. 33:24-25. Seed ofAbrahamMyfriend Hebrew Johavi; literally, "who loves Me." Ibn Ezra stressed the active force of the verb and distinguished it sharply from the passive sense ("who is loved by Me"; cf. Avot de-Rabbi Natan, B, 43). A reversal or softening of this theological point occurs in the Septuagint, where a relative clause is used ("whom I have loved"). 2 Chronicles 20:7 speaks of the land given to the "descendants of Abraham," God's "friend." These variations reflect ongoing theological considerations and applications. The tradition of God's love for Abraham occurs in the Septuagint at Isa. 51:2, but not in the Masoretic tradition. God's love for Israel occurs in Isa. 43:4. 8 14. O wormjacob A rare designation of abject suffering (cf. Ps. 22:7). The next phrase refers to the meteiyism'el, "men of Israel." This vocalization may be an error. On the basis of the Akkadian noun mutu, "maggot," this should possibly be read motiyism'el. This yields a synonymous parallelism (worm/maggot). This harsh designation of Israel is turned into a more positive attribute in an old midrash: just as the strength of a worm is in its mouth, so the strength of suffering Israel is in its prayers and repentance. 9 Kimhi cites a version of this teaching; Rashi alludes to it. 10 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Through Isaiah's reference to Israel as the "Seed \zerac\ of Abraham My friend," a correlation is established between this prophecy of renewal and the promise in xhcpa-msha-h that this patriarch will have "offspring [zera']" as numerous as the stars on high (Gen. 15:5). Based on this typology the ludeans in exile may hope that God will rescue them from Babylon, just as he once brought Abraham from Ur of the Chaldeans to the Promised Land (Gen. 15:7). At one level, therefore, the nation's restoration from their Chaldean exile completes God's promises to Abraham. God's HAFTARAH FOR LEKH LEKHA 15
new word of trust (-W tim\ "Fear not" [Isa. 41:10]) thus echoes his ancient promise of assurance (}altim\ "Fear not" [Gen. 15:1]) to the patriarch. By this intertextual correlation, the haftarah suggests the mystery of divine protection to later generations. The God who rewarded Abraham's faith with tzeda-kah (merit [Gen. 15:6]) speaks now to all the people with the promise of providential care: "I am your God . . . I uphold you with My victorious right hand \bi-ymin tzidki]" (Isa. 41:10). Isaiah seeks to awaken his audience to this reality and so provide the hope that renews strength. By proclaiming that the vitiated spirit may be revived through trust in God's creative might (40:28-31), the prophet offers a new theology of divine care and redemption.
Haftarah for Va-yera' XT! ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
2KINGS4:l-37 2 KINGS 4:1-23
For the contents of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall content, historiography, and theology, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah selections from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah presents two miracles performed by the prophet Elisha: the first involves the provision of oil for a poor widow, that she might redeem her children from debt-bondage and live on the proceeds of the remainder (2 Kings 4:1-7); the second includes the annunciation of a child for a barren woman, that she might be rewarded for her charity, and the subsequent revival of the boy after a fatal illness (v. 8-37). These two wonders are part of a cycle of tales of help and healing that commence with the death of Elijah (mid-ninth century B.C.E.) and the descent ofhis spirit upon his disciple Elisha (2 Kings 2:1-15). 1 As is typical of legendary narratives, the two miracle tales include biographical and locative elements, focusing on lives and places.2 PART 1. WIDOW; PROPHET, AND OIL (2 Kings 4:1-7) a. 2 Kings 4:1-4 A widow of one of the disciples of the prophets complains to Elisha of her debts and the seizure of her sons as credit. The prophet asks, "What can I do for you?" (v. 2), and when informed that she has but one jug of oil, he tells her to borrow empty vessels from her neighbors, "shut the door behind" her (v. 4), and then pour from the full jug into the other vessels. b. 2 Kings 4 : 5 - 7 The widow acts as instructed and pours enough oil to settle her accounts and have an inheritance, too. PART 2. BIRTH, DEATH, AND RESURRECTION (2 Kings 4:8-37) a. 2 Kings 4:8-16 A wealthy woman in Shunem regularly provides meals and lodging for Elisha "whenever he passed by" (v. 8). Convinced of Elisha's holy status, she makes a small enclosed chamber for him in her house, appropriately furnished. In gratitude, the prophet has his servant Gehazi ask the woman, "What can we do for you?" (v. 13). When Elisha learns that she is barren, he announces the birth of a child within the year. Stunned, she tells Elisha not to "delude" her (v. 16). b. 2 Kings 4:17-28 "At the same season the following year," the woman gives birth; but when her son grows up, he is stricken in the fields and dies (v. 17-21), whereupon the woman tells her husband that she will visit the "man of God" (v. 22-24). She confronts Elisha in distress and reminds him how, when the child was announced, she had said to him,"Don't mislead me" (v. 25-28). HAFTARAH FOR VA-YERA'
16
c. 2 Kings 4:29-37 In response to this crisis, Elisha sends Gehazi ahead with his magical staff, but without success (v. 29-31). When the prophet arrives, he prays to God and then lies over the child (twice)—mouth to mouth, eye to eye, hand to hand. The child then arises from death and is delivered to his mother (v. 32-37).
CONTENT AND MEANING The two tales are complexly intertwined. At first sight there seems to be little connection between them: the first portrays a miracle of food for a debtor widow, while the second describes the resurrection of a wealthy woman's son. But at a deeper level, intriguing relations emerge. Food provides the first point of contact—since its absence in the first text is the reason for the miracle of plenty and its presence in the second text (as charity) is the reason for the annunciation of the child's birth. Significantly, in both cases we also have the query "What can I/we do for you?" (2 Kings 4:2, 13), and the subsequent fulfillment of the request. The third point of connection revolves around the theme of children—they are taken and restored in the first case and announced and restored in the second. Furthermore, in the performance of the miracle, the same phrase is used in each story. In the first tale, the woman is told to "go in and shut the door behind you" when she pours the oil (v. 4); while in the account of resurrection, Elisha himself "went in" to the child's room (actually his own guest room; cf. v. 21) and "shut the door behind the two of them" (v. 33). Such thematic and verbal patterning suggests a close tie between the tales, perhaps drawing upon a cluster of oral traditions. The commonality of motifs extends beyond the haftarah, for Elisha repeats actions performed by his teacher, Elijah (in 1 Kings 1 7 : 7 - 2 4 ) . In that case, the man of God (Elijah) first performed a miracle over food ( 1 Kings 1 7 : 7 - 1 6 ) , telling a "widow" at Zarephath that her "jar of flour shall not give out and the jug of oil shall not fail until the day that the L O R D sends rain upon the ground" (v. 1 4 ) . Subsequently, he resurrected "the son of the mistress" in the upper chamber of the house where he had been a guest, by stretching over the child three times (v. 1 7 - 2 4 ) . 3 A pair of miracle tales, variously elaborated, would explain the relationship between the two sets of stories. Between the two sets, the difference is one of degree. In the case of the miracle of the oil, neither story explicitly mentions God as the cause of the miracle, but in both events the women do as the wonder-worker says. In the case of the resurrected son, however, the narrator of Elisha's tale only remarks that the prophet "prayed to the L O R D " ( 2 Kings 4 : 3 3 ) ; whereas 1 Kings 1 7 : 2 1 - 2 2 cites Elijah's full petition—"O L O R D my God, let this childs life return to his body!"—subsequently adding that "the L O R D heard Elijah's plea." Clearly this is the more pious version, with a narrative that neutralizes magical effects while emphasizing supernatural healing and the power of prayer.4 The two miracle tales in the haftarah underscore two types of sustenance: food and breath. But here, too, there is a significant difference between the cycles. In the case of Elisha, in our haftarah, the man of God lies over the corpse and breathes into it—"his mouth on its mouth" (2 Kings 4:34). The effect is miraculous—a transfer of vital essence, as evidenced by the fact that the child sneezes upon reviving. By contrast, in the resurrection drama of 1 Kings 17 there is no explicit remark that Elijah breathed into the child. Rather, the prophet Elijah "cried out to the L O R D " in prayer (1 Kings 17:21). Reflecting this issue, the episode concludes with the statement of the mother, who asserts that Elijah is a divine messenger, and that "the word of the L O R D is truly in your mouth" (1 Kings 17:24). It is the word of promise and prayer that is stressed here. Elijah is portrayed primarily as the pious intermediary of the miracle. His body and breath, infused with mantic powers, are not singled out. But just these two factors are stressed in our haftarah. Indeed, in 2 Kings 4:34-35 it is the concrete physicality of the holy man that is the channel of the supernatural healing. Verbal repetitions and puns give the haftarah dramatic intensity. In the story of the jug of oil, the action moves from the prophet's instruction to the widow to "pour" out the oil (ve-yatzakt [2 Kings 4:4]), to her wondrous fulfillment of the task (:motza-ket [v. 5]). Similarly, in the account of the 17
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YERA' 17
wealthy woman and the child, the pathos of the narrative is captured by the verb va-ta-ha-zek (seize, grab hold) —used to express her initial charity, when she "urged" the prophet to eat with her (v. 8), and her subsequent distress, when she "clasped" Elisha's feet after her child died (v. 27). One may also note that the verb shakhav (lie down) is variously used throughout the tale: first, to indicate Elisha's stay in the Shunammite home (v. 11); then to describe how the stricken child was laid up on the bed "of the man of God" (v. 21; cf. v. 32); andfinally,to refer to the magical prostration performed by the prophet (v. 34). The variations of the term encapsulate the whole spectrum of the text—from charity, to illness, to healing—and do so with no little irony and sense of retribution. Puns place thematic polarities of the narratives into stark relation. An example from each tale will illustrate the point. In the first text, the dramatic contrast between "the wife of [mineshey ] one of the disciples of the prophets" and her persecution at the hands of "a creditor \loanosheh]v is neatly captured by a verbal play (2 Kings 4:1). The pun in the second text is more laden with pathos. In it the woman of the dead child confronts Elisha with the words: "Did I ask [ha-sha'alti] my Lord for a son? Didn't I say: 'Don't mislead [tashleh] me'?" (v. 28). In one stroke—by juxtaposing sha'alti and tashleh—the prophet's generosity is incriminated and the woman's request for help is justified. In its present form, the episodes of the haftarah are crafted into an artful narrative. That the accounts were originally oral tales is suggested by a later reference to the revived son of the Shunammite woman, in 2 Kings 8:4-6. We read there that the king [of Israel] was talking to Gehazi, the servant of the man of God, and he said, "Tell me all the wonderful things [ha-gedolot] that Elisha has done." While he was telling the king how [Elisha] had revived a dead person, in came the woman whose son he had revived, complaining to the king about her house and farm. "My Lord king," said Gehazi, "this is the woman and this is her son whom Elisha revived." The king questioned the woman, and she told him [the story] . . . . Something like this tale of wonders must have circulated among the disciples—reworked as it was retold and eventually written down for generations to come. 5 In just this way, the great deeds of the Lord, from the Exodus on, were told from mouth to ear, as memory and message, until they were collected and inscribed as sacred Scripture for all time (see Exod. 10:1-2; Pss. 78:2-8; 106:2).
COMMENTS 2 Kin^s 4:1.A certain 'woman... cried out to Elisha This cry, Hebrew tza'a-kah, denotes an appeal for legal aid. It is used here in the context of distress caused by a creditor who seized a widow's children to repay a debt. Significantly, an old biblical exhortation warns creditors not to keep garments in distraint overnight; and it notes that God will come to the poor person's rescue if he "cries out" (yitz'ak) to Him (Exod. 22:24-26; and cf. w. 20-22). In 2 Kings 8:3, the woman from Shunem mentioned in the haftarah has become impoverished and "went to the king [of Israel] to complain [litz'ok:, lit., "cry out"] about her house and farm," which had been seized in her absence. One may thus appeal to a concerned party (like Elisha), the king, or even God for help. The negative scenario is conveyed by lob: "I cry ['etz'ak], 'Violence!' but am not answered; I shout, but can get no justice" (lob 19:7). According to tradition, this "certain woman" was the wife of the prophet Obadiah (Rashi). a creditor is coming In distress, ancient Israelites might sell their children to creditors. A similar situation is envisioned in the Covenant Code (Exod. 21:7), where special provisions are set for the manumission of a daughter sold as a handmaid. In other formulations, an Israelite might "give himself over" to a kinsman but only be subject to distraint (with his children) until the lubilee year (Lev. 25:39-41). According to the situation reported in Nehemiah 5, severe economic conditions forced parents to sell their children and pawn their property to creditors. But when Nehemiah heard the HAFTARAH FOR VA-YERA'
18
ensuing "outcry [tza'akat]" of the people, he censured the nobles, told them that this was no "God-fearing way" to behave, and demanded that their goods and children be returned (Neh. 5:1-11). Remarkably, the wealthy agreed to this intercession—and even kept their promise (v. 12-13). Apparently pawned goods and indentured persons could be released at any time, at the pleasure or goodwill of the creditor. a creditor According to tradition, this was King Joram, son of Ahab (Rashi; Kimhi). 8.A -wealthy 'woman According to tradition, this was the sister of Abishag the Shunammite (1 Kings 1:3), the sister o f j e d o the prophet (2 Chron. 9:29) (Rashi; Kimhi). 16.At this season next year Hebrew la-mo'ed ha-zeh ka-'et hayyah. The phrase ka'et hayyah, "next year," is part of the promise given the barren woman that she would soon give birth. The same language is used when the pregnancy of Sarah is announced (Gen. 18:10). The exact meaning of the phrase has been scrutinized. 6 It seems like the analogous Akkadian expression is ana balat, "next year" (lit., "to life"), 7 since the Hebrew may be more literally rendered "in a living [or viable] time," that is, "in due course." Medieval commentators understood the phrase more elliptically. For example, Rashi suggested that the promise was pregnancy at a time like this one, when the woman was "alive and well." Kimhi proposed that the wording referred to the "time" ('et) when the "midwife" (hayyah) would come, on the basis ofRabbinic Hebrew. you will be embracing a son "You," Hebrew (ketiv) }atti. This unusual form of the pronoun also appears in verse 23. Like the ketiv second-person feminine singular suffix -ki in verses 2, 3, and 7, this form reflects the northern Israelite dialect, with many traits similar to Aramaic. Significantly, these usages appear in quotations from northerners. 23. But he said, "Why are youjyoing to him today?" After the woman announces that she wishes to see the "man of God" concerning her dead son (v. 22), her husband asks this question and adds, "It is neither new moon nor sabbath." Presumably, on such sacred days, people went to local shrines in order to consult the local man of God on some matter. On the basis of 2 Kings 4:23, ancient rabbinic tradition justified the custom of visiting one's teacher or master on the N e w M o o n or Sabbath (B. Sukkah 27b). 24. "Urge [the beast] on" The servant runs behind the donkey and urges it on with a stick [Transl.]. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Several features link the readings. The first is the annunciation of childbirth. In thc parashah, Abraham is at Mamre when he sees three visitors and immediately extends hospitality to them. Immediately thereafter, the patriarch receives the divine promise that "at the same season [lamo'ed] next year [ka-'et hayyah]" Sarah will have a child (Gen. 18:14; cf. v. 10). There is no statement that the annunciation to the barren woman is a reward for hospitality; but just this is the explicit theme in the haftarah, in the episode about the woman of Shunem who is rewarded for her hospitality with the announcement that "at this season [la-mo'ed ha-zeh] next year [ka-'et hayyah], you will be embracing a son" (2 Kings 4:16). A significant difference marks the fate of the two children. The child of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac, is subsequently bound on an altar by his father at God's command, but is not slaughtered; a ram serves as his substitute (Genesis 22). By contrast, the son of the Shunammite woman dies in childhood of unexplained causes, though he is eventually restored to life through Elisha's miraculous intervention. Some of the asymmetries between the two biblical units (Genesis 18 + 22 and 2 Kings 4: 8-37) were narrowed by rabbinic interpretation. One significant factor was the tradition that Isaac actually died upon the altar but was revived.8 This was a decisive development in the perception of a link between the texts. The midrash Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer makes this quite plain. In chapter 31 of that work, treating the so-called Tenth Trial of Abraham, the Binding of Isaac, 19
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YERA' 19
Rabbi Judah states that when the blade of Abraham's knife touched his son's throat, the lad's soul departed—but was immediately restored. In the sequel, Isaac is portrayed as the prototype of all those who would be resurrected from the dead. 9 The theme of resurrection recurs in chapter 33 (after the intervening account of Sarah's death), which reports how both Elijah and especially Elisha revived a child from death and adds that both resurrections were rewards for the hospitality accorded the holy men by the boys' mothers. This striking assertion is complemented by the suggestion that Isaac's own revival was a reward for his personal acts of charity.10 This point is somewhat unexpected, given the hospitality offered by Abraham and Sarah (in Genesis 18) and its similarity to the acts of the women in the Elijah and Elisha narratives. Be that as it may, the foregoing (late) midrash shows that the pa-mshah and haftarah were exegetically entwined around the two themes of resurrection and reward for charity. One may wonder how much of this development had occurred when 2 Kings 4:8-37 was selected as the haftarah to Va-yera'. By contrast, Sephardim conclude their recitation at verse 23. In this tradition only the birth announcement is the connection between the passages.
Haftarah for Hayyei Sarah ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
"n
I KINGS 1:1-31 I KINGS 1:1-31
For a discussion of the contents of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall contents, historiography, and theology, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah depicts the last days of David, before his death, when he was "old, advanced in years." The scene is set at the beginning of the Book of Kings, though it is more common to find the death of a major figure at the conclusion of a book or cycle of traditions. Moses dies at the end of Deuteronomy, and the point is noted in losh. 1:1; loshua dies at the end of the Book of loshua, and the event is restated in ludg. 1:1; and Saul dies at the end of 1 Samuel 31, with a brief transitional notice of it in 2 Sam. 1:1. Presumably the author of the Book of Kings wished to make a point by his decision to defer the death of David to the beginning of 1 Kings. With David still alive, the Book of 2 Samuel ends with his purchase of the site in lerusalem where Solomon will build the Temple after his accession to the throne (see 1 Kings 6-7). The end of David's reign is wracked by intrigue and dissension. The haftarah records the scheming for the crown by Adonijah and by the backers of Solomon—even as the king's blood turns cold and he lays with Abishag the Shunammite for warmth (1 Kings 1:1-4). It seems that David could never escape the plots ofhis sons and advisers. PART 1. PROLOGUE: OLD AGE (1 Kings 1:1-4) In this prologue, the tone is set by the opening reference to the health problems of the aging king. His royal handlers seek out a maiden to warm David and "be" at his side. The monarch himself is beyond response. He never answers his officious lackeys; and when the narrator remarks concerning Abishag that "the king did know her not" (OIPS), the overall sense seems more than sexual (NIPS). In his dotage, David seems largely unaware. PART 2. THE REBELLION (1 Kings 1:5-10) Adonijah proclaims his intentions ("I will be king!" [v. 5]) and gathers his forces. He chooses loab the general and Abiathar the priest to help (v. 7). The decision is not by chance: a successful revolt needed military and religious backing. The old warhorse loab could be counted on to attract many people who would remember his loyalty to David and assume that he had the king's best interests in mind. The coup begins with a sacrifice at a sacred stone (v. 9). Benaiah HAFTARAH FOR HAYYEI SARAH
20
(leader of David's Cherethite and Pelethite guards), Nathan (the king's prophet), and Solomon are conspicuously absent (v. 10). PART 3. THE COUNTERPLOT (1 Kings 1:11-27) a. 1 Kings 1:11-14 In the first scene, Nathan advises David's wife Bathsheba to go immediately to the king. She should first remind him of his oath guaranteeing Solomon's succession and then question the meaning of Adonijah's enthronement. At this point, trusty Nathan will appear and fill in her phrases with more detail. b. 1 Kings 1:15-27 The plan unfolds. First, Bathsheba comes into the king's bedroom (and the presence of Abishag) and gives an elaborate oration based on Nathan's advice (v. 17-21). Her remarks exceed the prophet's laconic words and echo the material found in verses 5-10. Nathan has little to add and basically covers the same ground (v. 22-27). His main twist is to introduce an ironic innocence into his report of the coup: "Can this decision have come from my Lord the king, without your telling your servant who is to succeed to the throne of my Lord the king?" (v. 27). This query feigns ignorance of Bathsheba's claim to a private agreement concerning Solomon and subtly hints at David's (supposed) disloyalty to him. PART 4. EPILOGUE: SUCCESS (1 Kings 1:28-31) David again swears his "former" oath concerning Solomon, and Bathsheba gratefully falls before the king. With pious irony, she proclaims: "May my Lord King David live forever!" (v. 31). The haftarah concludes here, according to Ashkenazic, Sephardic, and Yemenite custom. According to the Italian rite, the reading concludes at verse 34—with David's instructions to his servants to anoint Solomon immediately at the Gihon spring, blast the trumpet, and shout: "Long live King Solomon!"
CONTENT AND MEANING The scenes are centered around different pairs: (A) David and Abishag (in the prologue); (B) Nathan and Bathsheba and (B') Nathan and David (in the middle sections); and (A') David and Bathsheba (in the epilogue). From this perspective, the narrative has a ring structure, being balanced in its outer (A/A') and inner (B/B') frames. Noting this compositional feature (and the fact that A pairs David with Abishag, while A ' pairs him with Bathsheba), we may further observe that the central episode is C, the main encounter between David and Bathsheba, with Abishag present (1 Kings 1:15-21). This is the pivotal scene of the narrative. As in A, C also characterizes David as zaken (old [v. 1, 15]); but whereas the text initially says that the king did not know the Shunammite maiden (v. 4), the legitimate wife now tells her husband that he does not know that Adonijah has claimed the throne (v. 18). The central episode thus includes a critical moment of awareness that leads toward the conclusion—when David guarantees Solomon's succession to the throne. In this regard, Bathsheba's language is immensely suggestive, for when she informs the king of the coup, she says 'adoni ha-melekh, "my Lord the king." This phrase not only (ironically) echoes the words of the courtiers who tell'adoni ha-melekh that a young lass would keep him warm (1 Kings 1:2), but also (wittily) juxtaposes it to the announcement "yet now }adoni-yah malakh [Adonijah has become king]" (v. 18a). In a final play on this language, Bathsheba gratefully accepts David's oath and says: "May my Lord King David ['adoni ha-melekh david] live [yehi] forever" (v. 31). This final proclamation provides a triumphant balance to Nathan's report (v. 25) that the traitors have proclaimed: "Long live King Adonijah [yehi ha-melekh adoni-yah]!" Clearly, the narrator is a master of intonation—binding and counterposmg episodes with consummate skill. The threads linking the verb shava' (to swear an oath) with Bathsheba provide further evidence for the subtle texture of this haftarah. David's oath to Bathsheba is instructive for another reason. The phrase "the L O R D . . . who has rescued me" (1 Kings 1:29) gives insight into popular Israelite piety. In liturgical contexts, HAFTARAH FOR HAYYEI SARAH 21
the verb padah was often used to express the hope or assurance in divine rescue from a personal difficulty (Pss. 31:6; 55:19). Thus one may call upon God to "redeem me [pedeni], have mercy on me" (Ps. 26:11) or boldly assert, "But God will redeem my life \yifdeh nafshi] from the clutches of Sheol" (Ps. 49:16). According to biblical tradition, David himself recited such words after his rescue from Abimelech (Ps. 34:1, 23); and upon hearing of the death of Saul, he swore by the Lord "who has rescued me from every trouble" (2 Sam. 4:9). There is thus a relationship between the belief in a personal God who saves individuals from distress and its transformation into an epithet of the divine. In a striking instance, God even refers to Himself has the one who "redeemed \padah] Abraham" (Isa. 29:22). In addition to revealing a mode of ancient Israelite piety, David's oath gives witness to a "last will and testament" (1 Kings 1:29-30). This takes various legal forms in the Hebrew Bible. Here it will be instructive to recall three key moments of Israelite history and observe how succession is guaranteed. A first case, from the patriarchal period, is the deathbed blessing of Isaac, who invokes for lacob godly dew, political power, and domination over his brother (Gen. 27:28-29). All the principals involved believed this event assured the recipient of the promised destiny A second case is Moses' transfer of leadership to loshua. That event involved not only the public display of succession through a laying on of hands, and Moses' request that God transmit to him a measure of divine glory—so that the people would heed his commands (Num. 27:15-23). David's oath is a third instance. As in the first case (Isaac), the father's decree is made privately; but as in the second one (Moses), the determination of succession has political implications. It was therefore vital for Solomon to refer publicly to this guarantee. Accordingly, when the Temple is completed, Solomon stresses that the Lord told David that his son would build the shrine (1 Kings 8:19) —and that he (Solomon) is that successor, "as the L O R D promised" (v. 20). With these words, Solomon invokes the general promise of 2 Sam. 7:12-13 togetherwith the specifics of 1 Kings 1:30. The announcement asserts his divine rights before all.
COMMENTS 1 Kin^s 1:2. -wait upon Your Majesty Literally, "stand before ('a-medah lifnei [the king])." In royal contexts, the idiom means to "serve at court." Compare the courtiers who "were serving" Rehoboam ('omedim lefanav) and giving advice (1 Kings 12:8; for the variant 'omedim }et penei, see v. 6). 6. bom afterAbsalom son [Transl.].
Thus, Absalom having died, Adonijah was David's oldest living
7-8. loab is the longtime faithful commander-in-chief of David's forces (2 Sam. 8:16), who now follows Adonijah; Benaiah served David as head of the elite Cherethite and Pelethite guard (2 Sam. 8:18). After killing loab on Solomon's instructions, Benaiah will become the new commander-in-chief (1 Kings 2:28-34; cf. 1 Kings 4:4). According to 1 Chronicles 24, Zadok is a descendant of Eleazar, eldest son of Aaron; Abiathar of Aaron's younger son, Ithamar, through Eli. Both serve David and are frequently paired (cf. 2 Sam. 15:29, 35; 20:25). After Solomon's succession, Zadok replaces Abiathar (1 Kings 2:35), while Abiathar is dismissed from office and banished to Anathoth—though not killed, because of his loyal service to David (2:26-27). This fulfills an old oracle against the house of Eli (cf. v. 27 and 1 Sam. 2:31). The pairing of Abiathar with Zadok in Solomon's cabinet (1 Kings 4: 4) seems to contradict this (it is missing in the Septuagint). But it is likely that the two priests served together before Solomon dismisses Abiathar; and, in any case, by the time of the list, Azariah has succeeded his father Zadok to the priesthood (4:2). Nathan is the court prophet of David, who interpreted his sovereign's dream to build a Temple (2 Samuel 7); and it was he who boldly criticized the king for having Bathsheba's husband Uriah killed on the front, after David committed adultery and impregnated her (2 Sam. 11: 1-12:10). After the child of this union died, by divine punishment (12:11-19), Solomon was born to David and Bathsheba (v. 24). HAFTARAH FOR HAYYEI SARAH
22
13. Did not you... swear to your maidservant This appears to be a ruse; but Kimhi suggests that it was known to Bathsheba herself, after David told her that Solomon's succession had been prophesied. 18. you According to many manuscripts and ancient versions, the original Hebrew was ve-'atah-, usual editions read "now" (ve-'atah). 21. traitors Literally, hata'im, "offenders." 25. and the army officers Literally, commanders-in-chief (sarei ha-tzava'). This is an odd usage, as only Joab was chief (cf. v. 19). The Lucianic recension of the Septuagint reads, "and Joab the commander-in-chief." 29.As the LORD lives "Lives," hay. But the grammatically correct construct form for an oath would be hey, as commonly with imprecations over a human life (Gen. 42:15-16; 1 Sam. 17:55). Since such punctuation would be theologically offensive, a distinction was made between oaths by God and persons. This solution is exemplified in our received text, with its syntactically incorrect but religiously acceptable nominal phrase. Indeed, "hay YHWH" is a liturgical exclamation ("The L O R D lives!"), not an oath formula. 1 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The parashah and haftarah are verbally linked by the expression zaken ba} ba-yamim ("old, advanced in years") found in Gen. 24:1 and 1 Kings 1:1 and by the theme of old age. From one perspective, Abraham and David represent two distinct models of aging. The "Abrahamic type" enters old age with all the religious and moral integrity of his life. Thus we see that Abraham, after the death of Sarah and the purchase of a family tomb (Genesis 23), "was now old" and prepares for his family succession. He calls to his servant and has him "swear" (ve-'ashbi'akha) that he will not marry Isaac to one of the Canaanite women but rather will procure a wife from his homeland (Gen. 24:1-4). The patriarch is thus active in securing a future that will continue the past. Indeed, being blessed by God "in all things" (ba-kol [24:1]), Abraham passes on "all" (kol) he has to Isaac (25:5). This is his deposition before death, along with "gifts" to the children of his concubines (25:6). Eliminating contentions over the inheritance and preparing for new generations, Abraham dies "at a good ripe age [seyvah], old and contented [saved]" (25:8). The harmony between seyvah and save'a suggests an integrated aging—a balance between one's natural person and spiritual self. David enters old age more catastrophically. Though he has shortly before boasted, in a poetic testament, "Is not my House established before God? For He has granted me an eternal pact, drawn up in full [ba-kol] and secured. Will He not cause all [kol] my success and [my] every desire to blossom?" (2 Sam. 23:5) —he spoke too soon. The Davidic type of aging thus focuses on physical debility and the schemes ofhis dependents for a stake in the future. Succumbing to infirmity, he does not know what is going on. His courtiers seem self-serving, and his own presence has all the frustrations of defunct power. A manipulator in his lifetime, David is manipulated in old age. Stung by the disclosures of Nathan and Bathsheba, David "swears" (va-yishavac) that he will fulfill his "former" oath (1 Kings 1:29-30). Giving final vent to his complex personality, he gets hold of Solomon and gives him some advice for survival: observe the Torah, so that God will fulfill his promises to the dynasty; and kill the renegade soldier Joab, in order to secure the realm (1 Kings 2:1-6). 2 Theological and political sensibilities mark the man. David's "fullness" (kol) is one of will and conceit, far removed from the noble "wholeness" of Abraham. Quite different are the traditions about David's last days preserved in the midrash. In a sermon apparently drawn from Midrash Tanhuma, but with some variation, the parallel phrase zaken ba} ba-yamim leads to a positive connection between the acts of justice performed by Abraham and David. 3 For their virtues, they merit the rewards of old age. HAFTARAH FOR HAYYEI SARAH 23
"King Davidwas now old [zaken], advanced inyea-rs." This is what Scriptures means (by the expression), "Old age \seyvalo\ is a crown of glory" [Prov. 16:31a]. And how is it attained? "It is achieved by the way [derekh] of righteousness [tzedakah]" [v. 31b]. [And] from who can you learn this? —From Abraham; for inasmuch as it is written of him, "that they [his descendants] preserve the way [derekh] of the Lord, doing what is just [tzedakah] and right" [Gen. 18:19], he merited old age [.seyvah]—as it is said [Gen. 25:8], "[And Abraham died] in good old age [seyvah]'" and he [also] merited ziknah, as is said, "And Abraham was zaken [old], advanced in years." [Now] you can find the [very] same in connection with David; for inasmuch as it is written of him, "And David did justice and righteousness [tzedakah] for all his people" (2 Sam. 8:15), he merited ziknah—as itis said, "King David was now zaken, advanced in years." (Yalkut Shimoni 2, Kings, 166) In this concise homily, Abraham and David appear as two paradigms of righteousness. For this they receive the status of"old age" [ziknah]—a spiritual achievement that ennobles one's life as a crown.
Haftarah for Toledot nn^W ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
MALACHI 1:1-2:7 MALACHI 1:1-2:7
For Malachi's work and message and a consideration of his concerns, see the "The Book of Mala chi" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah selection taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah evokes the ancient rivalry between lacob and Esau, as it focuses on the ongoing historical strife between their descendants—Israel and Edom. Giving hope to a renewal of Israelite national and religious destiny, the prophet stresses the priests' duty of piety and purity before the Lord. Speaking in the fifth century B.C.E., the prophet reveals some aspects of religion and culture in the early years of the Second Temple. PART 1. IACOB AND ESAU REVISITED (Malachi 1:1-5) This section presents God's word of love to lacob (Israel) and promise of destruction against Esau (Edom). All of Esau's plans for national renewal will come to nought, for though "they may build," God "will tear down" (v. 4). The desolation of Israel's old foe, whose participation in the destruction of Zion (586 B.C.E.) is marked in national memory (cf. Ps. 137:7), 1 will be celebrated by a proclamation of God's greatness "beyond the borders oflsrael" (Mai. 1:5). The precise circumstances of Edomite destruction have invited much speculation—but no certain conclusions.2 More clear is the prophet's concern to invoke the ancient fraternity of lacob and Esau and vaunt God's love for the younger brother. This preference serves as a prologue to the theme of filial piety and Israel's inheritance of the patrimony. 3 PART 2. T O THE PRIESTS AND PEOPLE (Malachi 1:6-14) This section stands in direct counterpoint to the prologue (1:2-5). Speaking to the priests, who exemplify the beloved son but betray this love with perversity, Malachi says in God's name: "A son should honor his father. . . . N o w if I am a father, where is the honor due Me?" (v. 6). The theme of betrayal dominates the first half of this unit (v. 6-9a), which is directed to the priests, and the second half as well (v. 9b-14), where profanation of worship is committed by laymen. 4 Both groups treat the "table of the LORD" with "scorn" (v. 7, 12), bringing "lame" and "sick" animals to the altar (v. 8, 13), desecrating God's honor and law. Even a secular governor (pehah [v. 8]) would be insulted by such disgrace; all the more so the Lord of Hosts, whose honor the people "degrade" (hippahtem [v. 13]). It is bitter irony that the honor due the Lord is only acknowledged "among the nations" (v. 11, 14), who offer a "pure oblation" to His holy name. HAFTARAH FOR TOLEDOT
24
PART 3. TO THE PRIESTS ONLY (Malachi 2:1-7) The passage concludes by shifting attention back to the priests. They are warned to honor God or have their blessings cursed and their offerings heaved in their faces (2:1-3). There are no two ways about it: the priests bear the "covenant of Levi" (v. 4) and are thus obligated to teach the Torah in truth, to serve with loyalty, and to guard the people from falsehood (v. 6b-7). By performing their duties faithfully, the priests would be a "messenger [malfokh] of the L O R D ofHosts" (v. 7). The haftarah ends with this charge.
CONTENT AND MEANING A forensic style dominates the haftarah. Among the notable features is the way the prophet presents God's case through assertion and response. Typically, this form is expressed through (A) statement; (B) query; and (C) proof—where the speaker in A and C is God, and in B is Israel; in which a specific verb recurs (in A and B, and sometimes C as well); and in which B is introduced by the word ve-'amartem (but you ask). The full pattern appears in Mai. 1:2 (where the key verb is "love" ['ahav]), in 1:6 and 7 (where the key verbs are "scorn" [bazah] and "defile" |ga'al]), and in 3:8. All the major themes and contentions of the book are dealt with through this rhetorical structure. While other prophets cite comments of the addressee as part of the arraignment (cf. Isa. 28:15-16; 49:14; Jer. 2:23, 25, 35; and Hag. 1:2), Malachi's style is unique in form and intensity. Equally compelling is the way words are reworked by the prophet in order to create rhetorical echoes and repetitive variations. A characteristic example is the way the term for divine "profanation" (mehallelim) in Mai. 1:12 counterpoints the earlier call to "implore" God's favor (hallu [1: 9]). It also anticipates the subsequent rebuke of the people's offering of "sick" animals (holeh [1: 13]) in the shrine. Another case of rhetorical intensification is created by the variations on the letters h/n/m in the words viyhonnenu (will He be gracious? [1:9]), hinnam (to no purpose [1: 10]), minhah (offering, oblation [1:10, 11]), and nihat (stoodin awe [2:5]). N o less dominant is the verb nasa' (raise up). The nominal form massa? names Malachi's "pronouncement" (1:1); whereas its verbal forms convey a broad range of features. For example, in Mai. 1, the question is posed: ha-yissa' mikkempa-nim, "will He accept any of you?"—with reference to God's acceptance of the false worship. The question is obviously rhetorical. The priests are warned that their sullied sacrifices will be heaved back like dung—ve-nasa} Jetkhem 'ala-v, "and you shall be carried out to its [heap]" (2:3). That is, God will not raise His face to the offerings in favor, and those who bear the animals' offal will carry the offending priests with it to the dung heap. 5 Another use of this terminology occurs in 2:9. The prophet accuses the priests of "partiality i n . . . rulings," using the expression nose'impa-nim ba-tomh to make his point. On closer inspection, it appears that the combination of the verb nasa' (raise up, carry, accept) with the nounpa-nim (face) alludes ironically to the Priestly Blessing in Num. 6:23-27. In it, the faithful priests are bidden to bless the people with divine favor (yissa* YHWHpanav:, lit., "the L O R D will lift His face"). Other terms from this sacred performance echo in Malachi's rebuke as well. Indeed both the promise of divine graciousness (vi-yhunneka) and blessing {yeva-rekhekha) through invocation of the holy name (shemi, "My name") are inverted; for God will not give favor (vi-yhonnenu [Mai. 1:9]) to those who defile His name (shemi [v. 6]), but will turn their priestly "blessings \birkhotekhem\ into curses" (2:2). Moreover, if the ancient priests prayed that the Lord would "shine \ya,er\ His face" upon the faithful and "be gracious" iyi-yhunneka) to them, Malachi now gives these words a tinge of doom—for since the priests "ignite" (tn'iru) the altars "falsely" (hinnam), the prophet announces that God will turn their blessings into curses (ve-'a-roti [2:2]). A more biting denunciation could hardly be made. The perversity of the priests is lambasted through the very words they were given in sacred trust. Malachi's rebuke is thus more than a prophetic critique. It is an anti-blessing—a slandering of the slanderers in their own words. 6 HAFTARAH FOR TOLEDOT 25
The ritual focus of the haftarah leaves little room for moral rebuke. This concern is not entirely outside the prophet's ken (see Mai. 3:5), but it is not part ofhis present concern. Even where Malachi expresses antagonism at the people's theft of animals, he is focused on the ritual faults involved (1:13). His single-minded denunciation thus provides a strong counterpoint to Isaiah's criticism of immorality coupled with sacrifice (Isa. 1:10-15). The prophet's universal vision is also affected by his concentration on ritual purity. In contrast to his earlier contemporary, who promised the maimed a share in the sacrificial cult (Isa. 56:3-5), Malachi's pronouncement contrasts the perversity of the priests of Israel with the faithful among the nations—whose meal and incense offerings are given in purity (Mai. 1:11). 7 Some interpreters have suggested that such offerings provide evidence for cultic offerings to the God of Israel in the Diaspora. However this may be, it is significant that no meat sacrifices are mentioned by Malachi. Ritual sacrifice outside lerusalem was expressly forbidden by Pentateuchal interdictions (see Deuteronomy 12) from the time of losiah's reforms (in 622 B.C.E.). But the prohibition was not universally obeyed, as records from the fifth-century-B.c.E. lewish military colony at Elephantine suggest. 8
COMMENTS Malachi 1:1.Apronouncement Hebrew massaoften translated "burden" on the assumption that this was the word the prophet had to "carry" to the people (Rashi). The term refers to prophecy (Ibn Ezra) and is used to indicate the taking up of a speech (Num. 23:7, 18; 24:3). 2. accepted Hebrew va-'ohav, "I loved" (OIPS). This term continues the theme of favor for lacob, as against the hatred and disfavor of Esau. In this context, God's love is expressed through the giving of the land (Rashi; Kimhi). 4. the •region of wickedness Hebrew gevul rish'ah. This negative designation (rish'ah) may be a punning inversion of Edom's byname Seir (se'ir).9 Ezekiel (35:6) voiced his curse of Edom by a pun as well, saying that 'edom will be turned to da-m (blood). Obadiah 1:5 alludes to both motifs when he warns that Edom will be "utterly destroyed" (nidmeitah) and that the plunderers ofEsau-Seir will "leave" {yash'im) virtually nothing. 6. a son should honor his father The terms of this passage (father-son; master-slave; honor-reverence) recur throughout the book and have extended overtones. The father-son pair alludes to the divine-human relationship (cf. Mai. 2:10; 3:17); the master-slave pair alludes to the divine-worshiper relationship (3:14, 18); and the honor-reverence pair sets the terms of positive piety against which the language of scorn and curse is counterposed, often through puns (cf. mom\ "reverence"; and me'emh, "curse," in 2:2). 13. ccOh, 'what a bother]" The NIPS translation of Hebrew matla'ah is a complex interpretation, apparently drawing from several strands of medieval commentary. On the one hand, Kimhi and Abravanel (following the Targum) suggest that the people proclaim that the offering is a tela'ah, a great "weariness" or "burden" for them economically (cf. Exod. 18:8) —and thus they "degrade it" (hippahtem Joto). On the other, Ibn Ezra proposes that the ma- prefix of the noun matla'ah is really the interrogative particle mah, "what" (with final heh elided; cf. Exod. 4: 2, mazeh [ketiv:, mah zeh, keri] be-yadekha, "what is that in your hand?"). Hence the people apparently say, "What is the loss?" (viz., how is this a loss to God?) —and therewith diminish the value of the sacrificial offering. NIPS has combined features of both interpretations. The sense of degradation results from taking hippahtem as something worthless as the wind (cf. Songs 2: 17),a mere cipher (cf. Exod. 9:8). Alternatively, the expression ve-hippahtem }oto may be understood as "puffing up" the offering in order to make it appear fat (so Abravanel). Artificial fattening of animals is mentioned in the Talmud; see B. Baba Metzia 60b, 'ein mesharbetin }et ha-behemah, "one may not give the animal [the appearance of] stoutness" (and Rashi explains that this means filling the bladder HAFTARAH FOR TOLEDOT
26
with liquids to give it a bloated look). All these interpretations assume that the object J oto, "it," refers to the animal. But an old rabbinic tradition regards this word as a euphemistic "correction" of the scribes, introduced in order to soften the theologically more offensive }oti, "Me." 10 This assumes that the point of the idiom is to give disrespect to God—to "blow Him off," so to speak. But this hypothetical reversion seems to be a midrashic interpretation of the words. In point of fact, the pronoun object J oto best refers neither to God or the animal but to the altar, as is clear from verse 12. Will I accept it Hebrew ha-'ertzeh }otah (cf. v. 8). This is one of many priestly idioms used by the prophet. It is particularly effective here, where the prophet derides improper sacrifices. Leviticus 1:3 indicates the proper procedure whereby an offerant shall gain "acceptance in his behalf" (li-rtzono) for an offering, and Lev. 22:17-22 and 25 explicitly say that animals given to fulfill vows will not be acceptable if they are blemished and have a defect (moshhat). This is the background for Malachi's denunciation of those who cheat and offer a defective animal (moshha-t) to fulfill their vows (Mai. 1:13). God will not accept them (lo}yerotzu). Earlier prophets used the idiom to express rejection of certain offerings (see Mic. 6:7; Jer. 6:20). For a positive postexilic usage, see Isa. 56:6-7. Malachi 2:4. My covenant with Levi The priest is exalted for the perfection of his service and reverence for God's name—the opposite of the present situation (cf. 1:6). The precise "covenant" is not certain. Numbers 25:12-13 refers to a pact with the descendants of Phinehas. As here, a covenant of peace is mentioned; but the present text has the whole tribe of Levi in mind (note the variant "covenant of the Levites" in Mai. 2:8), and not a single line. Abravanel construes the reference to Levi to mean "the one" of Levi, that is, Aaron. This permits a harmonization with Num. 25:12-13. Jer. 33:21b also considers the priestly covenant to be with the whole tribe. 11 6. Proper rulings See Hag. 2:10-13 ("Seek a ruling from the priests") [Transl.]. Hebrew torat'emet; literally, "the Law of truth" (OJPS). The role of instruction is emphasized here and in verse 7. Instruction in priestly matters is found in Lev. 10:10-11. Deuteronomy 17:8-10 extends the role of the priests to jurisprudence. Ezekiel combines both functions (Ezek. 44:23-24). The tribe ofLevi receives the blessing of instruction in Deut. 33:8 and 10. 7. a messenger of the LORD ofHosts The exalted purity of the priests gave them the status of a mal'akh, a "messenger" or "angel" of God. Perhaps this designation was due to their role as (inspired) instructors of Torah. According to the divine initiation of Joshua, as envisioned by Zechariah, that High Priest was even promised a heavenly status, among the "attendants" of the divine court, if he kept God's charge and sacred service (Zech. 3:1-7). It is hard to know whether R. Yohanan is a strong or soft advocate of this position, when he midrashically construes the phrase kimaPakh YHWH tzeva'ot hu} (Mai. 2:7) to mean that the priest is "like an angel \ke-maPakh~] of the Lord of Hosts" (B. Mo'ed Katan 17a). Other midrashic homilies are unequivocal. R. Simon taught that Phinehas, the priest, was an angel in fact: for "when the Holy Spirit descended upon him, his face was irradiated like flaming torches" (see Leviticus Rabbah 1, end). The illumination of the priest's face is an image of mystical transfiguration and recalls the hymn celebrating the splendor of the High Priest's face when he emerged from the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur. This moment is recited at the end of the Musaf'Avodah service. In the version preserved in the Ashkenazic rite, 12 we read that "the countenance of the [High] Priest" was "like the brightness of the vaulted canopy of heaven" or "as the lightnings flashing from the splendor of the Hayyot [Creatures bearing the Divine Throne]." (In the Sephardic and Avignon rites, the comparisons are to gemstones and cosmic forces.) 13 But such versions of priestly luminescence are ancient. They already occur in Ben Sira's panegyric to the High Priest Simon (son of Onias) in the second century B.C.E. (Ben Sira 50:5-15). The imagery was probably transmitted to the Middle Ages via such compositions as "Truly, H o w Splendid" by Yosi ben Yosi, the great synagogue poet of the Land oflsrael (fourth-fifth century c . E . ) . 1 4 HAFTARAH FOR TOLEDOT 27
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
A link between the haftarah andpamshah is established at the outset. According to Malachi, God announces His preference for lacob, whom God has "loved [NIPS: accepted]" ('ahavti), and He shows that love by condemning Edom to destruction (Mai. 1:2-3, 4-5). This inequity echoes Rebekah's parental "love" (Johevet) for lacob (Gen. 25:28) in the Torah portion, and the oracle that the younger "nation" in her womb would supercede the elder twin (Gen. 25:23). Attentive readers of the haftarah could therefore infer from the pronouncement of Edomite doom the continued fulfillment of the Pentateuchal promise—and thus find some consolation, if only in the downfall of Israel's hated enemy. Verbal connections between the Pentateuchal and prophetic passages were also observed by the ancient Rabbis. In Midrash Genesis Rabbah (63:14), the phrase "Esau spurned [va-yivez]n (Gen. 25:34; root b-z-h) is linked to Esau's "region of wickedness ['rish'ah]" in Mai. 1:4 through an interpretation of Prov. 18:3 (which uses buz, "derision," alongside msha"wicked man"). 15 The three divisions of Scripture (Torah, Prophets, Writings) are thus combined to teach one truth: the advent of the wicked (Esau-Edom) brings physical plunder (buz) and cultural derision. The historical resonance of such homilies becomes evident when we recall that, from the second century c.E. on (specifically, from the time of Hadrian's edicts and the revolt at Bethar, 132-135 16 c.E.), Edom was a symbol for Rome. Thus R. Simeon bar Yohai interpreted "the voice of lacob" and "the hands of Esau" in the pamshah (Gen. 27:22) with reference to the cry of suffering at Bethar, when lews were slaughtered at Roman hands. 17 And the promised destruction of the "wild oxen [re'emimY of Edom in Isa. 34:7 was interpreted by Rabbi Meir (second century c.E.) to allude to Rome (romiyim). 18 In a homily on the oracle about the "two nations \shneigoyimY in Rebekah's womb (Gen. 25:23), we are told that this predicts "two proud [ge'imY kingdoms (the lews, typified by Solomon; and the Romans, typified by Hadrian) and that one of the "two [.shnei]" will be "rejected [san'uy]." By invoking Mai. 1:3 (san'eti, "I have rejected"), the preacher informs his audience that the hated one is Edom-Rome (Genesis Rabbah 63:7). 19 The theme of eschatological hope underlies other midrashic expositions linking the pamshah and haftarah. The repetition of God's love for lacob in Mai. 1:2 is made to teach that though Esau was born first (Gen. 25:25), and thus legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance (Deut. 21:17), only lacob will merit reward in this world and the next. Thus, the historical competition of the twins in this world will be resolved in due time by God. The allusion to an ultimate victory over "Rome" may reflect feelings of this-worldly resignation by the lews of the third and fourth centuries; 20 but even if this is so, the lewish identification of Rome with Christianity (for papal Rome was heir of the Caesars as a "holy empire" into the Middle Ages) gave this passage polemical potential. 21 Talmudic legends of the Edomite foundation of Rome were also exploited in medieval histories (like thc Josippon and Sefer ha-Tashar),22 in ways that reinforced lewish hopes that Israel was the beloved son and would be vindicated and the hated aggressor would come to naught. Such feelings were reiterated in numerous sermons. According to Rabbi loshua ibn Shu'eib (Spain, fourteenth century c . E . ) , lews could rest assured in God's promise of love for Israel. 23 The terrors of Edom could be withstood, for lacob's covenantal destiny was divinely assured.
Haftarah for Va-yetze' N^l ASHKENAZIM
HOSEA12:13-14:lC)
For the haftarah for Va-yetze' for Sephardim, see the next haftarah. For the life and times of Hosea and a consideration of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Hosea" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). HAFTARAH FOR
VA-YETZE'
(ASHKENAZIM)'
28
Hosea 12:13-14:10 opens with a reference to Jacob's flight to Aram after deceiving his brother Esau and to his service there for his wives Leah and Rachel (Hos. 12:13). This allusion affirms a continuity between the narrative of the pa-mshah and the subsequent history of the nation. The prophet emphasizes the iniquity of the people of Israel, despite divine providence, and threatens them with God's punishment. A great appeal for repentance climaxes the haftarah. The prophet Hosea was active in the north ("Ephraim") during the reign of King Jeroboam II (784-748 B.C.E.). PART 1. DIVINE FAVORAND NATIONAL SIN (Hosea 12:13-13:3) a. Hosea 12:13-15 The text opens with a brief resume of Jacob's flight to Aram and his labor for a bride (12:13). It then jumps forward to the Exodus, and states that the Lord "brought Israel up from Egypt. . . through a prophet; through a prophet they were guarded." These clauses mark two phases ofMoses' role in the liberation of the nation—and continuing evidence for divine care (Hos. 13:14). 1 Withal, Ephraim sinned and was punished for his "mockery" (v. 15). b. Hosea 13:1-3 The prophecy continues with a reassertion of God's active providence: when Ephraim was pious the Lord "exalted" him, but when the nation sinned—"he died." Specific reference is made to incurring guilt "through Baal" and of kissing metal calves (v. 1-2). If this is more than a general indictment, the first criticism may refer to the sin of Baal-peor during the desert sojourn (Num. 25:1-3; cf. Hos. 9:10), and the second to the sins of Jeroboam I and ongoing apostasyin Samaria (cf. 1 Kings 12:25-31; andHos. 10:5, 8). PART 2. AGAIN, DIVINE FAVOR AND SIN (Hosea 13:4-14:1) a. Hosea 13:4-8 The prophet adds God's word that only He has been the nation's faithful God—"you have never had a helper other than Me" (u-moshi'a }ein bilti [v. 4]). This refers to God's ongoing salvation and protection of Israel. But the people were "sated" in their haughtiness and "forgot Me." As a consequence, the Lord threatens to "devour them . . . like a lion" (v. 8). b. Hosea 13:9-14:1 The divine reproach continues, mocking the people for their false trust and reminding them that "You had no help but Me" (ki vi ve-'eznkha- [13:9]). In their folly, Israel turned to kings who could not save and who are themselves destroyed (13:10-11). The theme of guilt, doom, and divine judgment is then restated in more figurative terms (13:15-14:1). PART 3. CALLS FOR REPENTANCE AND WISDOM (Hosea 14:2-10) a. Hosea 14:2-9 The prophet urges the nation to return to the Lord and gives them the statement of confession and supplication they should recite (v. 3b-4). The people are to appeal to divine mercy and affirm their trust in God's power and salvation. In response, the Lord promises to "heal" the people's affliction and be to them as "dew" and "shade" (v. 5-8). Hearing this, the prophet says that Ephraim will forswear idolatry forever, and the Lord affirms His providential care. b. Hosea 14:10 A concluding exhortation admonishes the people to "consider these words" and turn to the "paths of the L O R D . "
CONTENT AND MEANING The diversity of content and literary form suggests that the various portions of this haftarah were originally distinct rhetorical units. For example, Hosea 12:13-15 which begins the reading is actually the concluding section of a larger retrospective dealing with Ephraim, the patriarch Jacob, and similarities between events in the patriarch's life and current national deeds (see Hosea 12). But even this unit is disjointed, and commentators have long puzzled over the links between verse 13, dealing with Jacob's flight to Aram and his labors there for his wife; verse 14, dealing with the Exodus from Egypt and prophetic guidance; and verse 15, dealing with a judgment upon Ephraim for its sins. In the present context, these verses serve as the prologue to the haftarah, along with the ensuing proclamation against Ephraim's apostasy in 13:1-3. This HAFTARAH FOR VA-YETZE'(ASHKENAZIM)'29
threefold structure of divine providence (with emphasis on the Exodus), Ephraimite sin (with emphasis on Baal worship), and divine punishment (through violent dooms) recurs in the materials collected in Hos. 13:4-14:1. Having substituted a subversive religious history for God's providential guidance, the nation is threatened with dire punishments. The effect of concluding these proclamations of doom with an exhortation to repent is twofold. It reverses the negative tenor of the haftarah and injects a tone of hope into the sequence of sin and punishment. The announcement of new spiritual possibilities thus erupts unexpectedly, breaking the cycle of recriminations through the act of repentance. In turning from the false gods of nature and politics, the people may be revived by the true source of life and sustenance. This climax is dramatized through a series of verbal echoes. These link the beginning and end of the haftarah in a striking manner and give it theological coherence. For example, Ephraim's early exaltation (nasa} hu} [Hos. 13:1]), perverted through pride and apostasy, will be divinely healed through a repentant turning to God to "forgive \tissa}] all guilt" (14:3; verbal stem nasa'). In like manner, the divine "plagues [devarekha]" of death for sin (13:14) will be reversed when Israel takes "words [deva-rim]" of confession and returns to God alone (14:3). Then Israel will not be destroyed "like dew [tal] so early gone" (13:3) —but will be nourished by God Himself, who "will be to Israel like dew [te/]" (14:6).
COMMENTS Hosea 12:13. Thenjacob had toflee This is the punishment mentioned in 12:3 [Transl.]. It continues the theme of lacob's biography, begun in w. 4 - 5 (Rashi). 14. Through a prophet The prophet is Moses, and this is the first attribution of the title to him. The designation of Moses as the prophet who brought Israel from Egypt and guarded (;nishmar) her in the desert may be a polemical rejection of the Pentateuchal tradition found in Exod. 23:20, according to which God sent an angel to guard the people (lishmorekha) in their wanderings. By contrast, Amos speaks of God's exclusive act of deliverance (Amos 3:1). In postexilic sources there is a further reference to the "angel of [God's] Presence" as the one who delivered Israel from Egypt (Isa. 63:9; cf. Deut. 4:37), but the ancient versions polemically rejected this reading and construed the verse to indicate that only God delivered the nation—no messenger or angel was involved. This topic recurs in the Midrash (cf. Sifre Deuteronomy 42 and 325). 2 The emphatic proclamation in the Passover haggadah averring that God alone performed the redemption with his great and exclusive power, and "not by an angel and not by a messenger," underscores the ongoing vibrancy of the issue.3 15. cast"hiscrimes upon him Hebrew ve-da-mav 'alavyittosh-, literally, "held him liable for his bloodguilt." The idiom for bloodguilt is da-m/da-mim + preposition (W or be, "upon" or "against"). Compare Deut. 19:10 and 2 Sam. 1:16 (with W); Lev. 20:9 and 11-13 (with be).4 The use of the verb yittosh with the sense of "hold accountable" is unusual, since it commonly means "to abandon." Presumably, the prophet means that God will leave the blood upon the guilty one, thereby holding him accountable. Hosea 13:1. When Ephraim spoke The prophet surveys the history of the northern kingdom, from its rise to preeminence, to its physical and spiritual collapse. Because of their practice of Canaanite worship and pride in their own accomplishments, the people of Ephraim rejected their divine savior and faced destruction. The theme of pride as leading to rejection of God is a feature of Deuteronomic sermons (see Deut. 8:11-14; 32:15). Along with other shared terms and themes, this motif supports the opinion that Hosea and parts of Deuteronomy derive from common northern circles.5 piety Hebrew retet occurs only here. It has the sense of trembling. Hence, as the object of "spoke," the noun may be construed as having the metaphoric sense of pious fervor or awe HAFTARAH FOR VA-YETZE'
(ASHKENAZIM)'
30
(NJPS). Alternatively, it is part of a nominal clause to be translated "When Ephraim spoke, there was trembling" among the nations (OJPS). For this interpretation, compare the Targum, Ibn Ezra, Kimhi, and R. Eliezer of Beaugency.6 As a result of the terror engendered, Ephraim was exalted or exalted himself. The unique form retet (with the letter tnv, twice) may be compared to retet (trembling) in Jer. 49:24 (with the letter tet, twice). 7 This variation (tav/tet) occurs elsewhere (e. g., the verbs ta'ah/ta'ah, "to stray"). Baal Thatis, Baal-peor; cf. 9:10 [Transl.]. 2. by their skill Hebrew ke-tevunam. Like ke-tevunatam-, cf. Ihn Ezra (see Ps. 49:15, tzumm for tzumtam).8 Others suggest that it is like ke-tavnitam, with the same sense (Rashi; R. Eliezer of Beaugency). Yetfor these they appoint men to sacrifice Hebrew zovhei ha-'ada-m. In its rendition, NJPS connects this phrase to the reference to idol worship earlier in the verse. Alternatively, "They that sacrifice men kiss calves" (OJPS). This rendition suggests that those who would sacrifice must kiss the calves, as part of the ritual (Kimhi). kiss calves At the division of the united monarchy, Jeroboam I built a shrine in Shechem, in the hills of Ephraim (1 Kings 12:25), where golden calves were made and venerated through liturgical proclamations (v. 28) and sacrifices (v. 32; cf. Hos. 11:2). Kissing the image of the calves was an act of piety in Hosea's day, like the kissing of images of Baal in the days of Elijah (1 Kings 19:18). 3. morning clouds This image signals the swift extinction of Israel for their unfaithfulness. It ironically echoes Hos. 6:4, where the people fail in their efforts to repent and are mocked by God, who states that Israel's "goodness is like morning clouds, like dew so early gone." 4-5. Only I the LORD This emphasis on the Lord as the historical redeemer from Egyptian bondage and the sustainer of the people in their desert wanderings (cf. Hos. 9:10) is also found in Amos 2:10 and 3:1-2. It is an important theme in early classical prophecy and a witness to the assertion made in the opening words of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:2). 5. Ina thirsty land Hebrew } eretz taPubot. The adjective is difficult. R. Eliezer ofBeaugency understood the basic stem as ta'ab, "thirst," with the lamed to be understood as a secondary element (cf. shaPanan, "tranquil" [Job 21:23], instead of sha'anan). The Targum reflects an earlier witness to this interpretation. Ibn Ezra follows earlier grammarians and commentators and proposes the Arabic stem la'ab.9 7-15 Verses 7 - 1 1 contain a series of images projecting retributive doom upon Israel. Punishment is also delineated in 13:15-14:1. Opinions vary about the intervening unit, 13: 12-14. NJPS assumes a shift to compassion, in which Ephraim's sins are "stored away" or suspended for some future retribution (v. 12). 10 Similarly, God will withhold His "revenge" (noham) and deliver the people from Sheol (v. 14). 11 Such a reading interprets such questions as "Where Y'ehi], O Death, are your plagues?" ironically and considers }ehi as a variant of the regular interrogative particle 'ayeh. Alternatively, verses 12-14 continue the theme of judgment, without any break between verses 7-11 and 15 (Rashi). 12 On this reading, the sinful iniquities are bound up for judgment, not suspended, and verse 14 is read as containing an initial question followed by a cry of despair over the destructive powers of death. This requires understanding 'noham as a term for compassion or mercy (Rashi) 13 and the particle }ehi as a cry of lamentation ("Woe"). OJPS: "Shall I ransom them from the power of the under-world? . . . Ho, thy plagues, O death! . . . [Let] Repentance be hid from Mine eyes."14 10. Where now is your king) NJPS interprets }ehi here as a form of the interrogative "where?" (Rashi; Kimhi). The translation captures the overall sense of the passage (which parallels the two pairs king/chieftains and king/officers), but its rendering goes against the cantillation HAFTARAH FOR VA-YETZE'(ASHKENAZIM)'31
notes and normal Hebrew syntax (construing be-khol 'arekha ve-shoftekha as "the chieftains in all your towns"). Hosea 14:1. Samaria must bear herjyuilt Hebrew te'sham Shomron. The verbal stem 'asham also occurs as a biform of the stem shamam, "ruin" or "destruction." Compare Ezek. 6: 6, whereye'shmu is combined withyehervu ("smashed and annihilated"). 15 Thus Hos. 14:1 may mean "Samaria shall be destroyed" (so Ibn Ezra; Kimhi; R. Eliezer of Beaugency; and Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi). Compare Hos. 5:15 and 10:2. 16 2-4. Counterpointing the preceding oracles of doom, Hosea calls upon the nation to repent. The cluster of elements includes: (1) the recognition of sin and its consequences (v. 2b; 4); (2) repentance (v. 2a); (3) confession and appeal to mercy (v. 3); and (4) rejection of past practices and the decision never again to engage in them (v. 4, 9). It is noteworthy that this fourfold structure anticipates the teachings on repentance formulated by R. Saadiah Gaon 17 and Maimonides 18 in the Middle Ages. A later spiritual disciple of Hosea, the prophet leremiah, also reflects this structure in the confession found in ler. 3:22-25. 3. Take -words with you The prophet instructs the people with appropriate words of confession (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi), appealing to them to ask God to "forgive all guilt" (kol tissa' 'a-von).19 This latter phrase alludes to the same attribute of mercy known from Exod. 34:7 ("forgiving iniquity," nose' 'a-von) and is used in other citations of the divine attributes, especially in Psalms. And accept what is^ood Hebrew ve-kah tov. The meaning is obscure. It may indicate a request for God to accept the good deeds done (R. loseph Kara), or the good heart (Kimhi), or even the words of contrition (Ibn Ezra). 20 Instead ofbulls we -will-pay The Hebrew is obscure. Many moderns read: "We shall pay the fruit of our lips [i. e., confess]"—understanding^«nw (bulls) as peri (fruit of) + m.21 The Septuagint also reads "fruit" (karpon). Thus prayer substitutes for sacrifice, confession being an offering of contrition. 4. on steeds That is, we will no longer depend on an alliance with Egypt; compare 2 Kings 18:24 (Isa. 36:9); Isa. 30:16 [Transl.]. 5-9. I will heal their affliction Or, "their backsliding" (meshuvatam). In response to Israel's confession, God returns to His people and forsakes His wrath. The preceding images of doom and drought (Hos. 13:7-15) are now replaced by figures ofbounty, and the reference to backsliding is counterpointed by the language of repentance, return, and restoration. At the onset, the prophet twice calls upon Israel to "return" (shuvah and shuvu) to the Lord (Hos. 14: 2-3). In response to this act, God promises that He will heal their affliction, "for My anger has turned away \shav\ from them" (v. 5). The consequence will be total renewal: "They who sit \yoshevei] in his shade shall be revived \yashuvu\' (v. 8). 9. Ephraim [shall say] According to some, the verse contains only the words of Ephraim (see NIPS). Others see the initial confession to be that ofEphraim ("What more have I to do with idols?"), and the sequel being God's promise of protection (Targum; Rashi; Ibn Ezra). Still others construct an ongoing dialogue between Ephraim and God (viz., Ephraim: "What more have I to do with idols?"; God: "I shall respond to him [Ephraim] and look to him"; Ephraim: "I become like a verdant cypress"; God: "Your fruit is provided by Me"). 22 Either way, verse 9b brings the confession to a climax.23 The whole verse is a fitting conclusion to the prophet's call. In it the main point is affirmed: spiritual fidelity leads to a thorough transformation of earthly life. The prophet makes his point with wordplays on the name Ephraim (14:9). Thus the "bulls" (parim) of substitute prayer (v. 3) will lead to a divine healing (evpa' [v. 5]) and flourishing {yiphmh [v. 6]) of Ephraim's fruit (peryekha [v. 9]). 24 These positive tones counterpoint the HAFTARAH FOR VA-YETZE' (ASHKENAZIM)'
32
earlier negative references to God's judgment, when He denounces Israel's desire for a king and says: "Where now [ceypho] is your king? . . . I [shall] give you kings in my ire \}api\" (13: 10, 11). Similarly, God's attentive regard toward the people ashurennu, " I . . . look to him" [14:9]) reverses the people's rejection of God for Assyria ashur [v. 4]). Alternatively (NJPS), repentant Israel will again look to God (understanding 'ashurennu as "look to Him"), having rejected their trust in Assyria. 10. He who is wise... these words A concluding exhortation. If "these" refers to the preceding counsel to repent (Rashi), then v. 10a is the rhetorical conclusion to the unit 14:2-9. Alternatively, if "these" refers to the "paths of the LORD" in the following phrase (Ibn Ezra), the reference is to the justice of God ("paths" [or "ways"] indicates divine providence; cf. Exod. 33: 13). By contrast, Kimhi understood "these" as referring to the prophet's earlier words of reproof. On this view, the people are exhorted to heed God's judgment. Some commentators suspect that the coda is a call to reflection by later disciples of the prophet. If so, Hosea's words have become part of traditional wisdom—and invoked for study and contemplation. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah echoes the content of thepamshah, referring to the flight o f j a c o b to Aram and his service there for a wife. The prophet even uses similar vocabulary. Just as the Torah states that Jacob "served" (va-yadvod) for Rachel (Gen. 29:20, 30) by "guarding" ('eshmor) Laban's sheep (Gen. 30:31), Hosea remarks that Israel (Jacob) "served" (va-yadvod) for his wife by guarding (shamar) sheep (Hos. 12:13). Clearly, features of a common tradition are manifest here. But why the references in the first place? 25 For Hosea, Jacob's flight is punishment for his prior acts of perversity (Hos. 12:3-4), and thus proof that Ephraim (in his day) is the deceitful descendent of a deceitful ancestor. Moreover, we may infer that the prophet's reference to Jacob's acts of servitude and guarding in Aram are prototypes or prefigurations of God's redemptive care for the Israelites in Egyptian bondage, and His protection of them then and thereafter (Hos. 12:14). Later commentators pondered Hosea's words in just this vein, and gave full voice to the ingratitude of the nation (Ephraim-Jacob) for all God's beneficences. Among these teachers, R. David Kimhi emphasized this point. Picking up an insight of Ibn Ezra, he precedes his comment on Ephraim's rebellion (Hos. 12:15) with an extended paraphrase of God's aid to Jacob and Israel (v. 13-14): Then Jacob"hadtoflee And they [the nation] do not remember the good that I did for their ancestor, who fled from his brother Esau. There Israel servedfor a wife And even when he was there, he was forced to serve Laban that he give him his daughter for a wife, and I [God] was with him, and blessed him, and he returned from there with wealth and possessions. Through aprophet [He] brought Israel upfrom Egypt Andl [God] also acted graciously with his descendants, who descended to Egypt and were enslaved there, and I sent them a prophet who brought them from Egypt with great wealth, and that was Moses.And through a prophet they wereguarded They were guarded for forty years in the desert by the prophet I provided them, and lacked for nothing. But they [the people] do not remember [this beneficence] and anger Me with abominable deeds and [worship of] no gods, as it is said, Ephraimgave bitter offense. For all that, the hope of the haftarah goes further. It does not wish to end with denunciation and doom. Rather, its intent is to prod its listeners to a new religious consciousness—to a confession of sins and a wholehearted return to God. For Hosea, this means a renunciation of idolatrous artifacts and the promise of political power. Renewal of Israel's being is a renewal of her awareness that God alone is the source of all—in nature as in history. HAFTARAH FOR VA-YETZE'(ASHKENAZIM)'33
Haftarah for Va-yishlah n^WI ASHKENAZIM HOSEA 11:7-12:12
Haftarah for Va-yetze' N^l SEPHARDIM HOSEA 11:7-12:12
For the haftarah for Va-yishlah for Sephardim, see next haftarah. For the haftarah for Va-yetze' for Ashkenazim, see previous haftarah. For a discussion of the life and times of Hosea and of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Hosea" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on other haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah focuses on the sins of Ephraim (a designation for the northern tribes) and God's transcendent love. The deceits of Ephraim are connected to the deceptions of the patriarch Jacob at various stages of his life. Other features of Jacob's life, including his flight to Paddan-aram (Gen. 28:10) and strife with an angel (Gen. 32:25-31), are also mentioned by Hosea. These historical references all have a didactic function in the prophet's discourse. The haftarah begins in the middle of Hosea 11, with a proclamation of Ephraim's "defection" from God (v. 7). This overture sets the tone of denunciation that marks the piece. It is part of the prophet's overall rebuke of Israelite behavior during the reign of King Jeroboam II (784-748 B.C.E.). PART 1. PROLOGUE: DECEIT AND LOVE (Hosea 11:7-11) a. Hosea 11:7 The haftarah opens with a categorical rebuke, "My people persists in its defection from Me," and resists all calls for repentance. b. Hosea 11:8-9 Despite this rejection, God cannot give Ephraim up or destroy him—but will overcome His wrath with divine love. c. Hosea 11:10-11 Forsaking destructive "fury" (v. 9), the Lord will nevertheless induce holy terror in His people, who are promised a return to Him and to their land. Thus Hos. 11:7-11 provides a prologue of judgment and a promise ofhope. PART 2. DECEIT AND ITS ANTECEDENTS (Hosea 12:1-7) a. Hosea 12:1-2 The prophet returns to the present and proclaims the enduring guile of the Ephraim and denounces its political treaties. By contrast, the people of Judah are praised (v. 1). b. Hosea 12:3-7 Jacob's past is recounted and his deceits punished (v. 3-6). His ancestors are now called upon to "return to your God" (v. 7). This call is not a divine roar, as in 11:10, but Hosea's own exhortation. Judah is also decried (12:3). PART 3. DECEIT AND JUDGMENT (Hosea 12:8-12) a. Hosea 12:8-11 For a third time the prophet charges Ephraim with deceit and defection. The emphasis is now on their cupidity and pride (v. 8-9). In response, the prophet raises the specter of the people's return to their desert origins—presumably to begin again with the basics of divine dependency (v. 10-11). b. Hosea 12:12 The cultic sins of the north are again denounced, and the worthless shrines of Gilead and Gilgal are doomed. On this note, the haftarah ends. HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH' (ASHKENAZIM)—VA-YETZE' (SEPHARDIM)
34
CONTENT AND MEANING The dominant feature of the haftarah is its recurrent denunciation of Ephraim's religious and moral behavior. Condemnations appear in each of the three parts. The first instance sets the overall mood, judging Ephraim for continuous defection from God. Counterpointing this attitude, God's affection for His people is proclaimed: He cannot and will not destroy them like the ancient cities of the plain (Admah and Zeboiim, ruined along with Sodom and Gomorrah in ancient times; cf. Deut. 29:22). "For I am God, not man, the Holy One in your midst: I will not come in fury" (Hos. 11:9). The mark of divinity is thus the ability to transcend wrath—to love with unconditional grace. God's "change of heart" is not induced by human pleading, but by a love that renews hope through undeserved blessing. Indeed, it is precisely God's triumphal intervention in human life that explains the figure of divine roaring (Hos. 11:10) in the context of mercy. Touching the hearts of His subjects, God's roar inspires the nation with awe and draws them like birds to their homeland (w. 10-11). With this, the people's resistance to a summons "upward" (v. 7) is overcome. A prophecy of national restoration closes part 1. After this vision of the future, the haftarah returns to the present. Ephraim is now condemned for pursuing political alliances with Assyria and Egypt, and reminded of the conduct of lacob and the fact that his actions were "requited" (Hos. 12:3). The people of Ephraim may also expect punishment if they do not "return to your God, practice goodness and justice, and constantly trust in your God" (v. 7). Like the preceding section, part 2 concludes with reference to a divine reconciliation. In this case, restoration does not depend upon God's unilateral grace, but upon the people's transformation of their spiritual and moral lives. Shifts in temporal perspective also mark the final unit. Like its predecessors, part 3 begins with a condemnation of Ephraim—though now for its desire for material gain and power (Hos. 12:8-9). Forgetting God in the present, the people are reminded that the Lord has been their faithful God since the Exodus. They are then told that they will yet again dwell in desert tents, as in ancient times. The context of denunciation suggests that this forecast is less a reward than an announcement of the nation's return to a formative state, when they were without material goods and utterly dependent upon God. The haftarah ends with a condemnation of the rites in Gilgal and Gilead (v. 12). The reference to lacob exhibits features in common with our Pentateuchal sources. But there are also notable differences, and these suggest that Hosea drew upon traditions other than those preserved in the Torah. Most obvious is the prophet's statement that "in the womb [beten]" lacob "tried to supplant ['akav] his brother [}ahiv],^ while in manhood "he strove with a divine being [sarah 'et \elohim], [indeed] he strove [va-yasar] with an angel and prevailed [va-yukhal]—the other [the angel] had to weep and implore him [for release]" (Hos. 12:4-5a). These events recall the account in Genesis, where it is stated that after "his brother ahiv]" Esau was born, lacob emerged holding on to the "heel [/akev]^ of his twin (Gen. 25:26). They also hark back to lacob's evening encounter at the labbok ford with a mysterious being called a "man." With the dawn, when the assailant "had not prevailed [yakhol]" against lacob, he pleaded to be released and was granted the request only after promising the patriarch a blessing (Gen. 32:25-27). This wish was granted, and the patriarch was renamed: "Your name shall no longer be lacob, but Israel, for you have striven [sarita] with beings divine ['elohim] and human and prevailed [va-tukhal]n (v. 29). This phrase indicates that the "man" was in fact a "divine being," and this is also what Hosea calls him. The common verbs for striving and prevailing reinforce the links between the prophetic and patriarchal traditions. More puzzling is Hosea's statement that "At Bethel [lacob] would meet him, there [sham] to commune [yidabber] with him" (Hos. 12:5b). On the basis of the Pentateuchal traditions, this statement presumably refers to lacob's divine encounter upon his return from Paddan-aram (Gen. 35:9-15). There, too, Bethel is designated by the adverb sham (35:15), and the communion is designated by the verb dibber (35:13-15). The difficulty lies in determining who participated in HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH' (ASHKENAZIM)—VA-YETZE' (SEPHARDIM) 35
this encounter. According to the Torah, God appeared to Jacob (35:9-11, 13-15), and many commentators read the Hosean passage in this light. However, some medieval and modern interpreters interpret Hos. 12:5b as stating that Jacob reencountered at Bethel the same being he prevailed over at the Jabbok ford (the tutelary angel of the place). This interpretation has the advantage of contextual coherence and suggests that the prophet has drawn on traditions different from those preserved in Genesis. This reading also helps explain the otherwise unmotivated exhortation in Hos. 12:6, which states that "the LORD, the God of Hosts, must be invoked as 'LORD.'" By this remark, Hosea or subsequent tradition wished to stress the transcendence of God over His angelic Host and affirm that He alone has been Israel's God since Egypt (v. 10). Counterpointing Israel's deceit in Hos. 12:1, verse 7is the prophet's call to the people to "return [;tashuv] to your God!" The thrust of this appeal is marked by inner-textual emphases. The first of these occurs with the word meshuva-ti at the very beginning of the haftarah (Hos. 11:7). According to some medieval and modern interpreters, the force of the noun is negative, and the prophet proclaims God's judgment that "My people persists [telu'im] in its defection from Me [le-meshuvati]n (NJPS). Others, however, read the noun as referring to repentance. On this reading, the prophet's tone remains condemnatory but now focuses on the failure of the people's return to God: "And My people are in suspense [telu'im] about returning to Me [le-meshuvati]n (OJPS). The two interpretations pull in opposite directions, and much depends on the meaning of the verb telu'im and the noun meshuvah (see Comments). Nevertheless, the ambiguity is not absolute. The opening salvo of the haftarah is judgmental in both cases, and what remains in doubt is the psycho-spiritual state of the people—whether their difficulty is one of persistent failure before God or an attitude of inconsistent mindfulness towards Him. By contrast, God's attitude is not in doubt. Despite the people's sinful behavior, divine punishment is aborted: "I will not act on My wrath," says the Lord, and "will not turn [lo} }ashuv] to destroy Ephraim" (Hos. 11:9). Indeed, God's love will prevail; He will "roar like a lion" and "settle" (ve-hoshavtim) His people "in their homes" (11:10-11). This promise precedes God's second rebuke of Ephraim and His call to them to "return [tashuv] to your God" (12:7); it also precedes the ensuing (third) denunciation of Ephraimite overreaching (12:8-9) and God's judgment that He will "let you dwell ['oshivekha] in your tents again as in the days of old" (12:10). Since this return to the barren desert is a result of the people's cupidity, it undermines the hopes projected by the first statement of resettlement (11:11). What is more, by their play on the verb shuv (return, repent), these variations on the verbyashav (dwell, settle) point to the positive and negative consequences of Israel's behavior. This creates a thematic density of meanings—realizing on the verbal level the full theological spectrum ofHosea's prophetic concerns. As for the return itself, the prophet is direct and precise: "Practice goodness [hesed] and justice [mishpat], and constantly trust [kaveh] in your God" (Hos. 12:7). The first part articulates the social-moral dimension of the covenant, enacting on the human plane precisely those values articulated by God Himself in His betrothal of the people: "I will espouse you with righteousness and justice [mishpa-t], and with goodness [hesed] and mercy" (Hos. 2:21). Israel's covenantal actions must mirror God's constancy, and be expressed through fulfillment of His laws. The second part of Hosea's demand transcends the human realm. Trust in God is an entirely theological attitude, a commitment to a source of power beyond human calculation. But it does not cancel the demands of justice. The two poles are put in dynamic correlation: social action and spiritual attitude must be combined.
COMMENTS Hosea 11:7. persists /In its defection from Me Hebrew telu'im li-meshuvati. Diverse interpretations have been given to the verb and noun, yielding different religious attitudes. If telu'im is derived from the verbal stem la'ah, with the sense of to "toil" or "struggle" repeatedly over an action (cf. Gen. 19:11; Exod. 7:18; Prov. 26:15), it may take on the sense of persistent or practiced action (Jer. 9:4). Such a derivation would go well with an interpretation of the noun HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH' (ASHKENAZIM)—VA-YETZE' (SEPHARDIM)
36
meshuvah as denoting negative action (Ibn Ezra; cf. ler. 3:11). 1 In this case, the pronominal suffix -ti (of meshuvati) refers to God ("Me"), and the defectors are the people. Alternatively, the verb may be derived from the stem talah (passive participle, tnluy), meaning to "hang" or be "betwixt" and thus yield the sense of being in suspense or indecision (waffling back and forth; cf. Targ. Ion., Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Kimhi). 2 This interpretation does not assume the same consistency of behavior as does the first one. It has been applied to meshuva-ti (interpreted positively) with the sense of the nation's indecision about "returning to Me" (Rashi; OIPS) and (negatively) in terms of the people's indecision about repentance "because of their defection and rebellion against Me" (Kimhi). Any certain resolution is impossible. 3 Given Hosea's rhetorical style, the ambiguities may be deliberate. When it is summoned upward Hebrew "summoned" is a plural verb; literally, "they have summoned him" (i. e., presumably referring to the prophets who have called Israel to heed their message) (Rashi). OIPS: "And though they call them upwards." Hebrew "upward(s)" may refer to God Himself by an abbreviated form of the epithet 'elyon (Exalted One) (Ibn Ezra), but Rashi understands %l as a circumspect reference to the subject "concerning which Rasher calav]n the prophets address the people. But they do not respond. This clause thus focuses on God's persistent initiative to the nation and counterpoints the opening judgment. 8. Ephraim A common designation for the northern kingdom of Israel; here it stands over against ludah, a designation for the south. Admah, Zeboiim Cities of the Plain that were destroyed along with neighboring Sodom and Gomorrah; see Gen. 10:19; 14:2, 8; Deut. 29:22 (but not mentioned in Gen. 19:23-29). 9. infury Interpreting be'ir as like ba'er or from be-'ir ("with fzV"; cf. ler. 15:8). Traditionally, the puzzling form has been interpreted as an ellipse, meaning that God would not come destructively "into the city [of Samaria]" (Abravanel andMalbim thus assume ba-'ir) or "into [any] city [other than lerusalem for destruction]" (Saadiah Gaon, cited by Ibn Ezra and Kimhi; Rashi). The LORD will roar An abrupt shift to the third person, with an unexpected use of an image of terror. Some commentators regard the verse as a supplement, elaborating verse 11. Unusually, the roaring serves here to develop the theme of salvation. The verse presumably refers to God's manifestation to the nation in exile, inspiring them with terror and the urge to follow Him (Rashi; Ibn Ezra). 10.
Hosea 12:1. surrounds Me -with deceit.. .guile That is, the deceit and guile they practice on each other ( 1 2 : 8 - 9 ) is constantly noted by the L O R D [Transl.]. Butjudahstandsjirm-with God The meaning of md ("stands firm" [NIPS]; cf. Targum and Rashi) is puzzling. If a positive meaning is conveyed, it contradicts verse 3—unless "ludah" there refers to the patriarch, not the region. 4 Others interpret rad in terms of rebellion (Ibn Ezra), and even consider verses 1 and 3 to reflect later ludean glosses. Given Hosea's overall focus and the specific concern of this prophecy, one would have expected judgment only against the north (Ephraim/House of Israel in v. 1; Israel [instead of MT: Iudah]/Iacob in v. 3). 5 The present text is difficult. faithful to the Holy One The phrase "faithful to the Holy One" may be translated "to the Holy One, who is faithful" (OIPS). "Holy One" is rendered kedoshim ("holy ones," plural; the singular kadosh, "Holy One," is found earlier in 11:9). This is unusual, despite the phrase 'elohim kedoshim ("holy God") in losh. 24:19. Alternatively, if the judgment against ludah is negative, the reference may be to its alliances with "divine beings" or angels;6 but if it is positive, the sense would be God's continued loyalty to the holy ones of the nation. 7 2. a covenant withAssyria... oil is carried to Egypt That is, they foolishly depend on alliances instead of on the L O R D ; compare 5:13; 7:11 ("Like a silly dove . . . they have appealed to Egypt! They have gone to Assyria!") [Transl.]. 37
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH' (ASHKENAZIM)—VA-YETZE' (SEPHARDIM) 37
3.Judah
Presumably the patriarch Judah [Transl.].
4. he tried to supplant "his brother Compare Gen 27:36 ("Was he, then, named Jacob that he might supplant me these two times?"). The verb 'akav is connected with the name Jacob (ya'akov). he strove 'with a divine beimj
Compare Gen. 32:29 [Transl.].
5 .At Bethel [Jacob] would meet him The object may be God or the angel (so Yefet ben Ali and Ibn Ezra). 8 There to commune with him Literally, "us" ('imma-nu). The Hebrew form may be influenced by the precedingyimtza'ennu (would meet him). 9 A midrashic tradition interpreted this phrase as a statement by the angel, who told Jacob that the Lord would speak with both of them at Bethel (see Yalkut ha-Mekhiri, Hosea). Alternatively, Jacob finds God at Bethel, 10 or God finds Jacob. 11 6. Must be invoked as "LORD" That is, one should not invoke any of the angelic hosts [Transl.]. 7. Practicegoodness andjustice The call for repentance is followed by an exhortation to "practice [shemor] goodness and righteousness \hesedu-mishpat\. These traits of human allegiance correspond to God's promise of covenantal commitment in Hos. 2:21:"I will espouse you with righteousness andjustice \mishpat\, and with goodness [hesed] and mercy." These terms occur in many combinations in Scripture—as divine attributes (Ps. 33:5; Jer. 9:23), royal virtues (2 Sam. 8:15; Isa. 16:5), and human ideals (Amos 5:24; Mic. 6:8). 12 The concern is with socialjustice and righteousness, especially the reparation of grievances. Both ideals are earth centered. Hosea also calls upon Israel to "constantly trust [kaveh] in your God," shifting the focus to transcendental matters. The verb recurs in psalms and prophecies, denoting spiritual hope (Ps. 27:14). As here, it is found with exhortations to "keep to [shemor] [God's] way" (Ps. 37:34). 10.1 -will let you dwell in your tents again That is, securely; see 2 Kings 13:5 [Transl.]. But the verb }oshivekha may have a more causative force, and the verse may be translated, "I will yet again make thee to dwell in tents [,ohalim\^ (OJPS). Given Hosea's condemnation of Ephraim's greed, this verse may be less of a reward than a reversal of fate, restoring Israel to its ancient desert condition when it was dependent upon God. 13 The prophet adds that this will be "as in the days of mo'ed," translated variously as "of old" (NJPS) or "appointed seasons" (OJPS). The parallelism ohalim/mo'ed recalls the Ohel Moed or Tent ofMeeting in the desert. 11. When I spoke to the prophets NJPS translation adds "when" to the Hebrew text, attempting to link the content of verse 11 to the previous verse (translated "in the days of old"). This sets the prophecies in some indiscriminate past but leaves it puzzling why they are mentioned now. Alternatively, one may construe the passage to mean "I also spoke to the prophets" (OJPS). This rendition has the advantage of separating the period of the desert (when God spoke from the Tent) from the subsequent times of prophecy. This reading also provides a transition to the judgment in verse 12. spoke parables Hebrew,ada-mmeh. This passage has played a central role in the rabbinic notion that the prophets spoke of God in figures or similitudes that do not depict His indescribable essence. Among various midrashic sources, Leviticus Rabbah 1:1 gives classical expression to the related theme that all the prophets (save Moses) perceived God through a dark or unclean "mirror"; 14 that is, through the faculty of imagination. Among classical medieval treatments, Maimonides cites Hos. 12:11 as his first proof-text when, near the beginning of Guidefor the Perplexed (1:1), he begins to "make the following introductory remarks" about parables: "Know that the key to the understanding of all that the prophets, peace be unto them, have said, and to the knowledge of its truth, is an understanding of the parables, HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH' (ASHKENAZIM)—VA-YETZE' (SEPHARDIM)
38
or their import, and of the meaning of the words occurring in them." 15 Powerful readings of the verse continue into hasidic sources, where masters like Rabbi Nahman of Bratzlav used it to speak of the gradual purification of the imaginative faculty as "prophecy spreads forth" and the role of the purified imagination in the "restoration of proper faith." 16 In a paradoxical inversion, Rabbi Simhah Bunem of Przysucha correlated the word 'ada-m (man) and the verb 'ada-mmeh in Hos. 12:11 so as to glorify the human creative imagination and its capacity to comprehend and imagine God "like no other [creature]."17 H.Asfor Gilead, /f is -worthless Literally, the concluding verse articulates a strong judgment: "If im] Gilead be given to iniquity, becoming altogether akh] vanity, in [be-] Gilgal they sacrifice unto bullocks; yea \gam\ their altars shall be as heaps in the furrows of the field" (OIPS). 18 The crimes of Gilead and Gilgal are articulated in parallel fashion; both follow a sequence of condition be-) plus result (/akh^gam). The prophet also employs several puns: the "vanity [.shavJ]M of Gilead is echoed by Gilgal's sin of"sacrificing unto bullocks [shevarim],n and the names Gilead and Gilgal are echoed in the prophecy that the latter's altars "shall be as heaps [galim]."19 These wordplays suggest a logic of "measure for measure" punishment. Like stone heaps upon aplowedfield less as that ofBethel [Transl.].
That is, the cults of Gilead and Gilgal are as worth-
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah mentions various episodes found in the Book of Genesis, beginning with lacob's birth and continuing through his return to the Land and the shrine of Bethel. Hosea emphasizes the theme of strife: lacob's struggle with Esau and his night combat with the angel at the labbok ford. These actions follow a denunciation of Israel (the nation) as a people surrounding God with "guile" (mirrnah [Hos. 12:1]). This recalls Isaac's use of the word to describe lacob's act of deceit, when he stole Esau's blessing (Gen. 27:35); it is also alluded to by lacob himself, when he reproves Laban for deceiving him with Leah (Gen. 29:25). 20 Given this strategic recurrence, one may conclude that the term mirrnah (and derivatives) is used to mark the continuity of lacob's deceitful character. A typology is established between the acts of the patriarch and his descendants. Such a family trait must be confronted in order to be eliminated. Toward this end, the prophet calls upon the people to repent and perform good deeds. But the haftarah leaves little hope that self-examination will result.
Haftarah for Va-yishlah n ^ l SEPHARDIM
OBADIAH 1:1-21
For the haftarah for Va-yishlah for Ashkenazim, see previous haftarah. The entire brief Book of Obadiah (twenty-one verses) is the haftarah for xhepa-mshah. The prophecy is one of judgment and promise. The judgment focuses on Edom, whose dispossession and downfall is proclaimed for its overall arrogance, and for its perfidy against ludah during the siege and destruction of the First Temple. Having participated in the plunder, they will be plundered in turn: "As you did, so shall it be done to you" (Obad. 1:15). Most moderns concur that the work was written sometime after the fall of lerusalem in 586 B.C.E. Nahmanides is of the same opinion, 1 though other medieval commentators speculate on earlier and later dates.2 The promise is addressed to Israel. On the day of doom they will "wreak judgment on Mount Esau" (Obad. 1:21), inheriting its lands as part of a national resettlement in the promised Land. Thus, the renewal of the ancient rivalry between Esau/Edom and lacob/Israel will again result 39
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH (SEPHARDIM)
in the loss of the elder brother's patrimony. The concluding promise that "dominion shall be the LORD'S" gives Obadiah's prophecy of possession and liberation an unexpected, eschatological character. PART 1. JUDGMENT AND DESTRUCTION (Obadiah 1:1-15) a. Obadiah 1:1-7 The prophecy opens with a reference to an envoy sent to all the nations (goyim) to rise up for battle against Edom (v. 1). An oracle against Edom then predicts its fall from lofty pride (v. 2-4) and dispossession of wealth (v. 5-6). Particularly emphasized is the betrayal of Edom by its confederates (v. 7). b. Obadiah 1 : 8 - 1 5 The focus shifts to the onset of "that day" (ba-yom ha-huof doom when wisdom will fail Edom and its warriors will be destroyed (v. 8-9). This downfall is Edom's punishment for its betrayal of Jacob, when "foreigners entered his gates" and Edom joined their ranks (v. 1 0 - 1 1 ) . For having stood by on Israel's "day" of disaster, they shall be vanquished on "the day \yom\ of the L O R D " (V. 1 2 - 1 5 ) . Throughout part 1, the prophet speaks to Edom almost entirely in the second-person singular.3 PART 2. D O O M AND SURVIVAL (Obadiah 1:16-18) The prophet now anticipates a more universal punishment of the nations (goyim), Edom included. This section is formally distinguished from the preceding one because of the shift in style and the dominant use of the third person. 4 In addition, the prophet stresses the new theme of a surviving remnant on Zion and the utter dispossession of Edom. The part concludes with the phrase "for the L O R D has spoken" (v. 1 8 ; see Comments). PARTS 3 AND 4. TWO APPENDIXES OF H O P E (Obadiah 1:19-21) 3. Obadiah 1:19-20 Israel's future possession of vast tracts of territory, including Mount Esau (i. e., Edom) is delineated in terse prose. 4. Obadiah 1:21 The prophecies end with a promise of liberators arising on Mount Zion, "to wreak judgment on Mount Esau," complemented with an eschatological hope that "dominion shall be the L O R D ' S . "
CONTENT AND MEANING The distinct literary styles and topics of the book have led scholars to identify up to eight separate divisions.5 But microanalysis overlooks the larger coherence of the work and its two related themes: the judgment of Edom and the redemption of Israel. Moreover, a literary reading of the whole shows striking correlations within and between the parts. This is particularly evident if one focuses on the issue of sin and punishment. One will note how in Obad. 1:3 the prophet condemns Edom, whose "arrogant heart. . . seduced {hishi'ekhaY him to vaunted pride, and then later returns to the same terms when he says that Edom will be "duped" [hishi'ukha] by his own confederates on its day of judgment (v. 7). This linguistic play suggests a punishment measure for measure and draws together action and result in a striking way. In another example, the prophet condemns Edom for returning the survivors (seridav) of Jerusalem to their captors on the day of anguish (v. 14; NJPS: "those who fled"), and then alludes to this very point when he prophesies that "no survivor [serid] shall be left of the House of Esau" (v. 18). Once again, there is a verbal echo of the crime in the announcement of its punishment. To reinforce the impression of inescapable doom to befall Edom, Obadiah plays on the enemy's name. When speaking of the plunder to come, he echoes the name Edom with the rare verbal form 'eikh nidmeita, "How utterly you are destroyed!" (Obad. 1:5); and he further plays on the name Edom in his ironic remark that usually robbers just take dayyam, their fill—but not so in this case, when Edom shall plunder to the limit. Sound plays also occur in the arraignment of Edom's betrayal, where Israel's day of "calamity" is referred to asyom }eidam or }eido (v. 13). An echo of the name Edom can hardly be missed here as well.6 One may suspect that the image of "vintagers" (botzrim) HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH (SEPHARDIM)
40
who come and "leave \ynsh}iru\ some gleanings" (v. 5) is an ironic anticipation of the complete destruction of Edom through an allusion to its city of Bozrah and the land of Seir. But the doom of Edom is not the end. In a further account of the destruction of Edom, Obadiah prophesies that a remnant will survive in Zion and will inherit its ancient lands (Obad. 1:17). As fire is to straw, Israel will destroy any remnant of Esau-Edom and ascend the holy mountain of their homeland in triumph (v. 18). Then will "dominion be the L O R D ' S " (v. 21). The historical ascendance of God's kingdom is the grand climax to the battles of the "day of the L O R D . "
COMMENTS Obadiah 1:1. The prophecy of Obadiah Literally, the reference is to a hazon, or "vision." This term is elsewhere used where vision is not dominant (cf. Isa. 1:1). Sensing a general usage here (Obadiah receives a "word" from God), Targum lonathan simply translates "prophecy." We have received The plural form (shama'nu) is unexpected. Ibn Ezra suggested that this reflects Obadiah's identification with other prophets like "leremiah, Isaiah, and Amos who prophesied against Edom." The Septuagint here and the formulation of the oracle found in ler. 49:14 (sha-ma'ti) use the singular ("I have received"). 3. You who dwell in clefts ofthe rock This image of living in a remote mountain fastness, and thus beyond danger, portrays Edom's pride. The form shokhni (you who dwell) is an old participial form with a genitive ending. It is followed here by a preposition (be-ha-gvei, "in clefts"), as in Exod. 15:6 (ne'eda-ri ba-koah, "glorious in power") and elsewhere.7 The form also occurs in construct chains, most notably in Deut. 33:16 (shokhnisneh, "Presence in the Bush"). 8 Ibn Ezra correctly observes that the image of a rocky dwelling in Obad. 1:3 is an implied simile (i. e., "you who are like one who dwells," etc.). You think in your heart,"Who can pull me down to earths This expression of pride is comparable to the words of the king of Babylon in Isa. 14:13-14 ("Once you thought in your heart, 'I will climb to the sky,'" etc.). But this king is "brought down" (humd, tumd [Isa. 14:11, 15]). Similarly, Edom's question ("Who can pull me down?" miyorideini) is answered in Obad. 1:4, "I [God] will pull you down" (Joridekha). Compare also the similar image in Amos 9:2, stressing the impossibility of flight from God. 5-6. If thieves were to come This unit is marked by variations on rhetorical questions: (1) verse 4: 'im ("should") + ve-'im ("[and] should") + the (unmarked) conclusion; (2) verse 5a: >im ("if") + >im ("if") + 'eikh ("howutterly") + ha-lo} ("wouldtheynot?"); and (3) verses 5b-6 :}im ("if") + ha-lo' ("wouldtheynot") + }eikh ("How thoroughly"). These repetitions give dramatic force and intensity to the prophet's word. 5. How utterly you are destroyed! Hebrew }eikh nidmeita. The verb is from the stem da-mah, with the meaning "to be cut off or destroyed"; compare Ibn Ezra (who adduces ler. 47: 5) andTanhum ha-Yerushalmi (who adduces 2 Sam. 21:5). 9 6. How thoroughly •rifled NIPS parallelism "rifled . . . ransacked" is a figurative rendering of nehpesu . . . niv'u. Both verbs connote an intense search, and this aggressive searching can connote plundering. On this view, the verb niv'u is derived from the stem ba'ah, meaning "seek," as is common in Aramaic; but note Isa. 21:12 (cf. Ibn Ezra and Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi). Alternatively, niv'u means "to be exposed" (and thus, derivatively, "to be plundered"). This sense of the verb is suggested by Isa. 30:13, and this is also how Targum lonathan explained it in his rendering of Obadiah 1:6 (cf. R. Eliezer ofBeaugency and Daniel al-Kumsi). 10 ransacked"hishoards Hebrew niv'u ma-tzpunav. In a similar oracle in leremiah 49, this difficult phrase is rendered more simply as gilleiti }et nista-mv, "I [God] . . . have exposed his [Edom's] place of concealment" (v. 10). This simplification suggests that the formulation in Obadiah is the older of the two. However, there are diverse relations between the sources, and in HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH (SEPHARDIM) 41
some cases the priority seems to go the other way (cf. Obad. 1:3 and Jer. 49:16). 1 1 It is therefore best to assume independent development of these Edomite oracles. Commenting on the last comparison, the ancient Rabbis drew similar conclusions: "Several prophets can use one style, but no two prophets prophesy in the [very] same style" (B. Sanhedrin 89a). 7. Have planted snares Rendering w^zor as "snares" follows Targum Jonathan (relatedly, cf. the Septuagint and Peshitta). Elsewhere the noun seems to refer to a wound (Hos. 5:13), possibly due to beating or pounding. 12 Either meaning makes little sense in this context. There is thus good reason to suppose that the ensuing phrase 'ein tevunah bo (He [Edom] is bereft of understanding) is really a scribal gloss meaning "there is no sense to it [viz., the word w^zor]." 13 In itself, this phrase is without context and grammatically awkward. 9. Teman A city and region in Edom (southeast of the Dead Sea), used here to designate Edom as a whole. It is regularly found parallel to Edom (Jer. 49:20) and even instead of it (Hab. 3 : 3 ) . A s a city, Teman occurs with Bozrah (Amos 1:12). 12-14. How could you This is apparently the force of the eightfold repetition of 'al followed by a verb in the future tense. Rashi, followed by Kimhi, renders "you should not have"; Ibn Ezra renders "it was not befitting for you to." 15. The day ofthe LORD is at hand Compare the idiom in Ezek. 30:3 and Joel 1:15. The "day of the LORD" was an anticipated time of judgment against Israel and the nations. 14 It is first mentioned in Amos 5:18 and 20 and is usually depicted as accompanied by violent terrestrial and atmospheric disturbances.
16.you
That is, the Israelites [Transl.].
17. holy That is, inviolate; compare Jer. 2 : 3 ("Israel was holy to the LORD, the first fruits o f H i s harvest. All who ate of it were held guilty") [Transl.]. 18.for the LORD has spoken Hebrew ki YHWH dibber. This formula not only gives divine authority to the prophet's words (like ne'um YHWH, "declares the LORD"), but is used to cite earlier prophecies at the time of their reapplication to new circumstances. In this case, the reference is to the oracle against Edom recited by Balaam, in Num. 24:18f. The same terms for dispossession and survival link the passages.15
19. the Ephraimite country and the district ofSamaria After the exile of the northern tribes, the city and district of Samaria were occupied mainly by non-Israelites [Transl.]. 20. Zarephath A town on the Phoenician coast, also mentioned in 1 Kings 17:9 and Papyrus Anastasi I (thirteenth century B.C.E.) as being in the vicinity of Sidon. Traditionally, the place has been identified with France (cf. Kimhi). Sepharad The Aramaic form of Sardis, a city in Asia Minor, as evidenced by an AramaicLydian bilingual inscription. 16 Targum Jonathan and all later Jewish interpreters understood this place as Spain. The Jews oflberian descent are called Sephardim on this basis. 21. For liberators shall march up This concluding allusion to the "liberators" (moshi'im) of Israel, who will "wreak judgment [lishpot]" on the enemy, makes use of the old language of saviors and judgment found in the Book of Judges (cf. Ihn Ezra). The liberators came to be understood as the Messiah and his companions (Kimhi). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Thepamshah and the haftarah stand at two opposite points in the historical spectrum of relations between Jacob/Israel and Esau/Edom. The Pentateuchal narrative continues the account of the brothers' relationship that began with embryonic and natal strife and assumed consequential HAFTARAH FOR VA-YISHLAH (SEPHARDIM)
42
proportions when Jacob deceived his father Isaac in order to obtain the blessing of the firstborn. As a result, Jacob fled to Paddan-aram, where he married Leah and Rachel, assembled great wealth, and eventually made plans to return to his homeland at divine behest. The pa-mshah opens with Jacob's sending messengers to Esau in his homeland of Seir; and then, upon learning that his brother is marching toward him with a troop of 400 men, he first makes protective arrangements for his family and animals, and then sends a tribute offering in order to assuage the possible wrath of his twin. But it is all unnecessary. Esau receives his brother with a noble and generous spirit. The brothers then separate in peace, each to his own lands. National conflicts between their descendants lie in the future. 17 The haftarah takes us to the end of the biblical period, after Judah was exiled from its homeland and Edom participated in the downfall of the nation. The prophet indicts the elder "brother" for duplicity and arraigns him on charges of passive and active deceit. The roles of deceiver-deceived are now reversed, but with fatal consequences for Edom. Obadiah shouts God's revenge against him, predicting Edom's destruction and dispossession. As a triumphant nation, Israel will consume Edom and resettle its homeland. What is more, this destruction is part of an eschatological scenario that will result in the restoration of God's dominion. It is not clear if the prophet saw Israelite restoration in world-historical terms or as a case of national liberation. His rabbinical heirs clearly regarded the defeat of Edom as the end of historical tyranny and the onset of God's universal kingship. This is because Edom had become a standard epithet for the hated Roman Empire. 18 Indeed, it had already been inserted into Daniel 11 as the fourth and final empire of evil.19 As a result, the prophecy of Obadiah fostered hopes for an end to this brutal hegemony and a restoration of national religious service. In due course, with the assumption by Christendom of the mantle and might of Rome, the old epithet received a new referent. 20 The ancient encounter between Jacob and Esau marked by this pa-mshah was dramatized in political terms through the identification of Esau with imperial or medieval Rome and in religious terms through the exemplification of Edom as the civil cult of Rome or the faith of Christianity.21 For all postbiblical readers, Obadiah's prophecy of liberators ascending Mount Zion to destroy Edom, and the anticipation of God's dominion, was crucial. It was the consolation preached by ancient Sages and recited by synagogue poets as well. 22 Obad. 1:21 serves as one of the climactic verses recited in the Rosh Hashanah.Mw.OTf recitation (known as Ma-lkhuyot) celebrating and proclaiming God's one and future Kingdom. 23 The verse also has a climactic presence in the daily morning liturgy, where it occurs at the conclusion of the Pesukei de-Zimmh service (an opening selection of biblical psalms and hymns before the Call to Worship [Barekhu]). In both contexts, Obad. 1:21 is cited along with the prophecy of divine dominion in Zech. 14:9 ("And the L O R D shall be king over all the earth; in that day there shall be one L O R D with one name").
Haftarah for Va-yeshev ASHKENAZIM
AMOS2:6-3:8
SEPHARDIM
AMOS 2:6-3:8
For a discussion of the life and times of Amos and a consideration of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Amos" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah reading taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The prophet Amos thunders against the transgressions of Israel, denouncing their greed and other sins. Among these are the crimes of selling "for silver those whose cause was just" and of both "father and son" going "to the same girl" (Amos 2:6-7). Readers of thepamshah will call to mind the transgression of Jacob's sons, who "sold Joseph" into slavery "for silver" (Gen. 37: 43
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
28), and of Judah, who had intercourse with his sons' widow Tamar (Genesis 38). Thus the crimes of the ancestors continue unabated among their descendants. The Lord pronounces that the nation will pay the penalty: "For three transgressions of Israel, for four I will not revoke it" (Amos 2:6). The haftarah elaborates of the iniquities of Israel during the reign of King leroboam II (784-748 B.C.E.) and calls the people to account for their deeds. PART 1. CRIME AND PUNISHMENT (Amos 2:6-16) a. Amos 2:6-8 The prophet denounces Israel "For three transgressions . . . for four." These include acts of moral blindness and oppression. b. Amos 2:9-16 God outlines His historical beneficence in delivering the nation from Egypt and guiding them to the land of promise. Among His favors was raising up prophets and nazirites as men of God (v. 9-11). But the people shut up the prophets and gave the nazirites wine (v. 12). God will therefore weigh the nation down like an overloaded wagon, and they shall not escape their enemies on "that day" of judgment (v. 13-16). PART 2. RESPONSIBILITY AND D O O M (Amos 3:1-8) a. Amos 3:1-2 The prophet announces God's word to the nation delivered from Egypt and proclaims their special responsibility and accountability. b. Amos 3:3-8 The prophet enunciates a series of rhetorical questions implying certain inevitable relations of cause and consequence. The climactic question refers to God as the cause of misfortune. The unit then concludes with the questions: "A lion has roared, who can but fear? My Lord GOD has spoken, who can but prophesy?" The nation should therefore know that Amos speaks God's word. He cannot evade it, and neither should they. CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah opens with an indictment of Israel for its transgressions. It is preceded by indictments against six surrounding nations (Amos 1:3-2:3) and the southern kingdom of ludah (2: 4-5). The rhetorical pattern throughout is to open with the statement "Thus said the L O R D : For three transgressions of x, for four, I will not revoke it" and continue with an arraignment. In the case of the nations and ludah, the punishment opens with reference to a devouring fire that the Lord will send against transgressors. This idiom does not occur in the indictment of Israel, where there is only an emphasis on the inescapability of punishment on the day of doom (2:14-16). Also distinct is the fact that the indictment against the foreigners is for breach of international commitments, and not for transgression against divine law—as is the case with ludah and Israel. The indictments against the nations and ludah only mention one type of transgression, although this is sometimes extended by means of a parallel formulation. For example, lyre is indicted "because they handed over an entire population to Edom, ignoring the covenant of brotherhood" (Amos 1:9), and ludah is arraigned "because they have spurned the Teaching of the L O R D and have not observed His laws" ( 2 : 4 ) . Hence the opening words of these indictments, "For three transgressions . . . for four," must be taken as a rhetorical expression indicating excess. By contrast, the use of this phrase with respect to Israel seems to be intended more literally, as seven separate crimes can be detected: (1) "they have sold for silver those whose cause was just"; (2) "and (sold) the needy for a pair of sandals"; (3) they "trample the heads of the poor"; (4) "and make the humble walk a twisted course"; (5) in addition, "father and son go to the same girl"; (6) the people "recline by every altar on garments taken in pledge"; and (7) they "drink in the House of their God wine bought with fines they imposed" (2:6-8). Given this list and the use of technical terms (like "garments . . . in pledge" or "fines . . . imposed"), interpreters have tried to understand the legal basis of the various phrases and not simply assume that metaphorical generalizations are intended. The crimes of silencing prophets and defiling nazirites through drink are mentioned later (2:12), thus expanding the total. Significantly, the opening list of Israel's crimes is principally focused on ethical behavior, HAFTARAH VA-YESHEV
44
particularly acts of venality and greed. Hence the references to religious matters (like reclining at altars on garments taken in pledge, or drinking in the House of the Lord wine bought with money from imposed fines) do not describe religious transgressions per se. There is nothing inherently wrong with lying on garments or drinking wine in the shrine (presumably during pilgrimages and family sacrifices). It is rather the people's utter disregard of how they attained these goods that raises the prophet's ire. Amos is thus against oppression, first and foremost; but he is also against all types of blind formalism, whether it be in the realm of civil law or cultic behavior.1 These concerns characterize Amos throughout his prophetic career, and because of them he proclaims God's word against the people: "I loathe, I spurn your festivals. . . . If you offer Me burnt offerings—or your meal offerings—I will not accept them . . . Spare Me the sound of your hymns. . . . But let justice well up like water, righteousness like an unfailing stream" (5: 21-24). The focus of the classical prophets on "the primacy of morality" is nowhere more forcefully expressed than in the words of Amos. 2 God's arraignment of the nation's faithlessness is juxtaposed to acts of divine beneficence. He brought them out of Egypt, led them through the wilderness, and destroyed the mighty Amorites before them, that they might possess their land (Amos 2:9-10). Later prophets like Jeremiah also include references to divine guidance and favor in history as a counterpoint to the nation's failure to show reciprocal loyalty (cf. Jer. 2:4-12). In Amos's case, the Exodus is specifically reiterated in 3:1 ("Concerning the whole family that I brought up from the land of Egypt") as a prelude to a demand of accountability: "You alone have I singled out [yada'ti] of all the families of the earth—that is why I will call you to account for all your iniquities" (3:2). This assertion of singular status would seem to go beyond the deliverance from Egypt. Indeed, the fact that the verbyada'ti literally means "I have known" and that its cognates in Mesopotamian sources indicate the recognition of treaty partners suggests that God alludes here to the covenantal chosenness of Israel.3 It is for this reason, then, and not for the Exodus itself, that the people are held liable for their iniquities. 4 Accordingly, there is no contradiction between Amos 3:1-2 and 9:7, where Israel is told that its historical liberation was not unique. God also liberated other nations; hence, the people should not assume that their sins would be pardoned by special divine grace. In both instances, God states that Israel's covenantal iniquities will be punished. The announcement of impending doom is marked by a series of rhetorical questions.5 The chain of examples creates a logic of inevitability ("Can two walk together without having met? Does a lion roar in the forest when he has no prey?" [3:3-4]) —and the climactic point is put in no less a rhetorical form: "Can misfortune come to a town if the L O R D has not caused it?" (3:6). 6 But this issue is too important to be left for inference alone. The prophet himself specifies the answer and underscores God's role in history: "Indeed my L O R D God does nothing without having revealed His purpose to His servants the prophets" (3:7)7 The people should thus take note and respond accordingly This prophetic word is thus no mere subjective claim. Using the same rhetorical form with which he began, Amos adds, "A lion has roared, who can but fear? My L O R D God has spoken, who can but prophesy?" (3:8). With this point the prophet counters the earlier divine indictment of the people, who "ordered the prophets not to prophesy" (2:12). Amos will prophesy and will not be silenced. For he has no choice; God's word to him is like the fearsome roar of a lion. The rhetorical touch is deft. Not only does the image of the lion's roar also occur at the beginning of this rhetorical chain (Amos 3:4), it is found as well at the outset of the book. As his opening word to the people, breaking the silence of their complacency, Amos proclaims that "The L O R D roars from Zion" and that "the pastures of the shepherds shall languish" (Amos 1:2). The same sound is again in his ear as he proclaims the power of prophecy upon him and warns the people to "hear" his word. Later readers may wonder whether the prophet simply pronounces the inevitability of doom or warns the people of the inevitable consequences of their present behavior.
COMMENTS Amos 2:6. For three transgressions.. .for four This graded sequence is a rhetorical pattern of the x + 1 type. 8 The pattern is found elsewhere, followed by an enumeration of four elements (Prov. 30:18-19, 21-23, 29-31). 9 It is preceded by seven others in Amos 1:3-2:5. In 45
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
those cases, basically one crime is emphasized. 10 In the present instance, seven transgressions may be noted (see above). 11 According to an interpretation found in B. Yoma 86b (and followed by such medieval commentators as Rashi, R. loseph Kara, Kimhi, Abravanel, and R. Eliezer of Beaugency), the pattern of three/four in Amos means that God will forgive three offenses, but not the fourth. 12 However, in no other case is the climactic item in contrast to the preceding series; rather, the final one continues the sequence. 13 As a structuring device, the pattern of a triad plus a climactic fourth element organizes the oracles of Balaam (Numbers 23-24), the temptations of Samson (ludges 16:6-20), and the disasters that befell lob (lob 1:13-19). 1 4 The pattern of two and three triads plus a final element organizes the creation account in Gen. 1:1-2:4 and the plague cycle in the Book of Exodus, respectively. In the present case, Amos's oracle against Israel is the climactic feature of a 7 + 1 sequence. This pattern is found elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (Mic. 5:4; Eccles. 11:2) 15 and also in Ugaritic and Phoenician sources.16 Because they have soldfor silver The expression may indicate either the bribing of judges (already Ibn Ezra) 17 or the sale of persons into debt bondage on false charges.18 Ba-kesef is used with the sense of"for the price of silver." On either interpretation, the charge is corruption. And the needy for a pair of sandals This clause is stylistically linked to the preceding one. Here, too, the issue is sale; only now the needy are sold ba-'a-vur na'alayim, for the price of sandals. Once more the charge seems to be some type of corruption. The motif of "sandals" seems to be a hyperbole, contrasting "silver" in the preceding clause (cf. the use of "sandal strap" in Gen. 14:23). But some interpreters take the term literally, since sandals were used as probative instruments in legal contexts "to validate arrangements by circumventing legal obstacles"19 (cf. Deut. 25:9; Ruth4:7). 7.And make the humble walk a twisted course Compare Rashi, who understands the phrase to mean that the weak turn from their path to a twisted one out of fear. Alternatively, "turn aside the way of the humble" (OIPS). This may mean that there is a perversion of the legal way of the humble (cf. Kimhi). 20 Since the same verb is used in exhortations against judicial corruption (Exod. 23:6; Deut. 16:19), the present expression may be a charge of the same type. Thus Amos's rebuke is that the powerful "pervert the way [of justice] of the humble" {yattu derekh 'ana-vim). A similar idiom occurs in Prov. 17:23, "The wicked man draws a bribe out of his bosom to pervert the course of justice" (le-hattot 'orhot mishpat).21 profaneMyholy 'name Hebrew, battel 'etshem kodshi. This is an early use of the expression, otherwise known in the later speeches of the priest Ezekiel (Ezek. 20:39; 36:20-22) and in the Holiness Code (Lev. 20:3; 22:2, 32). 22 In these cases, cultic offenses desecrate God's name, whereas the expression in Amos is in the context of moral perversions. In classical rabbinic sources, hittul ha-Shem has the larger sense of profaning God's name by disgracing the lewish religion through acts of immorality and falsehood. 23 In one remarkable case, Ezek. 20:39 (which speaks of desecration_/or idolatry) is radically reinterpreted: "Go serve every one his idols . . . but My holy name you shall no more desecrate" (Lev. R. 23:3). 24 The sin of desecration (which occurs through public acts) is thus deemed graver than idolatry. 8.jyarments taken inpledjye The prohibition is already in the Torah (Exod. 22:25-26; Deut. 24:17). 25 But these cases and others suggest that Amos objects to something more than an object taken as security for a loan. Rather, the charge is against the confiscation of persons (lob 24:9) or goods (Prov. 20:16) taken when a debtor defaults on a loan. 26 The sentiment behind Amos's divine rebuke is unspecified. In Exod. 22:26, lenders are exhorted to return at night clothing taken in distraint, as an act of compassion. 9-11. The divine beneficences are stated repeatedly in the first person, with the pronoun anokhi ("I") dramatically emphasized in verses 9 and 10. God's guidance in history counterpoints Israelite acts of faithlessness. Among these, Amos refers to God's raising up prophets and nazirJ
HAFTARAH VA-YESHEV
46
ites. 27 The prophets symbolize obedience to the divine will as addressed to them; the nazirites symbolize the voluntary assumption of an exceptional sacred discipline (including abstinence from wine; cf. Num. 6:3-4). 14-16. The sequence of elements in verse 14 (mams, "flight"^ye'ammetz, "find strength"; gibbor, "warrior"; and lo'yimallet nafsho, "not save his life") is repeated in reverse in verses 15b16 (lo'yimallet nafsho, "shall not escape";'ammitz, "stouthearted";j , zMmw, "warrior(s)"-,yanus, "run away"). 28 3:2. You alone have I singled out Hebrewyada'ti, "singled out," refers to covenantal election; 29 the verb is used as a technical term in ancient Near Eastern treaties for recognition of partners (see the earlier discussion). 3-8. The pattern of rhetorical questions rises to a crescendo. The pattern has a double climax: first at verse 6, which completes the sequence marked off by the interrogative questions introduced by the particles ha-(five times) + }im (two times). This sequence concludes by emphasizing that God is the cause of all misfortune. The second climax is at verse 8, which completes the sequence with two rhetorical questions introduced by the word mi (who?). Bridging the two is the clarification in verse 7 that God will not do anything until he reveals "His purpose" or "counsel" (sodo) to His prophet. This clarification is introduced by the particle ki, "indeed." From a rhetorical point of view, the reader is caught short by verse 7, since the particle ki normally functions as the concluding element of a triple rhetorical question (of the ha-+ 'im + ki type). 30 In this case, ki does not complete the series but hammers home a new theological pronouncement. It thus serves to set up a second climax, which underscores the inescapable power of the divine word. Taken all together, this unit functions as a legitimation of Amos's prophetic word. He will speak because he must. His final words, "Who can but prophesy [mi lo,yinave,]}n (v. 8), thus contrast sharply with the earlier charge that the people "ordered the prophets not to prophesy"—literally, "they ordered: 'do not prophesy [lo} tinave}u\\ m (2:12). The unit thus also functions to distinguish Amos from earlier prophets. He will not be silenced. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
A close verbal congruity links the sale of Joseph by his brothers in the parashah with Amos's condemnation of unjust practices in the haftarah. According to the former, the sons of Jacob "sold [va-yimkem] Joseph to the Ishmaelites for [be-] twenty pieces of silver [kesef]" (Gen. 37: 28); while according to the latter, the unjust "have sold [mikhram] for silver [be-kesef] those whose cause was just [tzaddik; viz., an innocent person], and the needy for a pair of sandals" (Amos 2: 6). For close readers, this similarity suggested that Amos not only rebukes his contemporaries for immoral practices but alludes to the grave sin of their ancestors in patriarchal times. Just how early this identification was made is not certain, but a clear witness to this understanding is already found in the Hellenistic work called Testament ofthe Twelve Patriarchs. According to the Testament of Zebulun (3:2), Zebulun says that he and his brethren bought sandals for themselves, their wives and children, with the silver received for the sale of Joseph. 31 A similar tradition is found in the Targum (Yerushalmi 2) on this passage. A more explicit reference is made to the passage in Amos in the Midrash Tanhuma Va-yeshev 2, 32 and the verse is cited verbatim in Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer 38. This association between the Genesis story and Amos's prophecy was undoubtedly reinforced by the rabbinic tradition that epitomized Joseph as a tzaddik, or "righteous person" (cf. B. Ketubbot 111). On this reading, Amos's words are construed to mean that "they" (the brothers) sold a tzaddik (i. e., Joseph) for silver. Presumably, these various identifications account for the selection of Amos 2:6-3:8 as the haftarah for Va-yeshev. A remarkable sequel to this tradition is found in the apocryphal midrash known as Eleh Ezkerah, according to which ten Sages were to be put to death by the Romans to atone for the HAFTARAH VA-YESHEV 47
crime of the ten brothers who sold Joseph into slavery.33 A poetic version of this midrash is recited during the Musaf service of Yom Kippur. According to that text, the Roman governor tells the scholars about their ancestors "who sold their brother . . . for a pair of sandals" and condemns them to vicarious death, thus complying with the stipulations of Exod. 21:16 ("He who kidnaps a man—whether he has sold him or is still holding him—shall be put to death"). The divine words in Amos, which state that the transgression of selling a tzaddik was one that would not be forgiven, may have contributed to the tradition that the ancient crime of the brothers needed atonement. According to one midrashic tradition, though the penalty was paid by the ten martyrs of old, the sin is requited "in every generation" and "is still pending." 34 The synagogue poet Yannai reflects a similar notion when he says (in a liturgical poem on Genesis 37) that the "tribes of the righteous seed [zem'tzaddik] will have no [permanent] dwelling until they be requited for selling the righteous one [tzaddik]." 35 Thus according to one tradition, the exile was due to the ancient sin of the sale of Joseph.
Haftarah for Mikketz fptt ASHKENAZIM
I KINGS 3:15-4:1
SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 3:15-4:1
For the contents and theology of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this book (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah begins abruptly, in medias res, with the remark: "Then Solomon awoke: it was a dream!" (1 Kings 3:15a); it then goes on to report how the king went to Jerusalem, stood before the Ark of the Covenant, and offered sacrifices there to the Lord (v. 15b). In its larger narrative sequence, this notice concludes the preceding account of Solomon's dream at Gibeon, where the king requests and receives divine wisdom to judge the nation (3:5-14); and it also provides a transition to lerusalem, where the king performs an exemplary act of justice. Using his divinely inspired wisdom, Solomon adjudicates a dispute between two prostitutes concerning the maternity of a surviving child (3:15-27). The abrupt reference to Solomon's awakening was undoubtedly chosen as the prologue to the haftarah because the term for the arousal (va-yiykatz) of Solomon tallies precisely with the one used for Pharoah's arousal (va-yiykatz) from a dream at the outset of the pamshah (Gen. 41: 4). The importance of royal dreams for national and individual destiny further connects the two liturgical readings. THE PROLOGUE (1 Kings 3:15) The prologue dealing with Solomon's dream and return to lerusalem sets the temporal and spatial frame of the royal judgment that follows (note 'az, "then" [v. 16]; NIPS: "later"). This judgment develops in two scenes. PART 1. THE CASE (1 Kings 3:16-22) The case is one of conflicting testimony brought before King Solomon. According to the narrative synopsis, it involves the counterclaims of "two prostitutes" who lived in the same house. On successive days, each bore a son, but subsequently one of the children died. According to the testimony of one of the women, her companion accidentally smothered the child at her breast at night and switched the babies, leaving her with the dead one (v. 17-21). The second woman claims just the opposite, but this allegation is rejected by the first woman (v. 22a). The scene of testimony ends with the narrator's comment: "And they went on arguing before the king" (v. 22b). HAFTARAH MIKKETZ
48
PART 2. SOLOMON THE WISE (1 Kings 3:23-27) a. 1 Kings 3:23 Overall, this unit contains Solomon's judgment. It begins with a citation of the women's conflicting claims (v. 23). This serves as a summation of the situation and a transition to the event that follows. b. 1 Kings 3:24-26 In the absence of independent witnesses to corroborate one of the claims, the king resorts to a strategem—a kind of psychological ordeal—to resolve the matter. He calls for a sword and tells his aides to sever the living child in two, giving one half to each claimant. The proposal for an equal distribution, whereby neither party would benefit, evokes compassion in the true mother, and she makes a counterproposal that the child be allowed to live and be given to the other woman. By contrast, the other woman accepts Solomon's decision as a just apportionment oflosses ("It shall be neither yours nor mine"). c. 1 Kings 3:27 Based on the responses of the two women, the king recognizes the true mother and delivers the living child to her. EPILOGUE (1 Kings 3:28-4:1) The haftarah concludes with two comments. In the first, the popular response to the preceding judgment is recorded: the people "stood in awe of the king; for they saw that he possessed divine wisdom to execute justice" (3:28). Thereafter, the narrative is concluded by the editorial comment that "King Solomon was now king over all Israel" (4:1). The benefits of Solomon's wisdom abounded throughout his reign and led later people to recite in his name the following psalm ("Of Solomon"): 0 God, endow the king with Your judgments, the king's son with Your righteousness; that he may judge Your people rightly, Your lowly ones, justly. Let the mountains produce well-being for the people, the hills, the reward of justice. Let him champion the lowly among the people, deliver the needy folk, and crush those who wrong them . . . . Let him rule from sea to sea, from the river to the ends of the earth . . . . Let kings of Tarshish and the islands pay tribute, kings of Sheba and Seba offer gifts . . . . For he saves the needy who cry out, the lowly who have no helper. (Ps. 72:1-4, 8, 10, 12)
COMMENTS 1 Kings 3:15. He went tojerusnlem The king returned to Jerusalem from Gibeon, an ancient cultic site where he had sacrificed and received a divine revelation (3:4-14). There was as yet no centralized worship in Jerusalem. According to Deuteronomic tradition, this was to take place when God gave rest to Israel from its surrounding enemies (Deut. 12:10-11). Reference to this condition thus marks David's decision to build a Temple in Jerusalem (2 Sam. 7:1-2), and Solomon refers to it in his negotiations with King Hiram of Tyre regarding construction of the shrine (1 Kings 5:1s). 1 In Solomon's day, the Ark was in Jerusalem. It had been brought there by David in a grand pageant (2 Samuel 6), having been captured by the Philistines when the Israelites took it from the shrine of Shiloh into battle (1 Sam. 4:3-11). During Absalom's rebellion, David had the Ark removed from Jerusalem, only to have Zadok subsequently restore it in an effort to realize divine favor (2 Sam. 15:25). Solomon brought the Ark "from the City ofDavid, that is, Zion" into the Holy ofHolies when the Temple was complete (1 Kings 8:1-9). HAFTARAH MIKKETZ 49
16. and stood before him The text reveals features of legal protocol: (1) the standing of the claimants before the judge (v. 16); (2) the claim of the plaintiff (v. 17-21); (3) the rebuttal by the defendant (v. 22a); (4) the response of the plaintiff (v. 22a); (5) the summary of arguments by the judge (v. 23); (6) the adjudication (here an ordeal, in the absence of witnesses [v. 24-25]); (7) the plea bargaining by the claimants (v. 26); and (8) the final settlement (v. 27). 2 This is followed by a statement of the inhibiting effects of publicizedjustice (v. 28). Legal protocol certainly varied in different times and places. It is nevertheless interesting to compare this civil case with the hypothetical situations of village courts presented in Deut. 21: 18-21 and 22:13-19. These include (1) allegations; (2) presentation of evidence; (3) counterstatements by the contestants; (4) judgment by the court; and (5) public effects. The foregoing bear a striking resemblance to the reported trial of leremiah for false prophecy. From the precis, we may induce the following features: (1) arrest and laying of charges (ler. 26: 7-9); (2) convening of public trial (v. 10); (3) presentation of the argument by the plaintiff (v. 11); (4) presentation of the argument by the defendant (v. 12-15); (5) the appeal to witnesses and their justifications (v. 16); (5) the presentation of counterarguments by friends of the court, with precedents cited (v. 16-19); (6) the consideration of conflicting precedents (v. 20-23); and (7) the final adjudication (v. 24). Compare the protocol presented in Ecclesiastes Rabbah 10:16. 27. she is its mother Solomon's adjudication involves a psychological "ordeal" and attention to the mothers' responses (cf. Abravanel). According to talmudic tradition, Solomon's judgment ("Give the live child to her" etc. [v. 27a]) was confirmed by a heavenly voice [bat kol) from the divine court (saying: "She is its mother" [v. 27b]) (see B. Makkot 23b). According to R. Samuel bar Rav Yitzhak, it was "the holy spirit" that said: "She is its mother" (Genesis Rabbah 85:12). 3 28. divine wisdom Hebrew hokhmat 'elohim. Solomon thus had a divine gift "to execute justice," much as he also had divine wisdom for composing parables (1 Kings 5:9-13) and answering riddles (10:l-4a). The idiom of divinely granted wisdom is also used of supernaturally talented artisans (cf. Exod. 35:30-35). God's gift of the "spirit of wisdom" in judgment became a messianic ideal for Davidic kings (see Isa. 11:1-5). 4 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The two liturgical readings are entwined by several features. At the verbal level, there is a tally between the account of Pharaoh's arousal from his dream of the cows (va-yiykatz par'oh, "and Pharaoh awoke" [Gen. 41:4]) and Solomon's reawakening from his dream-revelation at Gibeon (va-yiykatzshelomoh, "then Solomon awoke" [1 Kings 3:15]). In both cases, this leads to a public awareness that an individual is gifted with divine wisdom. Thus after his (symbolic) dream, Pharaoh fruitlessly consults his court magicians, only to learn subsequently of "a Hebrew youth" with proven skill in dream interpretation. After loseph decodes the dream, much to Pharaoh's approval (Gen. 41:37), the king exclaims to his courtiers that this is surely "a man in whom is the spirit of God \ruah }elohim\ (v. 38) and then directly praises loseph, saying that "there is none so discerning [navon] and wise \hakham\ as you [kamokha]" (v. 39). In Solomon's case, the king receives in a dream God's promise o f " a wise \hakham\ and discerning [navon] mind"—so exceptional that "there has never been anyone like you [kamokha] before," nor will there ever be another as wise again (1 Kings 3:12). This aptitude is fully demonstrated in his judgment of the prostitutes, with the result that "all Israel" recognize that their king "possessed divine wisdom [ihokhma-t }elohim\ to executejustice" (1 Kings 3:28). 5 Though both men are blessed with divine wisdom and discernment, each initially applies it to a different realm: loseph decodes the hidden language of dreams; Solomon determines the truth of conflicting legal testimony. We thus have two models whereby a mediator is solicited to resolve a problematic case. In xhepamshah, it is the king's personal perplexity over the meaning of his dream that needs clarification, and only he can acknowledge the validity or fitness of loseph's interpretation (cf. Gen. 41:37). By contrast, the haftarah deals with an interpersonal dispute whose resolution HAFTARAH MIKKETZ
50
depends upon the people's trust in the judge and his means of adjudication; consequently, only the people (the litigants specifically, and society as a whole) can acknowledge the procedure and its result (cf. 1 Kings 3:28). Trust in a mediator is thus a vital factor in the resolution of psychological or social conflict. In the cases at hand, this trust is a function of demonstrated wisdom and skill. Neither social standing nor high office can inherently bring it about.
Haftarah for Va-yiggash ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
^n
EZEKIEL37:15-28 EZEKIEL 37:15-28
For Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the various comments to the haftarah readings taken from his book (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah emphasizes the theme of national restoration, with specific focus on the promised reunification of the northern and southern tribes, the renewal of the Davidic royal lineage, and the reestablishment of the covenant between God and Israel. The overall progression in Ezekiel 37 is thus from physical revival and national ingathering (v. 1-14) to political unification and spiritualrestoration (v. 15-28). The haftarah is composed of two parts. The first involves a symbolic act performed by the prophet, followed by an explanation of its significance; the second develops the themes of this explanation. The symbolic act presages the unification of the tribes of Judah and Israel in the homeland. The prophecy was delivered in exile, sometime after the destruction of the Temple i n 5 8 6 B.C.E.
PART 1. A SYMBOLIC ACT AND ITS MEANING (Ezekiel 37:15-23) a. Ezekiel 37:15-17 God commands the prophet to perform a symbolic act with two sticks. Ezekiel is bidden, first, to take sticks and write on one "Of Judah and the Israelites associated with him" and on the other "Of Joseph—the stick of Ephraim—and all the House of Israel associated with him" (v. 16). The prophet is then told to join them together as one. b. Ezekiel 37:18-22 God then explains the meaning of the act to Ezekiel, so that he can explain it to his compatriots. The unification of the sticks symbolizes the ingathering of the tribes and their unification as one nation with one king: "Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms" (v. 22). c. Ezekiel 37:23 The theme of the sticks is expanded to include a prophecy of purification and God's assertion of His covenant commitment: "Then they shall be My people, and I will be their God." PART 2. EXPANDED PROMISES (Ezekiel 37:24-28) This part of the prophecy does not refer to the symbolic act, but develops themes mentioned in verses 22-23. Again there is reference to the new king (v. 24), the covenant formula "I will be their God and they shall be My people" (v. 27), and the theme of national sanctification (v. 28). Newly emphasized are the themes of obedience to the divine law, permanent settlement in the Land, a divine "covenant of peace," and the renewal of the Sanctuary.
CONTENT AND MEANING The first part of the prophecy is built around the structure of act, inquiry, and explanation. Its central concern is national unification and the ascension of one king over all (Ezek. 37:15-22). The subsequent reference to the purification of the people is thematically secondary (v. 23). The 51
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
ensuing part further develops the theme of monarchy (adding such terms as "shepherd" and "prince") 1 and national purification. It focuses on settlement in the Land and the new Sanctuary. These added topics are all part of the wider concerns of Ezekiel's prophecies (34:11-31; 36:22-32), but the absence in 37:24-28 of any reference to the theme of national unification suggests that this part of the prophecy is a later expansion of the original prophecy.2 Taken all together, the elements of ingathering, monarchy, repurification, and Temple-building constitute the main configuration of messianic hope for ancient Israel. The themes of the haftarah are underscored by recurrent terminology. In a striking manner, they reflect the concerns and hopes of the nation. The first of these is unity, expressed through variations of the word 'ehad. Thus the prophet is told to take "a ['ehad] stick" and write on it the name of Judah, and "a ehad] stick" and write on it the name of Joseph (Ezek. 37:16), and "bring them close to each other [lit., one to the other; 'ehad }elJehad], so that they become one stick [le-'ahadim], joined together in your hand" (v. 17). The unified sticks are to stand for the ingathering of the nation, when they shall be "a single nation \goyJehad]" under "one king \melekh ehad]" (v. 22), "one shepherd [ro'eh ehad]" (v. 24). Another theme of the haftarah is that of stability, expressed as a permanent change from the past and as a vision of a permanent future. In terms of the past, the prophet says: "Never again [lo} 'od\ shall [Judah and Joseph] be two nations, and never again [lo}. . . 'od] shall they be divided into two kingdoms. Nor shall they ever again [ve-lo'. . . 'od\ defile themselves by their fetishes and their abhorrent things" (Ezek. 37:22-23). By contrast, the prophet goes on to anticipate a future when the people and their descendants will dwell in the land "forever [le-colam]n and the scion of David will rule over them "for all time [le-colam]n (v. 25). Moreover, God promises to make an "everlasting covenant [berit 'olam]" of "friendship [shalom]" (v. 26) and to place His Sanctuary "among them forever [le-colam]n (v. 26, 28). Through these terms and ideas, the haftarah achieves an intensity of focus and emphasis. Indeed, through them the dispersed nation is given hope in a new future—unsullied by the defilements of sin and restored to their Land and God, one people forever. This is the new covenant of shalom prophesied to the people. It is a promise without condition.
COMMENTS Ezekiel 37:16. O mortal Literally, "son of man." This phrase recurs repeatedly in the book, and frequently as here: "and you, O son of man." 3 The phrase emphasizes the mortality and earthiness of the prophet who, at his commission, beheld God transcendent in the heavens. take a stick and -write on it Each stick has an inscription referring to Judah (representing the southern tribes) or Joseph (representing the northern tribes) "and the Israelites associated with" them (see Rashi). The symbolism of two staffs, one called Unity, the other Favor, is employed in Zech. 11:7-14. To create the opposite effect of the joining of sticks by Ezekiel, Zechariah cleaved the staff called Unity in two, "in order to annul the brotherhood between Judah and Israel."4 16-22. Ezekiel frequently dramatized his oracles through symbolic actions (see Ezek. 4:1-3, 9-12; 5:1-4; 12:3-6). The pattern of act-inquiry-explanation is common. 5 The query in Ezek. 37:18 (mah }eleh lakh, "Won't you tell us what these actions of yours mean?") recalls the formulation in 24:19. 6 In this instance, the action of the joined sticks symbolizes the unification of the northern and southern kingdoms. 7 This was a hope expressed by prophets over the centuries (Hos. 2:2; Jer. 3:18; 31:1-27). 17. joined together Hebrew le-'ahadim-, literally, "as a unity." See Rashi and Kimhi, following the Targum. For the idiom, see Gen. 11:1. 8 19. Iwillplace the stick ofjudah upon it This is an interpretative solution of ve-natati otam 'alav }et 'etzyehudah. The syntax and the preposition create many problems in the Hebrew. For example, the plural pronoun suffix }otam ("them") oddly refers back to the tribes of Israel, rather than to the (singular) stick o f j u d a h at the end of the clause. Moreover, the preposition }
HAFTARAH VA-YIGGASH
52
'alav ("upon it" or "with it") refers to Ephraim and again focuses on the joining of the tribes—not the sticks. NJPS (and many modern commentators) do not translate }otam. This agrees with Abravanel's reconstruction and remark: "The word }otam has no purpose here." 9 23.1 -will save them in all their settlements This rendition resolves the textual difficulty through ambiguity. "In all their settlements" renders mi-kol moshvoteihem, literally "out of all their dwelling-places" (OIPS). But if the purification is from the idolatries of exile (Abravanel), the text has already referred to the national restoration to the homeland in verse 21. Thus NIPS seeks to harmonize the verses by a formulation that could refer to the people in exile and in the homeland. But based on the fact that Symmachus renders the word "turnings away" (a Greek translation of meshuvot in ler. 2:19), Greenberg proposes reading meshuvoteihem in our case.10 The original phrase would then be "I will save them from all their defections." This resolves the confusions of the Masoretic text. I -will cleanse them Ezekiel's priestly concerns lead him to regard the people's sins and restoration in cultic terms: idolatry is described as ritually defiling, and salvation is presented in terms of purification. This last theme is even more dramatically expressed in Ezek. 36:22-32 (especially w. 24-25). The result, in both instances, is a renewal of the covenant. they shall be My people, and I will be their God This is a formulaic expression of the covenantal bond and its reciprocity. It is also found in Ezek. 11:20 and 14:11, with alternate formulations in 36:28 and 37:27. The formulary is common in other prophetic writings (cf. Hos. 2:25) and in the Torah (cf. Lev. 26:12; Deut. 29:12). The priestly context of Lev. 26: 6-12, with its blessings of peace, repopulation, covenant, and indwelling of the divine Presence (;mishkan), is the likely source of the language and themes in Ezek. 37:26-27 (cf. also Lev. 26:3 and Ezek. 37:24). Elsewhere, the priest-prophet Ezekiel draws on the curses formulated in Lev. 26:14-43 (see Ezekiel 5 and 14). 24.My servantDavid This refers to a scion of the Davidic dynasty (cf. Kimhi). 11 The expression goes back to the founding of the dynasty; see 2 Sam. 7:5 and its citation in Ps. 89:4, 21 (cf. 1 Kings 11:13, 32, 34, 36, 38). Ezekiel anticipates a restoration of the united monarchy ofDavidic times. 26. everlasting covenant Hebrew berit 'olam. Ezekiel's emphasis on an eternal covenant reflects a distinct exilic hope. It recurs in Ezek. 16:60 and (the exilic prophecies of) Isa. 55:3 and 6 1 : 8 . A s a legal expression used in covenantal formulations, the term 'olam (lit., "forever") is much earlier (see Hos. 2:21). I will establish An odd use of the Hebrew u-neta-tim. Kimhi paraphrases "I shall establish in the land." Compare R. Eliezer ofBeaugency. 12 27. My Presence shall rest over them "My Presence," Hebrew mishkani. The prophet uses the old vocabulary of the desert Tabernacle (mishkan) to indicate the renewal of the divine Presence among the people (cf. Exod. 25:8-9). Ancient lewish tradition (Targum) already interpreted mishkani ("My Tabernacle") as "My (indwelling) Presence" or Shekhinah. R. Eliezer of Beaugency emphasized the protective aspect of the symbolism. This is effected by substituting the placing of the mishka-n "over them" rather than "among them." 13 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
What the Torah portrays as a family event, the prophet Ezekiel projects as a national hope: the reconciliation and reunification of all the children of Israel. In xhepamshah, ludah assumes a leadership role among his brothers and negotiates with loseph for the redemption ofhis brethren (Gen. 44: 18-34). This results in the restoration of family unity and the collective ingathering of the offspring of lacob in Egypt during the time of drought. In the haftarah, God prophesies the unification of 53
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
the northern and southern tribes, symbolized respectively by Judah and Joseph, along with their ingathering to the ancestral homeland. In the Torah, the initiation of reconciliation starts on the human plane and requires human understanding for its fulfillment. In the haftarah, the initiation of redemption belongs to God alone, as does its consummation: a divine grace transforming human hopelessness. Joined together, the Torah episode of reconciled brothers is a portent of the redeemed and reunited nation prophesied in the haftarah. In the influential formulation of Nahmanides, "all that occurred to the forebears [was] a sign for their descendants."14
Haftarah for Va-yehi ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
IKINGS2:1-12 I KINGS 2:1-12
For the contents of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its structure, historiography, and theology, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the various haftarah readings taken from this book (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). This haftarah reports David's last will and testament to Solomon. The dying king instructs his son and heir regarding the religious and political pursuits he should follow in order to be successful (1 Kings 2:1-4, 5-9). After this charge, David's death and burial are recorded, followed by a note recording the duration of his reign (v. 10-11). The fact of Solomon's rule is then added, along with a concluding point that his sovereignty was well established (v. 12) —even though he had not yet carried out the ruthless acts advised by his father (cf. w. 28-35). PART 1. PROLOGUE: FINAL ACTS (1 Kings 2:1) a. 1 Kings 2:1a David's imminent death. b. 1 Kings 2:1b David's last will and testament to Solomon. PART 2. RELIGIOUS ADVICE (1 Kings 2:2-4) PART 3. POLITICAL ADVICE (1 Kings 2:5-9) PART EPILOGUE: N D AND TRANSITION (1 Kings 2:10-12) a. 14.Kings 2:10-11 ENotices about David b. 1 Kings 2:12 Notices about Solomon
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is formed by a ring structure. Editorial comments at the beginning and the end (1 Kings 2:1) encase a report ofDavid's religious counsel to his son (v. 2-4) and his hints regarding the treatment of Joab (v. 5-6), the sons of Barzillai (v. 7), and the notorious Shimei son of Gera (v. 8-9). The figure of David portrayed here is both a pious observer of the Law and a savvy politico who knows what it takes to secure Solomon's throne—which has just been won by intrigue and duplicity (1 Kings l). 1 Closer inspection of the historical report shows that the political strategies of the king's final testament constitute its original content. David's words begin with a militaristic exhortation ("Be strong and show yourself a man") in 1 Kings 2:2. This charge is similar to the exhortation given by Moses to Joshua in connection with the tasks of conquest ("Be strong and resolute, for it is you who shall go with this people into the land" [Deut. 31:7]). Moreover, the natural sequel to David's advice to "be a man" is the political counsel that the older king gives his son in 1 Kings HAFTARAH FOR
VA-'ERA'
54
2:5-9. Significantly, the fulfillment of the charge is the exclusive subject of the remainder of the chapter, in which it is enacted step by step (2:13-46). All this suggests that the exhortation to Torah piety, which interrupts this advice in 1 Kings 2:3-4, is a secondary feature—radically transforming the older political account. This judgment is confirmed by the instance of God's charge to Joshua at the beginning of his command (Josh. 1:6, 9). Here, too, we have a call to military fortitude that repeats the military exhortation given by Moses to Joshua before his death (Deut. 31:7-8). Such an exhortation is natural before the onset of battles; hence it is altogether striking that the charge in Josh. 1:6 and 9 encases a call to Torah piety and an account of its benefits similar to that found in our haftarah. The conclusion is unavoidable that both Josh. 1:7-8 and 1 Kings 1:3-4 are pietistic supplements that bid Joshua and Solomon "to observe" (lishmor) the "Torah" ofMoses "in order to succeed" (le-ma'an taskil). The result of such an ideological reworking of the exhortation is that victory will be secured by Torah observance—not military might. This introduction of covenantal conditions into a military or political charge is nothing less than a total revision of values. There is nothing of this concern for obedience in 2 Sam. 7:8-16, where God's promise of an enduring Davidic dynasty is unconditional. 2 The dying King David is thus made to speak to Solomon in the language of religious rhetoric. The attribution of pious speech to him is also shown in the fact that David uses learned citations ("as recorded" [1 Kings 2:3]), quotations (v. 4), motivation clauses (introduced by le-ma'an, "in order that" [v. 3-4]; cf. Deut. 4:1; 5:16), and wordplays ("you may succeed . . . wherever you turn [;tijheh]" if you "walk before Me [le-fanay] faithfully" [v. 3-4]). The import is that David is a man of the covenant, fully versed in the teachings ofTorah, and that he bids Solomon obey its precepts. By contrast, the tone and content of the political section is more in tune with realpolitik. David's advice to his son is based on personal considerations, and he recalls private grudges that the dying king wants his son to take care of. David takes Solomon into his confidence and tells him about earlier events in his lifetime— (1) about Joab's murder of Abner and Amasa, and the consequent bloodguilt (2 Sam. 3:27 and 20:10); (2) about the curse uttered by Shimei (2 Sam. 16:5-13); and (3) about the protective sanctuary provided by Barzillai during Absalom's revolt (2 Sam. 17:27-29). In connection with the first and second instances, the king's tactics are crafty: he simultaneously colludes with Solomon (saying "you know" [1 Kings 2:5, 9]), appeals to his son's pride and cleverness ("your wisdom," "for you are . . . wise" [v. 6, 9]), and lets him know that death in Sheol is the only way to treat dangerous rivals (v. 6, 9). Moreover, knowing that his son will catch the hint in his comment that "I swore" that "I will not put [Shimei] to the sword" (v. 8), David can die in peace knowing that Solomon will do his dirty work. And this he does, through the agency of Benaiah (v. 46). Significantly, the narrator's remark about the security of Solomon's throne in 1 Kings 2:12 recurs in v. 46b—just after the murder of Shimei. Piety as a means to secure this end (as in 1 Kings 2:4b) is not the issue. The only indication that piety is a pillar of the throne must await Solomon's speech in 1 Kings 8:25, in which the old dynastic guarantee is cited togetherwith certain religious conditions. With that oratory, David's dying words become a public fact.
COMMENTS 1 Kings 2:1. he instructed Hebrew va-yetzav; literally, "he commanded." The term is used for final pronouncements, as notably in the case of Ahitophel. With the failure of his advice (in Absalom's service), "he [Ahitophel] went home . . . set his affairs in order (lit., "instructed [va-yetza-v] his household"), and then . . . hanged himself" (2 Sam. 17:23). For the term in our pamshah, see Gen. 49:29; 50:12, 16; and the Comments below. In the present case, the verb has a double entendre— combining the force of an exhortation (Deut. 31:23) with the urgency of a final request. 3. Keep the charge of the LORD The "charge," Hebrew mishmeret, is a technical term in the Deuteronomic tradition for observing the covenant. It originally has the sense of keeping 55
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
watch, especially over priestly objects. 3 The term is also found in ancientNear Eastern land grants from a suzerain to a vassal who "keeps faithful service." This usage is precisely parallel to God's grant ofland to Abraham for his faithfulness in Gen. 26:4-5. 4 as recorded Literally, "as written [in the Teaching of Moses]." The reference may not be merely to different types of behavior "recorded" in the Book of Deuteronomy, but to actual phrases nearly identical with that found here (cf. Deut. 11:1; also 10:12-13; 11:32). As for the relationship between religious observance and worldly success (1 Kings 2:3-4), compare Deut. 11:22-23, where Moses exclaims: "If, then, you faithfully keep all this Instruction that I command you, loving the L O R D your God, walking in all His ways, and holding fast to Him, the L O R D will dislodge before you all these nations: you will dispossess nations greater and more numerous than you." 4. your line... shall never end The promise that the royal line will not be cut off (yika-ret) is cited from the divine promise to David in 2 Sam. 7:12-16 ("forever" [v. 16]). The guarantee is repeated in 1 Kings 2:4 (and cf. 1 Kings 8:25 and 9:5). This promise has messianic dimensions in Jer. 33:17 (cf. v. 15). 5. blood ofwar That is, Joab had thus brought bloodguilt on David's house; see 2 Sam. 3:27 and 20:10 [Transl.]. 7. those that eat at your table 19:32ff. [Transl.]. 8. insultedmeoutrqgeously came down to meet me
That is, for whose maintenance you provide; see 2 Sam. See 2 Sam. 16:5ff. [Transl.].
See 2 Sam. 19:17ff. [Transl.].
12. and his rule was firmly established The concluding line of the haftarah indicates Solomon's success. Like the language of v. 4b (see preceding note), this phrase alludes to the divine promise in 2 Sam. 7:12-16. In this context, it serves to indicate its fulfillment. See also 1 Kings 2:45-46. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Thepamshah and haftarah both deal with the approaching death of a leader (Jacob and David) and with a final pronouncement delivered to their sons (the twelve sons of Jacob; Solomon). The two episodes begin with the phrase im-yikrevuyemei . . . la-mut, "When the [Jacob's / David's] life was drawing to a close" (Gen. 47:29; 1 Kings 2:1), and subsequently present the final will and instruction. The technical term va-yetza-v, "he instructed," also recurs in both instances (Gen. 49: 29; 1 Kings 2:1). Jacob requests that he be buried in the family tomb in the field of Machpelah (Gen. 49:29-32). This request is subsequently fulfilled (50:12-13), though not until Joseph's intervention with Pharaoh, referring to his father's instruction as an oath (50:5; see 47:29). In a further development, the brothers fear Joseph's revenge for their having sold him into servitude, and they send him a message (va-yetza-vu) saying: "Before his death your father [Jacob] left this instruction [tzivah]: So shall you say to Joseph, 'Forgive, I urge you, the offense and guilt of your brothers who treated you so harshly'" (50:16-17). Joseph accepts this assertion as true and assures them of his good intentions (50:19-21). In the case of David, the last will is a mixture of religious exhortation and political advice. Here, too, the dutiful son obeys his father. In rabbinic terms, the wills are made meiha-mat mitah, "in anticipation of death." Jacob's final request of his sons in xhepa-mshah repeats the more personal account to Joseph alone (Gen. 47:29). It is here that the full moral force of being an agent for the dead is articulated. After supplicating the son, the father refers to the burial in Canaan as an act of hesed ve-'emet, "steadfast loyalty." More specifically, it is best understood as an act of gratuitous kindness, of hesedshel }emet (Genesis Rabbah 96:5). 5 The Rabbis regarded such behavior as the most superior HAFTARAH FOR
VA-'ERA'
56
sort, since it cannot be done for personal gain. In their fulfillment of their father's deathbed wish, therefore, each of lacob's sons acts as an agent (shaliah) for this noble mitzvah. Performed together, the burial even seems to have effected the reconciliation between loseph and his brothers. The agency of Solomon in the fulfillment of David's last will is more complicated. For here his requests do not involve what a person could never do for himself (burial), but that which he intentionally delegates. In an effort to give the act of agency moral and legal force, rabbinic tradition articulated the overall principle that "the agent of a person is as himself" (B. Kiddushin 41b). But in an attempt to eliminate the double evasion of responsibility, they further stated that "there is no agent for a sin" (B. Kiddushin 42b). From this later perspective, David is culpable for the deaths of loab and Shimei. He could hardly claim the exigencies of war to disguise his murder, nor could Solomon simply say that he was following his father's orders or that both murders were committed by Benaiah (at his command [1 Kings 2:31, 46]). Indeed, the talmudic principle that "no agent can delegate another agent" (B. Gittin 29a) would apply here. The medieval commentator Don Isaac Abravanel was also astonished by David's behavior and vigorously dismissed the fiction used by David to evade his oath to Shimei. He emphasized the king had simply said: "You shall not die" (2 Sam. 19:24) —not that he personally would not kill him. Abravanel therefore argued that by delegating death through Solomon, David broke his vow and sinned. Atonement was required. A quite different parallel between thepa-mshah and haftarah is drawn in a homily preserved in the Midrash Tanhuma Va-yehi 2. Starting with the lead verse, "And when the time approached for Israel [lacob] to die" (Gen. 47:29), the preacher develops his theme through the phrase 'tin shilton be-yom ha-ma-vet ("there is no authority over the day of death" [Eccles. 8:8]) —which is understood to mean that one no longer has authority (or personal power) at the time of death. And after further stating that mavet (death) indicates a diminishment in power, he draws a comparison between David and lacob-Israel. Regarding David it is written, "And King David was old" [1 Kings 1:1]; but when he began to die, [we read] "When David's life was drawing to a close" [2:1]. Similarly, when lacob began to die, he humbled himself before loseph, as is said, "If I have found favor in your eyes" [Gen. 47:29b]; [and] when [did he say so]? —when he approached death, as is said, "When Israel's life was drawing to a close." The point of this midrashic comparison is to highlight the fact that lacob was of diminished authority in old age, as signaled by the language of entreaty, while David's loss of dignity is implied by the absence of the title "king" in the notice of his impending death. Accordingly, the preacher's insight has little to do with filial loyalty or parental privilege. It rather serves to suggest how Scripture reminds us that the elderly feel dependent upon their young (lacob) and are regarded differently with the diminishments of old age (David).
57
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
EXODUS m f t ^
Haftarah for Shemot mft^ ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH 27:6-28:13; 29:22-23
For the haftarah for Shemot for Sephardim, see next haftarah. For an overall discussion of the prophecies of Isaiah 1 - 3 9 and a consideration of their historical setting, literary style, and theological teachings, see "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 1-39" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other prophecies from Isaiah 1 - 3 9 recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index of Biblical Passages." The haftarah is taken from the end of a series of doom oracles known as the "Isaiah Apocalypse" (Isaiah 24-27) 1 and from the beginning of judgments directed against Ephraim and Jerusalem (symbolizing the northern and southern kingdoms, respectively). However, the haftarah is not completely negative, and even features an alternation between promises of hope and threats of destruction. The reading begins with a promise of national renewal (Isa. 27: 6 [A]) and concludes each of the threats against Israel (27:7-11 [B] and 28:1-13 [B 1 ]) with promises of redemption and renewal (27:12-13 [A1] and 29:22-23 [A 2 ], respectively). The overall schema is thus A-B-A 1 -B 1 -A 2 , in which the beginning, middle, and end of the haftarah are marked by promises of hope. The dominant expression of this hope predicts a national ingathering from the far-flung reaches of Assyria and Egypt (Isa. 27:13). This will be like a new exodus—a fitting counterpoint to the original Exodus anticipated in the pamshah (Exod. 3:18-22). Moreover, just as Moses beseeched Pharaoh to let the Israelites worship God in the wilderness (Exod. 5:1), the climax of Isaiah's prophecy is the service of the Lord on His holy mount. In this way, thepamshah sets the pattern for national and religious renewal. PART 1. JUDGMENTS, REASONS, AND PROMISES (Isaiah 27:6-13) a. Isaiah 27:6 A promise that the nation will again strike roots in its homeland and blossom gloriously. b. Isaiah 27:7-11 The punishment of Israel is proclaimed, along with the conditions for the people's atonement. Idolatry must cease and its altars smashed; until then, only divine anger will be Israel's fate. c. Isaiah 27:12-13 Two oracles of promise follow, both of which speak of a national ingathering from Assyria and Egypt. PART 2. THE FOLLY AND FATE OF EPHRAIM (Isaiah 28:1-13) a. Isaiah 28:1-4 A proclamation of woe against drunken Ephraim, besotted by pride and spiritual stupor. They shall be plucked like ripe fruit and devoured. b. Isaiah 28:5-6 The prophet speaks parenthetically of the destiny of the remnant, for whom God shall be a crown and a guiding spirit. c. Isaiah 28:7-13 By contrast, the present leaders are in a drunken stupor—priest and prophet alike. They stutter and stumble, and hear Isaiah's warnings as so much mumbo jumbo (;tza-v le-tzav ka-v le-ka-v). Their deafness will be their doom. PART 3. RENEWAL OF JACOB (Isaiah 29:22-23) The haftarah concludes on a positive note, promising the nation's restoration and acknowledgment of God. HAFTARAH FOR SHEMOT (ASHKENAZIM)
58
CONTENT AND MEANING The tension between promises and threats is expressed through botanic imagery. The opening figure of part 1 depicts Israel striking root in the land, sprouting (yatzitz) and blossoming with a prodigious growth (Isa. 2 7 : 6 ) . By contrast, punishment of the faithless is portrayed by broken boughs, stripped of all growth ( 2 7 : 1 0 - 1 1 ) . In a similar vein, the people's ingathering from exile is compared to grain that is beat out and collected ( 2 7 : 1 2 ) , whereas Ephraim's doom is described as "an early fig before the fruit harvest," devoured by all ( 2 8 : 4 ) . And finally, in part 2 , the "proud crowns" (/a-teretge'ut) of "glorious beauty" [tzevi tif'arto) on Ephraim's head are likened to "wilted flowers" (tzitz/tzitza-t novel), trampled underfoot ( 2 8 : 1 , 3 - 4 ) . This image is counterposed to the splendor of God, who "shall become a crown of beauty ['ateret tzevi] and a diadem of glory [tzefimt tif'amh] for the remnant of His people" ( 2 8 : 5 ) . The contrast provides a unifying figure for the overall proclamation and marks the difference between doom and divinity. These thematic polarities are reinforced through the sound clusters te + v/f. Thus the recurrent references to Ephraim's diadem as tzevi tif'a-rto (glorious beauty) and to God's as 'a-teret tzevi (a crown ofbeauty) and tzefimt tif'a-mh (a diadem of glory) are dominated by these phonetic elements. The same sounds recur in the accusation that Ephraim's folly makes him hear the prophecies of the Lord of Hosts (tzeva'ot) as mere babble (tzav le-tzav). This contrast is particularly apt, for the people's inability to hear the Lord's word leads to the wilting of their glory and the crushing of their crowns. Iwo further juxtapositions structure the haftarah. The first is the polarity between the smashed altars of idolatry in the doom oracle and the prophetic promise of a future service of God in lerusalem (Isa. 27:9 and 13). In this contrast the cultic rebuke finds its counterpoint. The other juxtaposition is typological in nature and provides an image of hope at the end of the prophecy. Isaiah tells the House of lacob that the God who "redeemed Abraham" is the very God who will save the nation from shame and regenerate it ( 2 9 : 2 2 - 2 3 ) . This divine epithet ("the L O R D . . . Who redeemed Abraham") evokes the redemption of one ancestor (Abraham) in order to encourage the descendants of another (lacob, the father of all Israel). The children of Israel may thus rest assured, for they shall be restored by God to their homeland. This renewal completes the ingathering from Egypt and Assyria promised in 2 7 : 1 3 , and complements the promise of worship on God's "holy mount" (bar ha-kodesh) with a prophecy that the people shall sanctify the Holy One oflacob (ve-hikdishu Jetkedoshya'a-kov) for His work of redemption ( 2 9 : 2 3 ) .
COMMENTS Isaiah 27:6. [In days] to come Hebrew ha-ba'im, "coming," has been construed by many medieval and modern commentators as an abbreviation for ba-ya-mim loa-ba'im ("in days to come") or the like (Ibn Ezra and Kimhi). 2 This reading aligns it with the eschatological formulate-jyowhahu} ("in that day") in 2 7 : 1 2 - 1 3 and 2 8 : 5 . An ancient alternative understood the wordha-ba'im to refer to the "coming" or "ingathering" of Israel to its homeland (Septuagint and Targum). However, other medievals suggest that the reference is to the coming of the Israelite exiles to Egypt, where they multiplied just as during their first descent into Egypt (see Rashi and R. Isaiah di Trani). Jacob shall strike root The Hebrew verb yashresh is used. A similar usage, also with reference to filling the earth with bounty, occurs in Ps. 8 0 : 1 0 . 7. Was he beaten as"hisbeater"hadbeen~i The Hebrew captures the alliterative sound of blows, ha-ke-makka-t makkehu hikkahu. But the phrase is obscure. NIPS gives an oblique rendering and does not specify who beat Israel. By contrast, the OIPS version ("Has He smitten him as He smote those who smote him?") construes this verse in terms of divine justice.3 Alternatively, some medievals assume the agent to be ancient Assyria and thus perceive an allusion to the fall of Samaria (Ibn Ezra); others identify the agent with Egypt (Kimhi). The identity of the actors in the second half-line has also yielded several possibilities, though most traditional commentators have assumed that it refers to the ancient Canaanites. HAFTARAH FOR SHEMOT (ASHKENAZIM) 59
Grammatically, the parallelism of the two lines is asymmetrical (ha-ke-ma-kka-t makkehu hikkahu /im-ke-hereg haruga-v horag, "Was he beaten as his beater has been? / Did he suffer such slaughter as his slayers?") —since the verb ofbeating in the first line (makkehu) is an active participle and that dealing with slaying in the second phrase (horag) is passive. Because of this difference, some medieval grammarians and commentators assumed that either the first verb (makkehu) should be construed as a passive participle or the second one (horag) taken as an active verb. 4 NJPS has apparently adopted the first alternative. On this view, the variation is merely for stylistic effect. For other interpreters, the decision to harmonize the verbal constructions is based on the assumption that the verse refers to only one agent and one action (see Ibn Bal'am). 5 Whatever the case, the prophet's rhetorical query is denied in the very next phrase (v. 8). S.Assailing them withfury •unchained NJPS is figurative here. Literally, Hebrew terivennah means something like "striving with her." This suggests that when God contended with Israel, He sent her (be-shalhah) into exile in full measure (be-sa'sse'ah) for her crimes. The devastation of Samaria by the Assyrians in 722 B.C.E. may therefore be alluded to. The notion that be-sa'sse'ah refers to a "measure of judgment" (i. e., that it is se'ah [measure] in a reduplicated form), 6 has been common since the Middle Ages, 7 but the idea is ancient. Already the Talmud and Targum understood the noun as referring to punishment measure for measure. 8 Israel would therefore not be punished unfairly, worse than its enemy, but divine justice would fit the crime. bore them off This is the meaning of the verb hagah (see the same usage in 2 Sam. 20: 13; Prov. 25:4). The verb may have been chosen here because of its association with breath or sound (Josh. 1:8; cf. Abravanel). The sense of removal has been generally followed since Saadiah Gaon. 9. This verse would read well before verse 6; the thought of verses 7-8, dealing with the punishment oflsrael's enemies, is continued in verses 10-11 [Transl.]. This is the only price The nation's sin was to be expiated through banishment and the destruction of false worship. This is the only or required condition (see Ibn Ezra). sacred-post... incensealtar Hebrew asherim andhammanim, respectively. The sacred post is proscribed (in Deut. 16:21 it refers to a tree) most likely because of its association with Canaanite worship of Asherah. 9 It is referred to here in the masculine plural, as in Deut. 7:5 and 12:3. The pair'asherim/hammanim is also found in Isa. 17:8. The sense of hammanim as an incense stand or brazier is inferred from the contextual use of the Nabatean and Palmyrene term The term is also found in Ezek. 6:4 and 6. 10 10-11. The referent of these verses is difficult. If the focus is Israel, the verse projects the devastation that would accompany divine judgment (possibly the fall of Samaria [Ibn Ezra]); whereas if the focus is Israel's enemy, the verse projects that foreign nation's doom after Israel abandons idolatry (Rashi). The determination as to which nation has "no understanding" would thus vary accordingly. 13. the strayed... and the expelled These terms, 'ovedim and niddahim, respectively, reflect a sense of loss and abandonment. The pair recurs in Jer. 27:10 and Ezek. 34:11-16. In the latter, the focus is also on national restoration. The motif in Ezekiel echoes the legal language in Deut. 22:1-3. 1 1 Isaiah 28:1-13. The prophet condemns Ephraim for its besotted ways. The focus is on the nation at large; the reference to "these are also" (v. 7) extends the condemnation to priests and prophets. Some medievals and moderns have taken this reference to mark the inclusion of Judeans in the rebuke (Ibn Ezra). The projection of doom suggests that this unit precedes the destruction of Samaria in 722 B.C.E. l.Ah Hebrew hoy. This cry of woe recurs throughout Isaiah 28-33. 1 2 Compare Isa. 5: 8, 18, 20, and 22. HAFTARAH FOR SHEMOT (ASHKENAZIM)
60
On the heads of men bloated with richfood In Hebrew, "bloated with rich food" is gey' shemanim (also v. 4). The large Isaiah scroll from Qumran (lQIsa a ) reads^^y, homge'eh, "bloated; pompous." This makes philological sense, and NJPS translates from this verb (following Ibn Ezra). See also "proud crowns," 'ateretge'ut (v. 1). 9-10. This is the drunkards' reaction to Isaiah's reproof [Transl.]. 10,13. Mutter upon mutter, 'murmur 'Upon murmur The prophet despairs of making sense to the nation. To whom could he instruct God's ways, children newly weaned? Isaiah seems to mock the way God's word sounds to these people. It is like mutter and murmur: tzav le-tzav kav le-kav. The discovery of old abecedaries has even led some to suggest that the prophet is chanting letters of the alphabet in an infantile singsong (the letter tzadi precedes kof). 13 But why these letters? Perhaps because the prophet plays on the notions of commandment (tzav) and measure (kav) —both of which were ignored by the people. 14 If so, Isaiah would speak to the people in a kind of prattle, ironically alluding to divine law and punishment (cf. v. I I ) . 1 5 Alternatively, the prophet mockingly suggests that what the people hear as mere blather (tzav/kav) is in truth God's command (tzav) and measure of judgment (kav) against them. 12. let the weary rest [Transl.]. 13. march
That is, do not embark on any political adventure at this time
That is, embark on the political adventure [Transl.].
Isaiah 29:22-23. The prophecy concludes on a positive note, skipping forward to a promise of national restoration. 16 The God who redeemed Abraham will redeem his descendants, and all shall hallow Him for these mighty acts. 23. For -when he—that is his children—behold This translation renders the pronominal suffix of bi-r'oto as anticipating the noun "children" and takes the object of the seeing to be the work of God's hands. 17 A similar view is espoused by Saadiah Gaon in his translation and by Ibn Bal'am. 18 Alternatively, Ibn Ezra and Kimhi understand the object of the seeing to be the children (cf. OJPS, "when he sees his children"). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Just as the Book of Exodus refers to "the sons of Israel who came [ha-ba'im] to Egypt with Jacob," where they settled and "increased very greatly, so that the land was filled \ya-timmale*] with them" (Exod. 1:1, 7), prophetic reading opens with reference to the people of Jacob/Israel "who came [ha-ba'im]" and settled and "filled \u-male}u\ the earth with produce" (Isa. 27:6; for this rendering, see Comments). Read in tandem with Exodus 1, this coming was often understood to refer to the original descent of the ancient Israelites to Egypt. This midrashic correlation is first attested in a piyyut of R. Yannai19 and is valuable ancient testimony to the reading of Isa. 26:6ff. with the opening chapters of Exodus. 20 Rashi developed a detailed parallelism with the events of the first Exodus. 21 However, some rabbinic homilists correlated Exod. 1:1 and Isa. 27:6 in order to extend the meaning of the verse to include their contemporary diasporas. The positive element here was the fruitful settlement of the new "comers" in their foreign habitats. 22 The haftarah evokes hope in a new exodus. This is done by the promise that "In that day, a great ram's horn shall be sounded; and the strayed who are in the land of Assyria and the expelled who are in the land of Egypt shall come [u-va'u] and worship the L O R D on the holy mount, in Jerusalem" (Isa. 27:13). For some Sages, this blast was correlated with the sound of the shofar on Rosh Hashanah and understood in an eschatological sense (B. Rosh Hashanah lla-b), prophesying the physical restoration of the nation to its homeland. The promised redemption has a spiritual component as well—the worship of God on His holy mount (bar ha-kodesh). A more inward dimension is added at the end of the prophecy, where the promise is given that a future generation shall perceive the presence of the Lord in its midst, and "hallow" (yakdishu) HAFTARAH FOR SHEMOT (ASHKENAZIM) 61
His name (Isa. 29:23). This betokens a transformation of the spirit. In xhepamshah, we are told that God put His awesome signs "in the midst" (be-kirbo; NIPS: "upon them") of the Egyptians, so that they might recognize His greatness and release the people of Israel from bondage (Exod. 3:20). The haftarah complements that image and suggests that the renewal of Israel will be realized through a perception of God's work "in his midst" (be-kirbo) (Isa. 29:23). This redemptive possibility is not dependent upon physical relocation or external worship but upon an inner awakening of the mind and heart to a divine sensibility.
Haftarah for Shemot mft^ SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3
For the haftarah for Shemot for Ashkenazim, see the previous haftarah. For the text and commentary for Shemot for Sephardim, see the haftarah for Mattot. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The pamshah and haftarah are linked by the commissions of Moses and leremiah. A common pattern of divine address, human resistance, and divine assurance is found in these texts. The theme of prophetic hesitation and divine encouragement was also noted in rabbinic circles, and a series of examples are given (Tanhuma Shemot 18; Tanhuma Buber, Shemot 5a). 1 A chain of prophetic messengers is thus formed across the generations, dramatizing God's involvement in Israel's destiny. Moses and leremiah come to their calling in two ways. Moses wanders in the silent space of the desert, where he hears God's address. From this place he will embark upon his historical mission. The fiery bush is the symbol of his initiation, marking his capacity to respond to the numinous in nature and the divine reality that transcends it. Moses is thus a model for every leader whose destiny is formed through a temporary withdrawal or separation from the patterns of everyday life. leremiah represents a second type. For him, divine destiny is an innate quality that must come to consciousness; it is the call of one's spiritual self that must be obeyed—beyond all sense of personal safety and plan. The symbol of his initiation is a divine consecration in the womb, leremiah is thus a model for those who must realize an inner truth known to them alone. Moses and leremiah also exemplify the courage to overcome earthly fear and self-doubt and to transform a private sense of divine task into a life of public service. For such persons, spiritual awareness is not something static or self-contained, but repeatedly engaged with all the challenges of life. In Moses' case, this required a single-minded focus on one goal, tirelessly articulated: the liberation of his people and their worship of God. leremiah's task involved more volatile shifts of rebuke and judgment, assurance and assuagement. His great challenge was to know that one God required both, depending upon circumstance, and that the anger and resistance his words evoked should not be taken personally. Social isolation is the correlate of such a life—a loneliness beyond God's promised protection.
Haftarah for Va-'era' XnXl ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 28:25-29:21 EZEKIEL 28:25-29:21
For Ezekiel's life and message, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" and the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). HAFTARAH FOR SHEMOT (SEPHAKDIM)'
62
The haftarah is taken from Ezekiel's oracles against foreign nations (chaps. 25-32). The main body of the reading is a series of prophecies against Egypt (Ezek. 29:1-16), dating from the last days of the First Temple (586 B.C.E.); added to them is another from seventeen years later announcing Egypt's despoliation by the Babylonians (29:17-20). 1 These pronouncements are framed by two oracles of hope delivered to the people of Israel (28:25-26 and 29:21). The first of these was originally the conclusion to prophecies against the Phoenician city of Sidon (Ezek. 28:2-24), while the second is a prophecy of national restoration after the Egyptian dooms recited in 29:1-16. The new form is entirely a rabbinic construction. PART 1. ISRAELS RESTORATION (Ezekiel 28:25-26) A prophecy of ingathering, promising Israel's resettlement in her land and security against dangers roundabout. Through this redemptive act, God will be sanctified before the nations, and Israel will know that the Lord is their God. PART 2. AGAINST PHARAOH AND EGYPT (Ezekiel 29:1-20) a. Ezekiel 29:1-12 In an oracle dated to the final days of the First Temple, divine doom is pronounced against Pharaoh and Egypt. The king is mocked as a mighty sea monster, who will be caught on God's hook like a fish and flung upon the land to be devoured by the beasts of the field and the vultures of the sky. All the Egyptians will then know the Lord and His great power. Since Egypt has proved to be an unreliable ally for Israel, who trusted in her might against the invading Babylonians, a forty-year period of doom and exile is prophesied against Egypt. b. Ezekiel 29:13-16 The prophet announces that after forty years Egypt will be restored, though her glory will be diminished and Israel will never again have reason to trust in her might. This great deed will convince Israel that the Lord is God. c. Ezekiel 29:17-20 Babylon is promised the plunder of Egypt as recompense for Babylon's role in the siege ofTyre. PART 3. ISRAELS N E W GLORY (Ezekiel 29:21) Israel is promised that God will "cause a horn to sprout for the House of Israel" (i. e., endow it with strength) and will vindicate His prophet among them. Then the people "shall know that I a m t h e LORD."
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah forms an ABA structure in which two undated oracles of hope directed to Israel (Ezek. 28:25-26 and 29:21) surround a series of dated oracles relating to Egypt and its fate (29: 1-20). The words spoken to Israel anticipate the people's restoration from exile and the renewal of national power; the prophecies affecting Egypt anticipate doom and only modest recovery. The oracles against Pharaoh and Egypt are not of one piece. The first group is dated to the tenth month of "the tenth year" (29:1) of King Jehoiachin's exile to Babylon in 597 B.C.E.2 Ezekiel's opening prophecy against Egypt may thus have occured at the beginning of 586 B.C.E., when the nation placed hope in an alliance with Egypt during the final Babylonian siege of Jerusalem (cf. Jer. 37:5). 3 Israel's vain trust is the basis of the prophet's vilification of Egypt, which was "a staff of reed" to "the House of Israel: when they grasped you with the hand, you would splinter" (Ezek. 29:6-7). Another doom prophecy is dated to the beginning o f t h e twenty-seventh year" of Jehoiachin's exile (571 B.C.E.).4 In it the Lord speaks again to Ezekiel and tells him that Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, would soon bring ruin upon the land of Egypt—a delayed recompense for the Babylonian siege against lyre years before (w. 17-20). The themes oflsraelite restoration and Egyptian doom are underscored by repeated words. Particularly forceful is the cluster bearing upon ingathering and dispersion, true security and false trust. Thus in the opening oracle, the House of Israel that "have been dispersed" (na-fotzu) among the "peoples" ('ammim) is promised that they shall be "gathered" (ka-btzi) by God to their 63
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
homeland, where they shall "dwell" (yaslwu) in "security" (la-vetah) (Ezek. 28:25-26). By contrast, doomed Egypt (in the figure of the "pharaonic fish") will be caught and left "ungathered" (ve-lo tikkavetz-, root k-b-tz:, NJPS: "unburied") on her shores (29:5) or (in a more conventional image) scattered by God (ve-hafitzoti) among the lands (29:12). So great is their punishment that, though God "will gather akabbetz] the Egyptians from the peoples \ha-'ammim\ among whom they were dispersed [nafotzu]" (29:13), they will not rise to their former greatness and will never again "be the trust" (le-mivtah) of the House oflsrael (29:16). This repetition of terms provides a rhetorical point-counterpoint, underscoring God's power over Israel and the nations. These acts of divine might will convince both Israel and Egypt that the Lord is the true God; or in the language of the prophet, both natives and foreigners "shall know" (ve-yade'u) that the Lord is God (Ezek. 28:26; 29:6, 16, 21). This recognition motif is a signature feature of the prophet Ezekiel and echoes a formula first found in the Book of Exodus. There too the Lord promises that both Israel and the Egyptians shall know (ve-yade'w, vi-yda'atem) His awesome might (Egypt: Exod. 7:5; 14:4, 18; Israel: Exod. 6:7; 10:2). Such knowledge is neither vague nor abstract, but based on direct experience—a theological confirmation through the concrete events of history. To underscore the effect of divine victory, the Egyptian enemy is portrayed as a figure of mythic arrogance. The pharaoh is identified with the "mighty monster" of the Nile who proclaims that "My Nile is my own; I made it for myself" (or even: "I have created myself!" [Ezek. 29:3]; see Comments). The defeat of this monster (called tannim^ like tannin) echoes God's destruction of primordial sea monsters (cf. "tannin in Isa. 27:1). Other prophetic ripostes against arrogant foreign kings make use of mythic themes (e. g., Ezekiel's own polemic against the king of Tyre as a "divine man" made mortal, in Ezek. 28:1-19; and Isaiah's prophecy against the king of Babylon as an "astral being" hurled from heaven, in Isa. 14:1-21). In the present case, Ezekiel mocks the claims of inviolable might vaunted by the pharaoh. For this pride, the king is humbled and flung like a fish upon the banks. This motif of ignominious death without burial is a further feature of prophetic oratory against kings with godly pretensions (see Isa. 14:18-19) —a horrendous curse for the ancients, as is known from Assyrian, biblical, and rabbinic sources. In this victory, God's providential power is exalted. Its historical manifestation includes the ascension oflsrael's "horn" of strength (Ezek. 29:21).
COMMENTS Ezekiel 28:25-26. The theme oflsrael's ingathering recurs throughout Ezekiel's prophecies of hope (cf. Ezek. 11:17; 20:34; 34:13; 36:24; 37:21). This oracular promise of building and planting literally reverses ancient curses for covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:30, 38-40). Positive and negative variations of the motif are prominent in the prophecies of leremiah, Ezekiel's contemporary.5 The present promise of security in the land alludes to the covenant blessings of Lev. 26:5. The sequence of national ingathering and security recurs in Ezek. 34:12-16 and 25-27. 25. WhenI. . . have shown Myself holy through them God speaks of His manifestation of sanctity by restoring Israel to its homeland. The Hebrew verb for "have shown Myself holy" is ve-nikdashtif A similar formulation of this theology, with the same terms for national ingathering and for divine sanctification through public acts, occurs in Ezek. 20:41. In that setting, the postexilic sanctification complements God's assertion that by not publicly destroying the nation for its sins, He avoided desecrating His holy Name (cf. 20:9, 14). 7 This language and these notions are priestly in origin; see Lev. 22:32. Ezekiel 29:1. tenth year
Dated from the beginning of King lehoiachin's exile to Babylon
i n 5 9 7 B.C.E.
3.1 made itfor myself Hebrew 'asitini. NIPS translates this to mean that Pharaoh boasts of having created the Nile. He thus claims self-sufficiency. This understanding agrees with Rashi. But such a use of the suffix to connote a dative is unusual. Alternatively, the verb means "I have made myself." This is the more radical mythic assertion, laden with the hubris of self-creation. It was so understood in many rabbinic midrashim and liturgical poems. 8 HAFTARAH FOR VA-'ERA'
64
Grammatically, the use of a reflexive form with a suffix is rare. Moderns have tended to soften the expression through emendation. In some cases 'asitini (I have made myself) is changed to 'asitiv/m (I have made it/them) 9 or simply 'asiti (I have made [it]), following the formulation in Ezek. 29:9. 10 The difficulty remains. As we have it, Pharaoh's boast to be a creator must be seen against God's own self-assertion as one who speaks and "will act" ('asiti) (Ezek. 17:24; 22:14). The verb 'asah (to do; make) is also used in terms of the creation of the heavens and earth (Gen. 2:3-4; Exod. 20:11). 4. I will put hooks in yourjaws This alludes to myths of a primordial battle between God and the tannin-monster found in Israelite literature (see Isa. 51:9; Ps. 74:13f.; Job26:12f.). The motif is not native to Egyptian mythology. 11 6-9. The form of Ezekiel's arraignment has three parts: (1) the statement of the crime: "because \ya'an\' (v. 6) + specification of misdeeds; (2) the divine judgment: "therefore \lakhenY (v. 8; NJPS: assuredly) + the dooms; and (3) the consequence: the offenders "shall know \veyade'u]" (v. 9) the Lord. 12 For other examples, see Ezek. 25:3-5, 6-7, 8-9, 12-13. 6. a staffofreed The portrayal of false confidence in political alliances as trust in a broken reed is first found in the prophecies of Isaiah, when an Assyrian envoy describes Israel's trust in Egypt in such terms (Isa. 36:6). By contrast, a postexilic prophecy portrays God's chosen servant as a reliable reed, an unbreakable source of divine instruction to the nations (Isa. 42:1-4). lO.from Migdol to Syene A comprehensive geographical designation of Egypt, from north to south (cf. the designation of Israel as "from Dan to Beersheba" [Judg. 20:1]). Migdol is a Semitic name (meaning "Tower"; in Egyptian sources, ma-k-ti-m) used for several frontier towns in the eastern Delta. The toponym is also mentioned in the Exodus narrative (Exod. 14: 2). Syene (the Greek form) marks the southern frontier, just north of the first cataract of the Nile, modern-day Aswan (the Arabic form). It is pronounced Sun in Egyptian; Sven in Hebrew. 12.forty years A typological number; it is well-known in biblical literature as a comprehensive period of time, perhaps two generations. This multiple is used to mark the period (forty years) during which the Israelites would wander in the wilderness, in punishment for the period (forty days) the faithless spies scouted the land (Num. 14:33f.). Various other examples occur in the Hebrew Bible and in rabbinic and other Semitic cultures. 13 14. land of their origin Hebrew mekhumtam is obscure, but related to mekhorotayikh in Ezek. 16:3 (where the synonym is "land of birth"). Rashi and R. David Kimhi (following the Targum) imply a dialectal relation to megumtam, "their dwelling." land ofPathros
That is, southern Egypt [Transl.].
17-20. This oracle promises King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon the spoils of Egypt, in recompense for his siege against Tyre. The prophecy is dated to 571 (the twenty-seventh year of Jehoiachin's exile), or seventeen years after the announcement of Egyptian doom in Ezek. 29:1. This compensation is a transformation of an older oracle against Tyre, in which it was predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would "plunder [its] wealth" (Ezek. 26:7-14). As this prophecy did not come to pass, Ezekiel now promises Nebuchadnezzar the booty of Egypt. It is an excellent example of the re-specification of an older prophecy that failed to materialize. 14 In this circumstance, it dramatizes the involvement oflsrael's God in the fate of other nations. 18. Nebuchadrezzar This form corresponds to the Babylonian name; the more wellknown biblical variant is Nebuchadnezzar. 21. On that day I -will endow the House ofIsrael -with strength Literally, "On that day I will cause a horn to sprout for the House oflsrael." Several medieval commentators argue that the expression "that day" refers to the forty years of Egyptian doom mentioned in Ezek. 29:12, 65
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIGGASH
which commenced in the twenty-seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar (see 29:17). This calculation points to the onset of Persian power and Cyrus's defeat of Babylon in 539 B.C.E. (see Kimhi, citing earlier traditions; also Rashi). The "horn" was thus understood as Cyrus, whose edict (in 538 B.C.E.) permitted the return ofBabylonian Jews to their homeland. This understanding is anachronistic and literalizes a typological figure (the forty years). 15 Alternatively, the prophetic image may be construed more figuratively as referring to the renewal of national "strength" after the divine salvation to come (see R. Eliezer of Beaugency). 16 Such an interpretation is supported by the language of Hannah's prayer of thanks to God, upon fulfillment of her request for a child (1 Sam. 2:1). The combination there of images of a raised horn and a mouth opened wide (in pride) against one's enemies (and their taunts) clarifies the combination in Ezek. 29:21 of a sprouting horn (Israel) and an opened mouth (a figure of vindication against scoffers). For the two images separately, see Ps. 132:17 and Ezek. 16:63. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
A rich verbal and thematic tapestry links the readings. The pamshah portrays the promise and fulfillment of divine judgments (shefatim; NIPS: "chastisements") against Pharaoh and all Egypt (Exod. 7:4). At the outset, proof of Moses' divine commission is exemplified by the wondrous transformation of his staff into a "serpent" (tannin), as well as a plague upon the waters of the Nile (ye'or), so that its "fish" will die (7:15, 17-18, 20). Through such activities, the Egyptians would come to "know" (ve-yade'u) the Lord who "would bring out the Israelites from their midst" (7:5). Correspondingly, the haftarah announces a promise of divine judgments (shefatim-, NIPS: "punishment") against Israel's enemies (Ezek. 28:26) and forecasts doom against Pharaoh and all Egypt (29:1-20). Moreover, the Pharaoh is presented as a haughty serpent (tannin; NIPS: "monster") in the Nile (ye'or), whose "fish" will be cast from the waters to die (29:3-5, 10). Through such activities, Israel and Egypt shall "know" (ve-yade'u) the Lord (28:26; 29:6, 16, 21). Theparashah and haftarah thus stand in a typological relationship to one other—as an old and new judgment against Egypt. lust as the first occurrence came to pass with Israel's liberation, so the new judgment against Egypt is marked by promises of the nation's ingathering and the sprouting of its horn of victory. In this way, history is envisaged as a recurrent pattern of divine acts of redemption. Through His saving acts, God will again be recognized as the transcendent source of redemption and will vindicate human hopes of freedom from oppression. The people are challenged to look beyond political alliances and the false confidences they bring (Ezek. 29: 6-7, 16). Only divine power will liberate the people. In several rabbinic homilies, our pamshah and haftarah are also read in light of each other, producing dramatic and ironic critiques of pharaonic pretensions. The starting point for these ripostes begins with the assumption that Pharaoh's proclamation of superiority in Ezek. 29:3 (}ani 'asitini) was nothing less than a proclamation of self-divinization ("I have made myself [a god]") or self-creation ("I have made myself")—not simply an assertion of creative power ("I have made it"; viz., the Nile). On the basis of the first boast (self-divinization), various accounts explain why the Pharaoh went down to the river early in the morning. With bold mockery, the Sages explain that Pharaoh sneaked down to the Nile to perform his bodily functions out of sight of all who would believe him a god. It was there that Moses confronted him and prevented the Pharaoh from doing his intended actions—mocking his physical needs and vaunted divinity.17 Since it is hardly likely that the Sages knew ancient Egyptian myths of the god-king (Pharaoh as Horus incarnate), one may suspect that contemporary expressions of divine kingship among the Roman Caesars may have pricked their ire. The midrashic comments (and hence the haftarah itself) would thus function as indirect polemics against contemporary pagan ideologies. 18 The motif of Pharaoh's self-creation ("I made myself") is sometimes linked with the theme of self-divinization and sometimes stands alone. Old Egyptian myths of divine self-generation may lie behind Ezekiel's polemic. For the Sages, the hubris of such a proclamation was sufficient to provoke their response. In fact, in many comments (both ancient and medieval), God's statement HAFTARAH FOR VA-'ERA'
66
to Moses in xhepa-mshah that He would "place [him] in the role of God [}elohim] to Pharaoh" (Exod. 7:1) was understood to counter the Pharaoh's claim that he was a self-created being—that is, a god. 19 "The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses: 'Wicked Pharaoh has made himself a god; inform him that he is a mere nothing. Indeed, I shall make you a god over him! For insofar as he made himself a god, as Scripture says, "The Nile is mine; I have made myself" (Ezek. 29: 3), therefore let him see you and say that this is (really) a god.' " 2 0 In presenting this teaching, rabbinic tradition walked a fine line—affirming the Scriptural statement ofMoses' "divinization" before Pharaoh, yet stressing that this God-given status is limited, and that it risks leading to false pride and presumption. 21 Indeed, Moses is warned against perverting his destiny through haughtiness, for then he would mirror the pretensions of the reviled king. The midrash thus captures the paradox of a leader who is at once the servant of higher values and imbued with special powers for their realization. As Moses needs to bear in mind the source ofhis authority, the words "I am the L O R D ['ani YHWH]" (Exod. 6:2; Ezek. 29:21) provide a fundamental theological link between thepamshah and haftarah.
Haftarah for Bo' ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH 46:13-28 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 46:13-28
For Jeremiah's life and times and a discussion of the content, style, and theology of the Book of Jeremiah, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of the other haftarah readings taken from Jeremiah's prophecies, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." Jeremiah 46:13-28 is part of a series of prophecies against Egypt and constitute the first group of pronouncements against foreign nations collected in Jeremiah 46-51. This anthology is entitled: "The word of the L O R D to the prophet Jeremiah concerning the nations" (Jer. 46: l). 1 As a distinct thematic unit, these oracles stand apart from the prophecies against Israel in Jeremiah 1-25, the consolations in Jeremiah 30-32, and the historical narratives found in Jeremiah 26-29 and 33-45. 2 The anti-Egyptian oracles in Jer. 46:13-26 are of varied content and styles. They are followed by two positive oracles on behalfof Israel in verses 27-28. The structure of the haftarah thus moves from negative prophecies directed against an external foe to positive exhortations addressed to the prophet's people. PART 1. AGAINST EGYPT (Jeremiah 46:13-26) a. Jeremiah 46:13 A narrative introduction states that the prophecies deal with "the coming of King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon" against Egypt. This is significant, since there is no specification of the enemy in the ensuing oracles. Presumably, the "gadfly from the north" (v. 20; also v. 24) was construed by later editors to refer to Babylon, in light of this identification elsewhere in Jeremiah (see Comments). b. Jeremiah 46:14-19 A declaration of impending doom is directed to the various Egyptian outposts (w. 14-16a), eliciting fear among the population (w. 16b-17). God asserts His might and threatens exile (w. 18-19). References to the city of Noph appear at the beginning and end of the unit. 3 c. Jeremiah 46:20-24 Apparently another oracle against Egypt. It opens with the new motif of Egypt as "a handsome heifer." As in the first series, flight is emphasized (v. 21; cf. v. 16), and the epithet "fair Egypt" (ba-tmitsmyim) recurs (w. 19 and 24). The units are thus related. d. Jeremiah 46:25-26 A narrative summary, repeating the theme of Egyptian destruction at the hands of King Nebuchadnezzar (= Nebuchadrezzar) of Babylon. 67
HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
PART 2. HAVE N O FEAR, JACOB (Jeremiah 46:27-28) Two oracles of promise and support for Israel. Both exhort confidence through the formula "Have no fear, My servant Jacob." The first focuses on deliverance from exilic captivity; the second emphasizes punishment, contrasting the fate of the nations who will come to "an end" and that of Israel, who "will not" be brought to "an end."
CONTENT AND MEANING The doom oracles against Egypt (part 1) are given a historical setting in Jer. 46:13 and 25-26, where King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon is identified as the avenger; but no precise date is given. One may surmise that Jeremiah's words date from the same period as the group of oracles found in 46:3-12, that is, from the time of the Egyptian defeat at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar in the fourth year of the reign of King Jehoiakim o f j u d a h , 604 B.C.E. (46:2). The oracles of the haftarah mock Egyptian defenses and repeatedly predict a headlong flight. The prophet says that the Egyptians will "not stand firm"—neither the regulars nor the mercenaries, for "the L O R D thrust them down" and "made many stumble" (46:15-16). The language of doom is filled with taunting proclamations of the Egyptian call to arms and the ensuing flight (Jer. 46:14, 15-16). These are counterpointed by the voice of the Lord, proclaiming doom and desolation against the people. This difference is underscored by the mocking epithet ascribed by the Egyptian defenders to "Pharaoh king of Egypt: 'Braggart who let the hour go by5" (v. 17). By contrast, God "the King, whose name is LORD of Hosts" swears by His own Being that the words of doom "shall. . . come to pass" (v. 18). The aura of inevitability is reinforced by the repetition of the particle ki, with the sense of"for" and "surely" (w. 14-15, 18-19, 21-23). In these prophecies, "The LORD of Hosts, the God of Israel" is the universal Lord of history—inflicting punishment "on Egypt, her gods, and her kings" (Jer. 46:25). However, the doom is not total destruction; eventual restoration is predicted as God's final word to the Egyptians (v. 26). The final oracles of the haftarah breathe another spirit (part 2). Israel is exhorted to overcome fear and loss though assurances that the Lord is with them and "will deliver" them "from their land of captivity" (Jer. 46:27). An ultimate vindictiveness tinges this prophecy of encouragement and restoration: God promises that He "will make an end of all the nations" among which Israel was "banished"—but "will not make an end of you." The Israelites will thus receive judgment in proper "measure," but will survive (v. 28).
COMMENTS Jeremiah 46:14. inMigdol... inNoph andTahpanhes The Egyptian place-names have been Hebraized. Migdol is a Semitic name meaning "Tower" (in Egyptian sources, ma-k-ti-m):, it was used for several frontier towns in the eastern Delta. Noph is a corruption of Moph (see Hos. 9:6), or Memphis (Saqqara, in the lower Nile). Tahpanhes is derived from two words, meaning "Fortress of the Nubian" (Tel Daphne). 15. stalwarts swept away Hebrew 'nishaph means "swept away" (for the verb sahaph, cf. Prov. 28:3). In the Book of Jeremiah, the alternate dialectal root sahab also occurs (see Jer. 15:3; 22:19; 49:20; 50:45). Given the theme of flight in these prophecies (cf. nas in 46:21), and the Egyptian setting of the oracle, it is possible that the word 'nishaph was chosen as a derisive pun on the Egyptian god Apis worshiped at Memphis. This interpretation is, in fact, articulated in the Septuagint, which renders the phrase "Why has Apis fled, the Bull not stood?" This translation is based on a midrashic etymology in which the word 'nishaph was construed from the verb nas (has fled) and the noun haph (Apis). It also takes the plural "bulls" abireykha) as a "plural of majesty" ("Bull") and links it to the next line. 16. " Up I Let us 'return to our people" who flee Egypt on the day of rout.
This refers to the mercenaries or foreign traders
HAFTARAH FORBE-SHALLAH68
deadly Hebrew ha-yonah. Compare Jer. 50:16 (also Jer. 25:38 and Zeph. 3:1). The word may be related to the legal verb used to convey oppressive violence in Exod. 22:20 and elsewhere (Lev. 19:33; Ezek. 18:12). 17. "'Braggart who let the hourgo by" The phrase is difficult. NJPS offers a figurative translation, taking sha'on (uproar; commotion) in the sense of a "loudmouth." The Targum construed the term more literally, referring to Pharaoh as one who made a big tumult. The noun can also mean "desolation" or "destruction." On this basis, Kimhi dubbed Nebuchadnezzar "King of Destruction." In the haftarah, this negative designation contrasts with the positive prophecy in verse 27, where redeemed Israel is promised "quiet," sha'anan, on their return to their homeland. 18.As surely as Tabor The simile is puzzling. As rendered here, the analogy suggests that as surely as Tabor is among the mountains, the event will come to pass (Rashi and Kimhi). Alternatively, the verb ("will come") refers to the advent ofNebuchadnezzar (i. e., "he shall come"). 20. Egypt is a handsome heifer This metaphor may allude to the Egyptian bull god, Apis (possibly mocked inv. 15; see above). from the north The reference here and in verse 24 to an enemy from the north (tzafon) is unspecified. Elsewhere in leremiah the designation of an enemy from the northland is similarly vague (cf. ler. 1:13; 6:22; 10:22). 4 Only in 605 B.C.E. does the prophet identify this people with Babylon (ler. 25:9). It is presumably based on this identification that the unspecified oracles against Egypt were contextualized by the final editors of the Book ofleremiah (see 46:13, 26). 25. inflict punishment Hebrew poked. This summary statement links back to verse 21, 'et pekudda-tam, "their day of disaster." The verb has the sense of requital and is so used in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:5) and in the list of divine attributes (Exod. 34:7, "visits [the inquity]"). Significantly, the phrase ve-nakkeh lo}J'anakkeka ("I will not leave you unpunished") in verse 28 echoes the phrase nakkeh lo'yenakkeh ("He [God] does not remit all punishment") in the same attribute list.5 Amon Amon or Amon Re, the imperial god of Egypt. The chief center of worship was in the Temple ofKarnak in Thebes. 6 No The city of Thebes. In Egyptian niwt, "the city." Thebes was the chief city of Upper Egypt from the Middle Kingdom period (2000 B.C.E.) on. leremiah lived during the middle of the Saitic period (also known as the Twenty-sixth Dynasty; 663-525 B.C.E.), when the center of government shifted from Thebes to Sais in the upper Delta. Nevertheless, Thebes and the Temple ofKarnak remained strong during this time. 27-28. Have nofear These oracles exhort the people to courage and hope. A similar usage is found in prophecies addressed to the nation in exile (Isa. 43:1; 44:2). The formula "have no fear" and "I am with you" is commonly used to encourage individuals embarking on difficult tasks. See ler. 1:8, 17-19; and 15:20. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah counterposes the theme of Israelite servitude in Egypt in the^pamshah with a promise ofEgypt's eventual destruction (ler. 46:14-24). The plague oflocusts arbeh) described in the parashah (Exod. 10:3-20) is also echoed in leremiah's prophecy, as a metaphor for the overwhelming hosts that will descend upon Egypt in its hour of doom ("for they are more numerous than locusts [}arbeh]" [v. 23]). The consolation of the haftarah is that the Egyptian kingdom will be punished "measure for measure." From this perspective, Nebuchadnezzar's "coming" in judgment against Pharaoh (la-vo:' [ler. 46:13]; root b-w-') also answers Moses' ancient "coming" (bo} [Exod. 10:1]) in supplication before Pharaoh himself. Thus God will wreak judgment upon 69
HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
the gods of Egypt (W mitzmyim ve-'alJeloheyha [v. 25]), as He pronounced long ago ("I will mete out punishments to all the gods of Egypt," u-ve-kholJelohei mitzmyim [Exod. 12:12]). The haftarah thus promises the final end of Israel's old enemy.
Haftarah for Be-shallah n t o ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
JUDGES 4:4-5:31 JUDGES 5:1-31
For a discussion of the Book of Judges and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Judges" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the discussion of other haftarah readings from the Book of Judges (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah presents an account of the battle between a coalition of northern Israelite tribes and Canaanite armies in prose (Judg. 4:4-24) and poetic form (5:1-31). This battle was part of the wars of liberation that completed the conquest begun by Joshua in the mid-twelfth century B.C.E. 1 In both versions, specific attention is given to the prowess of two women—Deborah, a prophetess and judge in the region of Ephraim, and Jael, a tent dweller of the Kenite tribe. Deborah rouses the commander Barak son of Abinoam to battle and supports him in exhorting the tribes to war; Jael, by ruse, kills the Canaanite commander Sisera when he flees for dear life ahead of his enemy. Both accounts are self-contained, and though they contain different details and emphases, they are presented as two versions of the same event. Ashkenazim recite both the prose and poetic accounts and thus conclude the historical narrative with the victory song. Sephardim recite only the song. The prose account consists of a prologue, setting forth the background of the event, and a description of the battle that follows. The poetic version is a more variegated series of voices and reflections. Its principal concern is to praise God, the participating tribes, and the individuals who did their people proud. As in the military epics of other cultures, this is a song of glory for present and future generations.
TheProseHistory (Judges 4:4-24) PART 1. BACKGROUND (Judges 4:4-11) a. Judges 4:4-10 The Israelite scene is set: Deborah is introduced as a prophetess and judge (w. 4-5) who summons Barak and informs him of a divine oracle concerning battle against Sisera, commander of Jabin's Canaanite army (w. 6-7). The Israelite commander demurs, requesting Deborah's assistance. She agrees, but warns him that if she participates, the glory of victory will go to a woman (v. 9). The two jointly muster the troops and prepare for battle (v. 10). b. Judges 4:11 As an apparent aside, the narrator remarks that Heber the Kenite separated from other Kenites and pitched his tent near Kedesh.2 This information anticipates Sisera's flight. PART 2. THE BATTLE AND H E R O I C EXPLOITS (Judges 4:12-24) a. Judges 4:12-16 The scene shifts first to the Canaanite response to the Israelite gathering on Mount Tabor (w. 12-13). There follows a brief account of the military charge—preceded by Deborah's reference to the divine oracle (as an exhortation to Barak) and followed by a rout of the enemy and their commander (w. 14-16). b. Judges 4:17-22 Sisera flees to Heber, based on past alliances; but Heber's wife, Jael, dupes the commander and kills him while a guest in her tent. When Barak arrives in hot pursuit, he finds his enemy Sisera slain by a woman (v. 22). N o motivation for Jael's deed is given, save for the earlier notice that Heber had "separated" from other Kenites, who were descendants of Moses' father-in-law (v. 11). HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
70
c. Judges 4:23-24 An epilogue concludes the account, stating that God has subdued the Canaanites by the hand of the Israelites. The initial prophecy is thus fulfilled.
The Victory Song (Judges 5) PART 1. THE PROLOGUE (ludges 5:1-3) An announcement of the song of Deborah and Barak "to the LORD" in thanks for victory. PART 2. THE SONG (ludges 5:4-30) a. ludges 5:4-5 God's advance to battle is praised in mythic terms: all the world shook before His presence and power. b. ludges 5:6-12 The historical situation is reviewed, and the absence of leadership until Deborah's advent noted (w. 6-8). The section goes on to exhort praise of God and His great deliverance (w. 9-11) and again extol the leadership of Deborah (along with Barak; v. 12). This unit sounds like a choral recitation. Deborah's voice appears to resume thereafter. c. ludges 5:13-23 Deborah now praises the participating tribes and the victory (v. 13). The recitation goes on to laud those who came to battle and castigate those who held back (w. 14-18, 22-23). The battle itself is succinctly depicted in mythic terms (w. 19-21a), and the evocative interjection ofDeborah is heard ("March on, my soul, with courage!" [v. 21b]). d. ludges 5:24-30 lael's heroic killing of Sisera is described in rhythmic detail (w. 24-27), followed, as a counterpoint, by a portrait of Sisera's mother awaiting her son's triumphant return (w. 28-30). PART 3. THE EPILOGUE (ludges 5:31) Deborah's song ends with a denunciation of the enemies of the Lord and hope for the dominion of the faithful (v. 31a). A final coda states: "And the land was tranquil forty years" (v. 31b).
CONTENT AND MEANING Both versions of the Israelite victory portray God's intervention on behalf of His people. The haftarah begins after a prologue in ludg. 4:1-3—where the new Canaanite menace is presented as divine punishment for Israelite offenses against God, and the victory as a result of the people's return to Him in supplication (they "cried out to the LORD" [v. 3]). Thus what is presented in Scripture as a cycle of divine punishment and protection, corresponding to Israelite sin and repentance, is deleted in the haftarah—which presents the victory solely as an expression of God's protection of His people. N o sin is hinted at. As a result, the concluding reference to the period of ease after the victory (5:31b) loses its theological point. For if the purpose of this phrase is to signal a period between sins—a time of national faithfulness following the last manifestation of divine power—in the present case it functions as a coda to the victory. (The full theological framework represented by ludg. 4:1-3 and 5:31 is found elsewhere in the Book of ludges—for example, 3:12-15 and 30, which frame the Ehud episode preceding our haftarah; and 6:1-7 and 8:28, which frame the Gideon narrative immediately following it.) The Israelite victory in the haftarah is distinguished by content, style, and theological emphasis. The prose account uses the narrative voice. It opens with Deborah sitting in judgment near a sacred palm tree in the northern territory of Ephraim. Her charismatic power is indicated by the seeming offhand remark that the Israelites went up to her seat of justice, and it is subsequently confirmed by her ability to rouse the troops for battle. Nevertheless, it is her status as prophetess that has particular weight in the narrative. The haftarah begins with her summoning Barak and telling him that he should mobilize soldiers from the tribes of Naphtali and Zebulun, for God has revealed that He will bring victory to His people (ludg. 4:6-7). Later on, after Barak summons his troops (along with Deborah) to Mount Tabor, the prophetess refers to this oracle in her exhortation to the commander to act (v. 14). 71
HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
Deborah's earlier retort to Barak's request for her aid provides a more ambiguous and ironic instance of prophecy. When the prophetess tells the commander that if he will not go it alone, as a man, then all Israel will say that victory was wrought by a woman (Judg. 4:9), the reader suspects that Deborah is alluding to herself. But when Jael emerges at the end of the battle as the heroine— killing the Canaanite chief before Barak can catch up with him (v. 22) — Deborah's words of warning are revealed as a prediction. Within the framework of these prophecies, the events unfold episodically. Expectation mounts as the setting shifts from Ramah (near Deborah's seat of judgment), to Mount Tabor (at the beginning of battle), to the tent of Heber (where Sisera flees) near Kedesh. Details of the battle are meager, save for the concluding encounter between Jael and Sisera. Clearly the death of the Canaanite commander by a Kenite woman was an event to be remembered—a moment of great glory. Jael's use of a ruse is a characteristic feature of the other narratives in the Book of Judges. The wiles of Rahab, Ehud, and Gideon are cases in point. The role of dialogue in the narrative should also be noted. Deborah first reports the prediction to Barak and then urges him to summon the troops. Later on she exhorts the commander to make haste and act on the divine word. Finally, Jael has a longish and deceitful discussion with Sisera. In each case, the woman is a central, motivating, or manipulative force—with the man her agent or dupe. Victory is thus achieved by a woman, as Deborah had said to Barak, and in a twofold manner: at first through the agency of Deborah herself, and then through the acts of Jael. By contrast, the men are portrayed as hesitant, fearful, and easily beguiled, and their actions parody the conventions of heroic manliness. Barak begs for Deborah's aid in gathering the troops, Sisera flees in battle and falls asleep in a tent with a woman for his guard, and Barak comes upon the body of his enemy, murdered by a maid with milk and a mallet. But the grim humor masks a more serious message: God's help is manifold and mysterious. He can throw the enemy into "panic" with the warriors of war (Judg. 4:14-15) or help his people through a whore (Rahab), a left-handed soldier (Ehud), or a lady of the tents. In the poetic version of these events, the hymn in Judges 5 is sung by the heroes with interjections by a song-leader or chorus. Placed after the historical narrative, the poetic version functions as a supplementary song of victory. However, it must have been formulated as an independent episode. This is suggested by the fact that in this version seven tribal units answer the call to battle (not just Zebulun and Naphtali, as in Judges 4) and other tribes are chided or cursed for not participating in the call to arms (see Judg. 5:14-18, 23). Moreover, the scene of battle here is different—shifting from Mount Tabor and Harosheth-goiim to "Taanach, by Megiddo's waters" in the Jezreel Valley, with events near the waterways of Kishon (w. 19-21). But with respect to the crucial scene in Jael's tent, we find the same motif of Sisera's asking for water and receiving milk (v. 25; cf. 4:19), though in the poetic version there is no reference to a blanket or his request that Jael guard him. Moreover, the song does not mention Sisera's sleeping, so that the assassination appears more as an act of bravery than one performed on a drugged enemy. On the other hand, only the song portrays the scene of Sisera's mother awaiting the return of the hero. There is no reason to assume that the ancients felt an irreconcilable conflict between the two versions. Judges 4 - 5 is not alone in juxtaposing a military prose account to a (different) poetic version. Thus, in the Torah reading for Be-shallah, the Israelite crossing of the Reed Sea and the death of the Egyptian host is told in two forms in Exodus 14-15—prose and poetry. Furthermore, just as in Judges 5, Exodus 15 (the Song at the Sea) formulates the divine victory in mythic terms. Drawing from ancient traditions dealing with the advent of the storm-god to battle, God's armament includes the bolts of fire and torrents of rain hurled from the sky (cf. Judg. 5:20). It is a matter for debate whether the hymns are songs of victory or traces of a lost national epic— perhaps like the "Book ofWars of the L O R D " mentioned in Num. 2 1 : 1 4 . 3 However this may be, the song in Judges 5 is formulated in epical forms—with events portrayed through repetitions, parallelisms, and puns. These, together with traces of the recitative voice ("I will sing" [v. 3]; "Awake, awake, O Deborah . . . strike up the chant" [v. 12]; "Take your captives, O son of Abinoam" [v. 12]), underscore the oral and performative nature of this song of victory. HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
72
The image of Sisera's mother peering through the window also illustrates how Judges 5 uses an epic motif. In this scene, the mother of the hero anxiously awaits with her maids the return of the hero's chariot, little suspecting his gruesome death. The setting recalls the finale of the Mad, when Penelope stands along the turrets of Troy awaiting the return of her husband Hector—the great hero of battles, whose violent death is known to the reader. The similarity is striking.4 But it is not necessary to look far for parallels. Of particular immediacy is the image of Michal, the daughter of Saul, looking from her royal window at the processional bearing the Ark to lerusalem. The particular phrase used, nishkefah be'ad ha-hallon (she looked out of the window [2 Sam. 6:16]) is the same as that used of Sisera's mother (be'ad ha-ha-lion nishkefah [ludg. 5:28]). Significantly, this portrait of a "(royal) woman at the window" is materially represented on Phoenician ivories from the eighth century B.C.E. 5 The image thus circulated throughout the Mediterranean region at this time and was realized in different artistic forms. The depiction of Sisera's mother is one of them. The oral nature of the song is also apparent in the structural refrain and the puns. In the refrain, one may note how the adverb }az (then) repeatedly punctuates details and events (ludg. 5 : 8 , "was there a fighter then in the gates"; v. 1 1 , "then did the people of the L O R D march down to the gates"; v. 13, "then was the remnant made victor"; v. 19, "then the kings came"; v. 22, "then the horses' hoofs pounded"). The word }az also evokes the military term coz (courage [v. } 2 1 ] ; and cf. the pattern az-'ozi in the epical Song at the Sea [Exod. 1 5 : 1 - 2 ] ) . Another pun playing on this alef/'ayin difference may be heard in the contrast between 'uri 'uri devorah (Awake, awake, O Deborah! [ludg. 5 : 1 2 ] ) and'oru meroz . . . }oru }arur (Curse Meroz! . . . Bitterly curse [v. 23]). In this case, the contrast goes beyond sound and emphasizes the difference between Deborah's arousal to war on behalf of God and nation, and the failure of Meroz to join the fray. Among other puns that underscore matters of content are the sound plays between hokekei yism'el/mehokekim (Israel's leaders/leaders [w. 9, 14]), who appear with their marshal's staff; the people ofReuben, who hold back from the fray with great hikeki lev/ hikrei lev (decisions of heart/searchings of heart [w. 15, 16]); and the deliberate determination of Jael, who mahakah (crushed [v. 26]) the skull of Sisera with a mallet. Poetic elements also appear in the rhythmic balances, repetitions, and intensifications that recur throughout the song.
COMMENTS Judges4:4. Deborah... a prophetess. Deborah is portrayed with seer-like qualities, and this prowess may have been expressed in her judgments as well (v. 5). Rabbinic tradition lists seven prophetesses in the Hebrew Bible (B. Megillah 14a).6 Picking up on the phrase "at that time," which follows reference to her role as a prophetess, Kimhi observed that "her prophecy was for her time, for there is no evidence that she prophesied for the future." It was also remarked that because Deborah boasted ofherselfin her song, the Holy Spirit departed for a time (B. Pesahim 66b). 7. Jabin King of Canaan, with a military force of 900 iron chariots (v. 13). See also the Comment to verse 24. 11. Kenites A nomadic tribe that associated with Israel (see Num. 24:22). Heber had left the main group in the south and wandered northward to at least Kedesh. Hobab, father-in-law ofMoses Here a Kenite, ancestor of Heber. According to Num. 10: 29, Moses' father-in-law was Hobab son of Reuel the Midianite. But Exod. 2:18 speaks of Reuel as Moses' father-in-law; and Exod. 18:1 speaks of lethro priest of Midian as Moses' father-in-law. Rabbinic tradition tried to resolve this variation by assuming that lethro had seven names. 7 13-14. The site of the battle is the Valley of lezreel, in the Galilee. Harosheth-goiim is near Megiddo, the Wadi Kishon rises in the southeast of the valley and flows into the Mediterranean, and Mount Tabor is also in the valley. 24. Kingjabin of Canaan He is also called "King labin of Hazor" (losh. 11:1; cf. ludg. 4:2). The title "King of Canaan" is old and attested centuries earlier in the tablets from 73
HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
the ancient city of Mari (where one king even has the name Jabin). 8 According to Judg. 5:19, Jabin was only one member of a coalition of "kings of Canaan" led by Sisera. This points to one significant difference between the battles reported in Josh. 11:1-15 and Judges 4-5. The relationship between the two battles has been much discussed. Some scholars have regarded them as a doublet, but it would seem best to regard the two events as distinct: the first being a report of conquest and destruction of enemy strongholds, with the second an account of the routing of a regional coalition after the early settlement period. 9 Only thereafter was King Jabin thoroughly "destroyed" (Judg. 4:24). Judges 5:1. On that day Deborah and Barak... sang The victors sing in praise to God and the people. Rabbinic tradition records "Ten Songs," which span the sacred history of Israel. The first was sung during the Passover feast itself (Isa. 30:29), and the second was the "Song at the Sea" in this week's pamshah (Exodus 15). The song of Deborah and Barak is listed as the sixth song; while the tenth and final one will be the messianic song of the future (Isa. 42:10). See Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Be-shallah l. 1 0 2. locksgo untrimmed Apparently an expression of dedication; compare Num. 6:5: "Throughout the term ofhis vow as nazirite, no razor shall touch his head" [Transl.]. 3-5. The Targum perceived an allusion here to Sinai and the giving of the Torah (cf. Rashi). Psalm 68 also sings a song of historical praise that refers to the event of Sinai in language similar to Judg. 5:4-5 (cf. Ps. 68:5, 8) and, like Judg. 5:9, also intones a communal blessing to God (Ps. 68:20-36). 6-7. In contrast to the theological prologue in Judg. 4:1-3 (not part of the haftarah recitation), wherein the national crisis is presented as divine punishment for apostasy, the song simply gives the more mundane situation: the Canaanites had blocked the caravan routes and marauded the surrounding settlements. Thus "deliverance [perazon] ceased" (5:7). This rendering seems to follow the sense of the corresponding Arabic noun and an old Greek tradition (lit., "leadership" or "championship"), 11 but medieval Jewish commentators quite consistently link it to Hebrew perazot, "unwalled cities" (cf. Zech. 2:8 and Esther 9:19; see Rashi, Kimhi, R. Joseph Kara, and R. Isaiah de Trani). The song presumably intends a complex pun, indicating at once the physical distress of the people and the lack of a military savior. 6. Shamgar
The previous chieftain. See Judg. 3:31.
7. you arose
Hebrew kamti, archaic second-person singular feminine [Transl.].
13. The LORD'S people Reading 'am (with patah) Adonai as in many Hebrew manuscripts [Transl.]. Alternatively, OJPS follows the Masoretic punctuation, reading 'am (with kamatz) as the end of the first phrase: "Then made He a remnant to have dominion over the nobles and the people; the LORD made me have dominion over the mighty." 14. -whose motsare inAmalek Hebrew shorsham ba-'amalek. This is a puzzling comment about some citizens of Ephraim. The Septuagint reads "valley" ('emek) for 'amalek; moderns have proposed similar emendations. One solution that continued into the Middle Ages was to interpret the passage as referring to heroes who stemmed from Ephraim and fought against Amalek (e. g., Joshua and Saul; see Exod. 17:8-13 and 1 Samuel 15, respectively). Compare Targum Jonathan, Rashi, and Kimhi. 21. them
That is, the kings of Canaan (v. 19) [Transl.].
27. At herfeet he sank The phrases here have an intensifying redundancy (Kimhi), rhythmically echoing the violent hammering of the murder (v. 26). 31. all Tour enemies In the context of the haftarah, the refrain calling for the defeat of "all" God's enemies has an eschatological ring (cf. Rashi and R. Joseph Kara, following the Targum). HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH
74
Hisfriends Hebrew'ohavav; literally, "His loved ones." In Hebrew and Akkadian, this is a standard designation for "treaty-partners." 12 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The Song of Deborah and Barak (Judges 5) is read along with the Songs of Moses-and-Israel and of Miriam (Exodus 15) as two celebrations of divine salvation in history. Moses' Song at the Sea, which depicts how God "threw . . . into panic" (va-yaham [Exod. 14:24]) the Egyptian army, occurs at the beginning of national liberation and anticipates settlement in the Land and the building of the Temple (Exod. 15:15-17). It concludes with the climactic hope in God's enduring kingship (Exod. 15:18). Correspondingly, Deborah's song, which celebrates how God "threw . . . into panic" (va-yaham [Judg. 4:15]) the Canaanite foe, occurs within the settlement period. It also concludes on an eschatological note (Judg. 5:31). Rabbinic tradition found further links between the pamshah and haftarah of Be-shallah. According to one legend, when the Egyptians were drowned in the sea, God demanded that the prince of the sea cast up the dead for all to see. The prince complained at this loss of spoil, and as recompense God offered the Wadi of Kishon as a security. This pledge was redeemed when the waters of the brook flowed in torrents and swallowed up the Canaanite army in the days of Sisera (B. Pesahim 118a). Thus was a link between the two "drownings" imagined. This tradition may be reflected in the Targum as well, which explains the reference to the Wadi Kishon as nahal kedumin (NJPS: "the raging torrent" [Judg. 5:21]) with the remark: "the brook at which miracles were wrought for Israel in ancient times [kadmin].13 Another midrash asserts the same, dating Sisera's defeat to the first night ofPassover (Panim Aherim, A, 6). 14 These various events are noted in the paraphrase ofDeborah's song found in Pseudo-Philo (32:16-17). 1 5
Haftarah for Yitro lirp ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH6:l-7:6;9:5-6 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 6:1-13
For an overall discussion of the prophecies of Isaiah 1-39 and a consideration of their historical setting, literary style, and theological teachings, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For discussions of other prophecies from Isaiah 1-39 recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah has a pivotal position in the opening chapters of the Book of Isaiah. Following the arraignments for sin and the threatened dooms in chapters 1-5, Isaiah receives a more dire commision in chapter 6: to ensure the punishment of the nation. Repentance is no longer a possibility. In contrast to Isaiah's earlier promise that the "repentant ones" of Zion "shall be saved" in the judgment (Isa. 1:27), Isaiah is now told to speak to the nation in such a way as "to render them blinder, deafer, and more insensitive"1—"lest, seeing with its eyes and hearing with its ears" the people might "repent [va-shav] and save itself" (6:10). Only after the general purgation will a remnant be restored (ve-shavah) —sprung from seed like shoots on a ravaged tree (v. 13). 2 A subsequent sequence of oracles also promises the survival of the House of David. Isaiah urges King Ahaz (743-727 B.C.E.) "to be firm and . . . calm" before the Aramean alliance against him (7:1-6), for his descendant has been born through whom God will establish the throne of David in eternal peace (9:5-6). The haftarah is thus composed of two parts: one national, the other royal. Both promise a future for the people. PART 1. THE TEMPLE VISION OF ISAIAH (Isaiah 6:1-13) a. Isaiah 6:1-4 Isaiah reports that "in the year that King Uzziah died" (733 B.C.E.), he had an awesome vision of the Lord enthroned on high, with winged seraphs roundabout Him 75
HAFTARAH FOR YITRO
reciting God's holiness ("Holy, holy, holy!" [v. 3]). This celestial choir causes the Temple itself to quake and puts the prophet in a state of dread because of his impurity b. Isaiah 6:5-10 Isaiah envisages a seraph descending toward him "with a live coal. . . from the altar" (v. 6). Purified thereby, the prophet hears God's query to the angels concerning whom He should send to Israel as messenger—and the prophet volunteers. The message is paradoxical: the prophet should speak so as to ensure the doom decreed for sin ("Dull that people's mind, stop its ears" [v. 10]). c. Isaiah 6:11-13 The prophet asks how long such a message must last and is told that its end will be doom and exile for ludah (w. 11-12); but even so, a remnant shall repent and become the seed of a renewed people (v. 13). PART 2. THE SYRO-EPHRAIMITE ALLIANCE AND MESSIANIC H O P E (Isaiah 7:1-6; 9:5-6) a. Isaiah 7:1-6 "In the reign of Ahaz" (735 B.C.E.), a Syro-Ephraimite alliance threatened lerusalem. The king and people are put in terror, but the prophet tells Ahaz to be calm, because: b. Isaiah 9:5-6 A royal heir has been born who shall inherit the mantle of divine authority and rule in peace and equity upon the throne of David. The Lord Himself "shall bring this to pass."
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah according to the Ashkenazic rite comprises two parallel but continuous prophecies. Each part begins with a dated superscription, has a sequence of doom or danger, and concludes with the promise of renewal. Thus, despite imminent dangers of divine punishment and political threat, there is the promise that the people and the royal line will survive—the people as a holy seed, the kingship as a seat of justice. Indeed, this feature of survival and renewal is the climactic concern of each unit: on the one hand, the regeneration of a shoot from its stock reverses the initial oracle that focused on divine punishment (part 1, Isa. 6:10-13); on the other, the conclusion to the royal oracle skips over its immediate textual sequel (in 7:7-9) for the sake of a more Utopian promise of restoration (part 2, 9:5-6). Such "skipping" is found in other haftarah readings, for similar positive purposes. The editorial principle is tannaitic. 3 In the present case, the jump from Isa. 7:1-6 to 9:5-6 gives the prophecy a messianic dimension—extending it beyond the immediate circumstances of King Ahaz into the future. Hence, the divine promise of the text is not limited to one historical time but addresses the hope of anyone who would read this prophecy in faith. The Sephardic reading has a more modest national hope: the survival and regeneration of the people oflsrael (it concludes at6:13). The haftarah in Isa. 6 : 1 - 7 : 6 and 9 : 5 - 6 thus moves between two types of sovereignty: divine kingship in heaven ("the King L O R D of Hosts" [ 6 : 5 ] ) and royal (messianic) kingship on earth. Within that overall framework are stressed a holy God who punishes injustice and a just king who will establish with divine aid peace and equity for the "holy seed" ( 6 : 1 3 ) . What is more, God's grace will transfigure this king, as we can see from the messianic epithets by which he is called: "The Mighty God ['elgibbor] is planning grace [pek'yo'etz]; the Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler" ( 9 : 5 ) . Indeed, according to some medieval commentators, each of the first four expressions are separate epithets of God—as the parallels in Isa. 1 0 : 2 1 (Jelgibbor) and 2 8 : 2 9 (;hiphl'etzah ["Who gives wondrous counsel"; NIPS: "His counsel is unfathomable"]) suggest. 4 Whether it is the case that } elgibbor ("Mighty God") andpele } yo'etz ("Wondrous counselor") are distinct divine titles given to the king, or should be construed as epithetic designations of royal power and wisdom (Ibn Ezra), there remains a striking overlap between the two possibilities. This fact indicates the divine-like character of the messianic king, whose enthronement is the earthly embodiment of transcendent ideals. The judging God in heaven thus serves as the model for the ideal kingdom on earth. HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH 76
The poles marking the divine "king" (melekh [Isa. 6:5]) and the messianic "kingdom" (mamlakhah [9:6]) are one of several instances in the haftarah where thematic correlations are indicated by verbal plays. Another example highlights the relationship between God and Israel through the term "holy"—used of God in heaven (kadosh) (6:3) and the purified seed (zera' kodesh) on earth (6:13). Significantly, the discordance between the two is also marked verbally, by the contrast between God's glorious "presence" (kavod) (6:3) and the dulling (hakhbed-, root k-v-d) of the people's mind before the divine word (6:10). In other instances, the terms span several chapters—as in the contrast between the "smoke" ('ashan) of incense, which marks God's presence in the Temple (6:4), and the burning ('ashenim) brands (NJPS: "firebrands"), which symbolize the alliance of royal powers that threaten Jerusalem (7:4). 5 In a similar way, the negative counsel (ya'atz) of this human alliance (7:5) is counterpoised to the messianic counselor (yo'etz) of God (9:5) through a verbal play. The haftarah is also distinguished by certain stylistic considerations. Most notable is the scene of prophetic commission that occurs in chapter 6. According to the autobiographical report, Isaiah (presumably standing in the Temple courts, as Luzzatto surmised) has an ecstatic vision of God seated in His heavenly abode, surrounded by His heavenly host. These fiery forms (the seraphim) chant God's holiness aloud and, together with the vision itself, utterly overwhelm the prophet—who counterpoints the cosmic litany with a confession of his own impurity (Isa. 6: 4-5). At this point, one of the seraphs descends with a coal from the divine altar and purifies the prophet's lips (w. 6-7). So transformed, the prophet actively participates in the ensuing scene: he hears God ask the heavenly host whom He might send to earth as a messenger, and Isaiah immediately volunteers (v. 8). But upon hearing the strange word he must recite ("Hear, indeed, but do not understand") and learning that this means his speech will seal the fate of his people, the prophet asks how long he must perform this task (w. 8 - l l a ) . He is told that its end will be the destruction o f j u d a h and the exile of its population (w. l l b - 1 2 ) — though a remnant will revive: the seed of the renewed nation (v. 13). This scene has several components— (1) Isaiah's experience of God, (2) his terror and sense of unworthiness, (3) a purification of his mouth, (4) his prophetic mission, and (5) a synopsis of the message—features of which recur in prophetic commissions found elsewhere in Scripture. Moses starts his career as a prophetic messenger with a fiery vision of the divine, a sense of his own unworthiness (specifically focused on his unworthy mouth or speech), God's promise to be with him when he speaks (lit., "be with your mouth"), and a synopsis of his task (Exod. 3: 2-4, 9-12; 4:10-12). Similarly, Ezekiel has a vision of God on His heavenly throne amidst a fiery retinue, reacts in terror before the sight, is bidden to undertake a prophetic mission, and is divinely prepared for the task by the transfer into his mouth of the divine words themselves (Ezek. 1:1-3:3). And finally, the commission of Jeremiah has a similar pattern: a divine revelation of the prophetic task, a response of terror and unworthiness to speak, and the preparation of the prophet through God's contact with the messengers mouth and His transfer to it of the divine words (Jer. 1:4-10). Further connecting these passages is a cluster of shared vocabulary. Moses, Isaiah, and Ezekiel "see" a fiery vision; for Isaiah and Ezekiel, this is of God as "king" on His heavenly "throne." Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah are "sent" to the people, and Isaiah and Jeremiah are each dedicated to their task by a divine "touch" to their mouth. A common spiritual pattern has thus shaped the prophetic accounts and their formulation— without blurring the distinctiveness of each occurrence (Luzzatto). 6 The pattern also indicates that the commissions are divinely initiated, and not a response to human preparations or desires. Nevertheless, it is questionable whether the scene in Isaiah 6 initiates the prophet's career as a whole. The problem has been debated since antiquity. In fact, tannaitic tradition already noted the surprising fact that this so-called "commission" does not occur in chapter 1 of the book (as with Jeremiah and Ezekiel, for example) and resolved the issue by citing other cases where narrative sequence is no proof of relative dating (viz., the "early or late" occurrence of a report is not a decisive criterion; cf. Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Shirata 7, on Exod. 15:3)7 But the problem remains—precisely because chapter 6 announces a prophetic word that denies the possibility of repentance after a 77
HAFTARAH FOR YITRO
succession of chapters that hold out this promise through conditioned warnings.8 It thus seems unlikely that the prophet would begin his career with a revelation of unconditioned doom and then preach the opposite. Ibn Ezra's statement that "this chapter contains the first prophecy of Isaiah" is asserted without any justification,9 and Luzzatto's contention (anticipated by Ibn Bal'am) that the text was "hidden away" by the prophet until a more propitious time is an insufficient apology. In the absence of other information, literary context and content must therefore provide the decisive criteria (Abravanel). The repeated condemnation in Isa. 1:4 and 5:24 that the people "spurned [the instruction of] the Holy One of Israel" suggests that the disciples who edited Isaiah's words intended to frame an initial cycle of sin—and set it off from the new word of doom to come. 10 This stylistic feature may also guide our modern understanding that the purpose of Isaiah 6 was to inaugurate a shift in the prophet's destiny.11 The scene of Isaiah's new commission has much to tell concerning ancient prophetic experiences. Comparison with Ezekiel's throne vision shows that neither event was induced by mystical preparations, but was an unexpected happening; moreover, neither vision was a mystical experience for its own sake, but rather for serving God and His involvement in Israel's history. 12 This is especially significant in Isaiah 6, where the ecstatic vision includes participation in a heavenly court scene (note God's query: "Who will go for wy?" as a messenger to Israel [Isa. 6:8]). Comparison with the heavenly vision of Micaiah son of Imlah in 1 Kings 22 bears this out. Here, too, a prophet is ecstatically transported to the heavenly court and "sees" God "seated upon His throne"—surrounded by the hosts of heaven and preparing to send one of them to earth with a prophetic commission (1 Kings 22:19). A trace of this prophetic pattern also occurs in ler. 23:18, which speaks of those who have "stood in the council [sod] of the L O R D , and seen, and heard His word." 13 Some modern commentators have even suggested that the call to give "comfort" in Isa. 40:1 (nahamu—a plural imperative) may also be God's address to the angelic court. 14 The sequel, "A voice rings out: 'Proclaim!' Another asks, 'What shall I proclaim?'" (Isa. 40:6), seems to confirm this possibility. Human ascensions to the heavenly court for the sake oflsrael's destiny and fate become a common motif in postbiblical literature. Isaiah 6 thus attests to the antiquity of this pattern. It is also noteworthy that one of the features of prophetic commissions is God's assurance of support (e. g., }al tim\ "do not be afraid" [ler. 1:8 and Ezek. 2:6]), and this is precisely the language Isaiah uses when he tells Ahaz (in God's name) to have confidence and not be terrorized by the Syro-Ephraimite alliance (Isa. 7:4). In this way, the king of ludah becomes an ally of the Lord—and of the prophet, as well. The motif of "silent trust" expressed here (7:4) is an important part of Isaiah's theology and repeatedly puts confidence in the power of spiritual truth against military might and power politics (cf. Isa. 30:1-5). In Isa. 7:4, the exhortation to Ahaz to "be firm and be calm" (hisha-mer ve-hashket) against the plot (ya'atz) hatched against him finds its ultimate justification in Isa. 9:5-6, wherein God promises to establish a king of divine might elgibbor) and wondrous counsel (yo'etz). Ahaz can thus rest assured; indeed, "the zeal of the L O R D of Hosts shall bring this to pass" (9:6). Echoing the opening scene, the conclusion of the haftarah now shows the redemptive concern of the "holy . . . LORD ofHosts" for His creatures on earth.
COMMENTS Isaiah 6:2. Seraphs stood in attendance Isaiah's vision resembles other scenes of divine enthronement, amid a retinue of heavenly beings (1 Kings 22:19-23; Dan. 7:9-14). In Ezekiel 1, fiery figures carry the throne, whereas in Isa. 6:2, the flaming attendants (the seraphs) appear to stand "before" or "near Him" (God). This makes best contextual sense of the Hebrew phrase mi-ma'al lo (understanding ma'al as like W in Gen. 45:1 and 1 Kings 22:19; cf. Isaiah di Trani and Ibn Ezra). One could hardly assume that the attending retinue stood "above" (mi-ma'al) the divine King. Ancient tradition construed the angels as surrounding the throne (cf. the Septuagint and Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer 4). Ibn Ezra concurs, but he also sought to harmonize Isaiah's vision with Ezekiel 1, by his suggestion that the previous verse does not refer to God as "exalted"—but to the heavenly throne as "raised up" or "borne aloft" (nissa' [Isa. 6:1]). 15 HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH 78
3.And one would call to the other, "Holy, holy, holy!" The translation suggests that each of the six seraphs enacted a perpetual threefold sanctification,16 though it is unclear whether they did so successively or in unison. Rashi suggests that the calling is a mutual angelic invitation to sanctify God, performed in unison. 17 The mutual granting of permission and the united orison is fully articulated in the targumic paraphrase of Isa. 6:3. Other rabbinic sources refer to three groups of angels and differ as to what each choral group recited (see B. Hullin 91b; Pirke deRabbi Eliezer 4; and Pesikta Rabbati 20, p. 97a). Angelic hymns (doxologies) in the heavenly Temple are also preserved in such diverse sources as the Targum (cf. Targum Jonathan to Deut. 32:40), the Qumran scrolls (4Q Serekh Shirot), and the mystical litanies of the Hekhalot tracts (e. g., Hekhalot Rabbati 8:4). Viewing and hearing the angelic kedushah (sanctification) was often deemed a climax of ancient mystical experience (see 1 Enoch 90:40). One tradition believed the recitation to have been taught by God to Abraham on an ecstatic journey through the heavens (ApocalyfiseofAbmham, 17). Jewish tradition has adapted the sanctification in Isa. 6:3 to the formal liturgy.18 It is called the Kedushah (Sanctification) or Kedusha-t ha-Shem (Sanctification ofthe Divine Name). On weekdays, there are three main types: (1) the Kedushah de-Yotzer (or de-Meyushav), recited (seated) in the morning service (as the introduction to the first blessing before the Shemac); (2) xheKiddush shel Amidah,19 recited (standing) as part of the public repetition of theAmidah prayer; and (3) the Kedushah de-Sidm\ recited as part of the closing Supplication (Tahanun) service. The first and third emphasize the themes of creation and redemption, respectively. On Sabbaths and holidays, there is a Supplementary ( M u s a f ) service instead of the Tahanun, and the Kedushah is recited as part of another public Amidah recitation. There are many variations in these liturgies, and they appear in greater or lesser expansions. In addition, the Kedushah theme inspired a voluminous poetry (fiiyyut) to ornament the liturgical stations and themes. The well-known poem Shomer Yisra'el is recited during the daily Ta-ha-nun service and appeals to God to protect the "holy nation" of Israel that recites the "three sanctifications" to the "Holy One." In ancient Palestine, during the Sabbath morning Amidah, the hazzanim (precentors) inserted references to the haftarah into their Kedushah poems. 20 An important feature of all traditions is the co-recitation of the Kedushah by the congregation of Israel and the angelic host, though ancient and medieval sources stress that the human recitation precedes the angelic one and that this was a coronation of God, who, at this moment, ascended to the highest throne in heaven.21 The MusafKedushah in the Sephardi rite articulates these themes clearly: "Let the (angelic) inhabitants of heaven and the (human) inhabitants of earth give You a Crown (O LORD); altogether, as one, they shall intone the threefold sanctification." The visionary experience of the prophet Isaiah has thus become the focal point of a communal rite in which the people of Israel participate in a heavenly ritual of divine enthronement—one that binds heaven and earth into a chorale of sanctification. Hispresencefills all the earth\ God's "presence" (kavod) refers to the manifestation of the divine Glory in history (Lev. 10:3; Isa. 40:5). Indeed, such appearances have a sensible and numinous aspect—something akin to the radiant penumbra (or melammu) of the divine mentioned in ancient Mesopotamian sources.22 This distinct presence often has a marked anthropomorphic appearance. The visionary experiences ofMoses (Exod. 33:22-23) and Ezekiel (Ezek. 1:28) are striking cases in point. But they pose a problem of interpretation for Isa. 6:3. Just what is the meaning of the seraphs' praise (that "His kavod fills all the earth")? Is something more intended here than a glorification of divine immanence or omnipresence? There is no conclusive answer; however, based on the previous sources, it appears that the reference is to a world-encompassing figure in heaven. Seated on high, surrounded by angels, the lower train of God's garment fills the earthly Temple—hence the seraphs proclaim that His kavod fills the entire earth. A further trace of this notion is also palpable in God's own remark to the postexilic community: "The heaven is My throne and the earth is My footstool: Where could you build a house for Me, what place could serve as My abode?" (Isa. 66:1). 79
HAFTARAH FOR YITRO
5. Of unclean lips That is, speaking impiety; compare Isa. 9:16, and contrast "pure of speech [lit., 'lip']" in Zeph. 3:9 [Transl.]. 9. Hear, indeed, but do not understand Isaiah's message is stylistically and theologically difficult. NIPS renders the particle va-v as "but" and thus introduces a paradoxical teaching. The prophet is apparently bidden to speak in such a way as to elicit the people's rejection of the message, thereby preventing repentance and ensuring divine punishment. On this reading, the absolute forms in verse 10 ("dull . . . stop") also have a negative force. Alternatively, the vavs in verse 9 have a clarifying force (viz., "hear though you do not understand") and reflect a more psychological fact. The people may hear, but they have become too inured to respond to the divine word. On this reading, the absolute forms in verse 10 clarify the inability of the people to respond (cf. Septuagint; Rashi; Kimhi; Luzzatto). Understood in this way, the resistance belongs to the people and is not a matter of divine cunning. The people's inability to see or hear thus contrasts sharply with the prophet's own vision. The sequence of acts (verb and body part) in verse 10a is reversed in verse 10b. 13. a tenth part NIPS renders the phrase against the Masoretic accents: repentance will occur for a small remnant, who are like a "ravaged" (ba'er) tree whose stump gives forth new growth. The "tenth part" will become a "holy seed." Alternatively, it is not the human remnant that "repents" (ve-shavah) but rather the desecrated land (w. 11-12), which "will again" be restored as a "grazing area" (reading: ba'ir) for the new settlement. This situation is likened to new shoots. Some medievals read the "tenth part" more allegorically. According to Ibn Bal'am, it refers to the ten tribes (which will return); Ibn Ezra saw a reference here to the ten kingdoms (the "tenth part" being the final, messianic one). Isaiah 7:3. Shear-jashub compare6:13; 10:21 [Transl.].
Meaning "[only] a remnant will turn back," that is, repent;
4-6. the son ofRemaliah... the son ofTabeel To refer to a man only as "the son o f . . ." is slighting; compare 1 Sam. 10:11; 20:27, 30, 31 [Transl.]. Isaiah 9:5. Surely Hebrew ki. Rabbinic tradition, as reflected in this haftarah, juxtaposed the plotters' royal pretender (7:5-6) to a future messianic king designated by God (9: 5-6). Rendering ki as "surely" clarifies the liturgical contextualization that connects the two passages. (In its original setting in the Book of Isaiah, ki marked a justification clause and is often rendered as "for.") The Mighty God is planninggrace This is one of a series of royal epithets, similar to those known from the ancient Near East. It is linked at the conclusion to a vision of the messianic king who rules with justice (v. 6). This is a standard portrayal and found in biblical liturgies (cf. Ps. 72:1-2). The ideals of might and power, combined with justice and peace, are repeated in Isa. 11:2-4. The NIPS translation follows the Masoretic accents, against the syntax. This difficult phrasing tries to avoid a title like "Mighty God" for the human king (but cf. Isa. 10:21). Thus Rashi and Kimhi refer the opening epithets to God. In their view, it is He who gives the child the name "Prince of Peace." Ibn Ezra also emphasizes the series of short titles, but explains 'elgibbor ("mighty god") as a royal epithet indicating the powerful nature of the expected king (Hezekiah). His reading is anticipated by Aquila and his lewish colleagues in their Greek translations. A quite novel solution occurs in the Qumran Thanksgiving Scroll (1QH 3:10), where the ideal ruler is called a "wonderful counselor with His Might [Hmgevumto]."23 The italicized phrase thus transforms the difficult 'elgibbor into Godi'sgevumh (Power; Might), which will be with the "counselor." This gevumh is a well-known hypostatic aspect of God Himself in classical rabbinic sources. 24 planningjyrace
As in 25:l:"You planned graciousness of old . . ." [Transl.]. HAFTARAH FOR BE-SHALLAH 80
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Thematic and verbal parallels connect the readings. At the thematic level, thepnrnshnh (Exodus 18-20) first presents a structure for justice and judgment (chap. 18) and then a revelation of God's instruction to the nation (chaps. 19-20). The haftarah presents these themes in more personal terms. The prophet receives a vision of God's majesty and words of instruction to the people (Isa. 6:1-12) and then the promise of a new era of justice to be inaugurated by a messianic king. The two passages stand at opposite historical poles: the past time of covenantal origins and the future time of messianic justice. What Moses inaugurates, the prophet Isaiah may only proclaim: a kingdom of justice under God. In the present, the people bidden to be a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exod. 19:6) have failed their task and are pronounced "unclean." Only in the future may they again become a "holy seed," after their punishment and purgation (Isa. 6:5, 11-13). The two passages are also interrelated by language and imagery. The Torah presents the historical God of the Exodus, who brought forth His people "on eagles' wings" (knnfei neshnrim) that the nation might observe the covenant and become a "holy nation" (goy kndosh) (Exod. 19: 4-6). At the revelation itself, God appears "in the sight [be-'einei] of all the people" (Exod. 19: 11), while the whole mountain "was all in smoke ['nshnn]" and "trembled violently" (v. 18). The people are then warned not break their legitimate bounds "to gaze" (lir'ot) directly upon God in all His numinous splendor (v. 21). "All the people witnessed [ro'im]" the smoke and lightning flashes, "and when the people saw it [vn-ynr']" they "fell back" or trembled (vn-ynnu'u) from afar (20:15). By contrast, the haftarah portrays a personal vision of God. The prophet stands in the Temple of Jerusalem and envisages the Lord enthroned in heaven—surrounded by a retinue of winged (,kenn-fnyim) figures of fire who intone the awesome holiness of God (kndosh) (Isa. 6:2-3). Reverberating to this cosmic chant, the doorposts of the earthly Temple "would shake" (vn-ynnu'u), and the shrine "kept filling with smoke {'^nshnn']"' (v. 4). The prophet is thereupon overcome at having "beheld" (rn'u 'tinny) the Lord of Hosts and dismayed by his own impurity and that of his people (v. 5). Ritually purified by an angel, Isaiah then receives his instruction—and the counsel that Israel would fall like a ravaged tree, but later regenerate from its own stock: a "holy seed" {zern' kodesh [v. 13]). the remnant people of the "holy" Lord of Hosts. This ancient promise has hovered over the decimations ofjewish history, giving hope to the present and future.
Haftarah for Mishpatim CPOQ^tt ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 34:8-22; 33:25-26 JEREMIAH 34:8-22; 33:25-26
For Jeremiah's life and message and a discussion of the Book of Jeremiah as a whole, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For discussions of other prophecies of Jeremiah recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index of Biblical Passages." The setting of the haftarah is during the final siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. This is indicated by the paragraphs that precede the haftarah and by details in the haftarah itself. According to Jer. 34:1-7, a word of God came to the prophet "when King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon and all his army, and all the kingdoms of the earth and all the people under his sway, were waging war against Jerusalem and all its towns" (v. 1; cf. w. 6-7). The oracle announced to King Zedekiah of Judah is that Jerusalem would fall—though he would survive and die in peace (w. 2-5). According to biblical and extra-biblical sources, the Babylonian invasion began on the tenth of Tevet in the ninth year of King Zedekiah (2 Kings 25:1; Jer. 39:1); this date corresponds to 15 January 588 B.C.E. 1 81
HAFTARAH FOR MISHPATIM
The national threat presumably elicits the statements reported in Jer. 34:8-12, at the beginning of the haftarah. We learn that another word of God came to Jeremiah "after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem"—to release their male and female slaves (w. 8-9). The slaveholders initially comply with this royal edict of manumission, whose practical effect would be to add manpower for the defense of Jerusalem (v. 10). 2 But the slaves are subsequently remanded by their compatriots, who "forced them into slavery again" (v. 11). This new action may have taken place during a respite between sieges, after the Babylonian withdrawal mentioned in 34:21. This retreat was in part due to the Babylonian fear of an Egyptian attack. Such a threat was real enough, for at the time of national peril King Zedekiah had appealed to the Egyptian Pharaoh Hofra for aid (Ezek. 17:11-18). This "report" was apparently sufficient to frighten off the Babylonian foe. Nevertheless, Ezekiel roundly rebukes Judean hopes in the Egyptian ally (see Ezek. 29:1; dated to 7 January 587 B.C.E.), and Jeremiah predicts the retreat of "the army of Pharaoh" (Jer. 37:7). In the end Egyptian support proves ineffective (Ezek. 30: 20-21), and King Nebuchadnezzar returns to the walls of lerusalem. leremiah envisions this turn of events (ler. 37:8) and proclaims it God's judgment for the people's violation of the edict of manumission (ler. 34:13-22). A final word of hope projects reconciliation between Israel and God (ler. 33:25-26) after the "desolation" to come (34:22). PART 1. lEREMIAH'S W O R D OF D O O M (leremiah 34:8-22) a. leremiah 34:8-11 This section establishes the setting: a royal proclamation by Zedekiah that all Hebrew slaves must be set free. After initial compliance with this "covenant," the slaveholders violate the edict and force their compatriots back into slavery. This elicits the prophet's condemnation. b. leremiah 34:12-16 The previous episode is juxtaposed to the event at Sinai, when God "made a covenant" with all Israel to release its slaves every seventh year. The present revocation of manumission is deemed a profanation of God's name. c. leremiah 34:17-22 The consequences of this breach of the slave "release" are announced: those who have violated the "covenant" will be punished. lerusalem and its inhabitants will be destroyed. PART 2. THE NATURAL AND THE SUPERNATURAL (leremiah 33:25-26) God swears that as surely as He established a "covenant" with nature He will never reject the promises made to the descendents of patriarchs. Israel will be restored in love.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah focuses on three "covenants": a "covenant" (berit) made between the people and Zedekiah in the present, dealing with the release of Hebrew slaves; a "covenant" (berit) made between God and Israel at Sinai, after they were delivered from Egyptian bondage, stipulating (among other things) the periodic manumission of slaves; and God's "covenant" (berit) with "day and night" (this being "the laws of heaven and earth"), in token of which He promises never to reject the offspring of lacob. The triad comprises the present, past, and future of Israel. In theological terms, the haftarah invokes creation, revelation, and redemption. Revelation and its consequences stand at the center (part 1, ler. 34:8-22), while creation and redemption are the two poles of the coda that concludes the recitation (part 2, ler. 33:25-26). God is the sovereign agent in creation and redemption; the language of part 2 is therefore a unilateral oath ("As surely . . . so," }im lo}. . .gam). By contrast, God and Israel are co-partners in the covenant and its revelation; consequently, the prophetic speech in part 1 is one ofbilateral accountability and judgment ("I [God] made a covenant with your fathers . . . [b]ut your fathers would not obey Me"; "you made a covenant. . . before Me . . . [b]ut now you have turned back"; "Therefore \lakhen, 'assuredly'] . . . I will make you a horror" [34:13-17]). The rhetoric of part 1 further underscores the structure of sin and punishment. A series of verbal plays signals that God judges Israel "measure for measure." For example, the prophet conHAFTARAH FOR
BE-SHALLAH
82
tends that because the people have brought back the slaves they "set free" (hofshim) and "forced them" (va-yikhbeshum) into slavery once again (Jer. 34:11; cf. v. 16), the unfulfilled "release" (deror) of their compatriots will turn against them as a divine "release" (deror) unto doom (v. 17): God punishes those who "have profaned" (va-tehallelu) His name with the "army" (heyl) of the king of Babylon (w. 16, 21). Variations on the verb shuv bring this forensic dynamic into focus. The prophet proclaims that since the slaveholders who "turned about" (va-tashuvu) and released their slaves have now "turned back" (va-tashuvu) and "brought back" (va-tashivu) the very persons whose freedom they granted (w. 15-16; cf. v. 11, va-yashuvu and va-yashivu), God will surely "bring . . . back" (va-hashivotim) the Babylonian army to destroy the cities o f j u d a h and its inhabitants (v. 22). This bleak conclusion is reversed in part 2 by a prophetic counterpoint. God swears that His allegiance to Israel will endure as the "laws of heaven and earth" (33:25) —and that He "will restore" ashiv) the "fortunes" (shevutam) of the nation, taking them back in love (33:26). The haftarah thus "skips" backward to an earlier word of hope in order to conclude on a positive note. Such skipping occurs in other readings established by the Rabbis, and the phenomenon is already attested in ancient tannaitic regulations.3 However, the messianic finale usually skips forward, as in the haftarah for Yitro (where Isa. 6:1-7:6 is followed by 9:5-6). The present case was undoubtedly determined by plays on the verb shuv. Throughout Jer. 34:8-22 and 33:25-26, the term dramatizes the ongoing relationship between God and Israel in history—and specific aspects of obedience, disobedience, and hope. The covenant has conditions and consequences, but ultimately God's love transcends them both. Another feature of the legal background of the haftarah emerges from the correlation drawn between those (in the time of Zedekiah) who "passed between [ha-'overim] the halves of the calf" (Jer. 34:19) but have nevertheless "violated [ha-'overim] My covenant" (v. 18).4 The phraseology marks a dramatic mode of treaty ratification, whereby the parts of a sacrificial object are split and the parties to the agreement (actually or symbolically) pass between them. First and foremost, it recalls God's covenant with Abram in Gen. 15:9-10, 18 (cf. Rashi on v. 10, where he adduces Jer. 34:19). But other parallels can be adduced in the ancient Near East, where vassal treaties were regularly concluded by similar actions performed to safeguard the obligations undertaken by the principal parties. Thus, in an Aramaic document known as the Sefire treaty, from the eighth century B.C.E., one Bir Ga'yah says to Mati"el: "[Just as] this calf is cut in two, so may Mati"el be cut in two and may his nobles be cut in two"—if they violate their legal obligations.5 A similar expression of this ritual imprecation is preserved in the Bible. When Saul attempted to conscript aid for the men of Jabesh-Gilead, "He took a yoke of oxen and cut them into pieces, which he sent by messengers throughout the territory of Israel, with the warning, 'Thus shall be done to the cattle of anyone who does not follow Saul and Samuel into battle! '" (1 Sam. 11: 7). Jeremiah 34:18 must therefore be understood within the framework of such rites. Like its counterparts, it also involves a praxis of passing between the parts of a sacrifice, and curses for noncompliance. "I will make the men who violated My covenant. . . [like] the calf which they cut in two so as to pass between the halves" (v. 18). The prophecy in verse 20, stating that the vanquished Israelites will be strewn carcasses in the field, graphically articulates the punishment for infidelity. This curse derives ultimately from the imprecations formulated in Deut. 28:26—also for violation of the covenant.6 There are other legal features of note in the haftarah. Particularly pertinent is the fact that the terminology of debt bondage in Jer. 34:14 and 16 has been influenced by Deuteronomic regulations. Comparison with Deut. 15:12-18 bears this out. Both texts use the expression "to set free," both refer to "male and female" Hebrew slaves, and both speak of their fellow Hebrew as a "brother" who "sells himself." By contrast, the language used to formulate the rules of manumission in Exod. 21:1-6 is different (see below). Added proof of Deuteronomic influence upon Jer. 34:14 may be found in the shift there from the plural to the singular form. The change is explained by the fact that Jer. 34:14 constitutes a citation from Deut. 15:12, where the singular is used. 7 83
HAFTARAH FOR MISHPATIM
A further link between Jer. 34:8-22 and the Deuteronomic legal tradition is the shared reference to a period of six years for debt bondage. But the matter is somewhat confusing, since the reference in Jer. 34:14 is preceded by the phrase "after a period of seven years" (see Comment to Jer. 34:14). The question arises whether the period of debt bondage referred to by Jeremiah was for six or for seven years. The problem is due to the fact that the reference to a period of "seven years" does not originate in the slave rules of Deuteronomy, but in the preceding rule dealing with the period set for the repayment of loans before their annulment after seven years (see Deut. 15:1). Since this seven-year cycle is distinct from the six-year cycle of slavery for debts (and would not necessarily coincide), the blending of the two cases in Jer. 34:14 is puzzling. One may suppose that the legal tradition reflected in Jeremiah's formulation understood the phrase regarding manumission "in the seventh year" in the light of the rule regarding debt release "after seven years" (i. e, slave release was required "at the end ofthe seventh year"). This, however, contradicts the manumission rules of Exod. 21:2 and Deut. 15:12. When rabbinic tradition faced the problem, it assumed that Jer. 34: 14 cannot mean what it says. Thus Don Isaac Abravanel (following an old solution) simply says: "after sevenyears, that is to say, from the beginning of the seventh year." Either alternative has its difficulties. Whatever the specifics, Zedekiah's "covenant" with the people served to restore a condition of debt amnesty after years of abuse (ler. 34:15): a general manumission of Hebrew slaves was enacted. The king's involvement (and initiative) suggests that this deror (release) was an ad hoc royal measure in a time of distress, such as was periodically proclaimed in the ancient Near East. 8 The covenant ceremony—with the people and before God— would ensure national compliance. The same would follow even if this release fell on a sabbatical year in ludah. 9
COMMENTS Jeremiah 34:8. to proclaim a •release The idiom is also found in Lev. 25:10, in connection with the lubilee year restitution of property and freedom (cf. Ezek. 46:17). 10 Zedekiah's proclamation may therefore be part of a general sabbatical amnesty. Alternatively, it is an ad hoc edict of debt release akin to the mishamm enactments promulgated by Mesopotamian kings. 11 The proclamation of"release" recurs in Isa. 61:1, where the subjectis an eschatological restitution of benefits to the downtrodden and enslaved. 9. that no one should keep hisfellowjudean enslaved The Hebrew syntax is difficult. R. David Kimhi proposed understanding the problematic second clause "by a ludean, his brother, a man" (NIPS: "his fellow ludean") as an explication of the preceding prohibition (lit., "that no one should enslave them"). In his view, therefore, the formulation is an appositional clause that articulates by an ascending series of references all potential violators of the law (be he:"a ludean, his brother, [or any] one"). 14. seventh year That is, of servitude. Literally, "After a period of seven years"; compare Deut. 15:1, 12 [Transl.]. 16. you... have profaned My name ttebrewva-tehallelu 'etshemi. The verb hillel (profane; desecrate, defile) is elsewhere employed by leremiah with the object "land" (ler. 16:18). But the verb is frequently used with the divine name in the Holiness Code (cf. Lev. 18:21; 19:12) or in prophetic sources influenced by priestly traditions (cf. Ezek. 20:39; 36:20-23; Mai. 1:12). Accordingly, the present usage (in connection with the remanding of manumitted slaves) is more than a theological metaphor. It concretely refers to the desecration of the covenant performed "before Me in the House which bears My name" (ler. 34:15); that is, it may allude to an oath sworn by God's name. In rabbinic sources, the verb is also used both in connection with the profanation of sacred things (cf. M. Avot 3:11) and the divine name—particularly through acts of idolatry (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 22:6). 12 Thus from earliest times, the phrase hillul ha-Shem (and its variants) was used to indicate a desecration of God's name consonant with disgracing the lewish religion as such (Tosefta Yoma 5:6-8). 1 3 HAFTARAH FOR
BE-SHALLAH
84
forced them A technical term for economic oppression. Compare Neh. 5:5. It can also be used to indicate the physical subjugation ofland (Gen. 1:28) or women (Esther 7:8). 18. [like] the calf The translation infers a comparison, much as if ha-'egel (the calf) were ka-'egel (like the calf). This reading is justified insofar as a comparative particle (ke/a) is required on analogy with Near Eastern imprecation formulas ("may I be like") recited when sealing a covenant with a ritual (see the discussion under Content and Meaning). The particle is repeatedly used elsewhere by Jeremiah when explaining the meaning of his symbolic acts (cf. Jer. 13:11; 18:6; 19:11; 51:64). Finally, Rashi and Kimhi have noted the similarity between the practices mentioned in Jer. 34:18-19 and Gen. 15:9-10. In both cases, the covenant-act is dramatized by one of the principals "passing" ('aver/im) "between" (beyn) the "part/s" (beter/betarim) of a severed "calf" ('egel/'eglah). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah and pamshah are linked by their citation of rules dealing with the manumission of Hebrew slaves. As indicated above, Jer. 34:9-14 is most closely connected with the formulation found in Deut. 15:12-18. Thus Exod. 21:2-6 (at the beginning of Mishpatim) deals with the purchase of a male Hebrew as a slave ('ivri [Exod. 21:2]) and indicates manumission by the phrase "go \yetze}] free [la-hofshi]n (w. 2, 5) or just "leave" (w. 3-4). By contrast, the Deuteronomic law and its Jeremianic reflex include male and female slaves (ha-'ivri ve-ha-'ivriyyah) in their ruling, and both speak of debtor release by the expression "set free" (the verb shalleah + hofshi; cf. Deut. 15:13, 18 and Jer. 34:9-11, 14). The expression "I do not want to leave" (lo} }etze}) in Deut. 15:16 does not contradict this point, for this verse is in fact a citation from Exod. 21:5. Finally, both Deut. 15:12 and Jer. 34:14 refer to the debtor as one "who may be sold [or: who sells himself] to you" {yimmakher lakh). The verb for "sale" in Exod. 21:2 is kanah. If, despite the close verbal tally between Jer. 34:9-14 and Deut. 15:12-18, the Sages nevertheless chose to recite the prophecy of Jeremiah with the portion of Mishpatim (where the rules about the manumission of male slaves constitute the first paragraph, Exod. 21:2-6), there must be good reason. It would seem that this is to be found in Jer. 34:13—just prior to the citation of Exod. 21:2 in Jer. 34:14. In Jer. 34:13, the prophet says, in the name of God: "I made a covenant with your fathers when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, the house of bondage, saying" (v. 14 follows). N o w since no special covenant regarding slavery and manumission is recorded in the Bible, it makes sense to follow Abravanel's interpretation. He suggested that the passage refers to the manumission rule along with the other commandments of Sinai, which are collectively ratified as a "covenant" in Exod. 24:7. The prophet has therefore singled out the manumission rule in light of his own situation, andjust this link between the 'manumission 'rule and Sinai explains the rabbinic decision to recite Jer. 34:8-22 togetherwith Exod. 21:1-24:18. The rabbinic tally is thus both thematic (manumission) and conceptual ("covenant"). In its particulars, Jeremiah's sin and judgment speech refers to a specific infraction (reneging on manumission) drawn from the civil code. Generally, prophetic denunciations are sweeping critiques of cultic abuses and moral insensitivity. The emphasis on one misdemeanor is therefore somewhat unusual. Even more striking is the connection drawn between the exile and the people's disregard of a covenantal law. But this too is characteristic of Jeremiah. In another discourse, he links the exile to the nation's disregard of the Sabbath and its proscriptions (Jer. 17:19-27). The divine concern to limit debt bondage (features of both theparashah and haftarah) is an expression of the Bible's overall concern for human dignity. It may be observed that virtually all the Pentateuchal rules of slavery, debts, and indenture inhibit economic enrichment at the expense of other persons (see Exod. 21:2-6; Leviticus 25; Deuteronomy 15). Toward this end, the rules repeatedly invoke the restoration of ancestral property rights on the land and emphasize inviolable human rights in society. These rights are derived from divine authority but depend upon social enactment and enforcement. Jeremiah's diatribe indicates that the people's disregard for human 85
HAFTARAH FOR MISHPATIM
freedom violates their ancient covenant with God, who "brought them out of [lit., "manumitted them from," hotzV\ . . . the house of bondage" (Jer. 34:13; cf. Exod. 20:2). Concern for the stranger and slave, based on national memories of bondage and alien status in Egypt, is a recurrent feature of the Pentateuchal laws (cf. Exod. 22:20; Deut. 5:14-15 and 15:12-15).
Haftarah for Terumah nftTin ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 5:26-6:13 I KINGS 5:26-6:13
For the contents and theology of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall content, theology, and historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah describes the beginning of the construction of Solomon's Temple, dated by scholars at around 958 B.C.E. To accomplish his task, Solomon struck a deal with Hiram, king of Tyre, whereby cedars and cypress trees from Lebanon would be exchanged for ludean wheat and beaten oil. This arrangement is detailed in the verses preceding the haftarah and is summed up in its prologue (1 Kings 5:26): "The L O R D had given Solomon wisdom, as He had promised him. There was friendship [shalom] between Hiram and Solomon, and the two of them made a treaty." This verse suggests that the divine wisdom granted Solomon (see 3:12) included political and executive acumen (Ralbag). Other descriptions of Solomon's wisdom emphasize his judicial discrimination (3:28), administrative capacity (5:1-9), and cleverness in parable and song (5:10-14). These various editorial notices of wisdom integrate the anthology of activities that exemplify Solomon's genius. Following the prologue, the haftarah describes the forced labor levied by the crown and the royal order to quarry stone for the Temple's foundations. Together with the wood from Lebanon (1 Kings 5:20-25), all is now ready for the building. Architectural details of the Temple are then enumerated. The reading concludes with an epilogue in which a divine word exhorts Solomon to obey the Law— so that God's promises to David might be fulfilled and His "will abide among the children oflsrael" (6:11-13). In this literary structure, references to two divine promises frame the preparations for and beginnings of the Temple-building: the bequest of wisdom to Solomon, in the prologue; and the conditional grant of divine favor to David's lineage, in the epilogue. Thus it is the religious covenant with God rather than the political alliance with Hiram that protects the realm. If the king will obey the divine commandments, the dynasty will be secure and God "will abide among the children oflsrael" and "never forsake" them (6:13). Solomon could hardly be surprised by this revelation; a similar exhortation was enunciated by his father David on his deathbed (1 Kings 2:2-4). 1
COMMENTS 1 Kings 5:26. Friendship Hebrew shalom. The technical sense of this term indicates the loyalty and accord basic to treaties. Thus verse 26 adds that Hiram and Solomon "made a treaty" (va-yikhretu berit). See also the idioms beriti shalom, "My pact of friendship" (Num. 25:12), and berit shelomi, "My covenant of friendship" (Isa. 54:10), used to indicate the divine accords with Phinehas (the priest) and David, respectively. The term berit is also regularly used to indicate political pacts. Thus Isaac negotiates an accord with the king of the Philistines (Gen. 26:28; with conditions, ceremonies, and oaths [w. 29-30]), and Ahab negotiates a set/ement with Ben-hadad of Aram (note the compliance clause; 1 Kings 20:34). See also 1 Kings 15:19 and Hos. 12:2. HAFTARAH FOR TERUMAH
86
1 Kings 6:1. In thefour hundred and eightieth year This biblical dating has been justified in rabbinic historical works (Seder Olam Rabbah 15). 2 If correct, this would put the time of the Exodus at about 1440 B.C.E. Modern historians find this dating problematic. First, it appears that the Israelites were in servitude in Egypt during the reign of Rameses II (ca. 1290-1224 B.C.E.), who set up his capital in the Egyptian Delta and named it for himself (note that Gen. 47:11 identifies the area with "the region of Rameses"). Second, an Egyptian stele known by the name of Merneptah, the successor to Rameses II, states that the people of "Israel" were "laid waste" in Canaan sometime in the fifth year of this king's rule (ca. 1220 B.C.E.).3 This evidence indicates that the Israelites were in Canaan by the last third of the thirteenth century. And finally, archeological excavations (at Hazor and elsewhere) reveal layers of destruction and ash around this same time, when the pottery type also changes. We must therefore understand the notice in 1 Kings 6:1 as a schematic generalization. By giving the Temple date as 480 years after the Exodus, the (late) biblical historian presumably wished to indicate that Solomon's shrine was built roughly midway between the Exodus and the return from exile. 5. the Shrine That is, the innermost sanctuary, designated in verse 16 and elsewhere as the "Holy ofHolies" [Transl.]. The Temple building was aligned along an axis that included an outer portico ulam [v. 3]), an inner sanctuary (hekhal ["Great Hall"]), and a hidden area of supreme holiness (devir). A similar threefold structure characterized the Tabernacle, as well as temple structures in the Canaanite-Phoenician region at that time. 7. only finished stones With this comment, the writer interrupts his document (v. 6 describes the lower story of the Temple; v. 8, the middle one). The notice that the stones for the Temple were cut at the quarry outside the shrinal precincts recalls 1 Kings 5:31. The intrusion thus seems gratuitous, and the comment that no iron tool was heard in the Temple during its construction appears redundant. However, these phrases are precise allusions to the Torah, where it is stated that an altar must be made of undressed stone and without any iron implement (Exod. 20:22; Deut. 27:5-6). It therefore seems that the writer of 1 Kings 6:6 wished to apply the ancient altar law to the Temple site. To do so, he had to take account of the Pentateuchal proscription of iron implements—and this led to the interpretive qualification that the stones were cut outside the Temple area. In this way, the ancient altar law was reapplied and extended. An analogous solution to the apparent contradiction between the Deuteronomic law and the use of cut stones in the Temple was articulated in classical rabbinic times; see Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, lethro 11 (end). 4 9. When hefinished... he paneled The verb, "He finished," va-yekha-llehu, recalls the statement at the completion of the construction of the Tabernacle that "Moses had finished [va-yekhal] the work" (Exod. 40:33). In turn, both cases echo the statement that "God finished" (va-yekha-l) His "work" of creation on the seventh day (Gen. 2:2). (For a comparable link between world-building and shrine-building, see Tanhuma Pekudei 2.) The reference to the cedar-paneled House of God alludes to 2 Sam. 7:2 and David's motivation to build a permanent dwelling for the Ark. 11. the word ofthe LORD came Hebrew dava-r (word) is regularly used in prophetic sources to indicate a divine revelation. The Targum therefore glosses it as a prophetic word. Kimhi was more circumspect and suggests a mediated revelation to the king (from the prophet Ahijah of Shilo). Don Isaac Abravanel notes that this prophecy interrupts the narrative (the details of the building continue in 6:14, after the haftarah ends) and adds that it would have fit better either at the beginning or end of the building account. Abravanel's solution to the literary issue is theological. In his view, the conditions for God's cultic presence (the king's obedience to the Law) have been thematized within the account of the building of the Temple.
12. ifyoufollow Three conditions of royal compliance, " i f y o u [1] follow My laws and [2] observe My rules and [3] faithfully keep My commandments," lead to three divine guarantees: HAFTARAH FOR TERUMAH 87
"Iwill [1] fulfill for you the promise that I gave to your father David" and "[2] abide among the children of Israel, and [ 3 ] . . . never forsake My people Israel." (Since the divine promise in 2 Sam. 7:15-16 is the permanence of the royal lineage, it is difficult to understand the latter 2 and 3 as explications of 1—as does the NJPS translation.) Note that the conditions are for Solomon alone. For the effect of the king's religious observance upon national destiny, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The Torah reading contains a divinely revealed blueprint of the Tabernacle, along with specifications for its construction (Exod. 25:9ff). Material support for the shrine comes through freewill donations by the people (25:2). God further tells Moses (25:8): "Let them [the people] make Me a sanctuary that I may dwell [ve-shakhanti] among them [be-tokham])"-, that is, the building of the shrine is the condition for divine indwelling. By contrast, in the haftarah, there is no divine blueprint of the building, and the presence of God in the building turns on specific covenantal preconditions. After the construction, the word of the Lord comes to Solomon, saying: "With regard to this House you are building—if you follow My laws and observe My rules and faithfully keep My commandments, I will fulfill for you the promise that I gave to your father David: I will abide [ve-shakhanti] among [be-tokh] the children of Israel, and I will never forsake My people Israel" (1 Kings 6:12-13). Under the new dispensation, God is drawn into the human realm through covenantal obedience and service.5 Theparashah and haftarah mark two phases of Israelite worship. The first is centered around the portable Tabernacle in the desert, where the Lord could dwell as He chose; the other is centered around a permanent House in Jerusalem, for the Lord's fixed earthly dwelling. More figuratively, these two phases also symbolize two poles of the religious spirit—the ever-new journey of spiritual search, and the always-present embodiment of tradition. The linking of the pamshah and haftarah does not require a choice between these models, but rather directs attention to their difference and potential interaction.
Haftarah for Tetzaweh mxfl ASHKENAZIM EZEKIEL 43:10-27 SEPHARDIM EZEKIEL 43:10-27
For Ezekiel's life and times and for a discussion of the contents, style, and theology of the Book of Ezekiel, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of the other haftarah readings taken from Ezekiel's prophecies, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." This haftarah is one of three haftarah selections taken from the program of restoration, found in Ezekiel 40-48. 1 After an intense period of rebuke and warning, 2 beginning some five years after his own exile to Babylon in 597 B.C.E.,3 the prophet's oracles of doom had become a reality. In the year 586 B.C.E., Jerusalem was destroyed, the Temple burned, and much of the population deported to Babylon. Ezekiel continued to prophesy within this exilic community and proclaimed a series of prophecies of consolation. Through such imagery as resurrected bones and apocalyptic wars, he projected a future in which the exiled nation would be restored to Zion, and the holy places purged of sin and renewed (see Ezekiel 35-39). The climax of these prophecies is a blueprint of the future Temple (and its new order of worship), along with a ground plan for resettlement in the homeland (and a reapportionment of inheritance holdings in an equitable manner) (Ezekiel 40-48). 4 In this new order, the great altar of sacrifices is central. A description of the dimensions of this altar and its priestly dedication is the core of the present haftarah. HAFTARAH FOR TETZAWEH
88
The haftarah provides a transition between Ezekiel's description of the return of God's Presence to the Shrine (Ezek. 43:1-9) and all the priestly rules that follow (chaps. 44-46). This transition is marked by a return of the divine voice. In the preceding vision of the future Temple, the prophet was instructed by an angelic guide (chaps. 40-42); but in Ezek. 43:10-27, after the return of the Glory, God speaks directly to Ezekiel. He is told to convey the preceding account of the Temple to the nation and is personally informed of the dimensions of the altar and all that will pertain to its consecration. In this way, Ezekiel emerges as a mediator of the cultic order—like Moses before him. The prominent position of the account of the altar at the outset of these instructions indicates its axial significance in priestly religion, connecting heaven and earth through the substances consumed thereon. PART 1. SUMMATION AND I N T R O D U C T I O N (Ezekiel43:10-12) After the account of the Temple's dimensions given by an angelic messenger (Ezekiel 40-42) and the return of the divine Presence to the Shrine (43:1-9), Ezekiel is addressed directly by God. He is told to inform the people of the future Temple, so that they may be ashamed of their sins; and if they are, he should also tell them of its dimensions and furnishings, passageways and ground plan, and the relevant rules and statutes for the Temple as a whole. PART 2. THE ALTAR OF SACRIFICE (Ezekiel 43:13-17) The structure of the altar is as follows. From within a depression eighteen by eighteen cubits, and one cubit deep, the altar rises ten cubits from its base (not including the horns at the top); this height starts from a lower ledge of sixteen by sixteen cubits in width and tapers in two unequal stages to twelve by twelve cubits. 5 It thus resembles a staged tower or mountain, which may explain the explanation of the topmost hearth (called }ari}el) as a "mountain of God" (hnr'el [v. 15]). The dimensions of Solomon's or Ahaz's altars are not recorded in preexilic sources; according to the postexilic account in 2 Chron. 4:1, Solomon's altar was a structure twenty cubits by twenty cubits by ten cubits. Thus only the height agrees with Ezekiel's projection. PART 3. CONSECRATION (Ezekiel43:18-27) a. Ezekiel 43:18-24 A new divine word provides the prophet with "the directions for the altar on the day it is erected, so that burnt offerings may be offered up on it and blood dashed against it" (v. 18). For the ritual preparation of the altar, two different sin offerings are required on succeeding days—a bull from the herd, then a goat from the flock—for the rites of purgation and purification. These sacrifices are to be followed by a concluding burnt offering of a bull and a ram. The only legitimate officiants to perform these sacrifices are "the levitical priests who are of the stock of Zadok" (v. 19). For Ezekiel, only this line was "eligible to minister" before God (v. 19; cf. 44:15-16). b. Ezekiel 43:25-27 Another pattern of sacrifices is presented—a bull from the herd and a goat from the flock are both offered for seven days and serve as sin offerings and for the rites of purgation and cleansing (purification is not mentioned). 6 After this procedure, on the eighth day, the altar becomes ready for regular service.7 (A week of consecration agrees with the regulation for the dedication of the Tabernacle altar in Exod. 29:37; during that time, a bull was offered as a sin offering and for the rites of purification and purgation).
CONTENT AND MEANING According to the beginning of the haftarah (Ezek. 43:10-12), the details of the new Temple are made conditional upon national contrition. Hearing of God's plan of restoration was to evoke shame in the people for their iniquities, and this state was necessary for learning further specifics. Presumably the mere proclamation of the new order was deemed sufficient to induce the beginning of repentance and make the people worthy of knowing the new sacral order (Rashi). The rest of the haftarah describes the altar and its consecration. The altar is both the focal point of the sacrificial service and a means of access to God. It is here that the substances brought by penitents and the pious alike are transformed into gifts for God. A vicarious offering HAFTARAH FOR TETZAWEH 89
of one's means is offered as a tribute of joy or a penalty for sin. In this process, the divine and human dimensions are aligned, and thanksgiving is expressed or atonement sought. God's own instructions as to the technical means for offering these substances give the people confidence in their efficacy. A chief condition is the proper purification of the means of service (both the human personnel and the sacral objects) —at the inaugural rites of service (as in this haftarah) and in the periodic purgations for repurification (cf. Ezek. 45:18-20). The consecration rites in the haftarah provide transformations of natural objects into means of sacral service. Properly done, "the priests shall offer your burnt offerings and your offerings of well-being on the altar; and I will extend My favor to you" (43:27). Nothing is more earnestly desired than this divine response, and nothing deemed more crucial for one's religious and material needs.
COMMENTS Ezekiel 43:10. describe the Temple to the House oflsrael In accordance with his visions as detailed in the three preceding chapters; compare 40:4:'"[N]ote well everything I am going to show you . . . report everything you see to the House oflsrael'" [Transl.]. But let them be ashamed of their iniquities This verb and its nominal forms recur in Ezekiel's prophecies (cf. 16:27, 54, 61; 32:24; 34:29; 36:6, 15, 32; 39:26). It is precisely the announcement of the new Temple that would cause the people's remorse at their past sins, insofar as this disclosure would manifest God's reconciliation with them (cf. Rashi). The syntax is difficult, because the command to "measure its design" (v. 10) follows the intended consequence of remorse at God's announcement. The syntax of verse 11 is also difficult, because its opening clause "And if they are ashamed" (not "when," as in NJPS) is separated from the command to "make known to them the plan" by the technical language of the plan that interrupts these phrases without any grammatical connection. It would therefore seem that the phrases dealing with shame in verses 10-11 have been inserted into an original divine command that simply informed the people of the plan of the future Temple. Both phrases add the important theological dimension of remorse as a condition for the people's hearing the architectural plan, but the importance of this feature should not obscure the awkward way that it has been incorporated into this passage. 12. Such are the instructions Literally, "this is the instruction." This conclusion of the Temple blueprint uses a formula found in priestly instructions in the Torah (cf. Lev. ll:46f.; 14: 32, 57). Such formulas refer to the instructions as a torah, as here, and provide a brief resume of the contents of the instruction. 8 In the present case, the words "enclosure" (lit., "roundabout"), "holy," and "top of the mountain" allude to the full descriptions found in Ezek. 40:2 and 42:20. most holy Hebrew kodesh kodashim is used here for the entire Temple area—not just the holiest recess of the Shrine. This usage underscores the comprehensive sanctity attributed to Ezekiel's Temple. See R. Eliezer ofBeaugency. 13. cubit Hebrew 'amah; an ancient measure of length based on the forearm (18-22 inches). The "handbreadth" is another bodily measure. 15-16. altar hearth The upper hearth is twice called "the 'ari'eP (ha-'ari'el). The reference here to the altar as a har'el (mountain of God) is possibly a punning variation on it. The meaning of 'ari'el has been debated. Possible renderings include "lion of God" and "(fire-)hearth of God." 9 The latter would support the function of the object as a ritual hearth (cf. Targum). This sense is further confirmed by an ancient Moabite inscription that reports the hijacking by King Mesha of Moab of an Israelite object (from the city of Ashtarot) called an V/ ('ari'ell).1® The prophet Isaiah refers to the city of Jerusalem as }ari}el (Isa. 29:lf., 7), possibly as a metonym for the (altar hearth of the) Temple. 11 17. [upper] base Hebrew 'azarah, which in verse 14 means "ledge." The altar consists of three blocks, each smaller than the one below it [Transl.]. HAFTARAH FOR TETZAWEH
90
halfa cubit [high] Half a cubit is identical with the one span of verse 13 [Transl.]. ramp Leading up to the altar; compare Exod. 20:23 [Transl.]. 18-27. The ceremony of consecration is replete with old priestly terms for expiation and purgation. The emphasis on sin offerings underscores the mood of purification pervading the unit. Blood rites for decontamination are especially central (v. 20). Radical shifts in verbal forms and pronominal references dominate Ezekiel's style here and elsewhere. Some commentators have thus concluded that this indicates a muddled textual tradition, 12 but others propose that such inconsistency was apparently an acceptable feature of ancient Israelite and Near Eastern cultic compositions. 13 19. the stock of Zadok Ezekiel regarded the Zadokite priests as the only legitimate priestly line (see 40:46), giving divine legitimation to this preference. All other levitical priests were demoted to gatekeepers and cultic servants (44:9-16). 1 4 The priest Zadok served David during his reign and supported him during the rebellion of Absalom (2 Sam. 15:24-29, 35; 17: 15; 19:12). He also sided with Solomon in the struggle for David's throne (against Abiathar, who supported Adonijah for king; see 1 Kings 1:8, 32). In preferring the Zadokite line, Ezekiel ignored and bypassed the Ithamarite line of Aaron. 26. shall it be consecrated This ancient idiom (lit., "shall fill its hands") usually designates the appointment of persons to a special task (cf. Exod. 28:41). This is the only place in the Bible where the idiom refers to an object. The seven-day consecration rite was long established (cf. Exod. 29:37; Lev. 8:33, 35), although the sacrifices prescribed in the Book of Ezekiel are more stringent than those in the Torah (R. Eliezer of Beaugency). Kimhi (on v. 25) cites the talmudic opinion that the altar consecration rites in Ezra's time followed Moses' prescriptions (B. Menahot 45a). But as the discrepancy was unsettling, he felt constrained to conclude that new cultic changes would be instituted in the future days. This is one of several contradictions between our passage and regulations found in the Torah. For example, Ezek. 43:22 legislates the use of he-goats as a sin offering for the purging of the altar, but this "did not occur in the Tabernacle" (Rashi). Similarly, the prescriptions of the altar call for ascending "steps" (;ma'alot [43:17]; not "ramp," as per NIPS); 1 5 this blatantly contradicts the prohibition of"steps" (ma'alot) leading to the altar in the Torah (Exod. 20:23). These and other contradictions almost led the early Sages to withdraw the Book of Ezekiel from circulation. Only a legendary tour de force of reconciliation prevented this from occurring (see B. Shabbat 13b). The details are not preserved; hence subsequent commentators have struggled with the matter. Contradictions also exist between the measurements of the altar described by Ezekiel and the measurements reported of the Second Temple in M. Middot 3:1. Although R. Yose was able to reconcile Ezek. 43:16 with tannaitic tradition, the whole matter of contradictions led Kimhi to assert that Ezekiel's vision was intended for the Third Temple in the eschatological future. (He read the phrase ve-'asu Jota-m in Ezek. 43:11 as meaning "they shall do them" in the future.) CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The link between xhepa-mshah and haftarah lies in their descriptions of the main sacrificial altar and its consecration. The desert altar was made of acacia wood overlaid with bronze and was outfitted for transport (Exod. 27:1-8; 29:36-37). By contrast, Ezekiel's altar is a great fixed presence, presumably made of stone blocks—though this and other details are absent. The juxtaposition of the accounts highlights the symmetry between Moses and Ezekiel as mediators of new orders of cultic worship, and the explicit reference to God's command in both altar descriptions establishes the divine authority of the two constructions. The Tabernacle (built after the Exodus) and Ezekiel's Temple (to be built after the exile) have temporal and spatial aspects. Viewed spatially, the Tabernacle and the Temple are the sacred sites HAFTARAH FOR TETZAWEH 91
where God will be present on earth. This emphasis on place underscores the fact that it is on earth that the rites of sanctity are performed and that it is in space that divine service is defiled. Viewed temporally, these two buildings mark the arena of divine immanence at the beginning and end of the biblical era. In addition, the vision of Ezekiel symbolizes the end of exile and the restoration of purification and atonement before God. For later generations, in exile and without a Temple, the hopes embodied in Ezekiel's vision were nurtured by its recitation. According to a midrash, even this has a redemptive dimension. Samuel bar Abba taught: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, "Even though the Temple will be destroyed and the sacrifices annulled, do not forget how to perform the sacrifices, but be careful to study them repeatedly. And if you will be occupied with them, I shall account it for you as if you were actually occupied with the sacrifices. And if you want to know (that this is so), take note: When the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Ezekiel the plan of the Temple what did He say? "Describe the Temple to the House oflsrael that they be ashamed of their iniquities, 16 and let them measure its design" (Ezek. 43:10). Ezekiel (then) said before the Holy One, blessed be He, "Master of the Universe, until now we are in exile in the land of our enemies, and You tell me to make known to Israel the plan of the Temple, and to 'write it down before their eyes, that they may faithfully follow its entire plan and all its laws' (43:11)?! Can they do this? Leave them be until they return from the exile, and then I shall go and tell them." The Holy One, blessed be He, (then) said to Ezekiel: "Because My children are in exile, should the building of My Temple be (completely) annulled? The reading thereof is as great as its (re) building. (Therefore,) go and tell them to read the measure of the Temple in Scripture, and the reward for their studious preoccupation with it is that I shall account this for them as if they were (in fact) occupied with the building of the Temple (itself)." (Tanhuma Tzav 14) The sanctity and atoning power of the ancient Temple service was activated in another way. Noting that the great altar in Ezekiel 43 is called both an "altar" (mizbeah) and "table" (shulhtm) in Ezek. 41:22, Rabbi Yohanan and Rabbi Eleazar both taught: "As long as the Temple existed the altar provided atonement for Israel, but now (when the Temple is destroyed) a person's table provides atonement" (B. Berakhot 55a). 17 Other Sages focused on spiritual sustenance. Noting the same conjunction of altar and table in Ezek. 41:22, R. Simeon taught that when three persons sit at table and discuss words of Torah, it is "as if they ate from the table of the Presence [hn-Makom], may He be blessed" (M. Avot 3:3). 18
Haftarah for Ki Tissa' N^n ">2 ASHKENAZIM I K I N G S 1 8 : l - 3 9 SEPHARDIM I KINGS 18:20-39
For the contents of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall contents, theology, and historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other haftarah selections taken from the Book of Kings, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah takes place during the reign of King Ahab (871-852 B.C.E.), who, though an Israelite, built a high altar to the Tyrian Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:29-33). 1 His Phoenician wife, Jezebel, also promoted pagan worship and even persecuted and killed Israelite prophets in the process. Little wonder that paganizing practices and worship went unchecked in the north, and loyalty to the Lord alone was either compromised or lost. Some Israelites engaged in outright worship of Baal; others expressed dual loyalties and developed syncretistic religious practices. The haftarah focuses on Elijah's attempt to stem the tide of false worship and defame the prophets of Baal. The event is the culmination of his prophetic career. HAFTARAH FOR KI TISSA'
92
In the chapter prior to this great drama, Elijah blasted the faithless Ahab for his behavior and swore: "As the L O R D lives, the God oflsrael whom I serve, there will be no dew or rain except at my bidding" (1 Kings 17:1). Immediately thereafter, Elijah works a miracle of food for the widow of Zarephath, who had sustained him on his journey (17:8-16), and also resurrects her dead child, who "had no breath left in him" (w. 17-24). Both episodes testify to Elijah's divine alliance, and both conclude with an acknowledgment of the prophet's powers (in the first case, the narrator says that the food did not run out, "just as the L O R D had spoken through Elijah" [v. 16]; in the second, the widow exclaims, "Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of the L O R D is truly in your mouth" [v. 24]). 2 More important is the fact that both episodes testify to the supreme power of the God of Israel: it is He who sustains life, not Baal. To dramatize this fact, Elijah is bidden by the Lord to appear before Ahab in the third year of the drought. This divine call sets in motion an encounter between the king and prophet and the religious showdown that follows. The haftarah has two parts, with several subsections: 3 PART 1. CONFRONTATION AND CHALLENGE (1 Kings 18:1-19) a. 1 Kings 18:1-2 A prologue; God appears to Elijah in the third year of the drought and sends him to King Ahab. God promises to "send rain upon the earth" (v. 1). b. 1 Kings 18:3-6 In the midst of the famine caused by the drought, Ahab summons his steward Obadiah and bids him to search the wadis for water in order to feed the animals. They separate and divide the land between them. The narrator parenthetically records Obadiah's reverence for the God of Israel and his bravery. c. 1 Kings 18:7-15 Suddenly, the prophet Elijah appears to Obadiah. He bids Obadiah to tell the king of his whereabouts. Obadiah, however, fears for his life, since he suspects that Elijah will disappear and his word to Ahab will seem a lie. Elijah assures Obadiah that he will appear before Ahab. d. 1 Kings 18:16-19 Ahab and Elijah meet. An encounter between Elijah and 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah is arranged. The site is Mount Carmel. 4 PART 2. THE RITUAL CONTEST (1 Kings 18:20-39) a. 1 Kings 18:20-24 The meeting is set up: the lone prophet of God versus the 850 Baalite prophets. The terms are arranged: the victor god will send fire; and the people, who "keep hopping between two opinions" (v. 20), will act as judge andjury. b. 1 Kings 18:25-29 The prophets ofBaal go first, and they rant and rave without success. c. 1 Kings 1 8 : 3 0 - 3 9 Elijah then takes his turn, and he douses his altar with water to intensify the miracle to come. The Tishbite calls upon the ancestral God oflsrael—who answers with fire. Then all the people proclaim that "The L O R D alone is God!" (v. 3 9 ) .
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah ends with the liturgical credo that the Lord alone is God and does not include the subsequent verses about the slaughter of the false prophets or the downpour that fulfills God's prophecy (1 Kings 18:40-45). The Rabbis thus emphasize the dramatic defeat of false worship and the ecstatic conversion of the people to God alone. Among the Ashkenazim, both the contest and its prologue are read as the haftarah (18:1-39); the Sephardim read only the contest of faith (18:20-39). In this drama, the challenges to the god Baal and to the people's faith are formulated in terms of power over natural forces. Whereas Baal worshipers try to stimulate their god and the forces of nature through bloodletting rituals and chants, the God of Israel triumphs supernaturally. Victory is achieved through a fire that "descended" from the Lord (like the consecration of the Tabernacle in Lev. 9:24)—and even "licked up the water that was in the trench" (1 Kings 18: 38). In pouring water on the altar, Elijah heightens the challenge of the contest and makes a 93
HAFTARAH FOR KI TISSA' 93
mockery of the pagan practice of pouring water upon the ground to bring rain. Thus a magical ritual is transformed into a divine miracle, highlighting the power of God over nature and His response to the prayer of the prophet. There is an ironical use of the term kol (voice) in the text. Elijah mockingly tells his foes to "shout louder" (kire'u be-kolgadol [ 1 Kings 1 8 : 2 7 ] ) , for perhaps Baal is asleep or otherwise occupied. But there is no answer, no sound (kol) from Baal. This word usage puns on the fact that kol also means "thunderclap"—the very signature in sound of Baal, the god of rain, who rides the clouds as his chariot. 5 The phrase 'ein kol ("there was no sound" [v. 29]) is thus a polemical trope, an anti-liturgy ("there is no god of thunder") reversed by the positive credal declaration "YHWHhu'ha-'elohim" ("The L O R D alone is God" [v. 3 9 ] ) . The formula (YHWH hu' ha-'elohim) is the climax of the drama. Earlier, Elijah testily anticipates this phrase when he urges the pagan priests to "Shout louder! After all, he [Baal] is a god [ki 'elohim hu'Y ( 1 Kings 1 8 : 2 7 ) . This taunt contrasts sharply with Elijah's subsequent appeal to the Lord, "Let it be known [yivada'] today that You are God [ki 'Mah 'elohim] in Israel" (v. 36), and with the people's momentous expression of faith in the God oflsrael (YHWH hu' ha-'elohim [v. 39]). The language of this affirmation resonates with liturgical assertions found elsewhere in the Bible. Thus in Ps. 1 0 0 : 3 the people are told to "[acknowledge [de'u] that the LORD is God" (ki 'YHWH hu' ha-'elohim). The expression also occurs in sermons and prayers in the Deuteronomic literary style. For example, the Exodus is deemed true testimony for the people "to know" and acknowledge (la-da'at) "that the LORD alone is God" (ki YHWHhu'ha-'elohim) (Deut. 4 : 3 5 , 3 9 ; cf. 7 : 9 ) . In a similar way, Solomon appeals to God to heed his supplications and provide for his people, that all "may know [da'at] that the LORD alone is God [ki YHWH hu' ha-'elohim]" ( 1 Kings 8 : 6 0 ) ; and variations of the formula appear in Nehemiah's prayer in connection with God's creation of the world and choice of Abraham to receive the covenant of the land (Neh. 9 : 6 - 8 ) . 6 The polemical resonance of Elijah's usage recurs in leremiah's prayers spoken in a time of drought. In his attempted intercession, the prophet first appeals to God's mercy ("Have You, then, rejected ludah? . . . Why have You smitten us so that there is no cure?" [ler. 1 4 : 1 9 ] ) and then to His honor ("For Your name's sake, do not disown us; do not dishonor Your glorious throne" [v. 21]). Between the two, he offers a communal confession (v. 20) and concludes with a testament to divine power (v. 22). The language is at once a critique of the gods of nature and a credo of commitment: "Can any of the false gods of the nations give rain? Can the skies of themselves give showers? Truly You, O L O R D , are our God ['atah hu'THWH'eloheinu] \ So we hope in You, for only You made all these things." 7 The same spiritual ambience evoked in Elijah's protest is found here: only the Lord God is master of rain, and only He must be acknowledged. The theme of spiritual fickleness and the struggle of the leaders to teach the people to acknowledge God thus permeates the Hebrew Bible. In the haftarah, the credo is asserted only after the people, twittering between theologies like a bird among branches ( 1 Kings 1 8 : 2 1 ) , overcome their ambivalence.8 For Elijah, Yahwistic monotheism is the one and only golden bough.
COMMENTS 1 Kings 18:1. in the third year That is, of the drought; in 17:1, Elijah said to Ahab, "[There will be no dew or rain except at my bidding" [Transl.]. 19. who eatatjezebel's
table
That is, who are maintained by lezebel [Transl.].
24.1 -will invoke the LORD by name According to the rules laid down, the adversaries will invoke their god by name, and "the god who responds with fire, that one is God." This phraseology has a marked liturgical dimension. Abraham appears as the first to call upon God by His name (Gen. 1 2 : 8 ) , and such invocations are repeatedly mentioned in the Book of Psalms. Phrases like "I cry aloud to the L O R D , and He answers me" (Ps. 3 : 5 ) and " O L O R D . . . when I cry, answer me speedily" (Ps. 1 0 2 : 2 - 3 ) present the evidence from the human side; the divine assurance "When he calls on Me, I will answer him" (Ps. 9 1 : 1 5 ) gives God's statement of support. HAFTARAH FOR KI TISSA'
94
Elijah's taunt that perhaps Baal "is asleep and will wake up" (1 Kings 18:27) is also rooted in liturgical forms. Just this language is used by the psalmist to motivate God to saving action: "Rouse Yourself; why do you sleep, O LORD? Awake, do not reject us forever!" (Ps. 44:24; cf. 59:5-6). In this light, the assertion "See, the guardian oflsrael neither slumbers nor sleeps" (Ps. 121:4; Isa. 5:27) has polemical force. Such statements may have a cultic basis. Egyptian evidence from the third millenium B.C.E. to Roman times indicates that priests called upon their gods to "awake" as part of the daily liturgy; and most remarkably, an order of Jewish Levites in the Second Temple were called me'orerim, "awakeners" (M. Ma'aser Sheni 5:15; M. Sotah 9:10). According to rabbinic tradition, they used to recite Ps. 44:24 ("Rouse Yourself; why do You sleep, O LORD?") every morning upon the dais; but the practice was abolished by the High Priest Yohanan (B. Sotah 48a). 9 29. keptraving
See Num. 11:25-26: "spoke in ecstasy" [Transl.].
31. Israelshallbeyourname
See Gen. 35:10 [Transl.].
32. enomyhfor two scabs of seed That is, of an area that would require two seahs of seed if sown. Compare Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10 [Transl.]. 36. "Let it be known today that You are God" The Lord is challenged to manifest His power in public, thereby showing the supremacy of Israel's God. This language is found in another famous ordeal, in which irony and taunt are also its backbone. After the young David volunteers to take on the giant Goliath, in a battle that would decide the fate of the war, the shepherd mocks the galoot by casting his armor aside and taking up pebbles from the stream. The Philistine is outraged ("Am I a dog that you come against me with sticks?" [1 Sam. 17:43]); but David piously replies that he comes in the name of the God whom Goliath has defied and that by his victory "all the earth shall know that there is a God in Israel" (1 Sam. 17:46; cf. v. 47). The final phrase is not innocent. The narrator could count on its well-known polemical thrust. In Elijah's mouth, the words serve as a motivational clause to incite divine action. 37. that this people may know "May know," ve-yede'u. Convincing knowledge of divine power through actions (predicted, experienced, and realized) is a pervasive form of proof in Scripture. It appears in all genres and periods. Most well known is the repeated idea that the plagues will convince Israelite and Egyptian alike (they "shall know") that "I am the LORD" (cf. Exod. 6:7; 7:5; 10:2; 14:4). The formula is particularly pervasive in the Book of Ezekiel. The liturgical dimension is expressed in various psalms, where God is beseeched to vanquish His enemies with the words: "May they know that Your name, Yours alone, is the LORD" (PS. 83: 19). The polemical undertone also surfaces in prayers asking God to "bestir" Himself and "bring all nations to account," in order "that it may be known to the ends of the earth that God does rule overjacob" (Ps. 59:6, 14). for You have turned their hearts backward Hebrew ve-'atah hasibota'et libam 'ahomnnit. This phrase is difficult and has been variously construed. Particularly crucial is the relationship of this phrase to the first half of the verse, in which the prophet beseeches God to answer his prayer in order that all may know Him. In antiquity, the Targum Jonathan and Septuagint variously understood the second clause to mean that by His miraculous response to the prayer God will "turn" or restore the hearts of the nation to Him; but the people have a wayward heart, nonetheless. The Talmuds and midrashim reflect other solutions. According to R. Simon ben Lakish, the negative consequence of the people's waywardness is linked to God's behavior. He interpreted Elijah's words to mean that if God were to respond miraculously, then the people would know the Lord; but i f H e did not, then therewith He (God) would turn the people's hearts astray (J. Sanhedrin, 10:31, 28a). 10 More radical is the view of R. Eleazar, who understood Elijah as trying to convince God to respond graciously to his prayer by saying that God Himself is the cause of the people's wayward heart; that is, He created them with an evil inclination and has the power (through miraculous action) to restore them to His worship. 95
HAFTARAH FOR KI TISSA' 95
In diverse ways, medieval lewish commentators followed these two types of interpretation. For example, Rashi principally follows R. Eleazar's construal of the passage; 11 but in light of the implications of this approach, Saadiah Gaon and Kimhi were quick to emphasize human free will as a response to the evil inclination. In so doing, they basically follow the Targum. However, the emphasis on the past tense of the verb in R. Eleazar's comment cannot be easily ignored. He read the passage as saying that God has "turned" the human heart backward. This is indeed the theologically difficult plain sense of the verb, and there is nothing that justifies construing it with a future orientation (viz., if God responds, He will thereby turn the human heart to Him). 1 2 Accordingly, it appears that the biblical phrase regards God as the cause of the peoples' sin and that just this is the offensive comment of Elijah, according to R. Eleazar.13 Alternatively, the prophet's remark is an expression of despair, projected against the mystery of human sin and resistance to repentance. 14 The LORD alone is God Hebrew YHWH hu' ha-'elohim. This proclamation of faith marks a quintessential expression of monotheism. The pronoun hu' has an emphatic thrust. Its force is dramatized in the divine assertions found in late prophecy, where God Himself vaunts His power with the words: "understand that I am He [hu']: before Me no god was formed, and after Me none shall exist" (Isa. 43:10; cf. v. 13). The exclusivist emphasis comes to the fore in other assertions, where God says, "I am the L O R D and there is none else [ve-'ein W]; beside Me there is no god" (Isa. 45:5; cf. v. 6). Both phrases are combined in Deut. 4:35, where the people are polemically warned: "You have been shown to know [la-da'at] that the L O R D alone is God [YHWHha'hu-'elohim]-, there is none ['ein 'od] beside Him." 1 5 The confession in 1 Kings 18:37 reflects this theological climate. 16 The more elaborated formulation found in Deut. 4:39, "Know therefore this day and keep in mind that the L O R D alone is God in heaven above and on earth below; there is no other," has entered the daily lewish liturgy. It forms the heart of the great prayer Aleinu, which proclaims allegiance to God alone and anticipates a messianic time when all idolatry will end and all people shall worship the Lord. 1 7 And once a year, at the conclusion of the Yom Kippur liturgy, faithful lews repeat their ancestors' chant on Carmel, publicly proclaiming seven times, "The LORD alone is God." 39.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Theparashah and haftarah join two negative events in Israelite history: the apostasy of the people before the Golden Calf and the worship of the Baals in the Land. Both represent a betrayal of monotheism and require the intercession of a leader to restore proper worship. The Rabbis saw a parallel and filled in the details. Both Moses and Elijah ascend a mountain and zealously fight paganism—even invoking the ancestors in prayer (Exod. 32:13; 1 Kings 18:20-21, 36); both are the agents of a covenantal affirmation by the people (Exod. 24:7; 1 Kings 18:39); and both force the people to make a choice for God and to destroy the sinners (Exod. 32:26-27; 1 Kings 18:40). A catalogue of such parallels is articulated in midrashic tradition (see Yalkut Shimoni 2, Kings, 209). Other Sages thought that Elijah's exclusive concern for God's honor set him apart from prophets like leremiah and lonah (see Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Bo' l). 1 8 In one notable opinion, Elijah's angry zeal was condemned, and his failure to deal lovingly with his people cost him his prophetic mantle (Yalkut Shimoni 2, Kings, 219). 19 An ironic echo further links the liturgical readings and injects added poignancy to the polemics. In the pamshah, when Moses descends the mountain, he rejects loshua's sense that the people were roused for war and says: "It is not ['ein] the sound [kol] of the tune ['anot] of triumph, or the sound of the tune [ve-'ein kol'anot] of defeat; it is the sound of song [kol 'annot] that I hear!" (Exod. 32:18). He thereupon becomes enraged, smashes the tablets and the Golden Calf, and punishes the people. In the haftarah, quite another scene is evoked. Elijah first sets the terms of the ordeal and then leaves the pagans to beseech their god. "They . . . invoked Baal by name from morning until noon, shouting, 'O Baal, answer us ['aneinu\) \ ^But," the narrator interjects, "there was no sound ['ein kol], and none who responded [ve-'ein 'onehY (1 Kings 18:26). HAFTARAH FOR KI TISSA'
96
In linking xhepa-mshah and haftarah, the Rabbis produced a searing indictment of idolatry. The Torah narrative mocks the impatience of the crowd and derides their need for a visible representation of divinity. On the other hand, the Prophetic passage derides the indecision of the masses and mocks the pagans' ecstatic supplications. The combined readings suggest that the apostasy at Sinai was not only a perversion in the past but an ever-present possibility. Monotheism thus requires vigilant attention, lest all-too-human needs for tangible forms pervert the spiritual life. The liturgical readings thus sound a warning and proclaim the principle of divine transcendence for the community of faith.
Haftarah for Va-yalchel ^Hp^l ASHKENAZIM
I KINGS 7:40-50
Haftarah for Pekudei HlpD SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 7:40-50
Haftarah for Va-yalchel-Pekudei HlpD-^np^ SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 7:40-50
For the haftarah for Va-yak-hel for Sephardim, see next haftarah. For the haftarah for Pekudei for Ashkenazim, see later. For the haftarah for Va-yak-hel-Pekudei for Ashkenazim, see later. For a discussion of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall contents, theology, and historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the other haftarah readings taken from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages").
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah summarizes labor done for the House of the Lord. It follows an account of the building of the Temple and a trade agreement for goods and services made with Hiram, king of Tyre,1 as well as a description of the copper work cast for the Temple, as executed by another Hiram, a master craftsman from Tyre.2 After a brief statement that "Hiram also made [va-ya'as] the lavers, the scrapers, and the sprinkling bowls" (1 Kings 7:40a), the text continues with a list of the achievements in two parts. Part 1 (w. 40b-45) notes the work completed by Hiram "for King Solomon on the House of the LORD." This includes the columns; the globes of the capitals with their network and rows of pomegranate design; lavers with their stands, and a giant tank with its chariot-like support; and pails, scrapers, and sprinkling bowls (the items mentioned in v. 40a). The section concludes with a comment on the nature of the bronze used, how it was cast, and its incalculable weight (w. 46-47). Part 2 (w. 48-50) shifts the focus from the craftsman to the king and reports that "Solomon made [va-ya'as] all the furnishings that were in the House of the LORD." These are then specified and include the altar; table for the display of bread; the lampstands; assorted utensils, like lamps, tongs, ladles, and fire pans; the hinge sockets for the doors of the Holy ofHolies; and the doors of the Great Hall. All these were made of gold. Just as Solomon utilized the resources of one Tyrian Hiram (the king) to have wood transported from the Lebanon and to have the hewn stones shaped by his masons for the Temple's foundation (1 97
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YAK-HEL (ASHKENAZIM)—PEKUDEI (SEPHARDIM)
Kings 5:22-23; 32), he utilized the skill of another (the coppersmith) for the design and casting of various features of the Temple. This was practical politics: one Hiram had the resources; the other, the skill—and Solomon had the "wisdom" to utilize foreign achievements in the crude and fine arts (porterage and masonry; metalwork and design) for his own religious purposes. The point is all the more striking when we note that Hiram the coppersmith was "endowed with skill, ability, and talent" for the execution of his work (7:14). While exceptional, his endowment is presented here solely in natural terms. It is thus in marked contrast to the talents ofBezalel, the master artisan of the Tabernacle, who was "singled out" by the Lord and "endowed . . . with a divine spirit of skill, ability, and knowledge in every kind of craft" (Exod. 35:30-31). One may further observe that the Tyrian's role is delimited. Notably, the depiction of his services shows that Hiram did his work "for King Solomon on the House of the L O R D " (1 Kings 7:40b) and that he worked in copper and burnished bronze (v. 45; cf. 7:14); whereas Solomon himself (endowed with divine wisdom) made all the furnishings "in the House of the L O R D , " and these were made of gold (7:48-50). The comparison between Hiram, the (skilled) Tyrian craftsman, who works in bronze for objects found outside the most sacred area, and Solomon, the (inspired) Judean who works in gold on objects having more sacred or special status, is not incidental. One may even assume that it reflects a deliberate concern to indicate the higher gradation of objects handled by the king. Moreover, just as in the Tabernacle degrees of sanctity are correlated with the value of metals used, so is the case within the Temple. In both settings, the furniture and objects of the outer court were bronzed, while those in the inner holy space were plated with "pure" or refined gold. In the Tabernacle, the Ark in the Holy of Holies was gold-plated inside and out, while the Ark cover (kaporet) was a solid slab of pure gold. 3 Correspondingly (according to an earlier report), King Solomon overlaid "the entire House" and its "floor" with gold—including "the entire altar of the Shrine," "the cherubim," and even the cherubim, palms, and calyxes on the walls of the House and on the double doors of the entrance o f t h e Shrine and Great Hall (1 Kings 6:21-22, 28-29, 30, 32, 35). The summary of Solomon's work as presented in the haftarah is thus not the whole story. The full picture evokes a structure of spectacular opulence: a home for God on earth. N o wonder pilgrims rejoiced at the thought of ascending to the Temple in Jerusalem (Ps. 122:1) and the pious yearned for its glories and spiritual benefits. One psalmist boldly articulated this desire and the meaning of the Temple in his religious life: "One thing I ask of the LORD, only that do I seek: to live in the House of the LORD all the days of my life, to gaze upon the beauty of the LORD, [and] to frequent His Temple" (Ps. 27:4).
COMMENTS 1 Kings 7:40. Himm The son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, whose father was a lyrian coppersmith (v. 14). He is called Huram in 2 Chron. 2:12; according to 2 Chron. 2:13, he was "the son of a Danite woman, his father a lyrian." Rabbinic tradition preferred the genealogy in Chronicles, thereby establishing a typology between the artisans of the Tabernacle and the Temple. Just as Bezalel, from the tribe o f j u d a h , and his assistant Ohaliab, from the tribe of Dan (Exod. 31:2, 6), were the chief craftsmen in the construction of the Tabernacle, Solomon the Judean and Hiram the Danite are correspondingly responsible for the artwork of the Temple. According to the Midrash, the "two tribes were partners" in both affairs (Pesikta Rabbati 6). 4 44. the... tank Hebrew literally, "the sea." This was an enormous drum, ten cubits in diameter (about eighteen feet) and five cubits deep (about nine feet). There were also ten smaller lavers (v. 43), each called kiyor. A large laver for priestly washing was also constructed for the Tabernacle, but called a kiyor (Exod. 30:18; 35:16). The termjya-m (sea) would thus seem to have symbolic significance—of an earthly and even cosmological sort. This possibility is reinforced by the attendant imagery. The large tank was supported by twelve brazen oxen, three facing each of the cardinal points (w. 23-26). Moreover, the separate lavers had insets engraved with images of lions, oxen, and cherubim (w. 28-29) and were set upon the likes of"chariot wheels" (v. 33). 98 HAFTARAH FOR VA-YAK-HEL (ASHKENAZIM)—PEKUDEI (SEPHARDIM)
This iconography resembles the chariot of the divine Presence in Ezekiel 1, supported at the corners by four beings with four faces: human, lion, ox, and eagle (Ezek. 1:10-11). They had the luster of "burnished bronze" (1:7). Ezekiel subsequently calls the beings "cherubim" (10:lff.) and describes their four faces as that of a cherub, a human, a lion, and an eagle (10:14). In ancient Near Eastern art, it was common for such animals, or combinations of them, or composites of human shapes with animal faces, to serve as pedestals for images of gods or supports for divine or royal chariots. 5 One may therefore presume that "the sea" and its supports refer to the lower world, whereas the throne and its supports refer to the upper realm. But it will be recalled that in ancient Israelite cosmology there were waters above the heavenly expanse (Gen. 1:7) and that in Ezekiel's vision the divine beings were positioned under the expanse upon which sat the throne (Ezek. 1:22-23). 6 All this suggests that "the sea" ("tank") is part of a cosmic symbolism that establishes the Temple as the House of the Lord on earth (replete with throne, cherubic supports, bread table and meat altar, and sacral attendants). Rabbinic literature gives expression to the parallelism between God's heavenly abode and the earthly Tabernacle He comes to dwell in (see Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, piska 1, Va-yehi Ha-yom, 2-3). 7 Moreover, according to the Midrash Tanhuma Pekudei 2, the features of the Tabernacle are even correlated with the acts of creation (shakul ke-neged beri'at ha-'olam). lust as God created the heavens by stretching it out "like a tent cloth" (ka-yeri'ah [Ps. 104:2]), the people were instructed to cover the Tabernacle with "cloths" (yeri'ot) of goats' hair for a tent (Exod. 26:7). And just as on the third day God created the waters, saying: "Let the water [mayim] below the sky be gathered" into one place (Gen. 1:9), so did He instruct the people to make a bronze laver for the Tabernacle and "put water [mayim] in it" (Exod. 30:18). In this way, the objects of sacred space (the shrine) exemplify the pattern of earthly perfection (the divine creation). 48. the altar, ofyold Hebrew mizbah ha-zahav; literally, "the altar of gold" (or: golden altar). This is the altar of incense, which was gilded. The bound (construct) form of this expression ("the altar of gold") differs from the inventory style found in the remainder of verses 48-50, whereby each of the objects is mentioned and followed by the comment that it was made "of gold." CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
1 Kings 7:40-50 is the haftarah reading for thepamshah ofVa-yak-hel according to the Ashkenazi rite and is recited for Pekudei among the Sephardim. Va-yak-hel (Exod. 35:1-38:20) details the blueprint for the Tabernacle erected in the wilderness. In it, the gradations of spatial sanctity are marked by the gradations of metals and woods used in the different zones of the shrine. 8 The Torah portion of Pekudei begins with the accounts of the metals and threads, describes the priestly vestments, and concludes with the erection of the Tabernacle and the divine advent into it. The language of the building of the Temple (found in the haftarah) echoes that of the building of the Tabernacle (detailed in the pamshah). The Tabernacle was built by Bezalel, who was "singled out" by God and "endowed" with "a divine spirit of skill [hokhmah], ability [tevunah], and knowledge [da'at] in every kind of craft [u-ve-khol mela'khah]" (Exod. 35:30-31). Likewise, the bronze work of the Temple was done by Hiram, who "was endowed with skill [hokhmah], ability [tevunah], and knowledge [da'at]9 for executing all work [kol mela'khah] in bronze" (1 Kings 7:14). There are other linguistic links between the haftarah and the Torah portions of Va-yak-hel and Pekudei. For example, the verb va-ya'as (he made) is used in connection with Bezalel's work on the Tabernacle objects and also in connection with Hiram's and Solomon's work on the Temple. The term hearkens back to its repeated use in the creation account in Genesis (1:7, 16, 25). A typological link between the Creation, the Tabernacle, and the Temple is thus suggested. This correlation is reinforced by key words. Thus the Tabernacle report concludes with the comment that "Moses had finished [va-yekhal] the work [}etha-mela'khah]" (Exod. 40:33), and the Temple description notes that "Hiram finished [va-yekhal la-'asot] all the work [}et kol ha-mela'khah] 99
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YAK-HEL (ASHKENAZIM)—PEKUDEI (SEPHARDIM)
that he had been doing Rasher 'asah~\ for King Solomon" (1 Kings 7:40). Both phrases echo the summaries of the Creation account: "On the seventh day God finished [va-yekhal] the work [mela'khto] that He had been doing asher 'asahY (Gen. 2:2). Then "God blessed [va-yevarekh]n that day "and declared it holy [va-yekaddesh]n (2:3). Correspondingly, "whenMoses sawthat [the people] had performed all the tasks [kol ha-mela'khah] . . . Moses blessed [va-yevarekh] them" (Exod. 39:43) and "declared holy [va-yekaddesh:, NJPS: consecrated]" the Tabernacle immediately upon its erection (Num. 7:1). The ancient Rabbis were aware of such verbal patterns and produced rich variations on the theme. A midrash attributed to Rabbi Jacob be-Rabbi Assi even states that the features of the Tabernacle fully correspond to (shakul ke-neged) the works of Creation (Tanhuma Pekudei 2). 10 Included are correlations between the curtains and the heavens, the brazen tank and the waters of the sea, the golden candlesticks and the lights in the firmament, and the winged cherubim and the fowl in the firmament of heaven. A more elaborate example of this symbolism occurs in the (late) Midrash Tadshe, which conflates the Tabernacle and the Temple into one ensemble. In this way, a typology correlating the Creation, the Tabernacle, and the Temple was established. Using other terms, one rabbinic homily even establishes a fourfold connection—moving from Creation to eschatology (the new Temple) by way of the desert Tabernacle and Solomon's Temple. See what Bezalel did, whom the Holy One granted wisdom; as (Scripture) says: "And I shall endow ['amftlki*] him with a divine spirit of skill [ihokhmah], ability [tevunah], and knowledge [da'at]" (Exod. 31:3). With these three things the Holy One created His world; as [Scripture] says: "The Lord founded the earth by wisdom [hokhmah]:, He established the heavens by understanding \tevunah\, [and] by His knowledge [da'at] the depths burst apart" (Prov. 3:19-20). And by these three Bezalel made the Tabernacle. In a similar way, the Temple was built by these three [things]; as [Scripture] says: "[Hiram] . . . was endowed with skill [ihokhmah], ability \tevunah~], and knowledge [da'at]" (1 Kings 7:14). And so too will the future Temple be built with these three; as [Scripture] says: [The] House will be built by wisdom [hokhmah], and established by understanding [tevunah\, and by knowledge [da'at] will its rooms be filled [yimmale'u ] with all precious and beautiful things" (Prov. 24:3-4). 1 1 (Tanhuma Va-yak-hel 5) With characteristic understatement, these midrashic teachings use verbal concordances to establish unexpected theological correlations. From their perspective, Scripture is no random historical record; but rather, correctly construed, its language reveals the structures of a meaningful divine order—one in which the world and the Temple are reflections of the same wisdom and cosmic structure.
Haftarah for Va-yak-hel ^np^l SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 7:13-26
For the haftarah for Va-yak-hel for Ashkenazim, see previous haftarah. For the haftarah for Va-yak-hel—Pekudei for Sephardim, see previous haftarah. For an overview of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall content, theology, and historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages").
CONTENT AND MEANING This haftarah delineates some of the bronze work done by the craftsman Hiram of Tyre for the Temple as commissioned by King Solomon. After an introduction that gives the lineage of the HAFTARAH FOR VA-YAK-HEL
100
artisan and his credentials (1 Kings 7:13-14), there follows (1) an extensive account of the two columns of bronze (called Jachin and Boaz) set up at the portico of the Great Hall (w. 15-22), and (2) a description of the cast metal tank and its base of twelve oxen (w. 23-26). This information is summarized in 1 Kings 7:40-50 (the haftarah for Va-yak-hel for Ashkenazim). Hiram is presented as a person of extraordinary skill (1 Kings 7:14) —comparable to Bezalel, the master craftsman of the Tabernacle, though without Bezalel's divine inspiration (Exod. 35: 31). The details of Hiram's work described in the haftarah attest to the high level of design and bronze work that he and his guild achieved. But despite the technical precision of the formulations, the account itself is often garbled. A comparison of the wording in verses 15-22 (the columns) with the summary in verses 41-42 shows various differences. 1 In other cases, some Greek translations attest to a clearer and more complete Hebrew text than the Masoretic version now used (for example, v. 15b is fuller in the Septuagint, and this formulation corresponds to what is found in ler. 52:21). Clearly the archival records of the Temple's design were affected by scribes unfamiliar with architectural vocabulary.2 The large tank was supported by twelve brazen oxen, three facing each of the cardinal points (w. 23-26). The separate lavers (not mentioned in the haftarah) had insets engraved with images of lions, oxen, and cherubim (w. 28-29) and were set upon the likes of "chariot wheels" (v. 33). This imagery recalls the chariot of the divine Presence in Ezekiel 1, supported at the corners by four beings with four faces: human, lion, ox, and eagle (Ezek. 1:1-11). Thus the large tank (lit., "sea,"yam) may symbolize the lower earthly realm and its supports, just as the divine throne in the upper realm had its supports. Alternatively, given the existence of an upper sea in ancient Israelite cosmology (Gen. 1:7), the "sea" may have cosmic symbolism and refer to the supports and waters of the heavenly realm. 3 Cosmic symbolism for objects of temples was common in antiquity. Such symbolism is spelled out in Philo and losephus, as well as in later rabbinic midrash. (See examples at the end of the Comment to 7:44 in the haftarah for Va-yak-hel for Ashkenazim.)
COMMENTS 1 Kings 7:13-14. Hiram... was the son of a widow ofthe tribe ofNaphtali, and hisfather had been a Tyrian In 2 Chron. 2:13, this same individual (called Huram in 2 Chron. 2:12) is the "son of a Danite woman, his father a Tyrian." Rabbinic tradition preferred the second genealogy, thereby establishing a typology between the Tabernacle and the Temple. lust as Bezalel, from the tribe of the ludah, and his assistant Ohaliab, from the tribe of Dan (Exod. 31:2, 6), were the chief craftsmen in the construction of the Tabernacle, Solomon the ludean and Hiram the Danite were correspondingly responsible for the artwork of the Temple. According to the Midrash, the "two tribes were partners" in both affairs (Pesikta Rabbati 6). 4 14. bronze Hebrew nehoshet means both copper and bronze. In the translation "copper" is ordinarily used to denote the natural product and "bronze" for the artifacts [Transl.]. 20. thesecond capital
That is, each of the two capitals [Transl.].
21.Jachin [and] Boaz The names of the two monumental pillars, set up to the right and left of the portico. Their exact nature is uncertain, due to uncertainties about the meaning of the terms and the various formulations found in the Bible and ancient translations. Nevertheless, it is certain that freestanding columns were part of ancient Temple architecture. Cultic objects of clay have been unearthed from the Israelite (Middle) Bronze period (tenth to ninth century B.C.E.), with pillars represented outside the portal; and fragments of pillars have been found outside the Temple to Nabu in ancient Dur Shrukhin (built by Sargon, end of the eighth century B.C.E.). Both Herodotus and Strabo report double pillars dedicated to Heracles, and Lucian testifies to two giant columns outside the shrine of a Syrian goddess (De Dea Syria, xvi, xvii). The significance of the names lachin and Boaz in ancient ludea is unknown. Midrashic expositors, in attempting to portray the Temple as a microcosm of the world, give the names symbolic significance. Midrash Tadshe (2) suggests that lachin {yakhin, "he establishes") stands for the 101
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YAK-HEL (SEPHARDIM)
moon, since the moon establishes (mekhin) the festival oflsrael; 5 "and Boaz (bo'az) corresponds to the sun, which comes out in power and in strength ( ^ t e ) . " 6 Other attempts to correlate the Temple objects to the human body (as microcosm) connect the pillars to the eyes of the head; for "just as eyes are placed high in the head, so were these pillars high and thick." 7 23. the tank Hebrew literally, "the sea." This was an enormous drum, ten cubits in diameter (about eighteen feet) and five cubits deep (about nine feet). The object was supported by twelve brazen oxen. For the symbolism, see "Content and Meaning," above. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The Rabbis found connections between the Creation (divine wisdom), the Tabernacle (Bezalel's wisdom), Solomon's Temple (Hiram's wisdom), and the new Temple to be built in the end of days (Tanhuma Va-yak-hel 5). 8 Midrashic tradition further connects the laver of the Tabernacle described in the pa-mshah with the gathered waters of Creation (Tanhuma Pekudei 2). 9 This laver (Exod. 38:8, in xhepa-msha-h) corresponds to the giant tank ("sea") in the Temple, set upon twelve oxen (1 Kings 7:23-26, in the haftarah). In an extended exegesis, the Midrash Tadshe (2) relates the solid "sea" to the world itself and correlates its dimensions to various rabbinic accounts about the size of the void or the distance between the earth and the firmament.10 In a further comment, the twelve oxen are deemed to symbolize "the twelve constellations [of the zodiac] by which the earth is governed." 11
Haftarah for Pekudei HlpD ASHKENAZIM
IKINGS7:51-8:21
Haftarah for Va-yak-hel—Pekudei HlpD-^np^ ASHKENAZIM
IKINGS7:51-8:21
For the haftarah for Pekudei (Sephardim) and for Va-yak-hel—Pekudei (Sephardim), see earlier, Haftarah for Va-yak-hel (Ashkenazim). For a discussion of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its contents, theology, and historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from the Book of Kings (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah marks a pivotal event in the history of ancient Israel: the completion of the Temple and the transfer to it of the ancient Tent of Meeting. Solomon announces before the gathered throng that this event also fulfills the promise made to his father David, for the Lord had confirmed David's intention to build a House for God's name, but deferred that plan to a future descendant (2 Sam. 7:12-13). Solomon declares himself that legitimate heir. At his instigation, the Temple was built and the Ark (with the ancient tablets of the covenant) brought to permanent rest in its precincts. Jerusalem thus becomes the sacred center of the nation. The haftarah describes these events in successive stages: PART 1. THE TEMPLE IS COMPLETED (1 Kings 7:51) A brief notice announces the completion of the work on the Temple and the transfer to its treasury of the sacred donations of King David. PART 2. TRANSFER OF THE ARK (1 Kings 8:1-9) a. 1 Kings 8:1 Solomon convokes "the elders of Israel—all the heads of the tribes and the ancestral chieftains of the Israelites" to bring the Ark of the Covenant from the City of David (Zion) to the Temple. HAFTARAH FOR PEKUDEI (ASHKENAZIM)
102
b. 1 Kings 8:2-5 The execution of this transfer takes place—led by the priests and Levites who carried the Ark, the Tent of Meeting, and the holy vessels to the Shrine. During this procession, Solomon "and the whole community oflsrael" who were gathered with him before the Ark, made sacrifices in celebration (v. 5). c. 1 Kings 8:6-9 The final phase of this process is the installation of the Ark in the Holy of Holies. The report includes a depiction of the cherubim, a remark about the poles of portage, and a statement that the Ark contained the two tablets of stone upon which the Lord had made a covenant with the people. PART 3. LEGITIMACY (1 Kings 8:10-21) a. 1 Kings 8:10-11 The priests depart from the sanctuary. b. 1 Kings 8:12-13 Solomon declares before God the full execution of the task. c. 1 Kings 8:14-21 Solomon then declares before the nation that God has fulfilled through him the promise made to his father David (v. 19).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah describes a major transformation of sacred life in ancient Israel. Solomon begins by transferring to the Shrine the sacred donations of his father David and then proceeds to transfer the Ark, the Tent of Meeting, and the sacred vessels from the City of David to the Temple. With this event, the period of the wilderness wandering—symbolized by the movable Tabernacle—is brought to a close.1 The transitional phase inaugurated by David is also concluded, since in his day the Ark also rested in various locales, including the City of David (Zion). It is now transferred to its permanent home in the Temple of lerusalem. Near the end of the ceremony, Solomon presents himself as the very son predicted, in 2 Sam. 7:12-13, to realize David's plan. Accordingly, the transfer of the sacred objects to a new site and the proclamation of the king's divine right bring all events to their true finale. God's word to David is fulfilled. Two events stand behind Solomon's ceremony and give it added authority. The first is the processional itself. One can hardly miss in the account of the Ark's transfer from Zion an echo of David's participation in the events that first brought the Ark to the City of David (2 Sam. 6: 12-19). The other takes us back to the construction of the Ark in Moses' day. According to the report in xhepa-mshah, at the end of the great labor "the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the Presence of the L O R D filled the Tabernacle" (Exod. 40:34). By this event it was clear that the Lord accepted the work of human hands as a fit place for His dwelling. Our haftarah alludes to this occurance in the announcement that after the Ark was deposited in the Holy of Holies, "the cloud had filled the House of the L O R D . . . for the Presence of the L O R D filled the House of the L O R D " (1 Kings 8:10-11). The point of this typology is clear: King Solomon is the Moses of the monarchy. To underscore matters, the historian notes that Solomon's Shrine housed "the two tablets of stone" that were hewn by Moses on Sinai (v. 9). The indwelling of the divine Presence or Glory (kavod) in the Shrine is a distinctive feature of priestly theology.2 It manifests the numinous force of God in concrete and visible terms. For example, at the conclusion of the initiation of Aaron and his sons into the priesthood, the kavod appeared before the entire congregation (Lev. 9:23), and it is just this divine reality that will return to the Shrine with the rebuilding of the new Temple (Ezek. 10:18-22; 43:2-4). In other accounts, the kavod also appears with an anthropomorphic shape. Thus, when Moses at Sinai asks God to reveal His kavod, he receives a glimpse of a receding figure that passes by and casts a hand over him—in order that he not see the divine face and die (Exod. 33:18-23). 3 Similarly, in his inaugural vision, Ezekiel himself discerns a "semblance of a human form" that "was the appearance of the semblance of the kavod of the L O R D " (Ezek. 1:26, 28). 4 Accordingly, the descent of the kavod into the Tabernacle and the Temple conveys the visual reality of the divine Presence. Solomon's words of prayer at this moment are thus a fitting sequel to the manifestation: "I have now built for You . . . a place where You may dwell [makhon le-shivtekha] forever" (1 Kings 8:10-11, 13). 103
HAFTARAH FOR PEKUDEI (ASHKENAZIM)
The phrase makhon le-shivtekha conveys a certain permanence to the divine indwelling. The same idiom appears in Exod. 15:17, in connection with the future Temple; and it is precisely the verb shivti that is reportedly used by God when He announces His rejection of David's plan to build the Temple, saying: 'Are you the one to build a House for Me to dwell in)" (2 Sam. 7:5). Clearly Solomon's prayer harks back to this ancient theology of Temple Presence. By taking over the tradition in 2 Samuel 7 for the purpose of applying God's Davidic promise to Solomon, the historian has highlighted this theology over another one that says that David will build a House for God's "name" (2 Sam. 7:13). This notion contradicts the preceding reference to a divine "dwelling" and reflects the non-anthropomorphic Deuteronomic conception of God's relationship to the Shrine.5 Significantly, the Book of Deuteronomy only speaks of the Temple as a place for God's name (Deut. 12:5), and the historical tradition based on this theology does the same (cf. 1 Kings 8:17-20). 6 The sequel to our haftarah manifests the conjunction of these two ideologies of divine Presence in a striking way. Every time the old phrase makhon le-shivtekha appears from one tradition, implying God's physical indwelling on earth, it is supplemented by the phrase "in ~ibur heavenly abode," whose purpose is to shift the reference to a more transcendental point (1 Kings 8:30, 39, 43, 49).
COMMENTS 1 Kings 7:51. the sacred donations of hisfather David Rabbinic tradition was not content with the plain sense of this passage, which notes the enrichment of the Temple treasuries through David's donations. The purpose of several interpretations was therefore to highlight Solomon's ethical integrity in refusing to use David's wealth in the building of his Temple. According to one midrash (cited by Rashi), Solomon opined that David should have used this money to buy food for the hungry during the famine in his day (cf. 2 Samuel 24) —and since he did not, his money was tainted. Another opinion (advanced by Ralbag) stressed that since David's gain was ill-gotten, Solomon deferred his building project (for four years) until he could finance the work on his own. These denigrations of David continue a line of criticism whose origin is in Scripture itself. According to 1 Chron. 22:8 and 28:3, the monarch was prohibited by God to build the Temple because "you have shed much blood and fought great battles." This rebuke is remarkable. It echoes the prophetic passion of Isaiah, who said that God will not accept the prayers of those whose "hands are stained by blood" (Isa. 1:15); 7 and of the psalmist, who stressed that only persons with "clean hands" may ascend to the Temple and "carry away a blessing from the L O R D " (Ps. 24:4-5). 8 1 Kings 8:2. Feast The Feast of Booths (Sukkot). Compare Lev. 23:34. 1 Kings 8:2-21 is recited as the haftarah for the second day of Sukkot. Ethanim
Here identified with the seventh month, later called Tishrei.
4. Tentof.Meeting The term used in theparashah for the Tabernacle. 9. There was nothing inside theArk Only "two tablets of stone ['avanim]." This follows the tradition in Deut. 10:1-5. According to the language of Exod. 25:16 and 40:20, Moses put the "Pact" ('edut) in the Ark (Exod. 34:29 refers to the "two tablets of the 'edut"). According to the Deuteronomic tradition, Moses himself made an Ark for the tablets. This point was acknowledged by rabbinic tradition, which differentiated the (temporary, wooden) Ark made by Moses from the (permanent, overlaid) one made by Bezalel according to a divine model (Tanhuma 'Ekev 10, followed by Rashi). 9 Other Sages suggested that both the first (broken) and second tablets were in the Ark (B. Baba Batra 14a). Medieval scholars deduced that this referred only to Bezalel's Ark in the Temple of Solomon, whereas prior to that the broken tablets were in Moses'Ark (see B. Eruvin 63b, Tosafot). 10 Talmudic tradition reports that the Ark (and its contents) was "hidden away" in the time o f K i n g Josiah (B. Yoma 52b). 11 In the ancient Near East, treaty texts were regularly deposited at the feet of the gods, in the shrine, 12 and this is the custom that stands behind the deposit of the tablets of 'edut (Exod. 25:16) or berit (Deut. 9:11, 15) in the Ark of the Tabernacle and Temple. According to Deut. HAFTARAH FOR PEKUDEI (ASHKENAZIM)
104
31:9-13 and 26-29, the book of the Torah (transcribed by Moses) was given to the levitical priests to place beside the "Ark of the Covenant of the LORD"—to be read aloud periodically and thereby instruct future generations. A copy of this document was to be copied by kings, as well, so that they might read it and serve God with knowledge and reverence (Deut. 17: 18-20).
12. then Solomon declared Hebrew }az (then) is a temporal adverb and can mean "when" or after certain things were done—as in 7:51. The translation "then" makes Solomon's declaration responsive to the divine descent; that is, when God had shown His favor, then Solomon spoke. This interpretation follows the Targum, Rashi, and Kimhi. the LORD said to... David Through the prophet Nathan (2 Sam. 7:8-17). The matter of David's intention does not quote directly from 2 Samuel 7; however, the key issue of a son who would build the Shrine draws explicitly from 2 Sam. 7:12b-13a. 18.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah underscores a typology between the ancient Tabernacle and the First Temple. The former was built by Moses and served as the movable pavilion of service during the time of the desert wandering and through the initial phase of settlement. The latter was built by Solomon with all the grandeur of oriental opulence and was designed as a place where God "may dwell forever" (1 Kings 8:13). The transfer into the Temple of the Ark of the Tabernacle was meant as a public sign of continuity—and certainly as a proclamation that the unstable settlement was completed and the Ark could also rest from its service at the vanguard of the armies of God. The typology between the events is also marked by the language chosen to indicate the end of the two labors. Regarding Moses we read that he "finished the work" (va-yekhal... }et ha-mela'khah [Exod. 40:33]) —an allusion to God's own rest from labor in Gen. 2:2 and a theological suggestion that the Tabernacle completed the work of creation. 13 Parallel to this statement, the historian says of Solomon's efforts that "the work . . . was completed" (va-tishlam . . . ha-mela'khah [1 Kings 7:51]) —a clear play on his name (Shelomo) and an allusion to the fact that in his day there was "peace" (shalom) in the region so that the House of God could be built (1 Kings 5:4). The ancient writers also wanted to suggest another common feature between the two Shrines. At the completion of the Tabernacle, Moses put the 'edut into the Ark, set the staves for its portage, and brought the Ark into the Shrine (Exod. 4 0 : 2 0 - 2 1 ) . This done, "the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the Presence of the L O R D filled the Tabernacle. Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud had settled upon it and the Presence of the L O R D filled the Tabernacle" (Exod. 4 0 : 3 4 - 3 5 ) . Similarly, after Solomon had completed the work, he had the Ark with the stone tablets carried into the Holy of Holies upon its poles ( 1 Kings 8 : 3 - 4 , 6-9); thereupon, "the priests came out of the sanctuary— for the cloud had filled the House of the L O R D and the priests were not able to remain and perform the service because of the cloud, for the Presence of the L O R D filled the House of the L O R D " ( W . 1 0 - 1 1 ) . The precise parallelism implies that the Temple was accepted by God in exactly the same manner as the Tabernacle in the days of Moses. But whereas the ancient pavilion led the people in their passages through time—with God's accompaniment (Exod. 4 0 : 3 7 - 3 8 ) , the great House in lerusalem now marks the people's settlement in space—and the desire for God's earthly indwelling forever (1 Kings 8:12-13).
The difference between a movable and permanent Shrine evokes different spiritual realities—the one of dynamic and changing circumstances, in accordance with the symbolism of religious life as a journey; the other of static and dependable stability, in accordance with the symbolism of religiosity directed toward a sacred center. The incorporation of the ancient Tent (of Moses) within the Temple of Solomon symbolically joins these two realities in the mind of the reader. The protrusion of the staves keeps the image of movement alive. 105
HAFTARAH FOR PEKUDEI (ASHKENAZIM)
LEVITICUS X i p " 1 Haftarah for Va-yikra' Nlp^l ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH43:21-44:23 ISAIAH 43:21-44:23
For a discussion of the prophecies in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks introducing the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). This haftarah is a prophecy of hope addressed to the Judeans in the Babylonian exile, sometime after Cyrus the Mede issued an edict allowing foreign subjects to revive their religious heritage and return to their homeland (538 B.C.E.).1 Many of the people hesitated and were repeatedly exhorted to trust in God's saving power (see Isaiah 40-48). Isaiah 43:21-44:23 reflects this situation. It opens with a call by God to the people, proclaiming that they shall declare His praise (Isa. 43:21). Following that prophecy, past sins are recalled and a new future anticipated. The people are told that they need not fear the outcome, for this promise is the word of the supreme God—"the first and . . . the last" (44:6), whose word may be trusted. He will pour His spirit upon their descendants, "and they shall sprout like the grass, like willows by watercourses" (44: 3-4). By contrast, idolatry is presented as a vain pursuit, and idolators as people deluded by images that cannot save them. Israel should therefore "remember" these things and not "forget" the Lord—their creator and redeemer (44:21). The haftarah is composed of four parts, marking successive stages of instruction. PART 1. THE PAST REMEMBERED (Isaiah 43:21-28) a. Isaiah 43:21 As a prologue to the haftarah, this verse anticipates a future for the people whom the Lord has "formed"—that they might declare His praise. b. Isaiah 43:22-28 The people are reproached by God for their religious perfidy. They have burdened him with their sins and not performed proper worship (w. 22-24). Following this arraignment, the people are allowed to present their case if they believe themselves wrongly accused (w. 25-26). N o answer is forthcoming; and therefore, in light of their long history of transgressions (v. 27), God abandons the people to proscription and mockery (v. 28). PART 2. A FUTURE PROCLAIMED (Isaiah 44:1-5) The prophet now addresses the people with a new message that shifts from the past to the present-future ("hear, now, O Jacob"). He announces that the God who formed Jacob promises to pour forth His spirit and blessing upon future generations (w. 1-3). The ensuing prophecy promises rejuvenation of the nation as a people "of the L O R D " (V. 5). PART 3. GOD AND THE IDOLS (Isaiah 44:6-20) a. Isaiah 44:6-8 God the Redeemer now proclaims Himself the first and the last—the one and only God, who may be trusted to fulfill His promises. As Israel can witness on His behalf, past predictions have come to pass. N o other divinity can rival this claim. A strong condemnation of false gods follows (w. 9-20). b. Isaiah 44:9-20 This unit contains a satirical denunciation of idols and their makers: the objects work to no purpose, and their manufacturers shall come to shame. The fabrication of idols is delineated, and the folly of expecting deliverance from a piece of wood maligned. PART 4. FORGIVENESS AND REDEMPTION (Isaiah 44:21-23) In contrast to the work of idol makers, God has fashioned Israel. He calls upon them never to forget Him and promises the forgiveness of sins. A call to repentance ends this speech (w. 21-22). HAFTARAH FOR
VA-YAK-HEL
106
The prophecy concludes with an appeal to the works of nature to rejoice in God's saving action on behalf of Israel. "For the L O R D has redeemed Jacob, has glorified Himself through Israel" (v. 23).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is marked by promises of hope. This is evident from the opening line, in which God announces that Israel has been created to declare His praise. In fact, the promise in this verse shows how the Rabbis took over biblical prophecies and recast them. In its original setting, Isa. 43:21 (the opening line) is the conclusion to an independent word of promise (43:16-21). In it, the Lord describes how He will do "something new" (v. 19) for Israel—nurturing and restoring His chosen people, "The people I formed for Myself that they might declare My praise \tehillati yesa-pperu]" (v. 21; NJPS). On this reading, God's new act of sustenance will result in the nation's proclamation of glory. But in our haftarah the verse has a different sense. As the initial line of the reading, this phrase now serves as an unconditional proclamation: "The people I formed for Myself shall declare my praise!" In this new format, the declaration provides a unilateral promise whose theme anticipates the conclusion of the haftarah: "For the L O R D has redeemed Jacob, has glorified Himself through Israel" (44:23). Thus, the entire recitation is framed by a tone of triumph, promise, and realization—a biblical word o f h o p e reshaped by rabbinic tradition. Set within a framework of praise and glory, the haftarah contrasts past and future time. Both underscore the theme of divine forgiveness. At the outset, speaking to the nation in exile, the prophet rebukes the people's failure to worship the Lord (in the past). This charge is presented as the reason for the nation's calamity, and God asks the people to correct Him if the allegation is false. "It is I, I who—for My own sake—wipe your transgressions away \moheh pesha'ekha] and remember your sins no more. . . . Tell your version, that you may be vindicated" (Isa. 43: 25-26). N o correction follows, and the people stand guilty as charged. However, as the prophecy develops, divine accusation is replaced by words of reconciliation and hope (in the future). A final exhortation calls upon Israel to "remember" her intimate bond with God (44:21) and adds: "I wipe away your transgressions like a cloud \mahiti ke-'avpesha'ekha\, and your sins like mist—come back to Me, for I redeem you" (44:22). 2 This language recalls the earlier statement of divine forgiveness and reinforces the reality of that fact (43:25). Formulated as a deed virtually complete, God's assertion provides a prelude to the nation's return to Him—both spiritually and physically. The haftarah thus shifts thematically from judgment to salvation. The opening rebuke assails the people for their religious failures, for not having worshiped the Lord (43:22) or sacrificed properly (w. 23-24). The language is blunt and concrete: the people are charged with having become weary (yaga'ta) of God and withdrawing their sacrificial service. Correspondingly, the Lord became wearied (hoga'tani) and burdened (he'evadtani) by the people's sins, though He never wearied (hoga'tikha•) them or burdened (he'evadtikha) them with sacrifices. This rhetorical play drives home the point of Israel's perfidy and its effect upon God. Some commentators have sought the setting for this cultic rebuke in the Babylonian exile (Ibn Ezra), but this is unlikely since sacrifices were not offered there (Abravanel). On the other hand, it is not certain whether the prophet's arraignment refers to a specific period of faithlessness during the monarchy (Rashi) 3 or is rather a more comprehensive criticism of the nation's infidelity. Reference is also made to the sins of "your earliest ancestor" and "your spokesmen" (Isa. 43: 27). But the meaning of these terms and the time referred to are ambiguous (see Comments). On the other hand, the effect of these transgressions is clear: they led to God's abandonment of His people and to the profanation of "the holy princes" (v. 28). As noted, there is no defense; the divine judgment remains unqualified. The turnabout comes with dramatic force. Immediately after the condemnation in Isa. 43: 22-28, a new word announces God's grace. Echoing the opening promise, in which Israel is called "the people I formed for Myself \ya-tza-rti /z]" (43:21), Israel is now called the chosen na107
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIKRA'
tion whom God "your Creator \yotzerkha] . . . has helped . . . since birth" (44:2). This intimate relationship leads to God's unilateral promise to pour His spirit upon future offspring and a prophecy that this progeny will renew their loyalty to the Lord and to the nation. "One shall say, ' I am the LORD'S,' another shall use the name of'Jacob'" ( W . 3 - 5 ) . All this shall come to pass because the Lord is "the first and . . . the last, and there is no god but Me," who can foretell the future and fulfill His word (w. 6-8). To reinforce the theme of God's supremacy, Isa. 44:6-8 is counterpointed by a polemic against idolatry. Similar terms mark the difference with stylistic deftness and ironic force. As against God's creative powers, the prophet mocks the "makers \yotzrei] of idols" who "fashion \yotzer] a god . . . that can do no good" (w. 9-10), for the craftsman in iron "fashions it \yitzreihu] by hammering" (v. 12), even as the craftsman in wood "marks out a shape with a stylus" (v. 13) —praying to one section while using the remainder for fuel. Such images cannot save, and those who call "Save me, for you are my god eli }atah]\" (v. 17) are deluded. Israel is reminded that God alone has "fashioned you \yetzartikhaY and adopts them with the words "you are My servant [cavdi fatah]" (v. 21). The difference between the God of Israel and the idols of iron and wood is also marked by wordplays. Most striking is the assertion of exclusive monotheism:"I [God] am the first and I am the last, and there is no god but Me [u-mi-bal'aday }ein }elohim]" (Isa. 44:6). This claim is repeated again several lines later, where God calls the people "My witnesses [ceiday]n and asks, rhetorically, "Is there any god, then, but Me [mi-bal'aday]}"—to which the people answer, "There is no other ['ein] rock; I know none [bal yadacti]ln (v. 8). One may furthermore observe that the components of the claim that there is no God "but Me [mi-balcaday]n set the terms for the entire speech: the negative particle bal (none) is highlighted in the phrase bal yada'ti (I know none), and the word 'aday (Me) reverberates in the reference to "witnesses" ('eday) and (through a reversal ofletters) the verb "I know" (yada>'[ti'•]). Such wordplays underscore the complex relationship between God and Israel. In addition, these terms highlight the folly of the idolators, whose images "work to no purpose [balyo'ilu]" (Isa. 44:9). These persons can themselves "testify" ('edeihem) to the fact that their works of wood can "neither look [balyir'u] nor think [bal yede'u]" (v. 9), that they are but a "block of wood" (but 'etz [v. 19]) and can "do no good" (le-vilti ho'il [v. 9]). The polemic against idols sharpens the theological difference between the God oflsrael and the gods of the foolish. It also underscores their incommensurability. Not only does the God of Israel create His people and care for them; He is also their redeemer who forgives their sins. By contrast, the image makers are prey to their own desires: they create a form of wood and then pray to it, blind to the folly of their deeds. The prophet underscores this delusion by citing their petitions to the wood: "Save me, for you are my god!" (Isa. 44:17). There is ironic poignancy in this phrase, since the language plays on a liturgical formula found in the psalms and other personal petitions (see Ps. 3:8; 6:5). By using it here, the prophet speaks with pointed derision. These false worshipers are deluded (Isa. 44:18) and unable to perceive the perversity of their actions (v. 19). For the prophet, the realization that self-proclaimed divinities are "a fraud" (v. 20) is an essential step toward a proper religious consciousness.
COMMENTS Isaiah43:21. The peoplelformedfor Myself "Formed": Hebrewyatzarti. This verb recurs thematically throughout the haftarah, underscoring true and false creations. See also Isa. 44:2, 19, and 21 and the pun in 44:12. The motif of God as the creator and former oflsrael is also found in Isa. 43:1, 7; 44:24; and 45:11. It highlights a sense of divine destiny and rebirth. Shall declare My praise As the opening proclamation of the haftarah, the phrase is best understood as a declarative promise. The declaration is in fact a telling {yesappem) of God's mighty deeds. Compare Exod. 10:1-2; Ps. 78:3; and 145:6. (In its original setting in the Book of Isaiah, this modal form of the verb is often rendered as "That they might declare . . ." See the discussion in Context and Meaning.) HAFTARAH FOR
VA-YAK-HEL
108
22. -worshipedMe Compare Gen. 12:8.
Hebrew }oti ka-m'ta-, literally, "called upon Me" in worship (OJPS).
24. bought Mefragrant reed The Hebrew employs a pun: "bought [kanita] . . . fragrant reed [kaneh]." For the spice, see Exod. 30:23. 4 25.forMy own sake God acts with unilateral grace, and not because of Israel's merit. In Isa. 48:9-11, divine actions "for My own sake" (v. 11) are correlated with acting "for the sake of My name" (v. 9). Reference to wiping away transgressions is also found in Ps. 51:3 and 6, in a human petition to God. 26. Let usjoin in argument Literally, "let us enter judgment together" (nishaftayahad). This forensic phrase appeals for counter-testimony from the accused. For use of this form in court procedure, see Midrash Yalkut Shimoni 2:458. 27. Tour earliest ancestor Literally, "your first forefather" (avikha ha-ri'shon). The reference to an ancient sin evokes the sin of Adam (Kimhi), but others have interpreted "ancestor" as "leader" and have proposed various sinful rulers, like Jeroboam (Ibn Ezra). The parallel term "spokesmen" is equally obscure. 28. So I profaned the holy princes The Hebrew sarey kodesh (holy princes; cf. 1 Chron. 24:5) makes the verse difficult, conceptually and theologically. Some have proposed emending the phrase to shem kodshi, "My holy name," but this only compounds the difficulty. Why would God profane His own name as a result of the previously mentioned sins? The Septuagint seems to be based on a Hebrew text that read: "Your rulers profaned My sanctuary" (presumably, vayihallu sarekha kodshi). proscription Hebrew herem is used for ritual extermination and for devoting things to the Shrine (i. e., proscribing them from common use; see Leviticus 27). Either use of the cult term is odd here, especially in conjunction with the references to "mockery" (giddufim). Hence, instead of herem, one should read heref "insult." This verb is frequently in parallelism withjjadaf "mock." See Kimhi and compare Ps.44:7. Isaiah 44:1-2. Israel/Jeshurun whom I"havechosen The theme of the nation of JacobIsrael-Jeshurun as chosen recurs in this prophetic collection (cf. Isa. 41:8-9; 43:10; 44:2). Deuteronomy first speaks of God's love for the patriarchs as the reason for choosing Israel, redeeming them from Egypt, and restoring them to the Promised Land (Deut. 4:37-38; cf. 7: 6; 14:2). The divine word of encouragement refers to God as the one who has created Jacob and sustained him since birth. This allusion to Gen. 25:19-26 gives historical depth to the prophecy of divine support. The reference to God as "your Creator" {yotzerkha) stands between the opening proclamation where the people are addressed as those whom "I [God] formed for Myself" {yatzarti li [Isa. 43:21]) and the closing call to Israel as those whom "I [God] fashioned [to be] My servant" {yetzartikha 'evedli [44:21]). This dual emphasis counterpoints "the makers [yotera] of idols" (44:9), who forget the true creator. 2.Jeshurun
Aname for Israel; compare Deut. 32:15; 33:5, 26 [Transl.].
3. So -will I pour My spirit The divine spirit is used in conjunction with blessing. Israel will be revived as a people and will return to its ancient God (see v. 4). 5. One shall say A prophecy of renewal and identification. Threefold repetition of zeh ("one," "another" "another") suggests three main types of connection: (1) a proclamation of belonging, "I am the L O R D ' S " ; ( 2 ) a use of the ancestral name "Jacob" for identity; and ( 3 ) a marking of the words "of the L O R D , " on one's arm, and an adopting of the name "Israel." However, it seems that the last should also be considered a distinct act. A fourfold scheme has also been emphasized by rabbinic tradition. According to Mekhilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Mishpatim 18,5 Isaiah's words refer to the "completely righteous," "converts," "penitents," and those who "fear Heaven" "among the 109
HAFTARAH FOR VA-YIKRA'
nations." Avot de-Rabbi Natan (A) 36 and Rashi give alternate lists. Stylistically the elements form an ABAB structure, with the A-element marking identity with God and the B-element indicating identity with the nation. On this basis, it appears that the prophecy has a double emphasis and should not be construed in terms of four separate types of identification. (For the theme of being called by God's name, see the Comment to Isa. 43:7in the haftarah for Bere'shit.) mark "hisarm It was customary to mark a slave with the owner's name [Transl.].6 6. I am the first The theme of God's exclusivity and incomparability is a dominant concern of the prophet. See 43:10; 45:5-6, 18, 22. The claim nullifies every other theological proposition: "And there is no god but Me." The argument is linked to prophecy and its fulfillment. See the Comment to verse 7. 7. Who likeMe can announce Divine uniqueness is linked to the fulfillment of prophecy. The rendering "even as I told the future to an ancient people" (NIPS) seems to presuppose an understanding of the difficult Hebrew misumi 'am 'olam ve-'otiyyot as a scribal corruption for mashmi'a 'am 'olamJotiyyot. The reading'otiyyot as "the future" is based on the verb 'atah, meaning "to come." The noun occurs with this sense also in Isa. 41:23 and 45:11. However, given the interrogative "who" in the first clause, the second phrase may have had a parallel construction like mi hishmi'a 'am 'olam Jotiyyot, "who has told the future to an ancient people?" The verb hishmi'a would thus p&railelyaggidu ("foretell"), as in verse 8. 9-20. The structure of the anti-idolatry polemic is (1) a satire of the attitude of the idol makers (w. 9-11), (2) a description of the construction of idols (w. 12-17), and (3) another satire of the beliefs of the idol makers (w. 18-20). Lampooned most of all is the image constructed from a tree—one half of which serves for fuel and the other for a divine figure to which one says, "Save me, for you are my god ['eli }atah]" (v. 17; cf. 42:17). This formula of false commitment counterpoints the positive allegiance stated by Israel in 44:5 ("I am the L O R D ' S [la-THWH J ani]). The phrase employs the language of legal commitment, often used to indicate marriage or adoption. 7 Compare the formula of God's "adoption" of the king in Ps. 2:7 and of the nation in Hos. 2:25. Similar words are spoken by God to Israel at the end of the haftarah: "you are My servant" ('avdi \atah [Isa. 44:21]). This statement reinforces the commitment expressed earlier: "But hear, now, O lacob My servant" (44:1). The critique in 1 and 3, which stresses that the idol makers do not see, know, or understand the foolishness of their ways, recalls the polemic in Psalm 115,in which idol makers are said to be like the images they make—unable to speak, see, or hear (Ps. 115:4-8). The prophet may draw on this liturgical form. For the claim that idols cannot see or hear, compare Deut. 4:28. The combination of a polemic against idol making with the exaltation of an incomparable God and His prophetic predictions (Isa. 44:6-8 + 9-20) is also found in Isa. 40:1-21 + 22 and 41: 1 - 5 + 6 - 7 (cf. 42:8 + 9). 12. it
That is, the image he is making [Transl.].
16. •roasts. . . eats
Transposing the Hebrew verbs for clarity [Transl.].
21. neverforget Me Nif'al verbal form, used like the kal. Alternatively, following the nif'al form, "you shall never be forgotten o f M e " (Ibn Ezra). 22. Come back to Me Hebrew shuvah }elay. In context, the call is for a physical return from the Babylonian exile to the homeland (cf. Kimhi). Later commentators also found an appeal here for spiritual renewal. This perception is also found among the ancient Rabbis (cf. Targum lonathan). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Theparashah details the forms of public sacrifice whereby one may sustain and renew a relationship with God. Among these are the whole burnt offering ('olah), the sacrifice (zevah) of wellHAFTARAH FOR
VA-YAK-HEL
110
being, the meal offering (minhah), and the spice of frankincense (levonah). In the haftarah, the prophet decries the abandonment of these offerings and the practice of sin and iniquity (Isa. 43: 22-24). Punning on the verb 'nvad, which commonly means to perform cultic service, God says that He did not "burden" (he'evadtikha) Israel with demands for meal offerings, but they have "burdened" (he'evadtani) Him with their transgressions. The perversity oflsrael is thus marked by their inversion of proper worship. Another link between the pa-mshah and haftarah highlights the importance of witnesses in social and theological matters. According to the rule in Lev. 5:1, a person who hears a public imprecation and can serve as a "witness" ('ed) to the event incurs guilt if he fails to provide testimony in cases of punishable crimes. By contrast, Isa. 44:6-8 speaks of Israel's role as "witnesses" ('eday) to God's incomparable ability to forecast the future and fulfill His prophetic word. This places human experience at the center of theological claims, for without human testimony the reality of God and the wonder of His ways would have no social significance. Rabbinic tradition understood this paradox and produces a remarkable transformation of Isaiah's words. According to Scripture, God's statement is self-aggrandizing and exultant: "You [Israel] are My witnesses. Is there any god . . . but Me?" (v. 8). The Midrash sets the record straight; there may be no god but God, but He needs the testimony of humankind to be known: "If 'you are My witnesses,' then 'I am God' (43:12); but if you are not My witnesses, then, if one may say so, I am not God" (Sifre Deuteronomy 346). 8 This striking statement presents theology as a type of testimony to religious experience. Integrity is as vital here as in the legal sphere, where honest testimony is crucial for a social realm to be established and sustained.
Haftarah for Tzav ASHKENAZIM
JEREMIAH 7:21-8:3; 9:22-23
SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 7:21-8:3; 9:22-23
For Jeremiah's life and times and a consideration of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments introducing the several haftarah readings derived from Jeremiah's prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is one of several rebukes that follow Jeremiah's Temple sermon (Jer. 7:1-20), in which the prophet proclaims God's judgment against the Temple and nation (w. 14-15, 20) for the people's sins ( W . 8-10, 18). That speech has been dated to 609 B.C.E. on the basis of Jer. 26:1-3, where a historical superscription precedes its recapitulation of 7:1-20. The proclamations that constitute the haftarah (7:21-8:3) have been appended to this sermon, 1 probably due to thematic similarity (charges of immoral behavior and cultic abominations). This editorial arrangement, however, is no proof of the original occasion(s) of these speeches. The conclusion to the haftarah (Jer. 9:22-23) skips forward in order to end with a positive religious instruction—though not the customary promise of national renewal. The Babylonian Talmud refers to this haftarah as one without the ordinarily requisite twenty-one verses,2 and adds that the reason for this is because "the topic is concluded" (B. Megillah 23b). PART 1. RIGHT, N O T RITE (Jeremiah 7:21-28) a. Jeremiah 7:21-26 In this speech, Jeremiah derides the people's performance of the 'olah (holocaust) sacrifice while proper covenant obedience is ignored. The people can multiply sacrificial rituals, he notes, but to no good end, since God "did not command them" (lo} tzivitim) to do this when they came out of Egypt (w. 21-22). Rather, He "commanded" (tziviti) the people to obey (shim'u be-koli, "do My bidding") and walk in the divine way (v. 23). However, the people failed to respond to a succession of prophets and behaved worse than their ancestors (w. 24-26). Ill
HAFTARAH FOR TZAV
b. Jeremiah 7:27 Jeremiah is bidden to say "these things" to the present generation, though they too shall not heed the divine warning. Thus Jeremiah takes his place in the chain of prophetic warners. c. Jeremiah 7:28 Because of the people's disobedience, the prophet delivers a withering arraignment: "This is the nation that would not obey [lo} sham'u be-kol] the L O R D their God, that would not accept rebuke." A final assessment underscores their retrograde character. "Faithfulness has perished, vanished from their mouths." PART 2. D O O M F O R PAGAN ABOMINATIONS (leremiah 7:29-8:3) a. leremiah 7:29-34 The people are told to prepare for mourning and lament, since they have provoked God's wrath with their abominations (w. 29-30). The nation is addressed first in the feminine singular (v. 29a) and then more obliquely, as "the people of ludah." The offenses are multiple: within the Temple they set up paganizing abominations (v. 30b), and outside of it they have built shrines for child sacrifice—"which I [God] never commanded" asher lo} tziviti [v. 31]). These perversions will result in unmitigated punishment. The dead will lie exposed, joy will cease, and the land will be desolate. The imagery is horrific and bleak. b. leremiah 8:1-3 Linked to this doom oracle ("at that time") is another one condemning worship of the heavenly bodies. Once again, the result will be exposure of the dead, though the punishment here is exacted on the exhumed bones of the sinners. The people who survive would be better off dead. The prophet's wrath gives no respite. PART 3. "IN THIS SHOULD ONE GLORY" (leremiah 9:22-23) The people are admonished to abandon self-glorification and pride—for their wisdom, wealth, and might are as nothing. Only "earnest devotion" to God has true value, and an imitation of the divine attributes of "kindness, justice, and equity." This is what the Lord delights in, and just this constitutes divine knowledge. As the conclusion to the haftarah, this instruction looks beyond false worship and doom to the renewal of right action. In doing so, it vaunts the primacy of morality in the service of God.
CONTENT AND MEANING The topic of proper action dominates the haftarah. This is stressed through rhetorical forms of negation and contrast. Thus, in the opening critique of the nation, God first says, "I did not speak [lo} dibbnrti] with them or command them [ve-lo' tzivitim]" concerning sacrifices and contrasts this with the positive assertion about "what [ha-davar] I commanded [tziviti] them" to do (ler. 7:22-23). The juxtaposition is between unbidden offerings and the command to follow the divine way. Similarly, at a later point, God maligns the heinous acts of child sacrifice being performed and emphasizes that "I never commanded" (lo} tziviti) such behavior (7:31). A final example of this structure occurs at the end of the haftarah. True to form, the rhetoric juxtaposes worthless assertions of self-glorification ('al yithallel) with their positive counterpart (yithallel) andvalues (9:22-23). To establish these contrasts, the rhetorical phrase ki 'im, "but," recurs in all three parts of the haftarah (ler. 7:22, 32; 9:23). In the first and third cases, these words link the positive and negative instructions and mark the difference between them. In the second instance, the phrase actually intensifies the doomsaying ("men shall no longer speak of Topheth . . . but [ki 'im] of the Valley of Slaughter" [7:32]) and the prophetic results to come. By emphasizing the people's false or unbidden acts of worship, leremiah assumes his place in the chain of prophets sent by God "daily and persistently" (yow hashkem ve-shaloah. [ler. 7: 25]) to heed His voice. In using this argument, found elsewhere in the Book of leremiah (cf. 7: 13; 11:7) and in historical assessments attributed to the Deuteronomic school (2 Kings 17:13), emphasis is placed on God's concern that the people repent of their ways and avoid punishment. By his activity, the prophet thus functions as one who forewarns the people of the consequences HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM112
of their behavior (cf. Jer. 7:23; 2 Kings 17:13) —a feature that becomes prominent in late biblical sources and subsequent Jewish law.3 Mocking the nation's resistance, the prophet punningly juxtaposes the path that "I [God] enjoin" a-tzavveh [Jer. 7:23]) with the self-centered "counsels" (mo'a-tzot [v. 24]) of the people. Through their behavior, the people "have gone backward" (v. 24) and "acted worse than their fathers" (v. 26). Counterposed to the divine way is the cultic activity condemned in Jer. 7:21-22 ("Add your burnt offerings \_'oloteik^em\ to your other sacrifices \zivheikhem\ and eat the meat! For when I freed your fathers from the land of Egypt, I did not speak with them or command them concerning burnt offerings or sacrifice"). Framed as a parody of priestly instructions, this prophetic word goes beyond the rejection of sacrifices found in Jer. 6:19-20. In that case, Jeremiah asserts that because the nation has rejected the Torah, their burnt offerings ('olot) and general sacrifices (zevahim) are displeasing. Such a critique follows the usual pattern in which sacrifices are rebuffed because of sinful practices or attitudes (see Isa. 1:10-17). What is striking about the present case, is that the people are derisively told to perform the 'olot together with the zevahim offering—and even to eat the meat thereof. Such a command blatantly contradicts the law in the Torah, which states explicitly that the 'olot are to be entirely consumed upon the altar (Lev. 1:1-9). For that reason, it is best to follow those commentators who regard Jeremiah's words as an ironic "instruction." In that case it would parody the formal priestly teachings 4 and imply that the people may as well desecrate the 'olah offering—since such a sacrifice was not given during the desert sojourn when God revealed His will to the people. This last point has evoked the perplexity of generations of interpreters, since Lev. 7:37-38 (at the end of Tzav) states explicitly that the cultic instructions were given during the Sinai sojourn (Lev. 26:46 even asserts that they were given at Mount Sinai itself). At first sight it seems that Jeremiah's remark comports with Amos's demotion of the significance of sacrifices, when he says that the Israelites did not offer God meat offerings in the desert (Amos 5:25). But Amos's remark says nothing about the origin of the sacrificial laws or that God did not command them. Rabbi Akiba tried to resolve the difficulty by suggesting that although the people as a whole did not sacrifice in the desert (because of their apostasy with the Golden Calf), the Levites remained faithful and continued to offer sacrifices (B. Hagigah 6b). However, this solution does not account for the divine statement in Jer. 7:22-23, which states that at the Exodus the people were only commanded to heed God's voice—not sacrifices. Ibn Ezra therefore rejected Rabbi Akiba's position and argued that the plain sense of the passages in Amos and Jeremiah was rather that the Israelites did not offer sacrifices in the desert, but were only commanded to do justice.5 Rashi offered a more drastic harmonization of the difficulty, suggesting that the law in Leviticus only enunciates the conditions for the voluntary performance of the 'olah and zevah offerings and does not refer to their obligatory character (i. e., the Torah only says "if" or "when" a person offers such sacrifices; it does not say that one must do so). 6 In the light of Jeremiah's explicit statement that sacrifices were not divinely commanded in the desert, Ibn Ezra's suggestion has merit and points toward the solution made forcefully by Rabbi David Kimhi. 7 According to him, God's statement refers to the revelation of the Decalogue. Only this was commanded at Sinai, in order to teach the nation that the unconditional obligations of morality are the cornerstone of the covenant (cf. Abravanel). In this sense, Jeremiah's words are historically accurate and reinforce a central covenantal point. Moreover, Kimhi's understanding of the passage also contributes to an appreciation of Jeremiah's ironic injunction that the people eat the 'olah along with the zevah offering. In light of the centrality of the Decalogue, the prophet's point is that voluntary (individual) sacrifices performed along with acts of divine disobedience are as good as worthless. 8 In fact, he suggests, they are no more efficacious than if they were entirely misperformed. Jeremiah's concern for the primacy of morality recalls the earlier emphasis of Hosea, who stated for God that "I desire [hafetz] goodness, not sacrifice \zevah\, obedience to God, rather than burnt offerings ['olot]" (Hos. 6:6). This emphasis that God "desires" personal piety over sacrifices is repeated in various supplications in the Book of Psalms (see Pss. 40:9 and 51:18). 113
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
Rabbinic tradition continues this concern in its choice ofjer. 9:22-23 to conclude the haftarah and counterpoint the cultic teachings of xhepamshah.
COMMENTS Jeremiah 7:21-28. This sermon is replete with phrases found elsewhere in Jeremiah's rhetoric. Compare the content and style of 7:22-25 with 11:3-4, 7-8; and 13:10. Reflexes of this language and theology also occur in historiographical surveys based upon this tradition (see Jer. 25:4 and 2 Kings 17:13-15). Other phrases echo the language of the Deuteronomic school tradition; compare, for example, the language of disloyalty in Jer. 7:24 and 30 with Deut. 29: 18 and Deut. 4:25; 9:18; Judg. 2:11; 3:7, respectively. These similarities (among many others) suggest the great impact of the Deuteronomic tradition upon Jeremiah himself and upon the final formulation of his teachings. 9 (The final form of this speech is complex and may have undergone expansions of various sorts. Thus Jer. 7:27 appears redundant with v. 26. It may have been modeled on7:13. The verse is missing in the Septuagint.) 21.Add your burnt offerings "Add": Hebrew sefu, from the stem y-s-f. The form puns on the stem s-f-h, "consume, destroy." Compare Kimhi, who stressed the optional character of these sacrifices (see above). Compare R. loseph Kara on verse 22. 10 23. thatlmay 12; and ler. 31:33.
be your God
For the covenantal formulary, see Exod. 6:7; 19:5; Lev. 26:
24. their own counsels "Counsels" (mo'etzot) and "willfulness" are linked in Ps. 81: 13. But "counsels" is missing in the Septuagint, and many moderns have suggested that it is extraneous here. 11 25. daily Hebrewjyow. An odd adverbial usage, presumably meaning "daily" (Targum; Kimhi; Abravanel). Others delete it as a copyist error. 12 28. This is the nation This phrase functions as a summary appraisal of sins at the end of prophetic discourses. Compare ler. 13:25; also, Isa. 14:26 and 17:14. These summations are introduced by zeh or zo't ("this is"). 29-34. This section is a lament for, and judgment against, apostasy. Two crimes are named: setting abominations in the Temple and sacrificing children. Both are mentioned in connection with Manasseh (2 Kings 21:4-7). Court-sponsored child sacrifice goes back to Ahaz (2 Kings 16:3), but more popular expressions are recorded (Mic. 6:6-7). ler. 7:31 mentions burning, the equivalent of "passing" a child through fire (cf. Deut. 18:10; 2 Kings 21:6; 23:10). Vocalization of the term tophet is modeled on the noun boshet (shame). A variant form is found in Isa. 30:33, where also the dedication is to a god called Melech ("king"; cf. 2 Kings 17:31, which refers to Arameans who "burned their children [as offerings] to Adrammelech"). The form Molech (in the prohibitions; e. g., Lev. 18:21) is thus also derisively modeled on boshet. A more dramatic and expansive version ofleremiah's diatribe occurs at ler. 19:1-13. 29. For the LORD has spumed The language of this statement of doom ("For the L O R D has spurned [ma'as] and cast off [va-yittosh] the brood that provoked His wrath ['evmtoY) is similar to the language referring to God's rejection of the shrine of Shilo in Ps. 78:59. leremiah also says that the people were worse than their "fathers" (J'a-votam [v. 26]). This point is also made in Ps. 78:57. 32. men shall no longer speak The contrastive expression "shall no longer speak o f . . . but o f " introduces a negative prophecy of doom. Elsewhere leremiah employs this formula with a positive sense (e. g., ler. 3:16-17, regarding the renewal of lerusalem; 23: 7-8, regarding the return of the northern exiles to their homeland). Postexilic prophecies were influenced by this form (Isa. 61:6; 62:4), which leremiah may have inherited from Hosea (cf. Hos. 2:1). HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM114
33. The doom prophecy of dishonoring the dead by exposure recurs in Jer. 19:7 and 34: 20. The variant expression in 8:2 is also found in 9:21 and 25:33. Both forms are combined in 16:4. The punishment is linked to the curse for covenant infidelity in Deut. 28:26, which is in turn related to penalties exacted by Assyrian overlords for violation of their treaties. 13 Reflexes of these curses appear in oracles against royalty (1 Kings 21:20-23; 2 Kings 9:23) and against foreign nations (Isa. 34:1-4; Ezek. 39:4-5, 17-21). Exposure of the dead was considered a great dishonor and a severe form of desecration throughout the ancient world. Recording his action against Susa, the capital of Elam, the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal states that he "ravaged, tore down, and laid open to the sun" the tombs of the former kings of that place. "Their bones I carried off" to Assyria, thus imposing restlessness upon their spirits, depriving them of food offerings and libations."14 In ancient Judah, during the same period, Josiah desecrated the tombs of the shrine ofBethel and exposed the bones (2 Kings 23:16). Jeremiah 9:22. not.. .glory A condemnation of vaunted power and knowledge, such as is also found in Isa. 5:21-22. Steadfast devotion is advocated; the Hebrew text speaks here of haskelve-da'at, of divine knowledge through acts of justice. Medieval commentators saw here a counsel to cultivate two types of reflective intelligence, in order to perceive God's physical and metaphysical dominion (cf. Kimhi and Abravanel). 23. kindness,justice, and equity Hebrew hesed, mishpat, and tzeda-kah. The last two terms constitute a semantic pair well known from Mesopotamian sources (kittu u mesham). They are also commonly linked to acts of kindness (damiktu) and constitute the attributes of royalty.15 In the Bible, the semantic pair recurs as a human and divine ideal (e.g., Gen. 18:19). A triad of elements for God (Pss. 33:5; 89:15) and man (Isa. 16:5) is also found. Jeremiah 9:23 shows the link between these divine attributes and the covenant ideal. In fact, this triad is recited as a core element of the covenant espousal in Hos. 2:21. Both texts link this covenantal precis to knowledge of God. For Maimonides, "kindness, justice, and equity" are the attributes of a person who acquires apprehension of God and knows His providence over His creatures. A meditation on this subject comprises the conclusion to his Guidefor the Perplexed (3:53-54). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Both thepamshah and haftarah refer to the 'olah (burnt offering) and zevah (sacrifice) of well-being— but do so in different instructional forms. Specifically, Lev. 1:3-17 + 6:1-6 and 3:1-17 + 7:11-18 provide prescriptive and descriptive accounts of the performance of the 'olah and zevah offering, respectively, with variations pertaining to the type of livestock or fowl permitted. According to priestly law, the 'olah was wholly consumed upon the altar, while the zevah was shared between the priests and the donor, and only certain fatty parts consumed on the altar. The fact that the zevah was partly eaten by laypersons provides the basis for Jeremiah's satiric instruction that the people eat the meat of their 'olah along with their zevah (Jer. 7:21). The prophet's sarcasm stems from the fact that the people have ignored the central tenets of the covenant—hence offerings have become virtually useless. Jeremiah stresses that God "did n o t . . . command" (tziwitim) the people to perform sacrifices when they came out of Egypt (Jer. 7:22). By contrast, the priestly rule ends with the specific emphasis that its regulations were "commanded" (tziwah) by God in the wilderness of Sinai (Lev. 7:38). Jeremiah's rhetoric presumably serves to underscore the primacy of the Decalogue in the covenant. For him, covenantal right is the precondition for ritual rite. Jeremiah's emphasis was not lost on the Rabbis. After the destruction of the Second Temple (70 c . E . ) , the prophet's statement that the Sinaitic covenant did not enjoin sacrifices would help assuage fears that without the cult the people's relationship with God was permanently impaired. Responding to such an anxiety, Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai radically reinterpreted Judaism when he taught that acts of loving-kindness would effect an atonement "just like" the ancient sacrifices 115
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
(Avot de-Rabbi Natan B, 4). 16 This ethicization of the cult was conveyed through a striking reuse ofHos. 6:6, "For I desire [hafatzti] goodness [hesed], not sacrifice." That passage is akin to the concluding teaching of our haftarah, in which Jeremiah also stresses that what God truly "delights in" (ha-fetz) is "kindness [hesed], justice, and equity" (Jer. 9:23). Both teachings affirm the primacy of morality. The significant element added by Jeremiah is that the covenantal virtues of kindness, justice, and equity are the very basis for knowing God—and for imitating His ways.
Haftarah for Shemini T f t ^ ASHKENAZIM
2 SAMUEL 6:1-7:17
SEPHARDIM
2 SAMUEL 6:1-19
For the content and theology of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from Samuel (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). This haftarah attests to a new phase of ancient Israelite religion and culture. After David was crowned king in Hebron (2 Sam. 5:1-5; ca. 1000 B.C.E.), he proceeded to conquer lerusalem (w. 6-10) and defeat the Philistines (w. 17-25). Following these events, the king decided to bring the Ark up to lerusalem from the home of Abinadab in Baalim, where it had been kept after earlier wars against the Philistines in the time of Samuel (1 Sam. 6:21-7:1). The transfer of this object to the ancient site of lebus (lerusalem) was presumably designed to unite the tribes oflsrael and ludah (in the north and south) around a sacred center.1 This act thus marks the innovation of religious centralization, in contrast to the earlier translocation of the Ark among the tribes and shrines. The ceremonious portage of the Ark to lerusalem (together with the unexpected disruption of this process) constitutes the first part of the haftarah (2 Sam. 6:1-19). The king's desire to build a permanent shrine for the Ark (together with a postponement of this request to a future descendant) makes up the second part of the reading (2 Sam. 7:1-17). Among Sephardim, only the first part is recited. PART 1. THE TRANSFER OF THE ARK (2 Samuel 6:1-23) a. 2 Samuel 6:1-5 After assembling select troops, David goes to the home of Abinadab to bring the Ark up to lerusalem (w. 1-2). It is loaded onto a special cart, and the sons of Abinadab accompany it, Ahio in front and Uzzah nearby.2 During the ritual process, David and all Israel dance and rejoice "before the L O R D " ( W . 3 - 5 ) . b. 2 Samuel 6:6-11 The celebration is disrupted accidentally. When the oxen stumble, Uzzah reaches out to steady the tottering Ark, and "God struck him down on the spot" (w. 6-8). Distressed and afraid, David cancels the processional and diverts the Ark to the home of Obed-edom for three months (w. 9-11). c. 2 Samuel 6:12-15 Upon learning that Obed-edom and his household were blessed while the Ark was there, David decides that the time is favorable to resume the transfer of the Ark to lerusalem (v. 12). On this occasion, more elaborate procedures are enacted: as the ark is borne forward, David sacrifices an ox and a fading to the Lord every six steps and dresses like a priest in a linen ephod (w. 13-15). d. 2 Samuel 6:16-23 When the celebrants reach lerusalem and the Ark is set "in its place inside the tent which David had pitched for it," more sacrifices are made, and the multitude receive food from the king (w. 17-19). The nation then returns home, and the king heads to his palace. As he does so, he is upbraided by Saul's daughter Michal. David's wild dancing during the processional evoked her contempt (v. 16), and she bluntly reproaches him for acting in a manner unbefitting HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM116
a king (v. 20). David dismisses her words, saying that there is no shame in honoring God completely—especially since this God chose him as king, and not her father or his family! (w. 21-22). The narrator concludes with the comment that Michal remained barren to her dying day (v. 23). PART 2. DAVID DESIRES A TEMPLE (2 Samuel 7:1-17) a. 2 Samuel 7:1-3 Settled in his palace, David tells his court prophet Nathan that though he dwells in a "house of cedar," the "Ark of the L O R D abides in a tent!" ( W . 1-2). Nathan construes this remark as a request for authorization to build a fixed abode for the Ark and tells the king, "Go and do whatever you have in mind, for the L O R D is with you" (v. 3). b. 2 Samuel 7:4-7 However, during that same night, Nathan receives a divine revelation. He is instructed to tell David: "Are you the one to build a house \ba-yit] for Me to dwell in?" (w. 4-5). The instruction adds that since the time of the Exodus, God has "moved about" in a Tent and Tabernacle and never reproached the leaders with the request for a "house of cedar" (w. 6-7). The divine speech constitutes a rejection of David's request—even as the query "Are you the one?" leaves open the possibility that someone else may build it. c. 2 Samuel 7:8-16 After the initial negative response to David's request, the divine word unfolds in two positive ways: (1) God promises continued reknown for the king (in war and peace) and a secure dwelling for the nation in the Land (w. 8 - l l a ) ; and (2) David is promised a "house" (or "dynasty" \ba-yit\) for his "offspring" to come "forever" (w. llb-16). This permanent commitment to David's lineage ("I will never withdraw My favor . . . as I withdrew it from Saul" [v. 15]) is supplemented by a further point: David's own blood successor will not only inherit the kingship, but "He shall build a house \ba-yit] for My name" (v. 13a). d. 2 Samuel 7:17 The divine promises of a secure settlement for the people and a secure dynasty for the king, and the guarantee of a future Temple are "all" reported by Nathan to David.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah oscillates between two poles: stasis and movement, with its principal focus on the Ark of the Lord. At the outset, 2 Samuel 6 depicts the initial transfer of the Ark from Kiriathjearim, where it had apparently rested for nearly two generations. But the movement to Jerusalem is postponed when Uzzah reaches out to stay the tottering Ark and is struck dead by God on the spot. 3 As a precaution, the Ark is brought to the home of Obed-edom, where it remains for three months until it is certain that divine wrath has passed. The transfer is then re-initiated, and the Ark is brought to Jerusalem and " s e t . . . up in its place inside the tent which David had pitched for it" (2 Sam. 6:17). Subsequently, David desires a more permanent dwelling for the Ark. But God initially deflects this desire, noting that from the Exodus until now He had always "moved about" in a portable shrine and never requested a stable "house" (2 Sam. 7:6). With these words, there is an idealization of the ancient Tabernacle-Tent as the suitable site for God's earthly dwelling. Indeed, movement is portrayed as the very core of the people's life with God—both on their journeys in the desert and in the rotation of the Ark from shrine to shrine in the Promised Land. The desire for a permanent Temple thus constitutes a radical break with ancient practice, exchanging older nomadic ideals (the "Tent") for the opulence of a monarchy (the "House"). 4 Nevertheless, the initial rejection is eventually compromised when God announces that a permanent dynasty should have a permanent shrine. The haftarah thus begins with the Ark at rest in the home of Abinadab and ends with the promise of its future rest in a royal Temple. The dynamic of stasis and movement is also expressed on two other planes. The first is national and spatial. God promises the king that He will provide the people a place in which they will be planted firmly and dwell in security (2 Sam. 7:10-11). Wandering and fear will cease, and there will be "rest" (NJPS: "safety" [v. 11]) from all enemies. The other plane on which the dynamic of stasis and movement is played out is temporal and focuses on the royal dynasty of David. Once again the issues of security and permanence are stressed, though now the focus is on the continuity 117
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
of the Davidic line. God promises that a covenant will forever link Him with David's descendents (2 Sam. 7:13). He will be to the king as a father, and the king will be like His son; nevermore will divine favor be withdrawn from the family of David, as it was from Saul's heirs (2 Sam. 7:15). All subsequent beliefs in the dynasty ofDavid and its restoration derive from this source.5 The movement toward cultural stability expressed in the haftarah (for the Ark and for the dynasty) is endangered at two points. The first involves the holy Ark itself, when it was transported to Jerusalem. At that time, Uzzah's illegitimate contact with the sacred object led to his immediate death by God. Subsequently, to safeguard against potential indiscretions, the Ark was carried forward by "bearers" (2 Sam. 6:13). The identity of these individuals is not mentioned; however, later biblical tradition believed that David corrected his earlier error of allowing laymen to transport the Ark and reported that "David gave orders that none but the Levites were to carry the Ark of God"— as was their duty according to the Law (1 Chron. 15:2). 6 The second source of danger lies with the dynasty. God offers a covenant of eternal commitment to David and his descendants and declares: "I will establish his royal throne forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to Me" (2 Sam. 7:13b-14a). But this bond does not free the kings of responsibility. God's unilateral commitment includes a bilateral dimension. If a king "does wrong, I [God] will chastise him with the rod of men and the affliction of mortals" (2 Sam. 7:14b). Thus there are duties the king owes his divine overlord—and he may expect punishments for disobedience. Nevertheless, says God, "I will never withdraw My favor [hasdi] from him" (2 Sam. 7:15a). Later generations relied upon this promise and in times of danger reminded God of the "covenant" sworn to David "for all generations" (Ps. 89:4-5) —reciting His commitment of a "steadfast love" or "favor" (hasdi) "for him always" (Ps. 89:25, 29, 34). "O Lord" cries the psalmist, "where is Your steadfast love of old [hasadekha ha-rishonim] which You swore to David in Your faithfulness?" (Ps. 89:50), for it is this that gives him hope during the disasters of his day (v. 51). 7 In a later divine word, the exiles of ludah and lerusalem also receive comfort from a promise that echoes this notion of divine "favor." Speaking to the people in Babylon, God encourages them with the words: "Incline your ear and come to Me; / Hearken, and you shall be revived. And I will make with you an everlasting covenant, / The enduring loyalty promised to David [hasdei david ha-ne'emanim]" (Isa. 55:3). The nation is thus assured that they will inherit the same enduring covenant promised to David in former times. The haftarah thus provides the foundation document of the Davidic dynasty.8 But the promise of 2 Sam. 7:13a, that a descendant ofDavid would also build a Temple, gives the dynastic prophecy an added dimension. It not only legitimates a Temple in the immediate future, but justifies the hopes of later believers that the destroyed Temple would be rebuilt by a scion of David. The historical import of 2 Sam. 7:13a is therefore remarkable—even more so given the likelihood that the phrase is a secondary addition.9 For one thing, the document otherwise stresses only the enduring dynasty ofDavid—not the building of a Temple; and for another, it opens with an outright rejection of David's proposed building project. Nonetheless, as noted earlier, the words "Areyou the one to build a house for Me?" (2 Sam. 7:5) leaves room for assuming that although David himself was rebuffed, another person could be deemed acceptable.10 lust this conclusion is now represented in the text, with its promise of a future Temple builder included in the dynastic charter. The result is a dual promise (Temple and dynasty)11 that serves Solomon's interests in the next generation. Indeed, in his speech upon completing the building of the Temple, he presents himself as the legitimate heir of the dynasty and the divine promise of a future shrine (1 Kings 8:20). The idea of a new (or renewed) Temple and kingship has served as the twin pillars of biblical and lewish messianic hope ever since.
COMMENTS 2 Samuel 6:1. assembled Hebrew va-yosef, a contracted form of va-ye'esof (Targum lonathan, Rashi, Kimhi, R. Isaiah di Trani). Compare Ps. 104:29. HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM118
2. Baalim ofjudah Baalim is also referred to as Baalah and identified with Kiriathjearim (Josh. 15:9; 1 Chron. 13:6); it is here that the Ark remained after being retrieved from the Philistine city of Ashdod (1 Sam. 6:21). Commentators have observed that Psalm 132 reflects an ancient liturgy celebrating David's transfer of the Ark from "the region of Jaar" (Ps. 132:6; being Kiriath-jearim). The old event is variously revised. Particularly noteworthy is the reference to a priestly processional (Ps. 132:9), a more conditional formulation of the divine promise to David's lineage (Ps. 132:11-12; cf. 2 Sam. 7:12-15), and God's choice of Zion as His "restingplace" (Ps. 132:13-14). The last is presented as a divine revelation. This justifies David's decision to bring the Ark to an old Jebusite city. to which theName was attached, the 'name The Masoretic text is difficult, repeating the noxvctshem (name). If this is a scribal error, the sentence more naturally reads: "to bring up from there the Ark of God, which was called by the name L O R D of Hosts Enthroned on the Cherubim." Targum Jonathan translates the text with only one occurrence of shem. LORD ofHosts Enthroned on the Cherubim This is a fuller form of the title found in 1 Sam. 4:4. The divine epithet " L O R D of Hosts" refers to God's majesty over the heavenly armies, with which He fights human enemies.12 These "hosts" include the sun, moon, and stars, as well as the atmospheric powers of nature (see Judg. 5:20-21; 2 Sam. 22:11-16). From heaven, the Lord of battles rides forth on cherub-like "wings of the wind" (2 Sam. 22:11; cf. Ps. 68:5, 10). On earth, the Ark represents His chariot of war. The Ark with cherubim was placed in the inner recess of the Tabernacle, and it was from there that the divine Presence was manifest to Moses (cf. Exod. 25:18-22).
4. [Uzzah walking]
Compare verses 6 - 7 [Transl.].
5. [the sound of\ all kinds of cypress wood [instruments] Compare Kimhi; the parallel passage 1 Chron. 13:8 reads: "with all their might and with songs" [Transl.]. 6.for the oxen had stumbled Taking "stumbled" (shamtu) as intransitive (with Kimhi); but an old tradition presumed that we have here a contracted transitive verb (i. e., the oxen caused the ark to totter; cf. Targum Jonathan and Rashi). 7 .for his indiscretion Hebrew 'al ha-shal. Targum Jonathan took this difficult form as related to an Aramaic word for "error" (cf. Kimhi). The notion that Uzzah inadvertantly sinned is developed by the Sages in the Talmud (B. Sotah 35a) and followed by some medieval commentators (Rashi, di Trani). R. Joseph Kaspi objects. In fact, the parallel version in 1 Chron. 13: 10 reads: "because ['al }asher\ he laid [shalah] a hand on the Ark." This suggests that either %l ha-shal is a truncated and misunderstood abridgement of 'al hishal (ah), "because he laid [a hand on the Ark]," or that the Chronicler has interpreted and expanded a fragmentary text. 8. Perez-uzzah That is, "the Breach of Uzzah"; compare Baal-perazim ("Baal of Breaches") in 2 Sam. 5:20 and the name Perez ("Breach") in Gen. 38:29 [Transl.]. 2 Samuel 7:1. safetyfrom all the enemies Literally "rest" (heniah) from enemies (cf. v. 11). This reference alludes to Deut. 12:10-11 where Moses tells the people that when they achieve rest from their enemies, they must bring their burnt offerings to the place that the Lord shall choose. Tradition understood this place to be Jerusalem, and the historian presents David as mindful of the condition. With the Philistine enemy defeated, the king determines to build in Jerusalem a glorious Temple for the Lord. Compare Rashi. 5.Areyou the one... ? The reason for David's rejection is not indicated. Later biblical tradition explains this as due to David's military past, having "shed much blood" (1 Chron. 22:8). 10. shall not oppress them Literally, "oppress him" (la-'anoto). The reading in 1 Chron. 17:9 is le-valoto (to wear him down); the citation of this passage in B. Berakhot 7b is le-khaloto (to eradicate him). These are all minor orthographic variants. Perhaps Ps. 132:1 ("O L O R D , 119
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
remember in David's favor his extreme self-denial [cunoto])n is an inner-biblical midrash on our phrase—understanding it to refer to David's (not Israel's) determination to have no rest until he "find a place for the L O R D " (PS. 1 3 2 : 2 - 5 ) . 1 3 11. house That is, a dynasty; play on "house" (i. e., Temple) in verse 5 [Transl.]. 14. 1 will be afather to him This formulation of a royal covenant is alluded to in Pss. 2:7 and 89:27 and gives the royal bond the intimacy of an adoption. Prophets occasionally use a similar formulation of marriage vows to give the covenant a sense of marital commitment (Hos. 2:18-22; cf. Ezek. 16:8). For negative and ironic uses of the adoption formulary, see Hos. 1: 8; Jer. 2:27; and Job 17:14. with the rod ofmen and the affliction ofmortals [Transl.].
That is, only as a human father would
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Iwo types of connection link the readings. The first type derives from a striking symmetry between the texts. Theparashah celebrates the dedication of the Tabernacle (Leviticus 9) and then records the death ofNadab and Abihu by God for bringing an "alien fire" into the shrine (Lev. 10:1-2). Correspondingly, the haftarah initially describes the transport of the Ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:2-5) and then notes the death of Uzzah by God for grasping the holy object as it seemed to totter (w. 6-7). An old midrash observed that these two disasters caused the people to complain, for they assumed that both the smoky "incense" (that the priests offered) and the holy "Ark" (that Uzzah touched) were objects of punishment and danger (Tanhuma Be-shallah 21). 14 For that reason, we are told, Scripture goes on to record that the incense could also bring the people atonement and protection (during the plague after Korah's rebellion [Num. 17:12]), and the Ark could be the agent of great blessing (for the household of Obed-edom [2 Sam. 6:11]). The midrash does not elaborate further, but by its terseness lets the reader ponder the paradoxes of the sacred—which may simultaneously be a source of life and of danger. Holy objects are presented here as bivalent entities, affecting human life by the manner in which they are approached and used. Another type of connection between the haftarah an&pamshah may be observed. At one level, it seems that the deaths of Uzzah and Nadab and Abihu are both punishments for misuse of the sacred. However, a persistent tradition first found in Philo and the ancient midrash portrays the deaths ofNadab and Abihu in positive terms—as a total dedication of themselves to God. 15 Their immolation is thus reconceived as an act of self-sacrifice, a "sanctified" offering to God of all their "alien fire" or impure desires. Hence, far from being a negative case, the death of these priests actually exemplifies an ecstatic culmination of the religious life. Consumed on the altar of God, their earthly nature is spiritualized and transcended. From this perspective, the deaths of Uzzah and Nadab and Abihu represent different religious modalities. The first (Uzzah) exemplifies the death and destruction that may result when religious worship is overly physical, concrete, and instinctive; the other (Nadab and Abihu) presents an ideal of self-renunciation, a suppression of the physical in the service of spiritual perfection. Certainly, these are both extreme alternatives. Conceivably, the figure of David in this haftarah may offer a middle way. Maimonides, in fact, presents such a model in the following observations on religious practice recorded in hisMishneh Torah: The joy [simhah] that a person should have when performing a commandment [mitzvah] or the love of God that He commanded them is a great type of religious service. Whoever desists from such joy is deserving of punishment, as [Scripture] says: "[Punishments will come] because you would not serve the L O R D your God in joy and gladness" (Deut. 28: 47). And whoever becomes haughty, gives himself honor [kavod], or is full of himself HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM120
[mitka-bbed] is in these instances a sinner and a fool. Concerning this, Solomon provided a warning, saying: "Do not exalt yourself in the King's presence" [Prov. 2 5 : 6 ] . However, whoever humbles himself and makes little [mekel] of himself is in these instances one who is great and honorable [mekhubad] and serves [God] in love. And thus did David say: "I shall dishonor myself [u-nekalloti] even more and be low in my own esteem" [2 Sam. 6: 22]. And indeed, true greatness and honor [kavod] come from rejoicing [lismoah] before the Lord, as [Scripture] says: and "King David [was] leaping and whirling before the LORD" [v. 16]. (.HilkhotLulav 8 : 1 5 )
In this discussion, Maimonides portrays David as an exemplar of proper joyful worship—as one who balances the physical and spiritual components of religious action. 16 On the one hand, there is the concreteness of religious behaviors commanded by God. They are embodied by the whole range of traditional obligations—from acts of sanctity to celebrations in dance. However, whenever these behaviors are performed for self-centered reasons or as an expression of one's physical nature, they fall under the category of sin (even if scrupulously performed). Maimonides even calls such persons sinners and fools, since their focus is on themselves and not God. On the other hand, there is the ideal of directing all one's actions to the loving service of God. David was able to achieve this level of worship; for he did not lose himself in ecstatic bliss, but transfigured the physical through a spiritual expression of joy. We may deem such a consecration of the earthly realm a middle way—one that integrates the models of Nadab and Abihu and of Uzzah into a new synthesis of the physical and the spiritual in the service of God.
Haftarah for Tazria' y~lTn ASHKENAZIM
2 KINGS 4:42-5:19
SEPHARDIM
2
KINGS
4:42-5:19
For the haftarah for Tazria'-Metzora', see next haftarah. For the contents and ideology of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the discussion of the several haftarah selections taken from this work (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah comprises two episodes from a cycle of wonder-working tales featuring Elisha, a northern prophet in the reign of King lehoram ( 8 5 1 - 8 4 2 B.C.E.). It first narrates the miraculous feeding of a multitude with a small amount of bread ( 2 Kings 4 : 4 2 - 4 4 ) and then the healing of an Aramean leper named Naaman ( 5 : 1 - 1 9 ) . This pair of miracle stories is preceded by an account of the miracle of a cruse of oil ( 4 : 1 - 7 ) , the resurrection of a Shunammite boy ( 4 : 8 - 3 7 ) , and the curing of the poisonous food in a pot ( 4 : 3 8 - 4 1 ) . After them comes the miracle of a floating ax head ( 6 : 1 - 7 ) and the prediction of a wondrous end to a famine caused by the Aramean siege of Samaria ( 7 : 1 - 2 0 ) . It is notable that almost the entire anthology is recited in haftarah readings: 2 Kings 4 : 1 - 3 7 is the selection for Va-yera'; 4 : 4 2 - 5 : 1 9 is the present portion for Tazria'; and 7 : 3 - 2 0 is the text for Metzora'. The Rabbis were thus drawn to the drama and didacticism of these tales when they chose prophetic readings for the Annual Cycle of Torah readings. (Different passages were used in the Triennial Cycle lectionaries.) 1 The common feature of the wonder-working tales is a conjunction of miracles of food and bodily healing. Both features are paired in our haftarah ( 2 Kings 4 : 4 2 - 4 4 + 5 : 1 - 1 9 ) and in Va-yera' ( 4 : 1 - 7 + 8 - 3 7 ) . The reading is composed of two parts: PART
1.
THE MIRACLE OF THE LOAVES
(2
Kings
4:42-44)
a. 2 Kings 4 : 4 2 - 4 3 A man offers Elisha food, who says to give it to the people. The attendant balks because the amount seems too small, but the man of God says that this is God's will. 121
HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
b. 2 Kings 4:44
The food proves more than sufficient, "as the
LORD
had said."
PART 2. THE MIRACULOUS CURE (2 Kings 5:5:1-19) a. 2 Kings 5:1-3 The commander of the army of Aram is a leper named Naaman. An Israelite girl carried off to serve as an attendant to his wife tells him of the curative powers of "the prophet in Samaria" (Elisha). b. 2 Kings 5:4-7 Naaman begs leave of his king to visit the healer. The monarch sends him to the king of Israel with a letter of introduction, beseeching his aid in curing the leprosy. With ironic miscomprehension, the king says that he is not God to do such a thing and believes the whole matter to be some pretext. c. 2 Kings 5:8-12 When Elisha hears the report, he sends word to have Naaman come to him and "learn that there is a prophet in Israel" (v. 8). The leper does so; but when Elisha tells him to "bathe seven times in the Jordan" (v. 10; without pronouncing magical words or performing a magical pass ofhis hand), the commander "stalked off in a rage" (v. 12). d. 2 Kings 5:13-19 Naaman's aides prevail upon their chief to bathe nevertheless, which he does and is cured. He returns to Elisha with great praise for the God of Israel and requests some earth from Israel to build a shrine to the Lord in Aram. Naaman pledges religious loyalty to Elisha's God, but begs forgiveness in advance if he must bow in the temple of Rimmon while in service to his king. The plea is granted; Elisha tells the commander to "go in peace" (v. 19).
CONTENT AND MEANING The miracle of the food moves swiftly from the opening scene (the presentation of loaves to the man of God) to the wonder itself; the dialogue is sparse and the descriptions even more so. The connecting thread is the verb "to give" (no-tan). At the outset, a man brings his votary gift to Elisha, who instructs his steward Gehazi to "give" (ten) it to the people; but when the steward queries, doubtingly, how he could "give" (}etten) this small amount to so many, the prophet reissues his command to "give" (ten) the food to the people. In the end, when the steward has complied and "given" (va-yitten-, NJPS: set before) the food to the masses, there is more than enough to go around. Gehazi is thus presented as a doubter, with little faith in his master. It is only when Elisha says that God has indicated there will be enough that the steward does his bidding. The text concludes with the comment that there was plenty of food (repeating God's promise to Elisha, reported to Gehazi) and that all happened "as the L O R D had said" (v. 4 4 ) . The miracle is thus presented as a work of God—something promised and fulfilled. The text also indicates Elisha's magnanimity, refusing to take gifts for himselfbut dispensing them to the people. The account of Naaman's miraculous cure proceeds with comparatively greater detail and fuller dialogues. In fact, it is the dialogical component that generates the narrative action: the Israelite girl intervenes with her mistress; the Aramean commander begs leave o f h i s king; the king oflsrael misinterprets the letter of the king of Aram; Elisha expresses readiness to perform the desired cure, that Naaman might know the power of prophets in Israel; and finally, Elisha's two encounters with the Aramean soldier—the first dealing with magical instructions (to bathe in the Jordan), the second being theological in nature (Naaman's recognition of God's unique power and his desire to worship the God of Israel alone). Altogether, the special powers of the prophet and God unite the narrative. At the outset, the girl mentions the curative powers of the prophet, and after the king of Israel poignantly says that he is not like a god to heal the sick, Elisha (who has heard this report) says that he will show the Aramean who's who and just what a prophet can do. And this he does—with the result that Naaman becomes a faithful servant of the God of Israel. The Aramean commander recognizes that the power of miracles comes from God alone, through the agency ofhis servants. He therefore expresses his gratitude by offering Elisha a gift (2 Kings 5:15). But the man of God once again demonstrates his refusal to profit from his prophetic powers (v. 16). This leads to a poignant reversal, for Naaman then requests some loads of holy earth to build a shrine to G o d i n A r a m (v. 17). 2 HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM122
Two features of popular piety may be singled out. The first is that people sought out holy men for consultation on topics of health or wealth. On such occasions, they would provide gifts in payment and gratitude: this is what Saul does when he visits Samuel to inquire about the lost asses of his father, Kish (1 Sam. 9:3-14); it is what the wife ofjeroboam does when she visits Ahijah of Shiloh concerning her sick child (1 Kings 14:1-4); and this is also what Naaman does here, when he goes to Elisha to be healed of his leprosy. In the last case, a foreigner in fact comes to an Israelite wonderworker—and just this phenomenon is the second feature to be considered. When it came to matters of health and healing, political and religious boundaries were of little concern. People wanted the best and most respected divine aid, and they would go to a recognized shrine or healer as necessary The Israelite king Ahaziah presumably felt the same way; after a bad fall, he sends messengers to consult Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron, about his prognosis. Elijah is furious at this act of betrayal, indicating the king's perfidy in turning to a foreign god for advice when there is a great "God in Israel" (2 Kings 1:2-4). This is precisely Naaman's point to Elisha when he is cured, and it is presumably also one of the key points that the biblical narrator wishes to impress upon readers. The magical recipe that Elisha gives Naaman is straightforward. He is told to dip seven times in the lordan River (2 Kings 5:10). The commander had probably expected something a bit more ceremonious—perhaps a few waves of the hand and the invocation of the God of Israel. But surely the seven ablutions are significant. They recall the prophet Balaam's request for seven altars for seven rams and seven bulls before his oracles (Num. 23:1-6, 29) and also remind us of the seven priests with seven rams' horns who circumambulated lericho seven times on the seventh day (losh. 6:6-8, 15-16). In other cases, the requisite number is three, not seven. Thus Elijah prostrates himself over the child three times before he revives (1 Kings 17:21) and ceremoniously douses the altar and wood three times with pails of water before calling upon God for rain (18: 34); for his part, the prophet leremiah curses King lehoiachin for his evil with an incantation, calling three times upon the "earth" to hear the word of God and banish the king to foreign soil (ler. 22:28-29). Both magical numbers (three and seven) are well-known in the ancient Near East, and beyond. 3 Mentioning the sequence of immersions gives a professional touch to Elisha's proceedings and marks him as one in the know—the heir of an ancient mantic tradition.
COMMENTS 2 Kings 4:42.A man camefrom Baal-shalishah The land of Shalishah is mentioned along with the lands of Shaalim and Zuph, as part of the tribal lands ofBenjamin in the region o f M o u n t Ephraim (1 Sam. 9:4-5). The specific toponym, Baal-shalishah, reflects an older Canaanite habitation, named after the tutelary god of the region. and he bro^ht... bread ofthefirst reaping In antiquity, prophets received votary gifts for their oracular or divinatory services (1 Sam. 9:7; 1 Kings 14:3). Early rabbinic tradition pondered the possibility that Elisha might have eaten of the first reaping (bikkurim) and explained the passage pedagogically: "whoever brings a gift to a disciple of the wise is as one who offers the first reaping" (B. Bikkurim 105b). 4 in"hissack Hebrew be-tziklono. This translation agrees with Gersonides. Alternatively, the corn was still "in its ears" (Targum lonathan, followed by Rashi and Kimhi). 2 Kings 5:l.Naaman... was important to his Lard and high in hisfavor Naaman is identified with various titles ("commander of the army") and honorifics. Of these titles, "important "gadol, can also indicate financial status, as is the case with the "wealthy woman" ishah gedolah) of Shunem in 2 Kings 4:8. The designation "high in favor" renders nesu} fanim (lit., "raised face"). 5 Other variants of this phrase indicate favorable regard (cf. Num. 6:26), 6 and just this idiom is the subject of a pun in Gen. 4:5-6 (God asks Cain why his face has fallen and says that if he does right, there is "uplift"; i. e., if he mends his ways, God will grant favor). The term nesu'panim is included here with the military titles sar tzava} (commander of the army) and gibbor hayil (great warrior). A similar cluster occurs in Isa. 3:2-3. 123
HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
leper Hebrew metzom', which NJPS renders traditionally (the Septuagint translates lepra). The Hebrew tzam'at refers to skin diseases on humans, and molds and fungi on clothes and buildings (Leviticus 13-14). The symptoms mentioned in Leviticus 13 are scales and discolorations, not suppurations or swellings. It is now assumed that tzam'at is some form of acute psoriasis, and not Hansen's disease (the type of leprosy known as lepmAmbum).7 Notably, Naaman's disorder did not brand him an outcast, for he came personally to the courts of the kings of Aram and Israel. Whatever the diagnosis, the narrative echoes features of biblical sources where quarantine and contagion are assumed. Thus in 2 Kings 5:3, 6, and 11, the verb 'asaf (gather) is used to indicate the "cure" of the disease. Moreover, in Num. 12:13-14, the leprous Miriam (punished for her part in the calumny of Moses) is placed in quarantine for seven days until she is "gathered" (NJPS: "readmitted") back to the community—a witty pun on the term 'asaf.\ also used to indicate its "cure." The seven days of quarantine (also mentioned repeatedly in Lev. 13) are echoed by the seven immersions prescribed here by Elisha. In Lev. 14:1-7, the recovered leper is first sprinkled seven times with a liquid solution of holy ingredients, shaves and "bathes" (mhatz), and waits seven more days outside the camp, when he again shaves and bathes and is fully "clean" (ve-taher). The verbs that the narrator uses to indicate bathing and cleansing in 2 Kings 5:10 and 13 are mhatz (ve-mhatzta; reloatz) and u-tehar. The purification rite for leprosy is also used as a metaphor in prayer to indicate inner cleansing and renewal (see Ps. 51:9). 14. So he went down and immersed himself in the Jordan Naaman performs the rites "as the man of God had bidden." A fifth-century (c.E.) tradition preserved on an inscription at Hammat Gader (hot springs in the Yarmuk Valley) links Elijah (not Elisha) with healing the lepers who bathed there. 8 Among other traditions of immersion to cure leprosy, one may note the recipe found in the medieval collection of charms known as The Sword of-Moses (Harba' deMoshe), no. 46. 9 The Midrash Exodus Rabbah (on Exod. 2:23) makes the shocking remark that the Pharaoh bathed in the blood of Israelite children to cure his leprosy. This rabbinic projection may nevertheless preserve contemporary traditions, for the Roman writer Pliny reports that immersion in blood was common in Egypt. 10 Another tradition of Elisha's holy powers were associated with his bones. According to 2 Kings 13:21, a corpse thrown into Elisha's grave was revived when it came in contact with his remains. For later versions of this miracle, see B. Sanhedrin 47a and Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, chapter 33. 18. the temple ofRimmon The god Rimmon (in Akkadian sources, Ramman) is a theophoric element in the name of the Aramean ruler Tabrimmon, mentioned in 1 Kings 15: 18. The name refers to "thunder" and was associated with Hadad, god of thunder, even in late biblical sources (cf. Zech. 12:11, mentioning Hadad-rimmon). 11 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The miraculous healing of leprosy in the haftarah is thematically linked to the diagnoses of leprosy found in the second half of xhepamshah (Leviticus 13). By contrast, the first part of the Torah reading, dealing with postpartum impurities and the prescriptions for their removal (Leviticus 12), finds no echo in our prophetic portion. In the ancient tradition of triennial readings (which divided the seder from 12:1 to 13:17 or 13:28), passages were found to correspond to this topic. For example, an old selection preserved in the Romanian rite recited Isa. 66:7-24. 1 2 In it, the theme of birth and travail marked an eschatological hope for the repopulation of Zion by its exiles.13 The haftarah dealing with Naaman's recovery does provide some eschatological complement to xhepamshah, insofar as it takes the theme of leprosy and dramatizes the conversion of a pagan HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM124
polytheist to Israelite worship. Two phrases (with liturgical overtones) make this clear: the first is recited by Naaman after his cure: "Now I know [yada'ti] that there is no God ['ein }elohim] in the whole world except [ki }im\ in Israel" (2 Kings 5:15); the second records Naaman's determination to serve God alone and his vow that he "will never again [lo}. . . 'od] offer up burnt offering or sacrifice to any god [lit., 'other gods,''elohim aherim], except [ki }im\ the LORD" (v. 17). Significantly, when Moses' father-in-law, lethro, a pagan priest of Midian, converts upon hearing "everything that the L O R D had done to Pharoah and to the Egyptians for Israel's sake," he reportedly says, "Now I know [yada'ti] that the L O R D is greater than all gods ['elohim]" and then "brought a burnt offering and sacrifices for God" (Exod. 18:8-12). 1 4 The correspondence between these passages is striking. Presumably, some pagan conversions in Israelite antiquity merely involved a credal statement along with a commitment to sacrifice to the Lord. These avowals typically included reference to a new knowledge, based on experience, of the supremacy of the God oflsrael. This is also manifest in the liturgical exhortation preserved in Deut. 4:35, when Moses reminds the people that "It has been clearly demonstrated to you [lit., 'You have been shown to know,' la-da'at] that the L O R D alone is God [hu} ha-'elohim]-, there is none beside Him." The people had experienced both the "prodigious acts" of the Exodus and the divine voice "speaking out of fire" at Sinai (Deut. 4:33-34). Naaman senses that it may prove difficult to maintain his exclusive allegiance to God during his official duties, when he must serve his king and help him bend in worship in pagan shrines (2 Kings 5:18). Elisha does not directly answer this concern but simply says, "Go in peace" (lekh le-shalom). The parting blessing is inconclusive and may be judged positive only by innuendo (Gersonides). Rabbinic tradition saw here a concession of sorts—an adjustment of the rules against idolatry, given Naaman's professional constraints; his intention not to serve the pagan gods; and the fact that any compromising actions would be done in private, and not in the presence of fellow monotheists (B. Sanhedrin 74b-75a).
Haftarah for Metzora' y-ilXB ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
2KINGS7:3-20 2 KINGS 7:3-20
Haftarah for Tazria'-Metzora' ym^tt-yn'm ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
2KINGS7:3-20 2 KINGS 7:3-20
For the contents of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its historiography, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For discussions of other haftarah selections taken from the work, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah is part of a cycle of legends and prophecies related to Elisha and the wars against Aram. 1 In particular, it constitutes the final section of 2 Kings 6:24-7:20, when "King Ben-hadad of Aram mustered his entire army and marched upon Samaria and besieged it" (6:24). Scholars have debated just which of three possible Ben-hadads is indicated here. 2 Since Israel under King Ahab was in fact an ally of Ben-hadad II in his resistance to the attacks of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (beginning in 853 B.C.E.),3 it is most plausible that the Aramean king referred to in our text is Ben-hadad III. He was the successor of Hazael (2 Kings 8:15; 13:3) and strong enough at the end of the ninth century B.C.E. to wage a brutal siege on Samaria against lehu. The problem with this solution is that our narrative is part of the block of Elisha traditions set after the accession of lehoram (2 Kings 3:1-3), the father of lehu and son of Ahab. In his day (851-842 B.C.E.), Israel was not in a weak condition, 4 and it is in fact quite likely that lehoram 125
HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIM O T - K E D O S H I M
(like his father before) remained an ally of Ben-hadad II against Assyria.5 One may therefore assume that the biblical historian mistook the name Ben-hadad when he incorporated it, together with a Samarian siege report, into the present prophetic narrative about the prophet Elisha. Whatever the chronological facts, the siege is described in brutal terms. Famine and cannibalism are rampant, and the price of food is out of control: "a donkey's head sold for eighty [shekels] of silver and a quarter of a kab of [carob pods] for five shekels" (2 Kings 6:25). The king is utterly helpless and angrily sends his messenger to Elisha (w. 26-33). The prophet replies that by "this time tomorrow" all would change: "a seah of choice flour shall sell for a shekel at the gate of Samaria, and two seahs of barley for a shekel" (7:1). The royal aide scoffs at this prediction of plenty, and in response Elisha swears that he will die before partaking of it (v. 2). Following this encounter, the haftarah begins. PART 1. SIEGE AND STARVATION (2 Kings 7:3-10) a. 2 Kings 7:3-7 Four starving lepers outside the walls of Samaria decide to defect to the Aramean camp, come what may. But they find the camp deserted. "For the Lord had caused the Aramean camp to hear a sound of chariots, a sound of horses" (v. 6) and the Arameans fled in terror. b. 2 Kings 7:8-10 The lepers raid the camp, plundering and burying treasure. "Then they said to one another, 'We are not doing right,'" and they decide to report the "good news" of the Aramean rout to the palace (v. 9). PART 2. SALVATION AND FULFILLMENT (2 Kings 7:11-20) a. 2 Kings 7:11-16 The gatekeepers pass the report to the king, but he is wary of an Aramean trap designed to draw the Israelites out of their stronghold. He nevertheless allows a small contingent to go out and assess the situation, and the group confirms the lepers' account. Soon the whole population swarms out to plunder food and booty. With such choice pickings, "a seah of choice flour sold for a shekel, and two seahs, of barley for a shekel—as the L O R D had spoken" (v. 16). b. 2 Kings 7:17-20 The narrative ends with the remark that the aide who scoffed at Elisha's prediction of the change in prices (7:1-2) did indeed die and "not eat" of the new food (v. 19) —"just as the man of God had spoken" (v. 17). C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The conclusion to the haftarah (2 Kings 7:16 + 17-20) indicates that a main purpose of the narrative was to demonstrate the power of prophecy. In the present setting, however, the conclusions "as the L O R D had spoken" and "just as the man of God had spoken" hang in the air, since they are without their predictive antecedents in 2 Kings 7:1-2. Also lost is the symmetry of the whole narrative: prediction—action—fulfillment. Nevertheless, the form of the haftarah has its own literary drama. It begins in the midst of a crisis (famine and siege) and ends with its termination (food and the opening of the gates). In this setting, the fulfillment formulas ("as"; "just as") point to prophetic forces secretly at work. They suggest that the external course of events is more than it seems: hidden within is the realization of divine predictions. History is thus presented as the fulfillment of God's will, as announced by His prophets. The dynamics of the haftarah moves along two axes: spatial and physical. The spatial axis is signaled at the beginning by the lepers' position "outside the gate [sha'ar]" of Samaria (2 Kings 7:3). Their marginal status marks the boundary of the siege and the tension between the hunger within the city walls and the provisions of the Aramean camp in the field. At the same time, the lepers are physically betwixt and between: ritually contaminated, their dichotomous status concretizes the poles of the narrative as a whole. They belong at once to the city and the field; to the starving (native) Israelites within and to the (alien) world beyond the walls. The lepers choose between death and life—and defect. In so doing, they move the action to the Aramean camp. HAFTARAH FOR A ' HAREI M O T - K E D O S H I M 126
Among the empty tents of the enemy, the lepers find food and wealth; they "ate and drank . . . carried off silver and gold . . . and buried it" (2 Kings 7:8). This they do repeatedly. The turning point of the narrative is the lepers' recognition that they "are not doing right [ken]" (v. 9). They thus return to the city and give word of the Aramean flight. At first, only a few of the king's men follow the lepers out to the camp; but with their return confirming the report, the whole population streams out of Samaria to fill their stomachs. With that, the spatial boundaries are opened and the physical crisis resolved. Elisha's forecast concerning the low price of "barley [secorah]n in the "gate [sha'ar]" of Samaria is gradually fulfilled (v. 18). In the end, food is in the gates—not the lepers; and the scoffing aide-de-camp is punished, "exactly [ken]" (v. 20) as the prophet had predicted. The movement back and forth between the city and the camp gives the illusion of an extended time frame. This sense is reinforced by the variety of tableaux that compose the account (the repeated plundering by the lepers; the deputation of messengers sent out to reconnoiter the scene and report their findings; and the stampede of the people to the enemy camp). But the original situation had been grave, and Elisha's prophecy was meant to assuage the people's fears. To that end, he began his economic prediction with the words "This time tomorrow" (2 Kings 7:1). We must therefore assume that the time narrated in 7:3-20 covers one day only. The many comings and goings are thus intended to dramatize the successive stages of the events. It is intriguing that the fulfillment of the divine oracle begins with the defection of the four lepers at the gate. As noted, they dramatize the polarities and precariousness of the overall situation. Moreover, it is precisely their social and ritual marginality that puts them beyond the walls and in a position to flee to the Aramean camp. As aliens among the aliens, they bring "good news" back to the city once they overcome their private desires and think of their starving compatriots in Samaria ("We are not doing right. This is a day of good news, and we are keeping silent!" [2 Kings 7:9]). At the core of the spatial and physical reversal, therefore, is a moral turning. When the lepers break their silence, the word of the prophet nears fulfillment. C O M M E N T S
2 Kings 7:3. There werefour men Rabbinic tradition has identified them with Gehazi (Elisha's servant) and his three sons (Rashi; Kimhi). lepers, outside thegate NIPS renders metzom'im traditionally, as "lepers." Medical analysis indicates that the disease is not modern leprosy (Hansen's disease) but some acute scaling or psoriasis. The general term "scale disease" is suggested. 6 Persons diagnosed with active symptoms are segregated from society (Lev. 13:4-5); those then judged unclean must rend their garments, unloose their hair, cover their lip, and call out, "Unclean! Unclean!" Such a one "shall dwell apart. . . outside the camp" so long as the disease lasts (Lev. 13:45-46). 4. Come, let us desert to theAramean camp Hebrew nippelah }el indicates "desert to" an enemy. For the idiom, see also 1 Sam. 29:3; 2 Kings 25:11; andler. 21:9, 37:14, 38:19. 6. the kings ofMizraim NIPS refers to 1 Kings 10:28 and the notcg there states that Mizraim is "usually Egypt, [but] here perhaps Musru, a neighbor of Rue (Cilicia)" in north Syria. This follows an old suggestion. 7 "But this view is untenable. The historical map of the ninth and eighth centuries B.C.E. does not allow positing an independent country by such a name in north Syria or Anatolia. The northern, trans-Tigris Musri, adjacent to Assyria, was conquered for the last time and annexed by Ashur-dan II in the late tenth century. After that, all Akkadian references to Musri are to Egypt; so, too, Mitzmyim in the Hebrew Bible."8 9. are not doing right Hebrew lo} khen 'anahnu 'osim. This translation follows the Targum (also Kimhi and Gersonides). Compare loseph's remark to lacob in Gen. 48:18. 18. two seahs of barley This citation of the prophecy from 2 Kings 7:1 (repeated in v. 16) inverts the sequence of the specified items (originally flour, then barley; here the reverse). Such reversals are often employed in inner-biblical citations. 9 127
HAFTARAH FORA ' HAREIM O T - K E D O S H I M
C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D
PARASHAH
The formal connection between the passages hinges on the term metzom'. This is the rabbinic title of xhepamshah and refers to a "leper" (Lev. 14:2; NJPS), who has "a leprous affection" (tzara'at) on his skin (Lev. 13:45) and must "dwell apart. . . outside the camp" (v. 46) until he is permitted to undergo the ritual of cleansing. Whereas the portion of Tazria' (Leviticus 12-13) includes the detailed diagnostics of the disease (Leviticus 13), that of Metzora' (Leviticus 14-15) focuses on the rites of human purification (14:1-32) and includes an appendix on diagnosing and purging the infection in buildings (w. 33-57). When the two portions are combined or Metzora' is read alone, the haftarah recited is 2 Kings 7:3-20. The disease of tza-m'a-t, and a historical example of ritual-social segregation, link the passages. Various biblical passages indicate a belief that tzara'at was inflicted by God for untoward behavior (Num. 12:9; 2 Kings 5:27; 2 Chron. 26:18-21). In particular, Miriam is punished for slandering her brother Moses (Num. 12:9) —and this case became the core for various rabbinic lists warning of dire consequences for moral or ritual sins (Midrash Leviticus Rabbah 17:3; 18: 4; and B. Arakhin 16a). Many old sermons turn on a pun between the word metzora' and the rabbinic term for slander or vilification—wotez^ (shem) m' (see Leviticus Rabbah 15-16). In fact, the homiletical relationship between tzara'at and sin explains the recitation oflsa. 57:17-19 as a haftarah in many old Palestinian rites. And the relationship between sin and physical affliction also accounts for the use of many other passages (like Eccles. 5:5) in classical rabbinic sermons for the Torah portions ofTazria' and Metzora'. 10 N o similar teaching was used explicitly to correlate 2 Kings 7:3-20 and the portion of Metzora'. Nevertheless, a trace may be detected in a sermon for xh&tpamshah preserved in the Midrash Tanhuma. 11 We learn that Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, is one of four commoners afflicted with leprosy for improper speech (2 Kings 5:20, 27). 12 Since 2 Kings 7:3 speaks of four lepers at the gate, it may be that this homily conceals an old tradition that linked the leprous Gehazi (and three others) to the scene at Samaria. This assumption is reinforced by a tradition in the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 107b) that states that Gehazi's leprosy was inherited by his children and that he and his three sons are the four lepers mentioned in our haftarah. 13 This rabbinic tradition reinforces the earlier observation that the lepers' decision to speak correctly about the condition in the field is a turning point of the narrative. Honest speech thus serves as a symbol of communal well-being.
Haftarah for Aharei M o t ma nntf ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL22:1-19 EZEKIEL 22:1-16
For the haftarah for Aharei Mot-Kedoshim for Ashkenazim, see next haftarah. For the haftarah for Aharei Mot-Kedoshim for Sephardim, see later. For a discussion of Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah contains an address by Ezekiel to the city Jerusalem, which he arraigns for "all her abhorrent deeds" (Ezek. 22:2). These sins are grouped in several clusters and emphasize moral and sexual crimes in the family and society, with special emphasis on the oppression of socially dependent and powerless persons. The prophet also charges the city with desecrating the Sabbaths and sacral offices. For Ezekiel, the city symbolizes the outrages of the population as a whole, and the arraignment constitutes a comprehensive judgment. It dates from sometime HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM128
between Ezekiel's deportation to Babylon in 597 B.C.E. and the year 586 B.C.E., when the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and the general population was exiled to Babylon. Though spoken from exile, there is no indication that the prophet was ecstatically transported to Jerusalem in order to envision its crimes—as was reported for his depiction of the paganizing rituals performed in the Temple (see Ezek. 8:3; dated to 591 B.C.E.). Moreover, Ezekiel does not refer to cultic outrages here but restricts his rebukes to civil and sacral crimes (22:1-16). A final oracle offers hope and homecoming after the disaster (w. 17-19). PART 1. ARRAIGNMENT, OUTRAGE, AND D O O M (Ezekiel 22:1-16) a. Ezekiel 22:1-5 The speech opens with God's address to the prophet to condemn the city for its crimes. Ezekiel speaks generally of the "bloodshed" (damim [v. 2]) and (cultic) "fetishes" (gillulim [v. 3]) of the people. These terms underscore the moral-civil and ritual-sacral sins of the people. The opening condemnation is then repeated (v. 4a) and followed by an oracle of judgment (w. 4b-5). b. Ezekiel 22:6-12 The prophet launches into a specification of Jerusalem's sins. The list includes diverse forms of social humiliation and economic oppression (w. 6-7, 9,12), ritual disregard and profanation (w. 8-9), and an enumeration of forbidden sexual relations (w. 10-11). c. Ezekiel 22:13-16 This unit shifts to an announcement of divine judgment (v. 13). God will smite the people for "ill-gotten gains" (betza-' [v. 13]) and for the "bloodshed" (dam [v. 13]) that they have caused. He will furthermore disperse the nation among the lands and thereby cleanse them of their impurity ("uncleanness" tum'ah [v. 15; cf. w. 3-5, l l ] ) . 1 PART 2. FINAL CONSOLATION (Ezekiel 22:17-19) A divine word that compares the House oflsrael to dross—an assortment of metals that shall be refined into silver through a crucible. lerusalem is the implied crucible, and the people will be gathered into the city for their transformation. CONTENT AND MEANING Ezekiel's speech has the character of an arraignment or judgment (ha-tishpot) that specifies (hoda') to the people their various crimes (Ezek. 22:2). Such terminology is forensic in nature, so that the prophet functions as the prosecutor of God's charge against the nation. The vocabulary is also found in priestly sources when a person is informed of his sins (hodac [Lev. 4:23, 28]). As a priest, Ezekiel would be prone to such terminology, and he in fact uses these terms elsewhere to indicate the priest's dual involvement in ritual and civil matters: They [the priests] shall declare to My people what is sacred and what is profane, and inform them [yodi'um] what is clean and what is unclean. In lawsuits, too, it is they who shall act as judges [le-mishpat]; they shall decide them in accordance with My rules \be-mishpataiyishpetuhu\. (Ezek. 44:23-24). As God's prosecutor, Ezekiel informs the people of crimes specified in the Torah. These rules are found in the Covenant Code (Exodus 21-23) and the Holiness Code (Leviticus 17-26) especially; but one can also detect various portions of the laws of Deuteronomy. The prophet's speech thus provides an unexpected witness to formulations of the Pentateuchal laws from the early sixth century B.C.E. — long before Ezra's return from the exile and the canonization of the Torah literature (fifth century B.C.E.). Ezekiel's diatribe also gives us some sense as to how the ancient Torah was used in legal and public forums. It thus complements leremiah's slightly earlier arraignment of the ludeans in his Temple sermon (ler. 7:1-15; dated to 609 B.C.E., according to ler. 26:1). On that occasion, the prophet accused the people of social oppression and other crimes in language derived both from the covenantal law collections and the Decalogue itself (ler. 7:7-9). The repetition of the crimes in connection with God's punishment presents divine justice as "measure for measure." The nation is informed of its sins ("declare to her;" ve-hoda'tah [Ezek. 22:2]) and will come to "know" (ve-yada'at [v. 16]) the judgment of God. This repetition of the verb yada' (to know) at the beginning and end of the discourse emphasizes God's providential concern to punish infidelity. 129
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
The detailed list of crimes draws from the legal collections in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. For example, the language of parental disobedience and oppression of the widow and orphan in Ezek. 22:7 echoes Deut. 27:16 and Exod. 22:10-11, respectively; and the references to slander, bribery, and crimes of interest in Ezek. 22:9 and 12 recall the legal formulations in Lev. 19:16, Deut. 27:25, and Lev. 25:36, respectively. His condemnation of contempt for the Sabbath and the holy offerings in Ezek. 22:8 alludes to Lev. 19:3 and 30, and references to relations with women in their menstrual period in Ezek. 22:10-11 are drawn from rules found in Lev. 18:7, 12 and20:10, 17-18. There was undoubtedly some basis to these accusations, but their comprehensive and schematic character should also be taken into account when assessing the overall religious-moral state of the nation. Given the stylized character of the arraignment, all that can be asserted with certainty is the content stressed by the prophet. In this regard, we may observe that Ezekiel does not limit his critique to issues of ritual impurity, but also condemns immoral and inconsiderate uses of power. This says a great deal about his religious consciousness and ideals. Later rabbinic tradition was equally impressed. According to Rabbi Jacob ben Aha, Rabbi Yohanan (a third-century Amora in Israel) said: "Ezekiel arranged [a list of] twenty-four sins, and of them all singled out robbery' for the conclusion; [as we read in Scripture], "Lo, I will strike My hands over the ill-gotten gains that you have amassed, and over the bloodshed that has been committed in your midst [Ezek. 22:13]" (Leviticus Rabbah 33:3). 2 For such actions, the people are condemned to exile, where their suffering and "dishonor" will "consume the uncleanness" from them (Ezek. 22:15-16). The polluting effect of idolatry and sexual misconduct recurs in Ezekiel (see 5:11; 20:7, 18, 31), and the prophet's inclusion of moral and civil behaviors in his judgment of impurity is also found in priestly sources (Num. 35:33-34). 3 Equally noteworthy is Ezekiel's view of exilic punishment as a purification through suffering. On this note of judgment the haftarah concludes, according to Sephardic tradition. Ashkenazic tradition adds three more verses in order to conclude with a message of hope. In this message, the prophet promises that the base metal of Israel shall be transformed in God's crucible and gathered to Jerusalem (Ezek. 22:17-19). This prophecy extends the imagery of purification found in verse 15 and offers the good news of restoration to the homeland. The result is a radical transformation of Scripture by the Sages. Read on its own terms, Ezek. 22: 17-22 is an oracle of doom, in which God condemns Israel as dross and announces that He will gather them together in Jerusalem and "melt" them in the "fire" of His "fury." Nothing hopeful is implied (for the trope, see Comments, v. 18). Accordingly, in order to use this condemnation as the positive conclusion to the haftarah, the Sages truncated Ezekiel's prophecy of doom at verse 19. The editorial result gives the impression that God will transform the sinful dross of His people in exile and then gather them back to Jerusalem in their purified state. In this way, rabbinic tradition has transformed God's original word of doom into a new prophecy of hope. C O M M E N T S
Ezekiel 22:2. arraign, arraign Literally, the interrogative "will you arraign?"4 In Ezek. 20:4, as here, the verb is repeated at the beginning of a prophetic speech. The rhetorical nature of the question asked by God gives it emphatic force (i. e., "will you arraign?" has the force of "surely you will arraign!"). For the forensic structure of arraignment and declaration, see also 20:4 (cf. 16:2 and 23:36). 5 city of bloodshed A recurrent image. See Ezek. 7:23; 9:9; 24:6, 9 (cf. also 22:4, 6, 9, 13). Because of its plunder and rapaciousness, the Assyrian city of Nineveh was also called a "city of bloodshed" (Nah. 3:1; NJPS: "city of crime"). On the basis of the elaboration in Ezek. 22:6, 9, and 27, the concern is with "judicial murder" where the deaths are the result of the evil use of legal power. 6 3. so that your hour is approaching Literally, "so that her time is approaching;" imminently (R. Eliezer of Beaugency).7 The evils bring about divine doom (cf. Rashi). Alternatively, the HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM130
prophet announces that the time for judgment has come. 8 The structure of the verse is apparently a parallelism, with the continuity referring to the other actions that bring about impurity. fetishes Meaning idols; Hebrewgittulim. On the basis of the context, Abravanel suggests that this is a metaphor for "all the other sins" besides bloodshed that the people have done. 9 become unclean Ezekiel's priestly orientation transforms Israels civil-legal crimes into ritual, polluting ones (cf. w. 3-5, 10, 15). In this, he was particularly indebted to older priestly traditions that treated illicit consanguinity (cf. Lev. 18:19-20, 24-25). Ezekiel includes bloodshed and economic oppression in his list. This is a recurrent feature of his language and sensibility (cf. Ezek. 20:23; 24:11-13; 36:22-32). The theological emphasis is that immorality is also a pollution, and the land must be purged by expelling the perpetrators. 10 5. O besmirched of name Alternatively, this phrase is the derogatory epithet spoken against them by the surrounding gentiles (Rashi). 7. Fathers and -mothers have been humiliated This reflects the Masoretic punctuation heikallu (hif'il of k-l-l). It is a variant of the formulation in Deut. 27:16 (makleh; hif'il of k-l-h). For cursing (pi'el of k-l-l), see Exod. 21:17 and Lev. 20:9. have been cheated and 23:29.
Hebrew ba-'oshek. For this syntactic form, see verse 12; also 8:18
9. upon the mountains
That is, in idolatry [Transl.].
10-11. The prophet details various sexual offenses (incest, adultery, and cohabitation with a woman in her menses). In terms of technical vocabulary and person (third), this legal cluster follows Lev. 20:10-18. Further indication that Ezekiel was drawn to this list is the fact that he omits the offenses mentioned in Lev. 20:19-20. As these are not incest prohibitions and differ in gender and number from the other prohibitions, it is possible that they are later additions to Leviticus 20 and that Ezekiel borrowed from the list in an earlier form. 1 1 10."haveuncovered theirfathers' nakedness of the father; compare Lev. 18:7-8 [Transl.].
That is, have cohabited with a former wife
12. advance and accrued interest That is, interest deducted in advance and interest added at the time of repayment; compare Lev. 25:36 [Transl.]. the LORD have spoken and I ivill act Promise andfulfillment are linked. Alternatively, "I am YHWH; what I have spoken I will do!" 12 On this reading, the first part of the verse is Ezekiel's common formula " I am the L O R D " ; the second is an attribute of reliability (see also 1 7 : 2 4 ) . 1 3 14.1
16. Tou shall be dishonored Hebrew ve-nihalt bakh. The prophet uses a word linked to ritual desecration (see v. 8; and Lev. 18:21; 19:8). In the present form, the verbis best construed as a nif'al (of h-l-l) with a reflexive sense (cf. R. Eliezer of Beaugency). By contrast, the Septuagint and R. David Kimhi construed the verb as api'el (of nahal), conveying the sense that the nation will "inherit" its punishment. Since the predicted shame is exile, this verb is ironic, suggesting the nuance of an inheritance of doom. The pun may be deliberate. 18. the House oflsrael has become dross This is a negative image and used to convey a sense of refinement in prophetic rebukes; compare Isa. 1:22, 25 and Jer. 6:28-30. The meaning of sig (dross) is unclear and possibly refers to some alloy oflead and silver.14 In this metallurgical trope, the people who are dross will be refined in fire as a punishment. In reality, dross is the process of liquefaction of the metals. For Ezekiel, the melting fire is both a proving of Israel's guilt and their punishment. 15 C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E H A F T A R A H A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah stresses cultic and moral sins. Many are connected with Torah laws found in Aharei Mot. On the one hand, there is a clear link to the sexual prohibitions found in Leviticus 18 and 131
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
20. Note, for example, the prohibitions of consanguinity (incest with father, sister, daughterin-law; cf. Lev. 18:7, 9, 15; 20:10, 12, 17; and Ezek. 22:10f.); of intercourse with women in their menses (cf. Lev. 18:19; 20:18; and Ezek. 22:10); and ofadultery (cf. Lev. 18:20; 20:10; and Ezek. 22:11). 16 The prophet's diatribe also includes materials found in Leviticus 19. This includes the profanation of the Sabbath (cf. Lev. 19:3 and Ezek. 22:8), the economic oppression of compatriots (cf. Lev. 19:13 and Ezek. 22:12), and base activities leading to bloodshed (cf. Lev. 19:16 and Ezek 22:9). Ezekiel was thus inspired by the laws of the Torah and utilized them in his prophetic discourse (for Leviticus 20, see Comments). The correlation between the prophetic discourse and the Torah proscriptions underscores the legal-theological consequences for disobedience. It establishes a structure of accountability in all areas of life—sexuality and the family; morality and the community; sacred days and acts of worship. In all these areas one may enact the covenant, which the Torah calls a way of life (Lev. 18:4-5). By stressing the point that covenantal behavior is something one lives by [ye-hay ba-hem [Lev. 18:5]), theparashah raises Torah living into a spiritual principle. By contrast, by emphasizing that maltreatment of the poor and needy is an act of bloodshed, the haftarah turns immorality into an abasement of life. And by speaking of sin as an act of defilement, the haftarah and pamshah understand the covenant to be a means of sanctification. In this way, all covenantal actions perform a priestly service, transforming the quality of the natural and social world.
Haftarah for Kedoshim D ^ l p ASHKENAZIM
AMOS 9:7-15
Haftarah for 'Aharei Mot-Kedoshim D ^ p - n i a nntf ASHKENAZIM
AMOS 9:7-15
For the haftarah for Kedoshim for Sephardim, see next haftarah. For the haftarah for 'Aharei Mot-Kedoshim for Sephardim, see next haftarah. For Amos's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Amos" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments on the other haftarah reading taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The prophet Amos is among the earliest of the classical prophets, appearing during the reign of King leroboam II oflsrael (784-748 B.C.E.) and King Uzziah of ludah (769-733 B.C.E.). Speaking against ludah and especially the northern kingdom of Israel, Amos upbraids the people for cultic sins and moral insensitivity. His words are all doom and dire prediction—save for the concluding lines, which constitute the final part of this haftarah. Opening with a judgment speech against sinful nations, his people included, Amos then promises hope and restoration to Israel and ludah in days to come. PART 1. DOOM FOR SIN (Amos 9:7-8a) The prophet proclaims that the Israelites are no different from other nations rescued by God and will suffer a similar fate: the Lord will destroy all sinful peoples from the face of the earth. PART 2. ISRAELS SPECIAL FATE (Amos 9:8b-10) However, God will not wipe out Israel entirely. Only those who boast that "the evil" doom shall not affect them shall be destroyed; the remainder shall be scattered in exile. The judgment is thus two-tiered. HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
132
PART 3. HOPE AND RESTORATION (Amos 9:11-15) a. Amos 9:11-12 The prophet declares God's restoration of the Davidic kingdom (ludah) and anticipates a renewal of its bygone hegemony over its neighbors. b. Amos 9:13-15 The northern kingdom (Israel) is promised fertility and restoration in their ancient homeland, forevermore. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
In a striking reversal, Amos's final words counterpoint his opening speech. Addressing the nation years before, the prophet spoke God's word "concerning the whole family that I [God] brought up from the land of Egypt: You alone have I singled out of all the families of the earth—that is why I will call you to account for all your iniquities" (Amos 3:1-2). This specialness is now revised, as God tells the people that He will judge their sins because they are no different from other nations (like the Philistines and Arameans) whom He has delivered to their homeland. "True, I brought Israel up from the land ofEgypt"; but this will not save them from judgment (9:7-8a). These remarks were designed to unsettle the listener and undermine any false sense of trust. 1 For Amos, historical redemption is not the basis for the divine election of Israel—or for its survival.2 Accordingly, the formulation in our haftarah does not contradict the prophet's teachings elsewhere. In fact, even in Amos 3:1-2 the Exodus is not presented as the reason for Israel's special status. This unique condition is rather presented as an aspect of divine decision—much like God's determination to save a remnant oflsrael in 9:8b. In both cases, God's will and grace are the key factors determining national destiny. Israel thus remains accountable to the covenant. Obedience and the acceptance of divine judgment is in the hands of the people; all else depends upon God. God's decision to save a remnant of the northern nation and to scatter them in exile is presented as an expression of divine kindness—wholly without justification; 3 for the sins of the people should have led to their utter doom. This act of grace is presented through the image of a sieve that scatters some particles while catching others in the grating. The strewn elements are apparently the people who are saved, in contradistinction to the sinners, who remain in the instrument and do not escape its mesh (Amos 9:8b-9). 4 From the standpoint of Amos's rhetoric, the survivors are those who do not deny divine judgment—or do not deserve acquittal for any other reason (cf. v. 10). For later readers the prophet's pronouncement seems to forecast the dispersion of the northern tribes, 5 an event that still lay in the future (722 B . C . E . ) . More perplexing is the prediction that God "will set up again the fallen booth ofDavid" (Amos 9:11). The obscurity of this image and the ensuing references to widespread ruins have long puzzled interpreters, not least because the destruction of the Temple and of ludah lay nearly two centuries ahead (586 B.C.E.).6 At any rate, readers of these words are promised a restoration of the Davidic era—when expansion was at a height and national unity a reality.7 The dooms forecast against ludah shall therefore be wholly assuaged by a renewal of the "days of old" (cf. Amos 2:4-5 and 9:11). In those times ludah dominated Edom, and so it will again. The restoration oflsrael is the fitting complement to these hopes. Here, too, ancient dooms shall be reversed—now through a miraculous regeneration of life (cf. Amos 2: 6 - 1 6 and 9:13-15). The cycle of nature will be so bountiful as to overlap itself repeatedly; scarcely will the older harvests be gathered when the times for new planting shall begin. In a dramatic image, Amos speaks of the planters planted in the earth, nevermore to be uprooted from their homeland. As a sign of this new era, Israel shall again be called "My people" (v. 14). 133
HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
C O M M E N T S
Amos 9:7. To Me, O Israelites Grammatically, this assertion is a question: "Are ye not [ha-lo*] as the children of the Ethiopians unto Me, O children oflsrael?" (OJPS). The interrogative particle loa-lo} introduces a type of disputation form in which a certain reality or expectation is contradicted or a certain difference is leveled. Compare Amos 5:20; Isa. 10:9; and Mai. 2:10. The precise intent of the comparison is not given and presumes a perception of otherness—now denied. Caphtor This toponym is most likely to be identified with Crete (cf. Jen 47:4, where the Philistines are identified with this place).9 Cappodocia and Cyprus have also been proposed. Kir In Amos 1:5, the people will be exiled back to Kir. Compare 2 Kings 16:9, which reports that the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III deported the inhabitants of Damascus to Kir (ca. 734 B.C.E.). The toponym is unattested in other Near Eastern sources. Isaiah 22:6 is too opaque to allow for topographic conclusions. 8. the Lord GOD has His eye Literally, "the eyes of the Lord GOD" (OJPS). The "eyes" dramatize the investigative character of divine justice. Compare Zech. 4:10. The image apparently derives from the older Near Eastern identification of royal investigators with the eyes of the king. This political image is theologized in the Bible.10 But Hebrew 'efes ki is a reservation clause. Alternatively, "however."11 See in Num. 13: 27-28 and 2 Sam. 12:13-14. 9. sieve Hebrew kevamh. This word only occurs here in the Bible; the exact type of mesh is unknown. The text seems to suggest a coarse sieve, used to strain straw and stones (NJPS note); 12 Ibn Ezra and Kimhi assume it to be a fine mesh. For the image, compare Ben Sira 27: 4, "In the shaking of a sieve the refuse remains."13 10. "Nevershall the evil..." A quote exemplifying the boastful disdain of the people. NJPS understands "evil" (ra'ah) as the subject of the clause, thus taking the Hebrew verbs taggish (overtake) and ve-takdim (come near) as third-person singular feminine. This follows the view of Targum Jonathan and Rashi. Nevertheless, the verbs are difficult and unusual; tiggash and ve-tekaddem are expected.14 Alternatively, the verbs may be construed as second-person singular masculine. This would yield the more arrogant assertion, "Never shall you [God] allow the evil to overtake us or come near us." 15 11.1 will set up again "Again" is interpretative and not represented in the Hebrew text. Alternatively, "In that day will I raise up" (OJPS). booth This image is unclear. Some have interpreted the metaphor in terms of the fallen state of the Davidic (united) monarchy (Rashi; Kimhi). 16 The subsequent reference to ruins makes this understanding difficult. Many moderns assume a postexilic addition; this view cannot be overlooked. 12. the rest of Edom The "rest" (she'erit) refers to the remnant of a nation. For this expression elsewhere in Amos, see 1:8 and 5:15 (referring to the Philistines and Joseph, respectively). The historical allusion is vague. Most broadly, it anticipates the restoration of the Davidic empire to its ancient glory. Some commentators explain the passage as a specific hope for the restoration of that part of Edom (the port of Elath) that was part of the Judean kingdom under Uzziah (2 Kings 14: 22), but subsequently lost by Ahaz (2 Kings 16:6). 17 If so, the oracle would be part of a later prophecy on behalf of a restored Davidic dominion. Others, presuming a postexilic situation (see previous verse), regard this prophecy as an expression of the later hope that a hated participant in Judah's destruction would be vanquished (cf. Ps. 137:7; Obadiah 9-21). 18 HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
134
once attached to .My name Hebrew asher nikm} shemi 'aleihem-, literally, "upon whom My name is called" (OJPS). This idiom signifies ownership. See Deut. 28:10; 2 Sam. 12:28; andjer. 7:10. 19 13. the plowman shall meet the reaper Compare Lev. 26:5 [Transl.]. This and the subsequent image of the "treader of grapes" dramatize the physical bounty anticipated. The produce will be so munificent as to extend into the ensuing planting season (Rashi; Kimhi). 20 The prophecy draws on ancient oracles of plenty. Compare the Mesopotamian forecast that "the winter vegetation will last until the summer vegetation; the summer vegetation will last until the winter vegetation." 21 14.1 will restore Hebrew shuv shevut. The idiom is common and even attested in Aramaic sources of the same time period (Sefire 3:24-25). 22 See also Deut. 30:3 and Jer. 29:14. Variations include shuv shevit (Ezek. 16:53) and le-hashiv shevut (Jer. 32:44). 23 It conveys the sense of reversing fortunes, not the return of those in exilic captivity. I. e., "I will restore [the fortunes of] My people Israel." They shall •rebuild The prophet includes images of rebuilding cities, planting vineyards, and tilling gardens. This triad is also found in ler. 29:5. Shorter variants occur in Isa. 65:21 and Ezek. 28:26. 15. Iwillplant them Like a firmly rooted tree, not to be moved. Compare Ibn Ezra and Kimhi. This image renews the settlement theme of Exod. 1 5 : 1 7 , "You[, O L O R D , ] will bring them and plant them in Your own mountain." Nevermore to be -uprooted The expression lo}... 'od (nevermore) is an assertive feature of many prophecies of renewal. Compare Isa. 60:18-20; ler. 31:12; Ezek. 36:30; Hos. 2:18-19; loel 4:17; Mic. 4:3; Zeph. 3:15; and Zech. 14:21. The rhetoric removes all doubt concerning the permanence of the envisioned future. C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The pamshah and haftarah present a dramatic contrast, inviting a reconsideration of the election of Israel. In bold terms, the Torah lesson issues a challenging proclamation to the nation: "You shall be holy to Me, for I the L O R D am holy, and I have set you apart from other peoples to be Mine [li-hyot /z]" (Lev. 20:26). Two distinct features are mentioned: the people are chosen unilaterally to be God's special people, and they are also set apart from other nations. But this election is not without conditions. As the context makes clear, Israel may only realize its special status through faithful observance of the covenant. In this sense, the nation's actualization of sanctity is a realization of its divine destiny. The haftarah stands in contrast to this teaching; for in the divine assertion that Israel is "to Me [/z] . . . just like the Ethiopians" (Amos 9:7), there is a denial of special election and any unique destiny awaiting fulfillment. Israel is a nation among the nations, and its particular history has parallels among its neighbors. Nevertheless, this neutralization of chosenness does not deny national memory or the path of piety that is distinctively Israel's. It only means that Israel may not rely upon divine grace in the past as a guarantee of mercy in the present. The triumphal assertions of difference (such as found in theparashah) must therefore be transformed into a more challenging awareness of national-religious distinction. Kept apart, the parashah and haftarah cancel each other's teaching about election; brought together, they offer the possibility of a more nuanced theology of chosenness.
Haftarah for Kedoshim D ^ l p SEPHARDIM
135
EZEKIEL 20:2-20
HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
Haftarah for 'Aharei Mot-Kedoshim •"WIp-niB nntf SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 20:2-20
For the haftarah for Kedoshim for Ashkenazim, see previous haftarah. For the haftarah for 'Aharei Mot-Kedoshim for Ashkenazim, see previous haftarah. For a discussion of Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments on the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). Ezekiel 20:2-20 is part of a sermonic retrospective on Israel's sinful past (w. 2-29) and present (w. 30-32), which concludes with prophecies of national restoration and the renewal of proper worship (w. 33-44). In all, five periods are distinguished: (1) the sojourn in Egypt (w. 5-10); (2) the first wilderness generation (w. 11-17); (3) the second wilderness generation (w. 18-26); (4) settlement in the Land (w. 27-29); and (5) the exilic present and the future hope (w. 30-44). 1 These historical frames are presented symmetrically and schematically: units 1 - 3 focus on divine instructions, Israelite apostasy, and the restraint of divine wrath, and unit 5 counterpoints or complements the earlier themes. In particular, the topic of continuous apostasy and divine attempts at instruction are emphasized in all units. The whole discourse is framed by a reference to the first Exodus, depicted as an act of redemption performed despite the nation's sin, and a threat of a new exodus, by which the sinful people will be gathered from its exile in a blaze of divine fury. The sermon is dated to 10 Av 591 B.C.E., according to Ezek. 20:1. The haftarah covers the first three historical periods. It subdivides into four parts. PART 1. THE ARRAIGNMENT (Ezekiel 20:2-4) The speech opens with an embassy of elders who hope to inquire of God through the prophet. Rejecting their presence, God has the prophet arraign the nation for their abhorrent deeds. PART 2. IN EGYPT (Ezekiel 20:5-10) Introducing topics not known from the Torah, God says that He revealed Himself to the nation in Egypt and swore to bring them to the Promised Land. He admonishes the people to end their idolatry, but they refuse. Restraining His wrath for His name's sake, God delivered them from Egypt into the wilderness. PART 3. FIRST WILDERNESS GENERATION (Ezekiel 20:11-17) God now states that He gave the people laws and sabbaths to sanctify them, but the people despised the laws and desecrated the sabbaths. Restraining His wrath for His name's sake, God had pity and "did not make an end of them in the wilderness." PART 4. SECOND WILDERNESS GENERATION (Ezekiel 20:18-20) In the wilderness, God admonished the children to forsake the way of their fathers, urging them to obey the laws and hallow the sabbaths—"that you may know that I the L O R D am your God." C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
At the beginning of the discourse, God rejects the inquiry of the elders in exile and arraigns the people for their sins. The precise nature of the query is not stated and cannot be inferred from the content of the prophet's remarks;2 indeed, God's refusal to respond rules out all suppositions regarding the content of the question.3 God's word to Ezekiel opens with the double query loa-tishpot loa-tishpot ("will you arraign, will you arraign?" [Ezek. 20:4]; NJPS: "Arraign, arraign them"), whose rhetorical effect is to create the urgency of a direct request to "arraign" the people.4 The detailed specification that follows is HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
136
anticipated by the command to "declare" or make known (hodi'em [v. 4]) to the people their sins. To counterpoint this negative information, the prophet utilizes the same verb to indicate God's favor in making Himself "known" to the Israelites and the Egyptians in ancient times—in the first case through His choice oflsrael and commitment to redeem them (v. 5), and in the second instance through the manifestation of His great power before all (v. 9). As a further expression of divine beneficence, God also "made known" His law to the Israelites (v. 11) and even gave them the Sabbath so that they might "know" Him (w. 12, 20). By such rhetorical means, Ezekiel makes the point that Israel has historically been an ingrate and that his declaration of sin is the just consequence of the people's apostasy.5 Another key word in this sermon is the verb nasa} ("to raise"). It is initially used by Ezekiel in connection with the oath God "swore" to the patriarchs (Ezek. 20:5-6), but it recurs with respect to the divine oath sworn against the generation of the desert (v. 15). In both cases, the prophet alludes to ancient traditions—the first case refers to the ancestral promise mentioned in Exod. 6:8, where also God's commitment is linked to the Exodus and the Promised Land; while the second one refers to the divine oath uttered in Num. 14:30 against those with little faith in God's power to bring the people to their homeland. Later in his discourse Ezekiel returns to this term to stress further doom (v. 23) and eventual restoration of the people to Judah (v. 42). There are other instances in this sermon where the prophet shows himself well versed in ancient Torah lore. Particularly notable is his reference to the "laws" and "rules" given by God for the people's well-being, "by the pursuit of which a man shall live" ('asher ya'aseh Jotam ha'ada-m -pa-hay ba-hem [Ezek. 20:11, 13]—a precise citation from Lev. 18:5, at the beginning of thepamshah). Ezekiel's arraignment also refers to the Israelite rebellion in the desert and to God's subsequent decision not to "make an end of them" (le-khallotam [Ezek. 20:13]) so that His name would "not be profaned [hehel]" among the nations (v. 14). This too alludes to Pentateuchal traditions—this time to the sin of the Golden Calf and God's statement that He would "make an end of them" (va-'akhalem; NJPS: "destroy them") in the wilderness, though He subsequently relented due to Moses' entreaty (va-yehal) (Exod. 32:10-12). Significantly, Ezekiel does not refer to Moses' interventions here and in connection with God's decision to destroy the people for their lack of faith in His ability to bring them to the Land. Rather, in this sermon, mercy is repeatedly portrayed as a unilateral divine act. (For other variations between Ezekiel's discourse and Torah traditions, see Comments, on w. 5 and 12). The prophet's diatribe stresses the continuous sin and rebellion of the nation. While still in Egypt, they refuse to heed God's remonstrations to quit their idolatrous behavior (Ezek. 20: 7-8); and later on, in the desert, they disregard the commandments given to them for their life and sanctity (w. 11-13). In the closing exhortation, Ezekiel refers to a second divine appeal to the nation in the desert—urging a new generation to reject the ways of their ancestors and to observe God's laws and sanctify His sabbaths (w. 18-20). Here again, the choice is between the defilements of idolatry and the sanctifying power of divine instruction. The conclusion (Ezek. 20:18-20) is a new teaching. In its original setting, it serves as another exhortation urging the people to obey the laws, before an account of their rebellion and sin. By deleting the negative continuation from the haftarah, the Rabbis have transformed Ezekiel's historical arraignment into a divine instruction for all generations. In this way, Ezekiel's prophetic word is made contemporaneous—the liturgical transformation of an old lawsuit into an ever-new summons to obey the covenant. C O M M E N T S
Ezekiel 20:3. Have you come to inquire ofMe ? Ezekiel is approached by a delegation of elders who wish an oracular consultation with God (v. 1). The prophet thus acts as a medium (cf. v. 2:"and the word of the L O R D came to me") who provides the divine response ( W . 3 and 3 1 ; cf. 14:3, 7). This use of the verb da-rash (inquire) has roots in oracular functions (cf. Gen. 2 5 : 2 2 ) , often performed by Israelite and foreign prophets ( 1 Sam. 9:9; 1 Kings 2 2 : 5 - 8 ; and 2 Kings 1 : 3, 6 ) . It is also found in connection with Jeremiah, Ezekiel's contemporary (Jer. 2 1 : 2 ) . 137
HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
Such divinatory uses of the verb are distinct from prophetic appeals to the people to "seek" (darash) after God (Hos. 10:12; Amos 5:4; Isa. 55:6) or references in the Psalms addressed to the religious seeker (Pss. 24:6; 34:11). The oracular dimension is revised in postexilic sources to indicate the interpretive inquiry of the Torah (Ezra 7:10:"to inquire" or "study the Teaching of the LORD").6 The verb darash is the stem of the noun midrash. 4. arraign them The verb is ha-tishpot-, literally, the query "will you arraign?" An old interpretive tradition (Targum lonathan), continued in the Middle Ages (Rashi; Kimhi), considers this a rebuke or reproof. This understanding has some basis in biblical usage. R. Eliezer of Beaugencycompares 1 Sam. 12:7 7 . 5-7. The references to God's self-revelation in Egypt and the divine oath to bring the people to the Promised Land derive from Exod. 6:2-8. However, in Ezekiel's discourse, the revelation is to all the people (not just Moses), and the divine oath to redeem the people is given to the nation in Egypt. Moreover, the references to Israelite idolatry in Egypt and to a divine warning to desist are traditions virtually unique to Ezekiel. In the Hebrew Bible, only losh. 24: 14 suggests that there was apostasy in Egypt. Some rabbinic comments point in the same direction (cf. Targum Yerushalmi on Exod. 12:21; and Exodus Rabbah 6:3). 6. which I had sought out "Sought out": tarti. This verb and the imagery of "eyes," "heart," and "go astray" (w. 7, 16, 24, 30), suggest the reverberation ofNum. 15:39 throughout the speech.8 9. I acted for the sake of .My name That is, the motivation for divine restraint is to avoid profanation of the name of God among the nations (see also w. 14, 22). It has a parallel in Moses' intercessory appeal to God's self-interest in Exod. 32:11-13. This tradition may have been in Ezekiel's mind, since the verb killah (to destroy) is used there (Exod. 32:12) and in Ezek. 20:9. Elsewhere, profanation of the divine name is the result of Israelite apostasy (Ezek. 20:39; 22:26; cf. Lev. 19:12). The counterpoint, that God will sanctify His name through an act of redemption, closes the present sermon (v. 44). 9 In Ezek. 20:9, 14, and 22, the theme of desecration of the name serves to explain events of the past and the survival oflsrael. 10 11. Igave themMy laws
At Sinai. This accords with the priestly view; see Lev. 26:46.
12. Ijyave them My sabbaths The Sabbath is singled out among the covenantal laws (also w. 16, 20, 21, 24). This emphasis is a characteristic of late biblical literature (see Isa. 56: 2-6). Desecration of the Sabbath came to be regarded as the archetypal sin that caused the exile (Neh. 13:18; cf. ler. 17:19-27). 11 Correspondingly, Isa. 58:13-14 envisages proper observance of the Sabbath as the chief justification for national restoration. 12 it is I the LORD who sanctify them The idea that the Sabbath is a sign between God and Israel, so that the people may know that the Lord sanctifies them, is derived from Exod. 31:13. In Ezek. 20:20, the language of sanctification is dropped, producing a different theological idea. 13. the House oflsrael rebelled... in the wilderness. This is comprehensive and unspecific. They rebelled with the Golden Calf (Exod. 32:17-24) and at Rephidim (Exod. 17:2). Focusing on Ezekiel's language, Rashi suggests that the phrase "they rebelled [va-yamru]n refers to the lack of faith at Marah (Exod. 15:23-24); and the words "and they grossly desecrated My sabbaths" refers to the transgression concerning gathering the manna (Exod. 16:16-21). Kimhi lists all four events. C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
A concern with the divine commandments and sanctifications links the haftarah andpamshah. In the pamshah, Moses speaks for God and calls upon the people to "be holy" (kedoshim tihyu) and "keep My sabbaths" (Lev. 19:2-3). Thereupon a whole series of behaviors is enumerated and classified as HAFTARAH FOR 'AHAREI MOT-KEDOSHIM
138
leading to holiness in God's sight. This theme recurs at the end of the unit, when God exhorts the people, saying: "You shall faithfully observe My laws \u-shemartem }et hukkotai va-'asitem 'otam]: I the L O R D make you holy \'ani YHWH mekaddishkhemY (Lev. 20:8). Correspondingly, Ezekiel repeats God's ancient word of instruction that the people "follow My laws and be careful to observe My rules \be-hukkotai lekhu ve'et mishpatai shimru va-'asu ^otew]" (Ezek. 20:19; cf. v. 11). They are also told to "hallow My sabbaths" (v. 20), for it is a sign that "it is I the L O R D who sanctify [the people]" (font YHWH mekaddisham [v. 12]). Like Moses, Ezekiel emphasizes the centrality of the Law—and the divine sanctification of the people by and through it. The parashah and haftarah share another phrase that underscores the special nature of the divine instruction—and that is the one that emphasizes that God gave the people His "laws" (:mishpatai) and "rules" (hukkotai) "by the pursuit of which a man shall live" ('asherya'aseh Jotam ha-'ada-m -pa-hay ba-hem) (Lev. 18:5 and Ezek. 20:11, 13, 21). The phrase is compact and the theology rich. On the one hand, it promises physical life for the observance of God's laws—a boon emphasized elsewhere by the prophet (Ezek. 18:9) and in other books of the Torah (cf. Deut. 30:15-19). On this reading, the phrase -pa-hay ba-hem has an instrumental sense, teaching that one will attain the blessings of earthly life "by means of" the laws. However, generations of postbiblical readers understood the true reward of the Law to be in the spiritual life such piety engenders—be that in a blissful afterlife (cf. Targum and Ibn Ezra on Lev. 18:5; Nahmanides on Lev. 18:4; and Maimonides,.M«^w^ Torah, Hilkhot Me'ilah 8:8) or in and through a life of sanctity in this world. For such seekers, the Torah fosters a spiritual path whose fulfillment depends upon their total attachment to God (Nahmanides)—who is the divine source of life and cosmic vitality (SefatEmet).
Haftarah for 'Emor "Ifttf ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL 44:15-31
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 44:15-31
For a discussion of Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). Ezekiel 44:15-31 opens with an announcement that only levitical priests of Zadokite descent may serve in the future Temple (w. 15-16)—because of the sacrilege of the non-Zadokite priests who allowed foreigners into the First Temple (w. 9-14). Following this stipulation, a collection of priestly rules and regulations is presented (w. 17-31). These have a close affinity with laws found in the Book of Leviticus, and are a part of the blueprint for cultic restoration found in Ezekiel 40-48. 1 Ezekiel's vision of the ground plan of the New Temple is dated to the beginning of the year 572 B.C.E., fourteen years after the fall of Jerusalem (Ezek. 40:1). 2 The instructions that constitute our haftarah follow this event. Since antiquity it has been observed that a number of the priestly regulations promulgated by Ezekiel contradict their counterparts in the Torah (see below). For this reason, we are told that there was a move to withdraw the Book of Ezekiel from circulation. According to Rav Judah, on the authority of Rav, it was only due to a heroic act of exegesis by one Hananiah ben Hizkiyah that the difficulties were reconciled (B. Shabbat 13b). The nature ofhis solutions is not reported, and many solutions to the contradictions have been proposed by the medieval and later commentators. 3 A separate talmudic tradition reports that a satisfactory resolution to one of the difficulties was suspended for the future, when Elijah himselfwould interpret the matter (B. Menahot 45a). 139
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
PART 1. THE ZADOKITE PRIESTS (Ezekiel 44:15-16) The haftarah opens with a proclamation concerning the exclusive legitimacy of the Zadokite lineage. Only priests of this family are permitted to enter the inner court and serve on the altar. PART 2. THE RULES (Ezekiel 44:17-31) a. Ezekiel 44:17-22 The priestly garments to be worn by the Zadokites are specified, along with a rule concerning proper hairstyle. Priestly decorum is controlled by the strict prohibition of intoxication within the sacred area. Permissible marital bonds are also specified. b. Ezekiel 44:23-24 The priestly office includes teaching the sacred and civil law and preserving the rules of the festival and sabbath days. c. Ezek. 44:25-27 The priests are warned to guard against defilement by the dead, except for certain close relations. Sacral service may be resumed only after a purification process. d. Ezek. 44:28-31 The priests' compensations are taken from the people's sacrifices and gifts to God. Eating unslaughtered flesh is strictly prohibited.
CONTENT AND MEANING The priestly rules specified in the haftarah are part of a larger list of regulations found in Ezek. 44:17-45:25. The content echoes several passages in the Torah, though they are formulated here in Ezekiel's particular style and with his emphasis. The number of topics is large, but there can be no doubt that the elevation and authorization of the Zadokite line is the central matter of the document. This purpose is achieved by Ezekiel's denigration of the other levitical priests for having been lax in securing the sacral areas against foreign encroachment (44:6-7) and by smearing them with the taint of apostasy (v. 12). Ezekiel also accomplishes his intent by appropriating older priestly language and revising it. Thus in the Torah, Moses speaks of the special status of the Aaronid lineage, appointed to "discharge the duties" of the Shrine (Tent) and its holy altar; whereas their brethren, the Levites, are enjoined to "serve" them without the right to encroach upon the holy objects or the altar (Num. 18:1-4). The Levites are thus the servitors of the priests and their divine labor but cannot serve as priests in their own right. By contrast, Ezekiel promotes the Zadokites as the ones with the exclusive right to be priests in the Temple and "serve" God as levitical priests—meaning that not only the priests are descended from the clan of Levi, but that all Levites have the right to serve as priests. This notion was first advanced in the Book ofDeuteronomy (18:1-8), where one benefit was to allow the Levites of the countryside to "serve" as priests whenever they came to the centralized "place" of sacral sacrifice (Deut. 18:6-7). The sacrilege of the Levites during the First Temple now gives Ezekiel cause to promote (or restore) a priestly hierarchy: now only the Zadokites can serve in the Sanctuary, discharging all its priestly functions, while the other Levites are demoted to the rank of senators—be that guarding the gates, doing menial tasks, or assisting the people in their sacrifices (Ezek. 44:11). Our sources do not indicate that this revolution is the result of a struggle for priestly power in the Second Temple. Nevertheless, the attestation of more liberal priestly regulations at just this time (Isaiah 56) suggests that Ezekiel's propaganda for the Zadokites was part of an ideological battle then taking place over the character and limits of the priesthood. The rules in Ezek. 44:17-31 have strongest affinities with (1) Lev. 10:9-11 (instructions for Aaron and his sons) and (2) Leviticus 21-22 (priestly regulations). Note the following contradictions. 1. LEVITICUS 10:9-11 a. Ezekiel 44:21 states that ' N o priest shall drink wine when he enters into the inner court." By contrast, Lev. 10:9 prohibits drinking wine or other intoxicants by priests when they "enter the Tent of Meeting." Ezekiel's rule is thus less strict than the Torah, only prohibiting intoxicating drinks in the inner area. HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM140
b. Ezekiel 44:23-24 states the duty of the priests to instruct in sacral matters (the clean and unclean; the sacred and profane), and also to act as judges in civil cases, deciding the law in accordance with the Torah. Their job is to preserve the laws of God, as well as the festival and sabbath regulations. Leviticus 10:10-11 speaks of sacral and other instructions by the priests but makes no mention of their judicial function, which is first found in Deut. 17:8-11. As in the priestly traditions, the Deuteronomic text uses the verbyom for this official teaching. Ezekiel thus seems to combine earlier functions. 2. LEVITICUS 21-22 a. Ezekiel 44:20 states that all priests must wear their hair trimmed (expressly prohibiting shaven heads and untrimmed hair). Leviticus 21:10 outlaws loose, untrimmed hair for the High Priest only. Ezekiel's rule is therefore more comprehensive. b. Ezekiel 44:22 forbids all priests to marry (lay) widows and divorcees but permits them to marry virgins of all Israel (not just those of priestly descent) and widows of priests. By contrast, Lev. 21:7 forbids harlots and divorcees to priests; 21:13-14 adds that the High Priest cannot in addition marry any widow and is restricted to virgins of his kin. Ezekiel thus knows only one priestly group and issues a comprehensive ruling. Rashi attempted several resolutions of the contradictions in his commentary to B. Hagigah 13a. c. Ezekiel 44:25 prohibits priestly defilement with corpses, limiting contact to certain blood relatives. The ruling in Lev. 21:1-4 is virtually the same, though the style is different. Ezekiel 44: 26-27 articulates a purification process before the priest can be reincorporated into the priestly rota. He thus protects against the defilement of the sacred objects. This is also the concern of Lev. 22:3-4, but from a more comprehensive standpoint. In addition to these differences and variations, Ezekiel's rules restrict priestly vestments to flaxen garments (Ezek. 44:17-19; pishtim, NIPS: "linen"), with no mention of the vestments of gold worn by the High Priest, or the "fine linen" garments worn by the High Priest and his sons, according to the priestly sources of the Pentateuch (Exod. 29:6-40, 42; called shesh and bad, respectively).4 His failure to specify such details is a puzzling aspect of Ezekiel's document, given its manifest purpose to be a self-standing messianic program. Also striking is the absence of any mention of the Ark and cherubim in the inner sanctuary, or the table for the bread of display in the outer area, or the anointing oil in the Temple or the courts.5 There is also no reference to the purgation of the Temple on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16), to the dramatic ceremonies of the Passover eve (Exod. 12:1-14), or to the species used to celebrate the festival ofTabernacles (Lev. 23:39-43). These glaring gaps raise questions concerning the prophet's relationship to earlier priestly traditions. The issue is further exacerbated by the register of different quantities prescribed for the daily offerings; the additional (musaf) offering for the Sabbath, New Moon, and festivals; and the proportions of wheat and oil to be blended in the grain (minhah) offering. Taking all this into account, one must necessarily conclude that in many respects Ezekiel's code shows no direct dependence upon the priestly sources canonized in the Torah.6 In fact, the content of Ezekiel's text sits awkwardly alongside the laws prescribed in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. No wonder the Sages were puzzled and considered withdrawing the book from circulation. Ezekiel's collection of priestly rules thus appears to reflect an independent strand of cultic tradition. For him, concern with priestly comportment and purity is uppermost. Special emphasis is placed not only on what is externally contagious and dangerous, but also on the physical incorporation of inappropriate substances that can render a priest unfit. The prohibition of intoxicants is one case; the restriction on eating unslaughtered game (dying of natural causes or being ripped by predators) is another (Ezek. 44:31). On the other hand, eating of sacrificial and other offerings devoted to God is a divine right of the priests. Being the "portion" of God gives them special benefits (v. 29), and giving the priests the first fruits of the earth may even endow the provider with heavenly blessing (v. 30). 141
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
At the center of the priests' activity is the Law, which they must teach—separating what needs to be separated, judging sacral and civil matters according to the God's word, and making sure that the holy days are properly safeguarded and sanctified. In this way, the priests insure that God's teachings are properly performed and applied. The late prophet Malachi also speaks of this priestly function, and he requires them to speak "proper rulings" for the nation and serve the Lord with "complete loyalty" (Mai. 2:6). "For the lips of a priest guard knowledge, and men seek rulings from his mouth; for he is a messenger \maVakh\ of the L O R D of Hosts" (v. 7). In this remarkable characterization, the priest is given a divine role in the propagation and interpretation of the Torah.
COMMENTS Ezekiel 44:15. levitical priests This title refers to priests of the tribe of Levi (Rashi). The designation first occurs in Deut. 18:1, not in priestly sources. The subsequent phrase in Deut. 18: 1, "the whole tribe of Levi," emphasizes that all the Levites are priests and eligible for service in the Temple. The phrase in Deuteronomy contradicts the formulation in Leviticus and Numbers, where the priesthood is restricted to the family of Aaron. Just this enlargement of the priestly privileges was the very basis of Korah's rebellion (Num. 16:3), and the subsequent miracle of the staffs gave divine legitimacy to the Aaronid line (Num. 17:16-24). In Ezekiel, the expanded priesthood is now restricted to the Zadokites alone, as a reward for their faithful service. Zadok This is the ancestral line of priests in Jerusalem. Zadok originally served as a bearer of the Ark for David, along with Abiathar (2 Sam. 15:24-29, 35; 17:15). Zadok supported Solomon for dynastic succession (1 Kings 1:8, 32), while Abiathar backed Adonijah (1: 7). Zadok therefore anointed Solomon king (1:39-45). Eventually, Solomon banished Abiathar (2:27), and Zadok remained the sole priest of the king. The origins of this priestly clan are unknown. Some have located them as priests at the shrine of Gibeon (cf. 1 Chron. 16:39); others have argued for a Jebusite origin (cf. Ps. 110:4). 7 According to biblical genealogies, the priests of the Second Temple were of the Zadokite line up to the Hasmonean rebellion. The Hasmonean priests were not Zadokite. This led to internal divisions among the various groups that constituted late Second Temple Jewry. Speaking on behalf of the old priestly lineage, Ben Sira praises God for choosing the Zadokites (Ben Sira 51:29), and the Qumran sectarians considered Zadokites the only pure and legitimate lineage, identifying with them in the present (Serekh ha-Tahad, 5:1) and expecting their restoration in the future (Serekh ha-'Edah, 2:3). 16. My table This may refer to the altar itself, and not to the table of the bread of display (Targum Jonathan; Kimhi). 17, 19. According to rabbinic tradition, we have references here to the sacred areas: "the gates of the inner court" (v. 17) are in front and within the Temple (Rashi); whereas the first "outer court" mentioned in verse 19 refers to the women's court (Rashi); and the "outer court where the people are" refers to the court of the male Israelites (Kimhi). 19. remove the -vestments... and... deposit them in the sacred chambers Compare 42: 13-14:"Before proceeding to the area open to the people, they shall put on other garments" [Transl.]. lest they make the people consecrated Thereby rendering the people unfit for ordinary activity [Transl.]. The concern is to avoid the transfer of the holiness of the vestments to the laity; it is not to avoid the appearance that the people were holy like the priests (Kimhi). For a similar concern in this period, see Hag. 2:11-13. 8 22. -widows Thatis, oflaymen [Transl.]. 25. He shall defile himself onlyfor Some ancient Rabbis noted the absence of the wife here and in Lev. 21:2-3. They resolved the matter by suggesting that the reference to near kin HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM142
in Lev. 21:2 refers to her (cf. B. Yevamot 90b). R. Eliezer of Beaugency rejects this view: "but he may not be defiled by [the corpse of] his wife." 9 26-27. The rules of decontamination from corpse defilement in Ezek. 44:26-27 seem to differ from Numbers 19, where only a seven-day period of purification is prescribed. The addition here of another week for priestly purification has been understood as a special stringency for the future. See R. Eliezer ofBeaugency and R. David Kimhi. 28-31. This shall be their portion The idea that God is the priests' portion refers to their receipt of portions of the sacrifices offered (Josh. 13:14; cf. Ezek. 44:29a) and to the Israelite tithes (Num. 18:24; cf. Ezek. 44:30-31). In nonpriestly contexts, Israel could be described as the Lord's own portion (Deut. 32:9). Ezekiel's references to priestly portions in verse 29 echo Num. 18:20, 23-24 and Deut. 18:1-2. 29. Everything proscribed See Lev. 27:28:"Of all that anyone owns . . . nothing that he has proscribed for the LORD may be sold or redeemed; every proscribed thing is totally consecrated to the L O R D " [Transl.]. 30. Priestly compensations in the first part of this verse echo Num. 18:11-13, 26-29. thefirst of the yield of your baking [to God]" [Transl.].
Compare Num. 15:20-21: "set aside a loaf as a gift
31. Priests shall not eat See Lev. 22:8. Rashi notes the difference between this prohibition and the Torah legislation (B. Hagigah 13a). He suggests that one might conclude from our passage that the Law did not include all Israelites, who might eat anything that died of itself or was torn by beasts; whereas in fact a general prohibition is articulated in Lev. 7:24. He provides a different explanation in his Torah commentary. Either way, this rule appears disjunctive in the present collection of rules. It is contextualized by R. Eliezer of Beaugency, who regards it as dealing with prohibited priestly gifts. 10 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The relationship between the regulations linking thcparashah and the haftarah exemplifies the process of tradition and change—the need to maintain continuity with the sacred practices of the past, and the desire to innovate for new times. Ezekiel functions as a new Moses, a spokesman for God in the specification of proper priestly behavior. 11 In the enumeration of priestly deportment, xhcpamshah opens with a warning to "the priests, the sons of Aaron" not to defile themselves by contact with the dead of their people—lest they become profaned thereby, desecrating their holy status. The only exceptions are certain close blood relations (Lev. 21:1-4). Ezekiel speaks likewise to "the levitical priests, descended from Zadok" (Ezek. 44:15) and provides the ritual process for the subsequent reincorporation of priests so defiled (Ezek. 44:25-27). These restrictions on defilement emphasize the sacred character of the priests. Separated from the people, the priests have a holy vocation. Their bodies and lives are consecrated to God's service; hence they are barred from contact with the dead of their fellow creatures. There is thus a tension between the priests' sacral office and their natural being. According to one ancient midrashic formulation, their specialness derives from the fact that they serve before God's altar, coming and going before His Presence (Tanhuma 'Emor 1). The only exception to their break with society is when the dead are their very own near kin. But since these relations share their sacred genealogy, such contact is permitted. As the ancient synagogue poet Yannai put it, "The sorrow of their disaster is his own, / because he is flesh of their flesh" (ta'alat shivram shivro / tahat ki she'emm she'ero).12 Nevertheless, this defilement temporarily disqualifies the priests from serving in the Temple. This paradox of the sacred may be instructive to all those who study Scripture and follow its sacred path. Inevitable conflicts arise between religious duties and social or familial obligations. 143
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
Devotion to God may require separation from natural and communal forms that would betray one's integrity and religious path; at the same time, there are forms of social contact and acts of care that take precedence over personal practices and considerations. The Sages suggest as much when they teach that a priest must defile himself in order to dispose of a corpse when he would be the only one who could perform the task. This act is the central religious obligation to care for the dead (met mitzvah), and it transcends all other prohibitions (see Tanhuma 'Emor 3). Such an unequivocal teaching introduces a theological paradigm of priorities: one cannot shirk one's human responsibilities for the sake of abstract or impersonal religious principles. Unrequited care for a fellow creature transcends all ritual bounds.
Haftarah for Be-har "IHD ASHKENAZIM
JEREMIAH 32:6-27
SEPHARDIM
JEREMIAH 32:6-27
For a discussion of Jeremiah's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from Jeremiah's prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah focuses on a symbolic action performed by the prophet leremiah, "in the tenth year of King Zedekiah" (587 B.C.E.), when "the army of the king of Babylon was besieging lerusalem" (32:1-2). At that time leremiah was confined to a royal compound, charged with uttering a seditious oracle about the fall of lerusalem and the exile of its king (w. 3-5; cf. 34: 2-5). The purpose of the prophet's action was to dramatize on the eve of the destruction the future restoration of the nation to its homeland. Accordingly, leremiah's purchase of the field of his cousin Hanamel (ler. 32:9-12) was written down and stored against the future time when "houses, fields, and vineyards shall again be purchased in this land" (v. 15). The legal proceedings are followed by a prayer in which the prophet struggles to comprehend the drama of hope that he has just performed; God's response addresses his concern. The public action and the private prayer constitute the two parts of the haftarah. PART 1. THE SYMBOLIC ACTION (leremiah 32:6-15) a. leremiah 32:6-12 A divine word instructs leremiah to purchase ancestral land from his cousin Hanamel (w. 6-8), which he does according to legal practice (w. 9-12). b. leremiah 32:13-14 leremiah then instructs his aide Baruch to seal and store away the documents as a witness to their future fulfillment. The prophet also does this at the command of God. c. leremiah 32:15 The divine prophecy of resettlement is boldly proclaimed. PART 2. PRAYER AND RESPONSE (leremiah 32:16-27) a. leremiah 32:16-26 The prophet extols God's mighty deeds in history but is aghast at the action and oracle ofhope at the very onset of the Babylonian siege. b. leremiah 32:27 In response, God repeats leremiah's words and proclaims His own powers. The import is to remove all doubt in God's purpose and might.
CONTENT AND MEANING The symbolic action in part 1 is one of several dramatic performances enacted by leremiah (see ler. 13:1-11, 12-14; 18:1-11; 19:1-13). Characteristically, such acts are followed by a divine oracle of clarification. This is the case here as well, since the legal praxis (32:9-12) of redeeming a kinsman's threatened estate is concluded by an oracle promising the future reclamation of the HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM144
land o f j u d a h (v. 15). In terms of procedure, the account preserves a precious witness to the technicalities of sale conveyances in ancient Israel. The following features appear to be customary with respect to the redemption of landed property between kinsmen (called variously the mishpat ha-ge'ullah, or legal "procedure of redemption," and the mishpat ha-yemshah, or legal "right of succession" [w. 7-8]). After the legal rights of purchase are acknowledged, the buyer (1) purchases the land by weighing out the silver (v. 9), (2) writes up the bill of sale, (3) seals it, (4) has it properly notarized by witnesses, and (5) weighs out the agreed amount of the purchase on a scale (v. 10). Moreover, (6) the document is sealed with an open portion summarizing the transaction (v. 11), and (7) the transfer of the deed to the seller is made in public before the seller and witnesses, as well as other members of the population in attendance (v. 12). Finally, (8) the deed of purchase is deposited for future reference (v. 14) —in this case as a witness to the validity of the divine promise of national redemption. 1 The deed is sealed and notarized, and the possibility of future examination or reference leads to the practice that the deed be both sealed and kept open (Jer. 32:11). This procedure is probably related to the practice found in documents of the archives in Elephantine (fifth century B.C.E.), as well as among Judean scrolls of the Bar Kokhba period (second century c . E . ) . In such cases, the deed was written on two ends of a rolled parchment: one side was sealed up (to prevent tampering), while the other end was left open for public examination. 2 The storing away of the deed in a sealed jar prevented its decay. A similar procedure, also related to the fulfillment of a divine word, is found in Isa. 8:16. Under normal conditions, lands alienated because of economic duress could be redeemed and reclaimed prior to the Jubilee year through the intervention of relatives able to pay the outstanding premium (Lev. 25:25-27). There is thus a strong resemblance between this reappropriation of ancestral lands by uncles and cousins (Lev. 25:48-49) and Jeremiah's action with his cousin Hanamel, as Nahmanides observed long ago. 3 Nevertheless, a significant difference remains. Jeremiah purchased the property directly from Hanamel, and there is no indication that the latter's property had otherwise been alienated to a non-kin. To be sure, we are dealing with a divinely initiated symbolic action and should allow for some leeway in comparing it with the Pentateuchal law. Nevertheless, it is possible that we do have here a proper redemption—some kind of a presumptive transaction that gave a near kin the first right of purchase, so that the property would not be alienated (cf. S. D. Luzzatto on Jer. 32:7, following Kimhi). 4 Whatever the legalities involved, the main purpose of Jeremiah's action was to dramatize an oracle of divine promise. This was its symbolic import, and it transcended the legal issues involved. Jeremiah's subsequent prayer opens with a cry of amazement that glorifies divine power andjustice (Jer. 32:17-19). The prophet goes on to describe God's greatwonders on behalfof Israel—from the Exodus to the Settlement (w. 20-23a). But the people's rejection of the Law inevitably results in their punishment, and the imminent attack at the hands of the Babylonians is portrayed as the just reward for such disobedience (w. 23b-24). Given this fact, the prophet must then be astonished at God's word of promise that closes the haftarah (w. 26-27). He is told that nothing is too wondrous for God. This language echoes Jeremiah's opening words of divine praise (R. Joseph Kara). The threefold repetition of the particle hinneh (behold) marks significant shifts of tone in the unit. The word occurs at the outset of the prayer, as the prophet reflects upon the action he has just done (Jer. 32:17a). It also dramatizes the transition from the prophet's words of divine praise to the theme of punishment and requital (v. 24). And finally, it helps inaugurate God's response to Jeremiah: "Behold [hinneh] I am the L O R D , the God of all flesh. Is anything too wondrous for Me?" (v. 27). Formulated rhetorically, this query concludes the haftarah on a note of theological assertion. With ironic concision, God's promise of redemption demands a commitment of faith. By means of the haftarah, the challenge posed to Jeremiah is extended to all his spiritual heirs.
COMMENTS Jeremiah 32:8. you have the duty of redemption Since the land had not been alienated by economic default, R. Joseph Kara explains the legitimacy of Hanamel's words as follows: 145
HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM
"If I [Hanamel] would die without sons, you [leremiah] would be able to be my heir; and if I were to sell [the property] to another, you would have the legal right to redeem [it] from the purchaser even if you were not to inherit i t ; . . . as it is written, '[redemption may be performed by a kinsman, ] or his uncle or his uncle's son' (Lev. 25:48-49)." 5 12.jyave the deed to Baruch Baruch (ben Neriah) serves as leremiah's aide, disciple, agent, and personal scribe. Note especially his role in leremiah 36. The title barukh ben neriah ha-sofer (Baruch ben Neriah, the Scribe) occurs on a personal seal from the seventh century B.C.E. There is every reason to suppose that this refers to leremiah's own scribe.6 kinsman Hebrew dodi:, literally, "my uncle." This formulation contradicts verse 7 (ben dodi, "cousin"). This is apparently a scribal error, and many commentators correct the phrase to ben dodi (so, according to the Septuagint). See S.D. Luzzatto. who were named With many manuscripts and ancient versions; so ancient Near Eastern practice. Other manuscripts and editions read "who wrote" (i. e., signed their names) [Transl.]. 14. the sealed text and the open one Hebrew he-hatum ve-'et sefer ha-galuy. The precise nature of this reference is uncertain, and one must try to reconstruct the practice from ancient custom. Among the Elephantine papyri and the legal documents from the Bar Kokhba period (Nahal Hever), one side of the text was inscribed and rolled closed, with a portion of the other side left exposed for purposes of reference.7 In cuneiform tradition, dockets were inserted into clay envelopes, with a legal summary on the cover.8 It is possible that ler. 32:14 refers to validating signatures within and without the scrolled document (if so, leremiah would have signed on the verso after sealing the text). Mishnah Baba Batra 10:1 refers to two types of documents: "a plain document whose witnesses signed within, and a tied-up one in which they signed on the back." The first custom is like the Elephantine practice (and a document from 134 B.C.E. concludes, "This document is plain and they signed within"), 9 whereas ler. 32:14 would be an early example of the latter.10 15. Houses, fields, and vineyards This chain of elements picks up the theme of rebuilding and replanting found in ler. 31:4-5. As there, the adverb }od (again) is emphasized. In the present setting, the three elements constitute an eschatological promise. In broadest terms, the rebuilding and replanting allude to ler. 1:10. More specifically, the cluster is thematically linked to leremiah's prophetic letter to the exiles of 597 B.C.E. In that document the prophet tells his compatriots to build, plant, and marry in Babylon—since redemption has not come (ler. 29:5-6; cf. v. 28). leremiah's statement here counterpoints that letter: the redemption will come, and the people will again build and plant in their homeland. 17.Ah,Lord GOD\ Hebrew 'ahah (Ah) is used in connection with cries of amazement, concern, or despair. Compare ler. 1:6 (also Ezek. 4:14; 9:8). 17-23. This liturgy is replete with themes known from the Deuteronomic theological tradition: Exodus, election, Promised Land, covenant, reward, and punishment (cf. Deut. 6: 20-25; 7:9-16, 19). 11 But the prayer also shows some striking transformations: (1) the phrase "[Your] outstretched arm" (v. 17) is normally used in an Exodus context, while it appears here in a cosmological setting; (2) the normal reference to the "signs and marvels" at the Exodus is expanded here (v. 20) to refer to wonders for all humankind (see next note); and (3), the traditional attributes of divine mercy and vicarious retribution in verse 18 (cf. Exod. 34:6-7) are expanded in verse 19 to indicate individual retribution (cf. Deut. 7:9 and the harmonizing comments ofRashi onv. 18). 18. Ojyreat and mighty God In his prayer, leremiah extols God with two attributes, "great" (ha-gadol) and "mighty" (ha-gibbor). By contrast, Daniel praises God as "great" and "awesome" (nora')—and does not use the epithet "mighty" (Dan. 9:4). All three attributes are HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM146
combined in Deut. 10:17, which speaks o f t h e great, the mighty, and the awesome God" (ha-'el ha-gadol ha-gibbor ve-ha-nom}). The Rabbis pondered these variations and tried to understand why the full formula enunciated by Moses (in Deut. 10:17) was subsequently changed. Their answer is that Jeremiah and Daniel wished to ascribe to God only those attributes that they could theologically affirm. In the context of the national debacle and suffering that they experienced, attributes like "mighty" or "awesome" were deemed out of place—and omitted. The Rabbis justify these liturgical revisions by saying that since "God insists on truth, [these pious ones] would not ascribe false things to Him" (J. Berakhot 7:3;B. Yoma 69b). According to talmudic tradition, 12 the full formula was restored to the liturgy by the Men of the Great Assembly.13 It is now recited in the opening paragraph of theAmidah prayer. In other contexts, it has received midrashic elaborations. Thus, at the conclusion of the NishmatKol Hay prayer, recited before the Call to Prayer (Barekhu) on Sabbath morning, the triad of attributes is first stated simply and then elaborated in the following way: God [ha-'el]: through the power of Your might;^rmt [ha-gadol]: through the glory of Your Name; mighty \ha-gibbor\-. forever; and awesome [ve-ha-nomthrough Your wondrous deeds. 20. with lasting effect Literally, "to this day." The text is difficult and disruptive. It is hard to understand the reference to miracles in the land of Egypt "to this day." NJPS skirts the difficulty with the phrase, "with lasting effect." This agrees with Kimhi's comment that the phrase means "to this day \cad ha-yom ha-zeh] they [the miracles] are known among humankind." He thus aligns the sense of this phrase with the next one ("and won renown in Israel and among humankind to this very day \ka-yom ha-zeh]"). C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D
PARASHAH
The legal theme ofland redemption by a near kin is the common element in thcparashah (Lev. 25:25-55) and haftarah (Jer. 32:6-12). The purpose of such a transaction (called^'Wa^, "redemption") was to safeguard the preservation of property within family groups (see Nahmanides on Lev. 25:33). This was especially significant when holdings might be alienated due to personal duress. According to Pentateuchal legislation, the act ofge'ulah devolved initially upon the owner himself or a "redeemer" (go'el) who was a near relative (karov) (Lev. 25:25-26, 31). The same terminology is found in the Book ofRuth (Ruth 3:12; 4:7). However, in that account, it would appear that when a valid kinsman could not be found, the right of redemption could be assumed by an unrelated person (Ruth 4:4-10). Such a "transfer" ofge'ulah rights was called a temumh (Ruth 4:7). In the case of Jeremiah's purchase ofhis cousin's land, there is no such transfer. Jeremiah has "the right of succession" and "the duty of redemption" (Jer. 32:8; cf. v. 7), and he agrees to buy the property. It appears that this purchase is offered to him before the land was put up for general sale (see Kimhi and Luzzatto on Jer. 32:7). Such a provision is not explicitly indicated in the Torah. The purpose of Jeremiah's purchase is to enact symbolically the reclamation of family lands after the exile. It thus accentuates the redemptive implications of Lev. 25:25-54, which merely states that nonredeemed land would be restored to their original owners at the Jubilee. The specific legal termge'ulah (redemption) takes on spiritually and nationally salvific overtones in the process. Implied in the figure of Jeremiah's act ofqe'ulah is the promise of God's own restorative ge'ulah of His people to their homeland. The redemptive drama inherent in Jeremiah's act is highlighted in an old homiletic comment on thcpamshah. Citing Lev. 25:25, "If your kinsman is in straits and has to sell part ofhis holding, his nearest redeemer ]go}alo] shall come and redeem what his kinsman has sold," the Midrash asks: "Who is hisgo'alo [redeemer]?" The question is answered theologically with this passage from the Book ofjeremiah: HAFTARAH FOR'AHAREIMOT-KEDOSHIM147
Thus said the L O R D of Hosts: The people oflsrael are oppressed, and so too the people of Judah; all their captors held them, they refused to let them go. Their Redeemer \go,alam\ is mighty, His name is LORD of Hosts. He will champion their cause—so as to give rest to the earth, and unrest to the inhabitants ofBabylon (Jer. 50:33-34). (Tanhuma Be-har 6)
Haftarah for Be-hukkotai Tllpnn ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH16:19-17:14 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 16:19-17:14
Haftarah for Be-har-Be-hukkotai Tllpnn-Onnn ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH16:19-17:14 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 16:19-17:14
For a discussion of Jeremiah's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments on the several haftarah readings taken from Jeremiah's prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah comprises a series of diverse pieces, spoken by the prophet leremiah in ludah sometime in the late seventh to early sixth century B.C.E. These include prayers of proclamation and petition, divine indictments and instructions, and maxims of a general and national character. A recurrent emphasis is the justice of divine punishment and trust in God's protective and redemptive power. The prophet himself exemplifies such piety by his personal prayers and acclamations—proclaiming God as his source of strength and healing savior. This liturgical dimension frames the haftarah (ler. 16:19; 17:14). PART 1. PRAYERAND RESPONSE (leremiah 16:19-21) leremiah opens with a personal assertion of trust in God, his "strength" and "stronghold," and anticipates a time when all nations will turn to the Lord and confess their folly (v. 19). God confirms the futility of worshiping idols and announces His judgment to come (w. 20-21). PART 2. THE SIN OF IUDAH (leremiah 17:1-4) God proclaims the guilt of the people, visible everywhere. For their sins of false worship, the nation will be punished: their ancient inheritance will be ruined, and they shall go into exile. The fire of divine wrath has been kindled and "shall burn for all time." PART 3. THE TRUE AND FALSE WAYS (leremiah 17:5-8) In a new speech God pronounces the doom to befall those who trust in humans and turn their thoughts from the Lord. They shall be like a dried bush in the wilderness, deprived of all good. By contrast, those who trust in the Lord shall be like a verdant and well-rooted tree, reaping the rewards (blessing) of true and faithful devotion. PART 4. WORDS TO THE WISE (leremiah 17:9-13) a. leremiah 17:9-10 In a maxim, we are told that the heart is devious and beyond understanding; but God penetrates its depth andjustly requites "every man according to his ways." b. leremiah 17:11 Another teaching states that unjust gain will not last; for whoever amasses such wealth is "like a partridge hatching what she did not lay." c. leremiah 17:12-13 The prophet now proclaims the great glory of the Temple and announces the shame to befall all those who forsake the Lord, the "Hope oflsrael." PART 5. FINAL PETITION (leremiah 17:14) In the conclusion, the prophet beseeches the saving help of God—his true glory. HAFTARAH FOR BE-HAR-BE-HUKKOTAI
148
C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
Though diverse in style and concern, the haftarah has an identifiable structure. The following symmetry marks its arrangement: (A) an outer frame (parts 1 and 5) that contains prayers in the first person, which expresses trust in God; (B) an inner frame (parts 2 and 4) that contrasts the false altars with the Temple and refers to the people's sin (ler. 17:1, 13); and (C) a centerpiece (part 3) that juxtaposes self-reliance with trust in God. In addition, there are recurrent themewords that integrate the units. The verbal stem_y-^-f (to know) is found in 16:21 and 17:4, 9; '-s-h (to do) recurs in 16:20 and 17:8, 11; (to write) is emphasized in 17:1 and 13; and s-w-r (to turn) links 17:5 and 13. Similarly, the noun word lev (heart) is the subject of the discourses in 17:1 and 9-10. Such repetitions weave a thematic texture into the separate sections. No doubt such similarities triggered the linking of the materials by leremiah or his disciples in the first place. A central image in the haftarah is the tree. Negatively, the verdant trees represent fertility and other alien practices condemned by the prophet (ler. 17:2), just as the withered shrubs and bramble convey the fate of those who rely upon human strength and turn away from God (w. 5-6). By contrast, whoever trusts in the Lord will be like a bountiful tree bearing fruit without fail (w. 7-8). The reader will especially note the contrast between the "verdant tree" (Jetz m'a-na-n) of false worship (v. 2), which ends in disaster, and the "tree" ('etz) of ever "fresh" (ra'anan) leaves (v. 8), which represents the faithful and their divine blessing. The figure of nourished plants recurs elsewhere in Scripture as a metaphor for divine sustenance. In Psalm 52, the speaker says that those who do evil court divine disaster and adds that because they "trust" in their own wealth and well-being they will be uprooted from the land of the living (Ps. 52:7, 9). By contrast, the psalmist states that he is "like a thriving olive tree in God's house" and will "trust in the faithfulness of God forever" (v. 10). Similarly in Psalm 92, the righteous are likened to a flourishing "date-palm . . . planted in the house of the L O R D " (PS. 9 2 : 13-14) —renewing their fruit and sap even in old age. However, the "wicked sprout like grass"; and though they "blossom, it is only that they may be destroyed forever" (v. 8). These images dramatize the bounty of a divine life, nourished by righteousness and faith. The same may accrue to a person who lives a life devoted to Torah and its study, as Psalm I counsels. Indeed, this prayer provides a striking counterpoint to the words of leremiah. Whereas the prophet speaks entirely of trust as the key virtue of a divinely blessed life and its capacity to transform its bearer into"a tree planted by waters . . . [which] does not cease to yield fruit" (ler. 17:8), the speaker of the psalm praises the Law and proclaims that only one who studies constantly in delight and devotion will be "like a tree planted beside streams of water, which yields its fruit in season, whose foliage never fades, and whatever it produces thrives" (Ps. 1:3). Those who follow such a path shall thus stand firm, unlike the wicked who "are like the chaff that the wind blows away" (Ps. 1:4) — scattered and dry, without any yield or bounty. Ancient Israelite theologians thus pondered the way a life of piety could transform the individual and exalt different virtues as beneficial. For some, it is through the power of study that one is blessed; for others, like leremiah, it is the power of trust in God that transforms the spirit and generates a life of ever-new bounty. Notably, both images emphasize the capacity of this devoted individual to overcome the destructive forces of life. They neither fade nor wither against the harsh blasts of the world, but withstand oppression by being rooted in divine reality. Accordingly, leremiah's teaching of trust in God is a counsel to choose the "the Fount of living waters" (ler. 17:13) for the sake of such God-given reliance. All else is folly and self-delusion—a deceptive blindness to the true source oflife. C O M M E N T S
Jeremiah 16:19-21. The sequence is difficult. leremiah's personal prayer continues with an assertion of a universal conversion (through rejection of idolatry) (v. 19), and this unit is followed by a divine assertion ("Assuredly" [lakhen]) to manifest His power in a momentous way (v. 149
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HAR-BE-HUKKOTAI 149
21). If verse 20 continues the people's confession, the divine oath would be a positive expression of divine redemption (Abravanel). This interpretation must disregard the fact that the divine speech begins with the particle lakhen, which normally precedes a conclusion ("therefore"). Accordingly, it seems best to regard the people's confession as limited to verse 19b and regard verse 20 as the divine arraignment that precedes judgment (cf. Targum Jonathan and Kimhi). Oddly, however, the divine arraignment and judgment follow the people's confession. One must therefore assume that what Jeremiah affirms for the future (the conversion of the pagans) God now confirms, announcing a manifestation of might that will induce the peoples to know Him (v. 21b). Jeremiah's prayer for the conversion of the nations to the God of Israel anticipates later appeals (Isa. 45:22) andprophecies (Zech. 8:20-23). 19. OLORD .. . my stronghold This expression builds on formulas of trust in the protective power of God (Nah. 1:7; Ps. 27:1). The underlying metaphor here is based on the bastions that served as a place of refuge (cf. Isa. 17:9). This accounts for the use of the term manusi ("my refuge"), presumably derived from the verb n-w-s, "to run" (Dunash ibn Labrat; cf. Rashi). It thus evokes a sense of sanctuary, insofar as just this verb is used in connection with the right of an accidental manslayer to flee to the protective custody of a city of refuge (Num. 35:6; Deut. 4:42). 20. No-gods are they This phrase is preceded by a (rhetorical) question asserting the futility of idolatry. In form and substance it echoes Jer. 2:11—albeit ironically, since it was used earlier as a mocking jibe at Israel's lapse of faith. There are other parallels between Jeremiah 2 and the haftarah. God is called a "Fount of living waters" in 2:13 and 17:13; Israel is said to become a booty for the nations in 2:14 and 17:3; and Jer. 2:20-21 speaks of sinful worship under leafy trees, as does the judgment in 17:2. The opprobrium "no-god" has polemical force (Deut. 32: 17, 21) and is often used to signal covenantal rejection (Deut. 32:21; Hos. 1:9). 21.1 will teach them Or, "inform them"; Hebrew }odi'em. The prophet seems to refer to a forthcoming arraignment of the nations. For this forensic sense of the verb, see Ezek. 22: 2. 1 Critique of the nations for idolatry is unusual in preexilic sources; Jeremiah is the first to enunciate this view (cf. Jer. 10:11; 5o: 35-39). 2 By contrast, the Torah never condemns the nations for such worship—only for moral perversions such as child sacrifice (Deut. 12:29-31). Deuteronomy 4:19 even presents the worship of the sun, the moon, and the stars as the divine fate of all nations except Israel. Compare Amos 1. Jeremiah 17:1. Theguilt ofjudah... on the horns oftheir altars Hebrew hatta't Tehudah. Normally, the purging blood of the guilt offering (hatta't) was put on the horns of the altar. This was done in order to purify the shrine (Lev. 8:15; cf. M. Shevu'ot 1:4-7). It was also performed in cases of accidental sin by the individual (Lev. 4:25, 30). Jeremiah thus mocks Israel's practices by punning on the noun hatta't. It is their guilt, he implies, that is on their altars, and not the blood of the expunging sacrifice.3 The inscription of this guilt on "the tablet of their hearts" (Jer. 17:1) anticipates the prophecy of God's Torah to be written there in the future (Jer. 31:33). Engraved Hebrew harushah. The stem h-r-sh is dialectically related to h-r-t (cf. Exod. 32:16). In Hebrew and Aramaic, the letters t andsh are variants. Compare Biblical sh-n-n (teach) and Aramaic t-n-n (learn); or the rabbinic variant mishnah/matnita:'. 3-4. This doom formulation resembles Jer. 15:13-14 in many respects. These passages have often been compared, and some have emended the difficult phrase bamotekha be-hata't (because of the sin of your shrines) in 17:3 in light of the clearer variant in 15:13 (vi-mhir u-v-khol hat'otekha, "free of charge, because of all your sins").4 This is not necessary, as the formulation in 17:3 has been adapted to refer to the cultic sins on the "lofty hills" mentioned in 17:2. This inner-textual component also accounts for the odd syntax. Targum Jonathan correctly construes the phrase by inverting the terms, as if it read be-hata't bamotekha (because of the sin of your shrines). NJPS has followed this tradition of interpretation. HAFTARAH FOR BE-HAR-BE-HUKKOTAI
150
3. a heap in thefield Hebrew harari ba-sadeh. The meaning of the phrase is difficult. The word harari only means "heap" by metaphoric extension (that is, as meaning "mountain-like"). The Targum treated harari as a plural noun ("mountains") and linked it to the previous judgment of false worship on the "lofty hills" (Jer. 17:2). On this understanding, the prophet addresses "those who worship on the mountains" and announces that "all your property and wealth shall be a spoil in the field [ba-sadeh].n See Kara, Kimhi, and Abravanel. Thus harari is construed as an independent clause, and ba-sadeh is connected to the sequel. Such a reading differs from the Masoretic phrasing. Rashi's commentary follows the Masorah and interprets harari as referring to Jerusalem set upon a mountain and ba-sadeh as referring to the surrounding plain. His reading thus dissociates the "mountain" in verse 3 from the lofty hills in verse 2 and takes harari as a vocative with pronoun suffix ("O My mountain[, Jerusalem]"). 4. You willforfeit, by your own act The sense of forfeit (Hebrew ve-shamatetah] goes well with the loss of the inheritance, for this is the verb used in the law of debt release (Deut. 15: 1-3). Difficult, however, is the fact that the word u-vekha intervenes between the verb ("forfeit") and the object ("the inheritance"). If the term does not refer to the reason for the forfeiture ("by your own act"), it may indicate its application ("against you"). See further Kara, Kimhi, and Abravanel. 8. like a tree planted by waters Jeremiah's image of the regenerative bounty of one who trusts God echoes Ps. 1:3, where the beneficiary is the student of Torah (see the discussion in "Content and Meaning"). Jeremiah extends the metaphor by stating that the tree's "leaves are ever fresh [m'anan]." This provides a powerful counterpoint to the critique of the sinners who worship "by verdant [m'anan] trees" (17:2). The image of pagan worship is thus transformed into an expression of the interior gifts of God to those who trust Him. 9. Most devious is the heart The superlative "most" is Hebrew mi-kol. Alternatively, the sense is that the heart is "full of deceit and perverted with all kinds of [mi-kol] evil" (Rashi). 10.fruit ofhis deeds A deft pun linking verses 9-10 to the tree imagery of verses 5-8. This image for individual retribution recurs in 32:19, where it can be seen that the phrase puns on the stem 'allal—taken both as "deeds" (cf. Deut. 28:20; Jer. 23:22) and as "grape gleanings" (cf. Deut. 24:21; Isa. 17:6, 24:13). 12. O Throne of Glory A vocative, addressed to the ancient Temple.5 The purpose of the invocation is not immediately clear. Given that this phrase intrudes between verses 11 and 13 (Kimhi), which together build an extended simile around the verb 'azav (leave, forsake), it has been variously contextualized. For example, R. Saadiah Gaon followed the Targum in linking verse 12 to the end of verse 11 and thus understood the passage as teaching that destruction would come from God's heavenly Temple (he interpreted naval, "fool," as "destruction"; cf. Jer. 14:21). R. Samuel ibn Tibbon linked verse 12 to verse 10 and understood the passage as an assertion that God would judge His creatures. The phrase has also been understood as an oath sworn "[by the] Throne" that "Israel's hope is the Lord." 6 13. O Hope oflsrael! O LORD! Jeremiah's cry of pathos. God is not only the focus of trust, but the source of hope and "the Fount of living waters [mekor mayim hayyim]", Calling God "Hope" (mikveih) condenses both theological ideas, as this noun puns on a pool for ritual immersion (mikveh)7 It thus conveys the notion of divine purification, as well. This very idea was taught by Rabbi Akiva, when he interpreted "O Hope oflsrael! O LORD!" as "The LORD is the mikveh (ritual pool) oflsrael" adding: "Just as the mikveh purifies the impure, so does the Holy Blessed One purify Israel" (M. Yoma 8:9). The notion of God as a source of nourishment counterpoints the prophet's earlier critique of the people who abandoned the "Fount of living waters [mekor mayim hay^yim]" to hew broken and waterless cisterns of their own (Jer. 2:13). The theme of the divine as the fount of spiritual bounty recurs in rabbinic and medieval mystical sources.8 151
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HAR-BE-HUKKOTAI 151
Those... who tumfrom You NJPS paraphrases. Hebrew ve-sumy literally means "and those who turn from Me." See Joseph Kara.9 For this verb used to indicate turning from God, see Jer. 17:5. The continuity "shall be doomed" is also a paraphrase; and it matches a speculative emendation ofyikkatevu (shall be written) to yikkaretu, or the like.10 The theme of the inscription of sin echoes Jer. 17:1 (also with ketuvah, "written"). 11 14. Heal me, O LORD The haftarah concludes with this request. In its original context, it initiates a prayer that wishes for the destruction of leremiah's enemies (ler. 17:18). The Sages truncated this prayer, leaving only this line. The result is an appeal for divine aid that balances the opening line (16:19). 12 In later lewish tradition this prayer has been incorporated into the Amidah, with the personal pronoun ("me") changed into the collective plural ("us"). It forms the Eighth Benediction, known as the blessing of "Health" (B. Megillah 17b) or "The Benediction of the Sick" (J. Berakhot 2:4). Our text requests healing and salvation. According to a formulation found in the old Palestinian rite, the request begins: "Heal us, O L O R D our God, from the sickness of our hearts."13 Both versions place the desire for divine healing at the center of religious consciousness. The syntax of the phrase ("heal me . . . and let me be healed") is of the action-result type, in which the same verbal stem is repeated. This style is a fairly common feature with leremiah—occurring twice in 17:14, in 11:18 and 20:7, and twice in 31:18. 14 The concluding affirmation, "for You are my glory" echoes the Deuteronomic formula in Deut. 10:21. See also the phrase inPs. 109:1.
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E H A F T A R A H A N D
PARASHAH
Theparashah concludes the Book of Leviticus with a series of blessings and curses that may befall a worshiper, depending upon obedience or disobedience to God and His covenant (Lev. 26: 3, 14-15). These rewards and punishments are set forth in detail and correspond to the central image of the haftarah: blessings for those who trust in God, and curses for those who spurn His ways (ler. 17:5-8). Several verbal links reinforce this thematic correlation. On the positive side, leremiah states that the blessed person who "trusts" (yivtah) in the Lord will be like a well-planted "tree," which "send[s] forth its roots by a stream \yuvat\" and "does not cease to yield fruit [^m]" (ler. 17:8). This image of earthly beneficence reinforces the promise in theparashah that the faithful will live in a fertile land—a land that will yield its "produce" (yevulah) and its "trees" their "fruit" (piryo), and one in which its inhabitants may dwell "securely" (la-vetah) (Lev. 26:4-5). On the other hand, leremiah fulminates against the cultic travesties practiced by the people of ludah with their "altars and sacred posts, by verdant trees, [and] upon lofty hills" (ler. 17:2). This condemnation refers to the practice of nature or fertility worship, long condemned as a feature of Canaanite religion. It is repeatedly mentioned in the Torah as a seduction awaiting the people in the Promised Land. Hence, xhepamshah virulently outlaws such behavior and announces God's doom against the disobedient people's "cult places" and "incense stands" (Lev. 26:30).
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HAR-BE-HUKKOTAI
152
numbers
nn^n
Haftarah for Be-midbar "QTOD ASHKENAZIM HOSEA2:l-22 SEPHARDIM HOSEA 2:1-22
For the life and times of Hosea and a consideration of his prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of Hosea" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah opens with a dramatic prophecy of renewal and blessing for the people of Israel (Hos. 2:1-3). The rejected nation (called lo} 'ammi, "Not-My-People") shall be called "Children-of-the-Living-God," and the inhabitants of the southern region of Judah shall be joined with the northern population of Israel as one community. This restoration reverses the rejection proclaimed against the nation for their religious apostasy (Hos. 1:2-8). The process of reconciliation is dramatized in a succession of scenes of divine reproof and solicitation (Hos. 2:4-19). The culmination is a renewal of the covenant and a declaration of vows (w. 20-21). By this means, Israel is espoused to God forever—along with her children (called 'ammi, "My People," and ruhamah, "LovinglyAccepted" [w. 3, 25]). According to the superscription (Hos. 1:1), Hosea prophesied during the reign of the Israelite king Jeroboam II (784-748 B.C.E.). This is said to correspond to the reigns of the Judean monarchs Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (769-698 B.C.E.). If the prophet began to prophesy toward the end of the reigns of Jeroboam II and Uzziah, his prophecies of doom would coincide with the advent of the Assyrian empire—and its growing power in the west. Assyria invaded Israel first in 733, and then in 722 B.C.E., when it sent the ten northern tribes into exile. Looking beyond this destruction, Hosea envisions a national renewal in the future. PART 1. REVIVAL AND RESTORATION OF ISRAEL (Hosea 2:1-3) The haftarah opens with a prophecy of national renewal. Israel (the north) is promised a revival of population and a reconciliation with God. Together with the people of Judah, Israel will assemble under a common leader and shall "rise from the ground" on the great "day of Jezreel" (v. 2). This forecast reverses the fate proclaimed earlier—especially the doom to befall the nation for the idolatrous acts and "bloody deeds at Jezreel" perpetrated by the royal House o f j e h u (1:4). PART 2. ARRAIGNMENT FOR APOSTASY (Hosea 2:4-15) a. Hosea 2:4-7 The Lord calls upon Hosea and his fellow northern Israelites to contend with their mother and urge her to "put away her harlotry from her face." The mother is the embodiment of the nation, which has gone astray after false "lovers" (gods), whereas the children are the brood conceived shamelessly through acts of promiscuity (apostasy). Initially proclaiming a rejection of matrimonial ties ("she is not My wife" [v. 4]), God calls upon the children to persuade their mother to reject her ways, lest they be disowned along with her (v. 6). The symbolism of a wife and children of whoredom carries over from the previous chapter, where Hosea is bidden to take a harlot to wife in order to dramatize the apostasy and waywardness of the nation (l:2-9;cf.2:6). b. Hosea 2:8-15 Hoping for reconciliation, God hedges the path of His people's pursuit of false worship (w. 8-9). But the "wife" persists in her folly and does not realize that it is God alone—and not the Canaanite Baalim—who provides all her sought-after benefits (v. 10). He will therefore take stronger measures against her and destroy the natural bounty of the land in 153
HAFTARAH FOR B E - H A ' A L O T E K H A
the face of "her lovers" (v. 12). Thus will the people be punished "for the days of the Baalim," when they "brought them offerings . . . forgetting Me" (v. 15). PART 3. RECONCILIATION AND RENEWAL (Hosea 2:16-22) a. Hosea 2:16-19 God initiates the renewal by leading the people into the desert and then back to the Land. Beloved of God, the nation will respond positively as in former times, "when she came up from the land of Egypt." This moment of reconciliation is sealed by the people's rejection of the names ofBaal and their evocation of God as Ishi, "My Husband." b. Hosea 2:20 The renewal is blessed by a return of natural bounty and peace. c. Hosea 2:21-22 In conclusion, God promises to espouse the nation to Him forever with justice, mercy, and faithfulness. The people shall thus know the Lord and be devoted to Him. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The three parts of the haftarah incorporate the judgment and doom to befall Israel into a larger framework of physical and spiritual restoration. Hope is proclaimed from the very outset, thus indicating that divine mercy transcends judgment for sin. False knowledge will be converted to renewed devotion. The people forgot the Lord and sought other gods, thinking that these deities would provide for their needs (Hos. 2:7). Little did they know or "consider" {yade'ah) that all sustenance comes from the Lord (Hos. 2:10). In the end, this transformed perspective will win the day, and the people shall know the Lord and be "devoted" (ve-yada'at) to His service (v. 22). 1 The prophet marks these shifts of attitude by symbolic changes of name. The people named "Not-My-People" (lo} 'ammi [Hos. 2:1 and 1:9]) and "Not-Accepted" (lo} mhamah [1:6]) at the outset, to indicate their rejection by God, will in the end be called "My People" ('ammi) and "Lovingly Accepted" (mhamah) (Hos. 2:3; cf. v. 25)—and collectively" Children-of-the-Living-God" (benei }el hay 2:1])—in token of their reconciliation with God. Correspondingly, God will also be renamed. No longer will the people call Him Baali, but rathier Ishi, "My Husband" (v. 18). These shifts of status are underscored by different uses of the particle lo} (not)—or by its strategic absence. Thus, the rejected people called "Not-My-People" (lo} 'ammi) shall be accepted as "My People" ('ammi), the removal of the negative functioning as the symbolic cancellation of the nation's rejection by God. Correspondingly, God's shift from rejection of the nation to its espousal is marked by the transformation of an old formula of divorce. At first proclaiming through His children that their mother "is not [/o^] My wife and I am not her husband [lo} }ishah]" (Hos. 2:4), God subsequently reverses the procedure when He says that in the future the people shall call Him "My Husband" (v. 18). Clearly this title is more than a preferred name. Since God does not invite the people to call Him by His holy name YHWH, one may assume that the designation Ishi has been introduced to counterpoint the initial formula of rejection (lo} 'ish-ah) and thus indicate the new "marital status" oflsrael. Significantly, the promise that Israel shall call God "My Husband" is followed by His declaration of covenantal espousals—thereby sealing the restored relationship with the people. A third example of the strategic use of lo} takes us to the theological core of the haftarah. God initially hoped to bring Israel back from her wayward path by frustrating the people's acts of apostasy—hedging her roads with thorns—so that she would become frustrated with her new lovers and "return" to her "first husband" (Hos. 2:8-9). But this did not happen, and she "did not consider" or know (lo}yade'ah) that it was God "who bestowed on her the new grain and wine and oil," not to mention the silver and gold that she used to decorate the Baalim (v. 10). Israel's apostasy is thus portrayed as rooted in a false knowledge of divine beneficence. Since this has led her astray, a reversal of this condition is necessary. Concluding the series of espousals, God proclaims that through His commitment to justice and mercy and steadfastness the nation shall "know [ve-yada^at]" (NIPS: "be devoted to") the Lord (Hos. 2:22). Nevermore shall they falsely attribute the bounty of the earth to the Baalim but shall know that its true source is God alone.2 Hosea is the first of the prophets to portray the covenant between God and Israel as a marriage. After him, leremiah (2-3) and Ezekiel (16 and 23) make strong uses of the motif—both HAFTARAH FORB E - H A ' A L O T E K H A154
positively, in terms of Israel's loyalty and devotion; and negatively, in terms of the people "whoring" after false gods and political alliances. Later prophetic traditions developed this theme further, portraying the reconciliation of God and Israel after the exile as the renewal of marriage between a "husband" and his "divorced" wife (cf. Isa. 54:4-7; 62:4-5). It was presumably this perception of the covenant as grounded in the sanctity of love and marriage that led the ancient sages to interpret the Song of Songs as a dialogue of covenant love and longing between Israel and her God. 3 Many midrashic motifs bolstered this intuition, thereby giving permanent spiritual status to Hosea's daring motif. 4 C O M M E N T S
Hosea 2:1-3. This section anticipates the redemptive conclusion (w. 16-20) and intervenes between the two negative judgments against Israel (1:2-8 and 2:3-15). For this reason, many moderns suggest that Hos. 2:1-3 originally occurred at the end of the prophecy, along with the other references to a positive renaming of the nation in verse 25. This is hard to substantiate, and the sequence of prophecies remains difficult. The units oscillate between doom and redemption; their chronology is confusing. A further complication lies in the two occurrences of the motif of whoredom and children of whoredom. In chapter 1, the wife symbolizes the Land of Israel and the children the northern tribes. By contrast, in chapter 2, the wife is wayward Israel (the national collectivity), and the children are embodiments of the people that are appealed to for spiritual renewal. The haftarah only presents the second pattern and thus also omits God's opening command that Hosea take a woman of whoredom to wife (1:2). Since the latter initiates an allegorical drama in which the prophet represents God—who is betrayed by infidelity—the absence of this command in our haftarah produces a different effect. The opening divine promise (2:1-3) now continues with God's words to the people (the children) regarding the nation as a whole (the wife). The people's betrayal of their covenantal bond thus occurs within the context of love; and the images of a faithless mother and her children function as a rhetorical figure of rejection and judgment. 1. The number... like that ofthe sands ofthe sea This image recalls the promise to Abraham (Gen. 15:5), and variations recur in other patriarchal blessings (Gen. 22:17; 32: 13). The sharp juxtaposition of this promise with the preceding words of doom introduces the theme of divine mercy and restoration from the outset. OJPS provides a transition through the translation "Yet the number . . .." NJPS captures the unqualified promise, which works best for the haftarah that begins with this verse. instead of Hebrew bi-mkom, like tahat 'asher (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi). The Targum renders "from the place" (viz., exile), reading (exegetically?) ba-makom. Compare also R. Eliezer of Beaugency.5 YouareNot-My-People
See H o s . l : 9 [Transl.].
Children-of-the-Living-God This positive designation has no negative correlate in the previous chapter (unlike the others). The epithet }el hay, "Living God" is unusual, though not unknown (Josh. 3:10; Pss. 42:3 and 84:3). For the form 'elohim hayyim ("Living God"; the inclusive plural of majesty), see Deut. 5:23, 1 Sam. 17:26, and 2 Kings 19:4. 2. "head Hebrew ro'sh, used as a leader also in xhcpamshah, Num. 1:4, as well as Num. 14:4 and Judg. 11:8 (NJPS: "commander"). The passage was interpreted as messianic by medieval commentators (Rashi; Kimhi). they shall risefrom theground Meaning, perhaps, "from their wretched condition," or "to ascendancy over the land" [Transl.]. The image seems to point to rejuvenation of the national condition, particularly through a rise in population. This is apparently the issue behind the same idiom in Exod. 1:10. 155
HAFTARAH FOR B E - H A ' A L O T E K H A
the day of Jezreel That is, the day when the name "Jezreel" will convey a promise (2: 23-25) instead of a threat (1:4-5) [Transl.]. 3. call The Lord addresses Hosea and his fellow North Israelites; see 1:9. The mother is the nation; her children the individual North Israelites [Transl.]. 4. Rebuke your mother God addresses members of the nation (the children) to rebuke or contend with the mother Israel as a people for her harlotrous ways (Kimhi). The language of "rebuke" (riv) introduces a forensic dimension and charges the people with abandonment of God. 6 This accounts for the formula of divorce ("she is not My wife and I am not her husband"), the threat of stripping and punishment, and the citation of the mother's own words as self-incriminating evidence and proof of infidelity (w. 4-7). Verse 4 strongly suggests divine rejection; reconciliation follows later, as the ultimate goal of the accusation process.7 In other sources, the issue of divorce and remarriage after the wife's intervening wedlock with another is posed as a legal problem (Jer. 3:1; cf. Deut. 24:1-4). The matter serves as a foil to emphasize divine mercy and reconciliation (Jer. 3:4). 8 The whole notion of God's divorce of Israel is bluntly rejected in Isa. 51:1. Nevertheless, the legal matter nettled later commentators. One solution was to invoke older rabbinic precedents that a writ of divorce would be canceled if the parties reconciled prior to its deliverance (see Rashi). Various prophets utter a divine riv against the nation and juxtapose the beneficence of God with human failings. Compare Jer. 2:4-9 + 10-37, with its charges, citations, evidence, and threats. The punishment of stripping and shaming is a feature of the motif in various passages (see v. 12; also Ezek. 16:36-39). These elements may have been part of common law or practice in ancient Israel. Evidence for such behaviors is found in Mesopotamian legal sources.9 she is notMy -wife /Andl am not her husband The guilt of the wife is juridically emphasized by this divorce formula. The second part of the repudiation, "I am not her husband" (Hebrew ve-'anokhi lo} }ish-ah), recalls the old Jewish divorce formulary "I am not your husband" ('eini ishekh) rejected by later halakhah (B. Kiddushin 5b; cf. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Ishut 3:1 and Hilkhot Gerushin 1:4). This language of repudiation recalls the positive marriage formula "I am her husband and she is my wife" known from early Jewish legal practice, preserved in the Aramaic papyri found at Elephantine, Egypt, 10 and elsewhere.11 Such formulas were replaced in traditional Jewish practice by another model ("You are consecrated to me . . . according to the laws of Moses and Israel"). Likewise, the divine repudiation formula in Hos. 1:9, "I will not be your [God]," is a striking reversal of the opening line of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:2), as well as such covenantal assertions as "I will take you to be My people, and I will be your God" (Exod. 6:7; cf. Lev. 26:45; Deut. 26:17-18). The prophet thus utilizes diverse legal formulas in his rhetoric, dramatizing the divine-human relationship in concrete and realistic ways. 5. naked ...ason the day she was born Presumably, in Egypt; compare Targum, Rashi, and Ibn Ezra. The topic is developed as a motif of divine care in Ezek. 16:7 and 22. 7. Because she thought Literally, "for she said" (OJPS); Hebrew ki }amrah. This is an expression of self-incrimination; see also in verse 14. 9. seek them... neverfind them Hosea uses the verbs bikkesh (seek) and matza} (find) to stress the failure of the pursuit of false gods. Elsewhere this pattern is used positively, in order to emphasize God's readiness to respond to Israelite entreaty. Compare Deut. 4:29 andjer. 29: 13. In Isa. 65:1, God says that He will be present (lit., "found") even though He was not sought out. The verbal pattern was also used to express search for a beloved person; see Song of Songs 3:1-2 and 5:6. CC
I -mllgo and 'return to myjirst husband" This suggests an intervening second marriage and divorce (initiated by the woman). Such remarriage was illegal according to Deuteronomic law (Deut. 24:1-4). The present situation is not a court case but uses legal features as rhetorical HAFTARAH FORB E - H A ' A L O T E K H A156
tropes for the purpose of dramatizing Israel's relationship with God. 12 The topic also occurs in ler. 3:1, again to highlight divine rejection and reconciliation.13 lO.Andgold—which they usedfor Baal Israel misuses the bounty of God for idolatrous rites. Such and other acts of ungrateful apostasy are depicted in full detail in Ezek. 16:16-22. In a later rebuke, Hosea repeats the matter: "Of their silver and gold they have made themselves images, to their own undoing" (8:4). 11.1 -will take back ttebrewve-hitzalti. For this meaning with respect to goods, compare Ibn Ezra on this verse and on Gen. 31:9. The same verb (in thepi'el form) is used to indicate the dispossession of the Egyptians (Exod. 3:22; 12:36). 14. afee For harlotry. Hebrew'etnah; this term is like the \tnan paid to a harlot (Hos. 9:1 and Deut. 23:19; cf. Ibn Ezra, following Ibn lanah). The word for a harlot's fee etnah) puns on the payment itself (te'enatah, "her fig trees" [v. 14]), 14 and it alludes to terminology for sexual "passion" (ta'anatah), also used in polemics mocking Israel's whoring after false gods (ler. 2:24). Harlot's hire "given" to paramours is mentioned also in Ezek. 16:26 and 33. 15 15. days ofthe Baalim Baalim used in the plural here and in verse 19, presumably to correspond to the many "lovers" (cf. 2:7, 9, 12, 14). Baal was the Canaanite god of the storm and fertility. His name is used as a collective noun in ludg. 2:11 and 8:33 and with the feminine Ashtaroth in ludg. 10:6. Among different regional Baal cults, note the references to the Baal of Hermon (ludg. 3:3) and of Samaria (1 Kings 16:32); also mentioned are the cult ofBaal-peor (Num. 25:3; Hos. 9:10) andofBaal-zebub ofEkron (2 Kings 1:2). 16. through the -wilderness Or, "into the desert." The image has been interpreted as a metaphor for the exile (Rashi; Kimhi; Rabbi Eliezer of Beaugency) or the devastated homeland (Ibn Ezra), where God will comfort the nation and begin the process of renewal. Alternatively, the desert/wilderness is a figure for the revelation of God (cf. Hos. 13:5) and the place where Israel demonstrated its ancient faithfulness to Him (ler. 2:2). Hosea may therefore use the theme of the desert typologically, in order to represent these ancient events anew—even as he uses the topic of the Valley of Achor (Hos. 2:17) to represent the entrance into the Land, and the theme of espousals (w. 21-22) to recall the covenant at Sinai (see below). 16 From this perspective, the prophecies of hope project a renewal of sacred history. In fact, the prophet explicitly speaks of Israel's response to God with reference to "the days of her youth, when she came up from the land of Egypt" (v. 17). 17. her vineyards The image is used here to depict the Land as a whole; in Isa. 5 :l-7, it functions as a metaphor for the people of Israel. The restored vineyards counterpoint the destruction of the vines in verse 14 (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi); similarly, the covenant with the beasts of the field (v. 20) counterpoints their former rapacity (v. 14). the Valley ofAchor A desolate region; compare Isa. 65:10 and losh. 7:25-26 [Transl.]. This may refer to the scene of Achan's sin at the beginning of the conquest (losh. 7:24-26) (Kimhi). That ancient site of infidelity will now become a gateway of renewal. According to 1 Chron. 2:7, Achan is called Achar. Alternatively, the phrase is simply a metaphor marking the ancient entrance into the Land in terms of a "Valley of Trouble" and counterpoints it with the promise that the people will reenter the Land through a "Gate of Hope" (Rashi). 18. Ishi This is the term for "husband," used figuratively for God already in verse 9 and as part of the divorce formula in verse 4. In this context it counterpoints the term Baali, "My Baal." Such a designation for a husband evokes the Canaanite god of that name, with whom the people sinned—hence it is rejected. Theologically, the fact that God says that the people have called Him Baali reinforces the category mistake with which he charged them earlier. The people thought that they should turn to the Baalim for food and sustenance, not knowing that all this truly came from YHWH alone (v. 10). 157
HAFTARAH FOR B E - H A ' A L O T E K H A
19.1 will remove the names ofthe Baalim God will unilaterally bring about the people's transformation through words of loving-kindness (v. 16), removal of the pagan terms from the nation's mouth (v. 19), and gifts of espousal (w. 21-22). N o human act of repentance is indicated. names ...be mentioned Hebrew shemot. . . yizzakheru. For other uses of this pattern in which a divine name will or will not be mentioned, see Josh. 23:7; Amos 6:10; and Ps. 20: 8. In this context of a denunciation of foreign gods, one may sense an allusion here to God's revelation of His name YHWH to Moses, saying: "This shall be My name [shemi] forever, this My appellation [zikhri] for all eternity" (Exod. 3:15). 21-22. God promises an everlasting espousal, an unalterable commitment. 17 His act includes the gifts of (be-, "with") "righteousness and justice," "goodness and mercy" [OJPS: "loving-kindness" and "compassion"], and "faithfulness" as the bride-price. 18 These are the central biblical terms for covenantal fidelity and social ethics.19 The divine formula of espousal is recited by many Jews daily, upon binding the strap of the arm phylactery around the fingers of their hand. It now constitutes an ever-renewed commitment of the worshiper to be bound to God through justice and loving-kindness. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D THE
PARASHAH
The parashah speaks of a census of the Israelite nation at the beginning of the second month of the second year after the Exodus (Num. 1:1). This reckoning (mispar shemot [1:2]) follows the erection of the Tabernacle a month earlier (Exod. 40:17) and precedes the actual trek in the wilderness by three weeks (Num. 10:11). Following the covenant and the apostasy of the Golden Calf, this wandering with the Ark could thus be perceived as a time of purification prior to the nation's entrance into the Land (Maimonides, Guidefor thePerplexed 3:24). The desert (midbar) serves a similar function in the haftarah. Speaking of a subsequent time, the prophet Hosea first shows how the seductions of idolatry have (again) perverted Israel's worship and deformed its religious consciousness. He then portrays how reconciliation will come about through God's tender speech to the people in the "wilderness" (midbar [Hos. 2:16]). This act would inaugurate the restoration of the nation to their homeland—regenerated beyond all counting (lo} yissafer me-rov [Hos. 2:1]). The desert thus serves as a physical realm marking the transformation of the nation from bondage to freedom and a symbolic realm marking this same passage as a spiritual journey of rebirth. In both cases, the desert has a paradigmatic status in the life of the nation, marking change, transition, and new beginnings. By contrast, centuries of Jewish exile and wandering have brought darker aspects of the symbol of the desert to consciousness. For these readers, the desert was perceived as a wasteland and connoted a space of emptiness and suffering. Hence, the Hosean passage repeatedly served its readers as a prophecy of redemption from the dislocations of exile (see Kimhi). Such readers could thus look to Zion as the "Door of Hope" (petah tikvah [Hos. 2:7]) at the edge of the desert—the long-awaited passageway from physical suffering to spiritual renewal.
Haftarah for Naso' ASHKENAZIM JUDGES 13:2-25 SEPHARDIM JUDGES 13:2-25
For a discussion of the Book of Judges and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Judges" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)158
Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other passages from the Book of Judges recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah begins a cycle of stories associated with Samson (ludges 13-16). The narrative opens with an announcement of the hero's birth to a Danite family living near Zorah (in the southern coastal plain) and concludes with a report of his burial in his father's tomb in the same region. Between these events, Samson raises havoc among the Philistines and dies in a fit of revenge against them. The annunciation prophesies that "he shall be the first to deliver Israel from the Philistines" (ludg. 13:5). In this respect, his travail anticipates the battles waged against the Philistines into the early days of the monarchy—battles that lead to the death of Saul and the ultimate glory ofDavid. Moreover, beginning with Samson, accounts of battle against the Philistines tell of wondrous deeds of derring-do: Samson himself kills a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass (ludg. 15:15-16) and even single-handedly brings the temple of Dagon down on some three thousand others (16:25-30); David slays the Philistine hero Goliath in solo combat with a slingshot and pebbles (1 Samuel 17); and in a further act of prowess, David's nephew lonathan kills another Philistine "giant of a man, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in all" (2 Sam. 21:20). Nevertheless, a difference must be noted. Samson's acts are hot-tempered acts of revenge and not motivated by the needs of his tribe, national honor, or peace. Accounts of his brutish bravado and lust are preserved in stylized patterns and sequences, evoking pathos and humor. 1 PART 1. THE ANNUNCIATION (ludges 13:2-7) a. ludges 13:2-5 An angel of the Lord appears before the barren wife ofManoah and announces that she shall conceive and bear a son. For her part, the expectant mother must observe certain requirements: she may neither drink wine or any other intoxicant, nor eat anything unclean. The reason for this behavior is also given. The boy shall be a "nazirite to the God from the womb on" (v. 5); accordingly, no razor may touch his head either. b. ludges 13:6-7 The woman reports the wondrous appearance of the angel to her husband and repeats the prophecy and the precautions. She adds that the boy shall remain a nazirite "to the day ofhis death" (v. 7). 2 PART 2. REAPPEARANCE AND DISAPPEARANCE (ludges 13:8-23) a. ludges 13:8-14 Manoah prays that the angel reappear and give instructions concerning "the child that is to be born" (v. 8). The angel appears again to the woman, who quickly summons her husband. He thereupon asks for the instructions he had prayed for, but the angel only repeats the precautions the mother must take. In this repetition, the prohibition against shaving the boy's head is not given. b. ludges 13:15-23 Manoah wishes to honor the messenger, not knowing that he is divine. When he asks the man to eat, he is told to give an offering to the Lord; and when he asks the man's name (so as to honor him after the birth), he is denied and told that "it is unknowable" (v. 18). However, when Manoah makes his divine offering, the messenger "ascended in the flames of the altar" (v. 20), and the couple realize that he was divine. They fear death at this sight ("for we have seen a divine being" [v. 22]) but conclude that the acceptance of the offering and the announcement itself are proof of divine favor. PART 3. BIRTH, BLESSING, AND INSPIRATION (ludges 13:24-25) In due course, the woman bears a boy and names him Samson. He is blessed by the Lord and soon moves with the divine spirit in the encampment of Dan.
CONTENT AND MEANING The heavenly messenger appears unexpectedly, with no account of any prior divine solicitation during the woman's barrenness. Thus when the annunciation comes, it has an oracular quality—reminiscent of the appearance of the divine messengers to Abraham by the terebinths of 159
HAFTARAH FOR SHELAH-LEKHA
Mamre (Genesis 18). On that occasion, heavenly guests come to the patriarch's tent and announce that the barren Sarah would soon conceive and bear a son (Gen. 18:10), and this announcement does indeed come to pass, "at the set time of which God had spoken" (Gen. 21:1-2). The common stylization of these annunciation scenes was presumably due to established conventions. 3 Similarly, the disappearance of a divine messenger in the flame of an altar sacrifice (Judg. 13:20) recalls the scene of Gideon and the angel of the Lord, who vanishes after a divine fire ignites a sacrifice by the terebinths of Ophrah (Judg. 6:11-22). Particularly notable is the influence of other biblical traditions upon the language and ideals of the haftarah. According to Judg. 13:5, the woman is instructed regarding her newborn to "let no razor [morah] touch his head \ya'aleh 'al ro'shoi], for the boy is to be a nazirite to God." This formulation recalls the rule formulated in Num. 6:5, in which a person consecrated as a "nazirite of the L O R D " must let "no razor [ta'ar] . . . touch his head [ya'avor 'al ro'sho]" Despite the slightly variant terminology, it is clear that both texts deal with a comparable ritual status in which the hair of one's head may not be shorn. 4 This similarity holds even though Samson's status is imposed (by divine revelation) before birth and for his lifetime (Judg. 13:7), whereas the status of the nazirite according to the Torah is periodic and based on a personal vow (Num. 6:2). 5 In both cases, hair may not be shorn during the period during which the consecration is ritually in effect. The shearing of Samson's hair through the wiles of Delilah (Judges 16) thus desacralizes the hero (symbolized by his loss of divine power) and is a motif that is meaningful only against the background of the hero's lifelong status as a nazirite.6 Other features of the Pentateuchal rule also echo in Judges 13. For example, Samson's mother is proscribed from drinking ('al tishti) any "wine or other intoxicant" (Judg. 13:4, 7) during the period of conception and childbearing. Correspondingly, the Torah states that the nazirite himself must desist from drinking (lo} yishteh) "wine and any other intoxicant" (including the vinegar of wine or any other intoxicant, anything in which grapes have been steeped, or even fresh or dried grapes [Num. 6:3]). Thus, in the case of our haftarah, the mother of the consecrated child observes certain naziritic stringencies. Nothing bearing on this proscription is mentioned in the Torah, which deals exclusively with cases of self-imposed vows. Perhaps there was some (unrecorded) ritual difference that distinguished what a lifelong or short-term nazirite could drink (or eat), and it was this theme that the narrator exploits. Given such stylistic adaptations and allusions, the situation of Hannah is of comparative interest. According to 1 Samuel I, Hannah is barren and goes periodically to the shrine of Shiloh to pray for a male child. On the particular occasion recorded in the Book of Samuel (chap. 1), she vows to God that if her prayer is granted she will "dedicate [the son] to the LORD for all the days ofhis life; and no razor shall ever touch his head [u-morah lo'ya'aleh 'al ro'sho]" 1 Sam. 1: l l ) . 7 As she goes on praying, Eli (the High Priest of Shiloh) takes her for someone intoxicated and upbraids her; but Hannah denies this charge and states that she has "drunk no wine or other strong drink" (viz., intoxicant) (1 Sam. 1:15). 8 Eli thereupon prays that God grant the woman's request, and Hannah soon conceives and bears a son. She fulfills her vow when the lad is weaned and devotes her son Samuel to the shrine—where he finds "favor both with God and with men" (1 Sam. 2:26). Several naziritic features are manifest in this narrative. Most noticeable is the condition of Hannah's vow. She says that if God will grant her a male child, she will dedicate him for life to the Lord and "no razor shall ever touch his head" (1 Sam. 1:11). The mother's vow must therefore be included among the naziritic features of the text; for although it is Hannah who promises her male issue to God, and not the individual himself, the notion of becoming a votary devotee of God through a vow is an explicit feature of the naziritic law in the Torah. Thus, in biblical times, a person might decide to enter this ritual state through a vow uttered in gratitude for having received some divine beneficence or as a precondition for the fulfillment of some beneficence by God. In the case of Hannah, the vow is to give to the Lord that part of her that would in fact constitute the fulfillment of her prayer (the first fruit of her womb). These allusions to biblical law, the motif of Hannah's drunken appearance in worship, and her own denial of that condition HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)160
through a verbatim reference to the liquids forbidden a nazirite suggest that the writer of 1 Samuel 1 has utilized features of the naziritic law in order to dramatize the pathos of the scene. As in the Samson cycle, the language of the rule reverberates thematically throughout the narrative. 9 The repetition of episodes and the use of words previously spoken give Judg. 13:2-25 an epic or at least folktale-like quality. As part of this aural effect, verbal puns play a significant role. The conclusion to the scene of the angel's appearance is exemplary (13:18-20). In response to Manoah's request for his name, the divine being demurs and says that "it is unknowable" {peli,)\ but as Manoah proceeds to give a meal offering to the Lord, "a marvelous \maphliy\ thing happened": the flames ascend the altar toward the sky, and the divine being ascends in the fire. Manoah and his wife looked on in amazement and "flung themselves \va-yippelu\ on their faces to the ground." The verbal echoes thus underscore the transcendent and mundane dimensions of the episode—the spectacular and wondrous nature of the visitation and the all-too-human response of fear. Given these echoes, it is possible that the word maphli} also alludes to the Pentateuchal law in Num. 6:2—where the rule of the nazirite opens with the words: "If anyone, man or woman, explicitly \yaphliy\ utters a nazirite's vow, to set himself apart for the Lord." 10 Through such verbal plays, the folk narrative is bound to ancient Pentateuchal law.11
COMMENTS Judges 13 \2. ofthe stock of Dan This notice reflects the early area of settlement of the Danites along the southwest coast, near Philistine territories. The same location may also be reflected in ludg. 5:17. However, the Danites had difficulty securing land on the maritime plain and were driven back into the highlands by the Amorites (ludg. 1:34). Near the end of the period of the chieftains ("ludges"), much of the tribe settled in the northeastern area of the western tribes (ludges 18). They overran the city ofLaish (ludg. 18:27), also known as Leshem (losh. 19:47), and gave it the tribal name Dan. This new location is reflected in Deut. 33:22. 3. angel Etymologically, Hebrew mal'akh (angel) means "messenger." This designation is also used by the narrator in verses 13, 15-18, and 20-21. The wife ofManoah later tells her husband that "a man of God Lish ha-'elohim] came to me; he looked like an angel of God" (v. 6); and thus Manoah himself uses the expression "man of God" when praying to the Lord for a new manifestation (v. 8). Because the being had a human appearance, "Manoah did not know that he was an angel of the LORD" (v. 16). Manoah requests a repeat performance in order to verify that the oracle is of divine origin. The belief in divine messengers taking human form accounts for the varied terminology. Thus of the three "men" who announce Isaac's birth to Abraham (Gen. 18:2, 16), the two who appear before Lot in Sodom are also called "angels" (19:1). Similarly, the divine being with whom lacob wrestles is called a "man" ('ish) in Gen. 32:25, but the prophet Hosea recalls him as an "angel" (mal'akh [Hos. 12:5]). 7. eat nothing -unclean The prohibition against eating anything "unclean" (tame1'; called tum'ah in w. 7, 14) is not precise. The phrase may either extend the primary prohibition against intoxicants to include other ritually unclean food or drink or serve to embrace all other things that the Torah (in Num. 6:2-3) prohibits the nazirite to ingest (see Kimhi). Significantly, the instruction is given to the mother who shall conceive and bear the nazirite. The concern is presumably to prevent his desacralization in utero. 18. unknowable Manoah is refused his request to learn the angel's name and told that it is beyond his comprehension. The sense of "unknowable" forpelP follows Kimhi (who expands upon the Targum). In other contexts, the noun has a similar sense. Thus Moses tells the people that the divine "Instruction" he has articulated is "not too baffling [niphPet]" for them (Deut. 30:11), and lob humbly repents before God at the conclusion ofhis protests and acknowledges that he "spoke without understanding of things beyond [niphla'ot] me" (lob 42:3). The denial of a divine name recalls the encounter between lacob and an angel at the labbok ford. Indeed, 161
HAFTARAH FOR SHELAH-LEKHA
the denial is formulated with precisely the same words ("you must not ask for my name") as foundhere (v. 18; cf. Gen. 32:30). 12 25. between Zorah and Eshtaol The place name Zorah is also mentioned at the outset of the narrative (v. 2). The cities of Zorah and Eshtaol are again recorded in the last line of the cycle, marking the location of Samson's burial "in the tomb ofhis father Manoah" (Judg. 16:31). C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The haftarah andpamshah bring together two biblical traditions about the nazirite. The Pentateuchal rule in Numbers 6 formally delineates the situation for one (male or female) who enters the consecrated status of a nazirite through a vow, the ritual requirements pertaining to that condition, and the ritual process of laicization—whether by (accidental or intentional) desanctification through forbidden acts or by the successful fulfillment of the term enunciated in the vow. Nothing is stated in the Torah about lifelong vows, vows affecting others (including unborn children), vows conditional upon the realization of specific happenings, or even the nullification of such a vow (along the lines exemplified by Numbers 30). These silences ring loud and clear when the Pentateuchal rule is compared with Judges 13 and 1 Samuel 1—texts that deal with the lifelong consecration of Samson and Samuel, respectively. In particular, the haftarah presents a popular narrative of a person consecrated from conception to be a nazirite for life. Remarkably, even the mother is bidden to observe some of the prescriptions (abstention from intoxicants) ritually incumbent upon a nazirite-to-be during her pregnancy. Moreover, the mother has not entered this state through her own personal vow. The narrative case of Samson suggests that in some Israelite circles a woman could consecrate her unborn child to God either in obedience to a higher authority or of her own will. In any event, Samson's ritual status makes him a vessel for the divine spirit that infuses him and inaugurates his mission (Judg. 13:25). In a comparable way, Jeremiah is designated by God to be a prophet from the womb and is fully consecrated to this status by the touch of God and the divine words put into his mouth (Jer. 1:4-9). Viewed instructional^, xhepamshah and haftarah juxtapose two types of action and devotion: the one is marked by the willful decision to abstain from intoxicants and impurities, and thus approximate priestly sanctity (cf. Sifre Num. Naso' 26); the other embodies the will-less force of destiny, which is equally imbued with private and petulant passions. For the former, devotion to God is expressed through self-limitation and restraint (perhaps even to rebalance one's spiritual life; Maimonides,.M«^w^ Torah, Hilkhot De'ot 3:1); whereas for individuals like Samson, the imposition of a sacred status infuses the self with powers that transcend ordinary limits. Accordingly, whereas the ritual nazirite knowingly and deliberately serves God, and does so through a private act that must be sustained and kept in mind for a set period, a devotee like Samson does not choose his status and devotes his transformed and consecrated condition to self-centered and isolated acts of revenge. Theparashah thus shows how a layperson may become (for a time) fully consecrated "to the LORD" (Num. 6 : 1 2 ) and serve as a model of devotion and self-limitation. In contradistinction, the haftarah describes a person overwhelmed by a lifelong supernatural energy. Only derivatively and accidentally do his passions benefit others.
Haftarah for Be-ha'alotekha in^ynn ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ZECHARIAH2:14-4:7 ZECHARIAH 2:14-4:7
For Zechariah's life and message and a discussion of the Book of Zechariah as a whole, see "The Book of Zechariah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
162
the detailed discussion of the other haftarah taken from Zechariah's prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah is taken from the first part of the Book of Zechariah (chapters 1-8), which anticipates God's return to Zion and the renewal of the Temple service. According to the superscription, Zechariah's prophecies begin in the second regnal year of Darius I of Persia (520 B.C.E.), in the eighth month of that year (October). This king continued the foreign policy of Cyrus who, shortly after his conquest ofBabylon, issued an edict (in 538 B.C.E.) permitting the ludeans to return to their homeland and restore their ancient religious practices. A version of this proclamation is preserved in the Book of Ezra (1:2-4), along with an account of how the priestly and royal families of ludah led a group of returnees back to Zion—building an altar upon their arrival and laying the foundation for a Temple two years later (Ezra 3). Work on the new Temple was postponed when the leadership refused to allow the local population to join in the labor (Ezra 4:1-3), and this group interfered with the building project down to the second year of Darius I (Ezra 4:4-5, 24). At that time, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah exhorted the people to resume the building of the Temple (Ezra 5: 1-2). Haggai began to prophesy at the beginning of the sixth month (Elul) ofthat year (29 August 520 B.C.E.; see Hag. 1:1), and Zechariah two months later (in Heshvan; see Zech. 1:1). The refoundation of theTemple occurred soon thereafter, on the twenty-fourth of the ninth month (Kislev; 18 December 520 B.C.E.; see Hag. 2:20), and the building was completed in four years, on the third of Adar in the sixth year of Darius's reign (13 March 516 B.C.E.; see Ezra 6:14-15). The visions and oracles that compose Zechariah 1-8 reflect an intense prophetic activity, lasting not much more than two years (Zech. 7:1 provides the date of 4 Kislev 518 B.C.E.). Repeatedly, the prophet vividly testifies to the dawn of a new era: God's reconciliation with Zion and the land, His forgiveness of sins, and the restoration of priestly and lay leadership in the persons of loshua ben lehozadak and Zerubbabel ben Shealtiel—heirs of the high priesthood and kingship, respectively. These topics are featured in the haftarah. PART 1. DIVINE ADVENT TO ZION (Zechariah 2:14-17) a. Zechariah 2 : 1 4 - 1 6 The prophet begins with God's word to Zion, telling her to rejoice for He is coming to dwell in her midst (v. 14). Following a messianic assurance that many nations will "attach themselves to the LORD" at this time (v. 1 5 ) , the prophet repeats the prophecy that God will again choose ludah and lerusalem (v. 16). b. Zechariah 2:17 Zechariah calls "all flesh" to know that the fulfillment is at hand, since the Lord is roused from His heavenly abode to dwell in Zion. PART 2. THE H I G H PRIEST'S VISION AND CHARGE (Zechariah 3:1-10) a. Zechariah 3:1-5 The prophet envisions the high priest loshua in heaven, standing before the angel of the Lord and the Satan at his right hand. At the outset, the angel invokes God's rebuke of the Satan, who apparently has just accused loshua of being unfit for priestly service; for after proclaiming loshua a "brand plucked from the fire" (i. e., a survivor of his lineage) (Zech. 3:2), 1 the angel tells his heavenly attendants to remove the priest's unclean clothes and robe him in priestly vestments with a diadem on his head. The ritual is a heavenly investiture for earthly service. b. Zechariah 3:6-9 The angel now testifies that if loshua performs his priestly duties properly, he will keep his office in God's earthly Temple and be permitted "to move about" in the heavenly shrine (v. 7). loshua is also told that the restoration of the priesthood is a sign that God will also renew the kingship ofDavid (v. 8). A stone with seven facets is then shown to loshua, whereby God will remove the "country's guilt" (v. 9). c. Zechariah 3:10 A further prophecy adds that the people will dwell in "the shade of vines and fig trees"—an old image of peace invoked here as a sign ofhope. 163
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
PART 3. A VISION OF THE MENORAH AND ZERUBBABELS CHARGE (Zechariah 4:1-7) a. Zechariah 4 : l - 6 a The prophet now envisions a golden lampstand (menorah) "with a bowl above it," with seven lamps on the bowl and an olive tree on either side of it. The prophet does not know the meaning of this vision, and the guiding angel begins an explanation. b. Zechariah 4:6b-7 The explanation (beginning atv. 10)is preceded by the Lord's word to Zerubbabel that success will come "not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit" (v. 6) and that all obstacles will be removed ("O great mountain in the path of Zerubbabel, turn into level ground!" [v. 7]). This oracle actually serves as a prologue to the angel's explanation of the two trees as the "two sons of oil" (viz., "the two anointed dignitaries," Joshua and Zerubbabel [v. 14]); but occurring as it does at the conclusion to the haftarah, the statement now functions as the divine meaning of the preceding vision. The menorah is thus understood as a symbol of God's transcendent dominion, and Zerubbabel is exhorted to know that only through His spirit will he triumph.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah begins with an announcement of God's arousal in heaven and His promise to return to Zion (part 1); it continues with the purification and investiture of the high priest and God's forgiveness of the country's sins (part 2); and it concludes with a vision of the menorah, proclaiming the authority of God's spirit and the success of Zerubbabel (part 3). God's decision to reside in Zion thus leads to the necessary cultic preparations and purifications of the priest, the Land, and the people. The two spatial poles are thus God's "holy habitation" (Temple) in heaven (Zech. 2:17) and the "Holy Land" on earth (2:16). Part 1 is replete with theological significance. It opens with God's word of comfort to "Fair Zion [bat tzion]" to "shout [ronni] for joy" (Zech. 2:14). Such a proclamation echoes the consolation addressed to the desolate city at the beginning of the nation's return from exile (Isa. 54:1). Now God announces His intent to "dwell in your midst \ve-shakhanti be-tokhekh]n (Zech. 2:15), for, the prophet adds, the Lord "will choose [bahar] Jerusalem once more [W]" (v. 16). Carefully chosen, these words of comfort actualize God's earlier statement that He "will again [cod] comfort Zion" and "choose [u-vahar:, stem b-h-r] Jerusalem again [ W]" (Zech. 1:16). Both prophecies reverse the oracle of seventy years of divine wrath (Zech. 1:12) and allude to Psalm 132, where the psalmist states that "the L O R D has chosen [bahar] Zion" (Ps. 132:13). Moreover, the psalmist says that the Lord "will clothe" the priests of Zion in salvation and "make a horn sprout ['atzmiah] for David" (Ps. 132:16-17). This clear reference to a dual (priestly and royal) leadership provides another precedent to Zechariah's concerns. In chapter 3, the prophet refers both to Joshua's investiture in "[priestly] garments" (Zech. 3:5) and to a divinely appointed "Branch [tzemahY (v. 8) who will serve alongside the high priest. Zechariah's depictions thus resonate with older, liturgical language. God's announcement to return to Zion has other resonances. His proclamation "For l o . . . I will dwell in your midst [ve-shakhanti be-tokhekh]n recalls Ezekiel's earlier vision of God's return to the new Temple and His words: "[L]et [the people] put their apostasy . . . f a r from Me, and I will dwell among them [ve-shakhanti be-tokham] forever" (Ezek. 43:9). 2 This language is not incidental. The verb "to dwell" is precisely the term found in the divine word to Solomon, when the king is told that if he (Solomon) will observe the statutes of the Torah, "I [God] will dwell [NJPS: abide] among [ve-shakhanti be-tokh]n the people of Israel and not abandon them (1 Kings 6:13). The recurrence of this terminology in Zech. 2:14 thus forges a typological link between the First and Second Temple. God will again dwell in the new sanctuary, as He did centuries before in the glorious days of Solomon. But Zechariah's oracle also evokes an earlier event, when God told Moses that if the people build Him a sanctuary in the wilderness, "I will dwell among them [ve-shakhanti be-tokhamY (Exod. 25:8). 3 Accordingly, a threefold typology of cultic indwelling spans Israelite history: beginning in the desert, with a portable shrine built en route to the Land; peaking in Solomon's day, with the construction of a permanent House for God; and concluding with the restoration HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
164
to Zion, with the building of a new Temple to receive God's presence on earth. Clearly the rebuilding of the shrine was fraught with messianic overtones—being both a new event and a restoration of religious-national glory. Zechariah's visions of Joshua in heaven and of the Temple menorah give further glimpses into the theological milieu of the times. In the first case, two features are especially salient: the purification of loshua and the charge that his faithful service "will permit [him] to move about among these attendants" (Zech. 3:7). Though obscure, this promise seems to say that the high priest would somehow function or participate in the heavenly realm—just as certain prophets could be (ecstatically) transported to heaven to participate in the divine tribunal (cf. 1 Kings 22). 4 loshua likewise appears to receive the assurance of some mystic existence on high. The idea recurs in lewish sources of late antiquity. For example, various midrashic sources provide examples of priests having ecstatic spiritual experiences in the Temple (Leviticus Rabbah 21:12) 5 and compare their service to angelic worship (Sifre Numbers 119).6 There are also extensive references to the Heavenly Temple and its service in rabbinic sources.7 But these are relatively late. Of a comparatively earlier vintage are references to an angelic priesthood and celestial Temple in the Book oflubilees, the Testament ofLevi, and elsewhere.8 Moreover, the Qumran scrolls preserve liturgies sung by the angelic priests (some of whom are called the kohanei korev, "priests of the inner sanctum"), and there are indications that these sectarians identified with this cosmic liturgy and participated in its spiritual service while the Temple was (in their view) defiled.9 Taken altogether, this body of evidence from the late Second Temple period permits the conclusion that loshua's heavenly investiture not only inaugurates his service in the earthly shrine but qualifies him to participate among the holy ones of heaven. It is perhaps not insignificant to recall, in this regard, that a slightly later contemporary of Zechariah actually calls the priest "a messenger of the L O R D ofHosts" (Mai. 2:7). Zechariah's focus on the Temple continues with his vision of the menorah (Zech. 4:l-6a). This is a solid lampstand with seven lamps; and on either side there is an olive tree. The explanation of this vision in 4:10b-14 makes it clear that the lampstand symbolizes God Himself, "the L O R D of all the earth" (v. 14); that the seven lamps are "the eyes of the L O R D , ranging over the whole earth" (v. 10b); and that the two trees are the "two sons of oil" who attend "the L O R D of all the earth" (v. 14). Theologically speaking, the Temple objects thus represent divine dominion on earth, and the trees represent the two stewards of that rule (loshua and Zerubbabel). These matters are omitted from the haftarah, which only gives the vision (not the explanation) and concludes with an oracle about human victory through God's spirit. Despite the awkwardness of this conclusion, it nevertheless highlights Zerubbabel's role in laying the foundation stone of the Temple and thus affirms the messianic importance of a descendant of David in any restoration. Moreover, by this conclusion the Rabbis emphasize that Zerubbabel's success came solely from God's "spirit" (Zech. 4:6b-7). Indeed, by giving Zechariah's prophecy the proclamatory ending "not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit," the Rabbis transformed the text into a divine warning. Groups wishing to "force the end" through military might, or support projects promising restoration of the Temple, are given divine notice of the futility of their plans.10
COMMENTS Zechariah 2:14. and I will dwell in your midst God is aroused to return to Zion from "His holy habitation" in heaven (v. 17). The language of indwelling (ve-shakhanti be-tokham) derives from the old Tabernacle traditions (Exod. 25:8) and is used to express God's dwelling in the Temple of Solomon (1 Kings 6:13) and the return of God to the postexilic Temple by Ezekiel (Ezek. 43:9). Other prophets and psalmists also use this expression to convey the presence of God in His earthly habitation (Isa. 8:18; loel 4:17; Ps. 135:21). In the Deuteronomic tradition, the verb shakhan (dwell) is used to express the indwelling of God's name, not His divine being (cf. Deut. 12:11; 14:2s). 11 Two distinct theological positions express the nature of divine immanence: one speaks of God's direct and tangible presence, the other suggests that this presence is mediated by the divine name. 165
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
In rabbinic tradition, God's attribute of providential presence was nominalized by the term Shekhinah, and the concept was developed to include divine involvement in Israel's fate both outside the Temple and outside the Land. 12 Various midrashic texts even express the notion that the Shekhinah suffers with Israel in exile and will return with it at the time of redemption. 13 In Kabbalistic sources from the twelfth century on, the Shekhinah was also conceived of as a heavenly hypostasis, symbolizing a feminine aspect of Divinity—who mediates and conveys God's fullness to earth and who serves as the heavenly Bride with which Israel enters into symbolic marriage on the Sabbath. 14 The Shekhinah thus became one of the most intimate and passionate of divine symbols and realities in ludaism. The LORD -will takejudah... asHis portion This notion is first found in Deut. 32: 9 (speaking of lacob). The ethnic unit and its territory are one and the same. The conception is that God will return to His people and His place. The exclusive dominion of God over Israel is clearly particularistic. Psalm 82:8 provides a universalistic formulation of the imagery. Zechariah's prophecy adds a striking dimension, speaking of the chosen land as 'admat ha-kodesh, "the Holy Land." The formulation is unique in the Bible, articulating a conception of the sanctity of the Land of Israel as a whole. Classical ludaism deepened this notion in several theological and ritual directions. Fully one-third of ancient rabbinic halakhah is concerned with "the laws contingent upon the Land." 15 16.
Zechariah 3:1-2. A heavenly scene is envisioned, in which God is the ludge, loshua the high priest is the defendant, and the angel of the Lord and the Accuser (satan) are the prosecuting and defense counsels, respectively. Presumably after having contended the unfitness of the priest for office, the Accuser is now rebuked by God. Because the rebuke refers to "the LORD," some interpreters have assumed that the speaker is the angel and have understood the phrase elliptically (so NIPS; cf. the Syriac version). If the Lord speaks, there is a logical continuity with the judgment of innocence on purification in verses 4-5—a judgment best rendered by God Himself. Those who assume that the angel speaks must insert a reference to him at the beginning of verses 4-5 (so NIPS). 16 Either way, the divine exhortation in verses 6-10 is enunciated by the angel. The purification of the priest's guilt comes first (v. 4, with the verb he'evir used in a rare way); 17 the purification of the Land follows and is contingent upon loshua's purity (v. 9, using the verb mashah in a unique sense; cf. the Akkadian cognate mushu meaning "exorcise").18 The Accuser's accusation may project concerns about loshua's fitness or legitimacy for office. The divine affirmation and the ritual transformation legitimate the priest and even pronounce him fit to serve as an attendant in the heavenly realm. 2. a brand pluckedfrom the fire loshua's father (Hag. 1:1; 1 Chron. 5:40-41) was exiled and his grandfather executed (2 Kings 25:18-21) by the Babylonians, but loshua returned [Transl.]. 5. apure diadem
That is, ritually pure [Transl.].
they placed the pure diadem on his head and clothed him in [priestly] garments loshua has now been rendered fit to associate with the heavenly beings (v. 7); compare Isa. 6:6-8 [Transl.]. 8. My servant the Branch loshua (the high priest) and Zerubbabel (scion of lehoiachin and the Davidic line) are joined as a pair in the Books of Ezra and Zechariah. They represent a dyarchy of priestly and royal leadership. The exclusive focus on loshua in Zechariah 3 presumably induced later tradition to add the reference to a royal scion in verse 8b (a clear interpolation). As the Branch is unspecified, a messianic expectancy was added to the text. The complementary notion of two messianic figures (one priestly and the other royal, from the lines of Aaron and David respectively) is fundamental to the messianic formulations found in the Qumran scrolls.19 In Isa. 11:1, the future scion ofDavid is called a "shoot" (hoter) and "sprout" (netzer). The metaphor of a branch (tzemah) used to depict a future king is found already in Isa. 4:2, but it HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
166
is not until the oracles in Jer. 23:5-6 and 33:14-16 that we have a fully developed use of it to prophesy the scion of David who will be established by God to bring victory and rule in justice. In the first of these cases, the royal shoot will be a tzemah tzaddik (true branch) ofDavid's line; in the second, the formulation of tzemah tzedakah (true branch) is used. These are variant designations for a legitimate ruler, similarly referred to in Phoenician inscriptions (tzmh tzdk).20 Distinctively, Zechariah uses the designation "My servant the Branch" (and cf."a man called the Branch" in Zech. 6:12). Many medieval commentators assumed this to refer to Zerubbabel (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi), but the formulation is vague. The Fifteenth Benediction of theAmidah, known as "the Benediction of David," begins with a petition that God cause "the Branch of David [tzemah David] to flourish." This messianic prayer is the last one added to theAmidah; it is unknown in ancient Palestinian sources and first noted by the Babylonian sage Rabba Bar Shila in the Babylonian Talmud (B. Pesahim 117b). 21 9. a single stone with seven eyes The stone apparently symbolizes the God-given power of the future Davidic ruler; see 4:6-7 [Transl.]. Zechariah 4:2. I see a lampstand Zechariah's vision of the lampstand (menorah) and lamps (or spouts) is different from the two major descriptions of these sacred vessels elsewhere in Scripture. He envisions a single stand with seven lamps surmounted on its top (with each lamp possibly having seven spouts, thus forty-nine lamps total) and apparently without branches.22 By contrast, the account of the Tabernacle describes a single lampstand with branches supporting the lamps (Exod. 25:31-40), and the depiction of Solomon's Temple notes ten stands (apparently without branches) set in two groups of five on each side of the inner sanctum (1 Kings 7:49). Moreover, early rabbinic tradition presumed the ten stands to be in addition to the Tabernacle menorah and fit for service (Baraita de-Melekhet ha-Mishkan 10). 23 These were taken as booty by the Babylonians (Jer. 52:19). Zechariah's version seems to be a conflation of older forms, possibly based on priestly memory. In the postexilic period, Ben Sira seems to refer to a single candlestick (Ben Sira 26:17), and this is also Josephus's testimony after the invasion of Pompey in 63 B.C.E. (Antiquities xiv, 14, 4). The earliest representation of a seven-branched candelabrum appears on the coins minted for Antigonus Mattathias, the last of the Hasmonean dynasty (40-37 B.C.E.);24 and with the destruction of the Temple by Titus, Domitian's masons (ca. 81 c.E.) carved such a candelabrum on his victory arch.25 Since Hasmonean times, the lights of the candelabrum have symbolized political freedom and religious liberty; the symbolism of an exiled menorah would be plain to all.26 6. Then he explained to me asfollows The preceding vision is of the candelabrum, lamps, and olive trees (4:2-3); but the detailed explanation of them inaugurated in verse 6a does not resume until verse 10b. Accordingly, verses 6b-10a are regarded by most modern scholars as an interpolation. (Note also that the plural reference in v. 5, "those things," is picked up only in v. 10b, "those . . . are"; the oracle that follows in v. 6 begins "this is"). The new oracle is addressed to Zerubbabel. Zerubbabel A grandson of King Jehoiachin (1 Chron. 3:17-19) and the secular head of the repatriatedcommunity (Hag. 1:1; etc.) [Transl.]. by My spirit That is, Zerubbabel will succeed by means of spiritual gifts conferred upon him by the Lord; compare Isa. ll:2ff. [Transl.]. 7. The details of the oracle have been disputed. Since medieval times, the "great mountain" has been identified with such figures as the princes of the Trans-Jordan (Rashi) or the Messiah (Ibn Ezra). The expression ha-'even ha-ro'shah (NJPS: "that excellent stone") is unspecified. The phrase may be related to ceremonies known from ancient Mesopotamian texts, in which a monarch dedicated a new Temple with a stone from the older shrine. 27 The Akkadian expression libittu mahritu (the first or former brick) provides an exact parallel to ha-'even ha-ro'shah (lit., "the first/principal stone"), with ro'shah referring to a former or primary state (cf. Ezek. 167
HAFTARAH FOR BE-HA'ALOTEKHA
36:11). 28 Similarly, the biblical reference to liturgical shouts of hen hen ("Hail! Hail!"; NJPS: "Beautiful! Beautiful!" following Rashi) in conjunction with the Temple building is also echoed by Mesopotamian texts dealing with building construction and dedication.29 The description of the foundation ceremony preserved in Ezra 3:10-13 may also be assessed in this light. There, too, we have an account of popular and liturgical celebrations, together with shouts by the people and hymnic praises by the Levites. C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Thepa-mshah and haftarah give particular attention to the ceremonial object of the menorah and its lamps. In the Torah, the context is God's word of instruction concerning the kindling of the lights in the Tabernacle during the wandering and early settlement periods; whereas in Zechariah's prophecy, the imagery is part of a vision of the future Temple and its leaders. Both texts also deal with the ritual celebrants of the shrine. In xhepa-mshah, the status of the Levites is singled out, with emphasis placed on their physical purification and the cleanliness of their garments (Num. 8:7). Their duty to keep God's charge is also stressed (Num. 8:24). Similar concerns and language are found in the haftarah, which depicts the purification of the high priest Joshua and his divine charge (Zech. 3:4-6). Sacred space, pure service, and the candelabrum of fiery lights thus link the shrine of antiquity with the future Temple. The symbolism of the menorah and lamps in the Torah is not explained there. However, in the continuation of the vision of Zechariah we learn that the candelabrum came to symbolize God Himself, and the lights His eyes, roving providentially over the earth (Zech. 4:10b-14). In subsequent postexilic texts, including Jewish Hellenistic sources and rabbinic Midrash, the lamps of the menorah also symbolized the seven heavenly bodies (sun, moon, and five visible planets). 30 This gave a more cosmic dimension to divine providence and added a transcendent aspect to the immanent presence of God—symbolized by the sacred lights in the shrine. A deeper mystery of God's providence is suggested by a pun perceived by the Sages in the wordjjullah, the term used in Zechariah's vision to indicate the "bowl" that is ro'shah ("above it" or "at the head" of the candelabrum; Zech. 4:2). Building on an identification of the menorah with Israel, one midrash suggested that the wordgullah is an allusion both to the nation's "exile" (golah) and to its "redemption" (ge'ulah), when God ("at the head") would "be with" His people for weal and woe. 31 Such a teaching underscores the two poles of Israeli historical fate—and God's intimate relationship with His people. As many midrashic homilies emphasize, God would be with His people in exile and in redemption. 32 In the present instance, these matters are fused in a dense verbal symbol about Israel with God "at its head."
Haftarah for Shelah-Lekha f7 n^W ASHKENAZIM JOSHUA2:l-24 SEPHARDIM JOSHUA 2:1-24
For a discussion of the Book of Joshua and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Joshua" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other passages from the Book of Joshua recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah is taken from the second chapter of the Book of Joshua. In preparation for his invasion of Canaan, Joshua sends forth two spies to scout the Land. "Go, reconnoiter the region," he commands, employing a verb that literally means to "see" or "spy out" (re'u) the Land (Josh. 2:1). This terminology recalls Moses' earlier command to the original twelve spies to go and "see [u-re}item] what kind of country" they are about to enter (Num. 13:18). The verbal echo signals to the reader that Joshua's commission is a second attempt to scout the Land, after HAFTARAH FOR SHELAH-LEKHA
168
the failure of the first venture. Because of their faithlessness, the generation of the desert was doomed—and denied access to the Promised Land. 1 Joshua now renews the project initiated by Moses years earlier. PART 1. THE MISSION (loshua 2:1-7) a. loshua 2:1 loshua commissions two spies to "reconnoiter the region of lericho." The men soon come to the home of Rahab, who gives them shelter. b. loshua 2:2-7 Canaanite counterespionage learns of the spies' existence and reports the matter to the king. He immediately sends orders to Rahab to deliver the invaders. She protects the Israelites by giving the false report that unknown men have come and gone. All the while, the men were hidden under some flax on her roof. PART 2. THE DEAL (loshua 2:8-14) As a quid pro quo for her protection, Rahab strikes a deal with the spies. She tells them how the rumors of God's power and Israelite victories have weakened the resolve of her people and requests a sign that she and her family will be spared. The spies give their word of honor upon their lives, provided that she not disclose their mission to anyone. PART 3. THE ESCAPE (loshua 2:15-24) a. loshua 2:15-21 Rahab advises the spies to retreat to the hills. The Israelites thereupon add to their earlier oath the provisos that if Rahab will tie a visible cord from her window and keep her family inside the house during the seige, they shall all be saved—otherwise the spies are guiltless for any death that may befall Rahab and her family. The woman agrees and sets the sign (cf. losh. 6:22-25). b. loshua 2:22-24 The spies flee to the hills until the pursuers depart and then cross back to their encampment, where they give their report to loshua. Alluding to Rahab's account of Canaanites' fears (w. 9-11), the spies exult in the assurance of a God-given victory.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is framed by the opening dispatch of the spies to scout the Land (losh. 2:1) and the concluding notice of their safe return and positive report (w. 23-24). Within this structure the events unfold, scene-by-scene: the spies first come to the house of Rahab the harlot and find shelter there; then they enter into a series of obligations with their host in recompense for her safekeeping; and finally the spies head for the hills, where they hide out until danger of their capture passes. The haftarah thus emphasizes the spies' advent to lericho, their deal with Rahab, and their escape to safety.2 These events turn on three separate commissions: (1) at the outset loshua sends (va-yishlah) spies from his encampment toward lericho (losh. 2:1); then, upon hearing an espionage report, (2) the king of lericho sends (va-yishlah) a report to Rahab to hand over the spies in her home (v. 3); and finally, after the oaths and agreements between them, (3) Rahab sends (va-tishlahem) the spies on their way home (v. 21). The verb shalah (send) thus highlights the principal actions of the narrative and marks the main spatial units. Beginning with loshua's word, the action moves from the Trans-Iordan into the land of Canaan and the home of Rahab in lericho. The transition from desert camps to a city and a home within the walls is subsequently reversed when Rahab dispatches the spies from the city to the hills—whence they cross the lordan fords and return to the camp of the Israelites. The episode thus oscillates between a focus on space and speech. Of the two, speech predominates, counterpointing the action with diverse types of dialogue. In particular, the reader is privy to the deceptions and deals, conditions and compliance, and loyalty and lies that compose the episode. The spies have no choice but to believe Rahab, despite her lies to her king. Perhaps they are encouraged by the simple fact that she requests no more than the lifesaving protection she has provided them—and that she has risked her life in so doing. But the reader is prompted to consider a more theological explanation. When Rahab gives her reasons for aiding the Israelites, 169
HAFTARAH FOR SHELAH-LEKHA
she recounts God's victories over the Egyptians and Amorites in terminology reminiscent of Israelite hymns and liturgy For example, her reference to the fear of the natives before this new foe (Josh. 2:9) precisely echoes the language ofMoses' song of victory in Exodus (Exod. 15: 1 4 - 1 6 ) ; 3 and her statement that "the L O R D your God is the only God in heaven above and on earth below" (Josh. 2:11) resonates with similar theological formulations in Deut. 4:35 and 39. 4 Rahab's words have the earmarks of a fixed liturgical phrase used for credal assertions. Significantly, the phrase that the foreigner Rahab uses is found elsewhere in the Bible by other notable strangers, who also acknowledge the greatness of YHWH among the gods. For example, when the Midianite priest Jethro (Moses' father-in-law) avers the power of the Lord over the Egyptians and brings offerings to Moses' God, he asserts: "Now I know that the L O R D is greater than all gods" (Exod. 18:11). Rahab's proclamation gives every indication that she too acknowledges the supremacy of Israel's God. Hearing this, the spies could have grounds to trust her offer of aid. Rahab goes on to report that she had heard that the Israelites troops had put the Amorites under the ban (herem) of utter annihilation (Josh. 2:10). The reference is to the tradition reported in Deut. 2:34-36—but she uses this information here in a wily way. After making this reference to the Israelite conquests, Rahab boldly requests that her act of beneficence to the spies be requited and her family saved (w. 12-13). N o similar situation is found in any of the war reports in the Book of Deuteronomy or elsewhere, where the Israelites fulfill the divine demand to annihilate the native Canaanite population. Indeed, such an arrangement would be in complete violation of the divine command to wipe out the resident population and show no mercy (Deut. 7:2). 5 Only in Deut. 20:10-18 do we find some qualification of the absolute demand, when it gives a special ruling stating that if the locals accept an Israelite call for peace, they are to be spared—though put to slave labor; whereas if they do not, the males are subject to destruction and everyone else to plunder. 6 But this deviation notwithstanding, we are struck by Rahab's attempt to strike a private deal between elements of the Canaanite population and the Israelite army.7 For this reason we must entertain the possibility that this text deliberately rejects the harsh law of herem and opts for mercy for those Canaanites who show kindness to the Israelite people. 8 A silent protest (albeit hedged with signs, oaths, and conditions) may thus lie at the heart of our narrative.9
COMMENTS Joshua 2:1. the house of a harlot Since antiquity, Jewish tradition has softened the image by interpreting the word zonah here as an "innkeeper," that is, one who "provides food" (zun) (cf. Targum, Rashi, Kimhi). There is no reason to doubt the original ascription of harlotry. It provides an ironic element in the narrative of salvation.10 4. and hidden them Literally, "and hid him" (va-titzpeno):, according to Rashi and Kimhi, she hid each one separately in order to make their hiding places inconspicuous. 10. doomed That is, placed under herein, which meant the annihilation of the inhabitants. Cf. Deut. 2:34ff. [Transl.]. 11.for the LORD your God is the only God Rahab thus expresses an exclusive monotheism. Latter midrashic tradition says that Joshua and Rahab married, and produced prophets (including Jeremiah) and priests. Compare Yalkut Shimoni, Joshua 2; Yalkut Shimoni, Jeremiah 1 (par. 256f); B. Zevahim 116a; and B. Megillah 14b-15a. 11 According to Matt. 1:5, Rahab was the mother of Boaz and thus an ancestress of David.
19. and if anyone ventures outside the doors This condition to the oath recalls the formulation of Jephthah's private vow—which victimized his daughter on his return from battle (Judg. 11:31). 22. and stayed there three days This period of hiding bothered medieval rabbinic commentators, who saw a contradiction between this event and a three-day period of preparations announced by Joshua (1:11; cf. 3:2); they thus suggested that the events in Joshua 2 occurred HAFTARAH FOR SHELAH-LEKHA
170
before that order (so Rashi, Ralbag, and the Gaon of Vilna, on 1:11; and R. David Kimhi, on 3:2). But this measure is unnecessary. The narrator, by placing the spy episode between the order ( 1 : 1 1 ) and its execution ( 3 : 2 ) , clearly wished to suggest simultaneous action. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The dominant connection between xhepamshah and the haftarah turns on the two delegations of spies sent to scout the Land. The little faith of the original spies (except Caleb and loshua) results in a popular protest against Moses' plan and God's punishment of that entire generation; only the innocent children (and the two faithful spies) are spared for entrance into the Land (Num. 14: 3 0 - 3 3 ; Deut. 1 : 3 9 ) . Hence, when loshua prepares for the crossing of the lordan, he readies himself and the people to fulfill Moses' original project. But even more is at stake. The events in loshua 2 also begin to bring closure to hopes and prophecies found at the beginning of national memory, when God promised settlement of the Land to Abraham in a vision (Gen. 1 5 : 1 6 - 2 1 ) . Despite the complementarity of the pamshah and haftarah, one ironic connection stands out. After the failure of the first venture to reconnoiter the Land, God bemoans the people's disregard of the many "signs" (Jotot) of divine power (Num. 1 4 : 1 1 ) . The wonders of Egypt left them faithless. H o w striking, therefore, that loshua's spies exchange "signs" ('otot) with the harlot of lericho (their oath; her cord). It is as if the miracles of the past have been reduced to human deals. Nevertheless, the spies learn faith from Rahab. When they return to loshua in the Transjordan, they use her very words to them (in losh. 2 : 9 ) and say: "The L O R D has delivered the whole land into our power . . . all the inhabitants of the land are quaking before us" (v. 24). With this assertion they nullify the statement of fear given by the original spies, who spoke of gigantic Canaanites and their superior power (Num. 1 3 : 3 1 - 3 2 ) .
Haftarah for Korah
n~lp
ASHKENAZIM ISAMUEL11:14-12:22 SEPHARDIM I SAMUEL 11:14-12:22
For the contents and theology of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from this book (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah marks the end of regional leadership under inspired "judges" and the onset of royal rule of the nation. Samuel bridges the two periods—being both a prophet-like figure who judges the people in various locales and the one divinely enjoined to anoint a monarch. But the leader initially refuses to go along with the people's desire for a king "like all the nations." For Samuel, the shift from theocracy to monarchy is theologically unconscionable—a betrayal of God and divine rule. Only God's support for the popular request changes his mind (1 Samuel 8). The people's desire for a king is referred to repeatedly in Samuel's final speech. In the haftarah, Samuel continues to believe that the nation's request is a betrayal of God's ongoing and gracious care. He even brings the nation to a confession of this fact—and to a state of anguish and fear of divine abandonment. The people thus beseech Samuel for divine intercession, lest they die for their sins. His response is to exhort them to serve the Lord wholeheartedly and to know that "For the sake of His great name, the L O R D will never abandon His people, seeing that the L O R D undertook to make you His people" ( 1 Sam. 1 2 : 2 2 ) . PART 1 . THE ASSEMBLYAND CORONATION ( 1 Samuel 1 1 : 1 4 - 1 5 ) Samuel summons the people to Gilgal for the coronation of Saul. Since the anointment has already occurred, it is not mentioned here. We are rather told that the people "declared" or enthroned Saul. 171
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
PART 2. SAMUELS SPEECH (1 Samuel 12:1-22) a. 1 Samuel 12:1-5 Samuel begins his final oration with a reemphasis on the people's demand for a king, his accession to their request, and the integrity of his service to the people all these years. The people affirm his honest leadership. b. 1 Samuel 1 2 : 6 - 1 2 Samuel recounts "the kindnesses that the LORD has done to you and your fathers" (v. 7) —beginning with the descent of Jacob to Egypt and continuing with the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, and the victories over various oppressors, up through Saul's victory over the Ammonites. A succession of historical periods are thus marked: the patriarchal era; the Exodus; the conquest; and the time of the chieftains ("judges"), up to the request for a king. c. 1 Samuel 12:13-15 A king is provided; but now the people are put in mind of the conditions necessary for success. If the people and the king follow the Lord, all will go well; but if they sin, they will be stricken down, as were their ancestors. d. 1 Samuel 12:16-22 Samuel concludes with a demonstration of divine power, as proof of the people's lack of faith in requesting a king. A torrential downpour ensues in the dry summer, and the people are afraid and acknowledge their sin in asking for a king. Having won his point, Samuel repeats the need for future obedience and asserts that "the L O R D will never abandon His people, seeing that the L O R D undertook to make you His people" (v. 22).
CONTENT AND MEANING Samuel's speech provides a review of the past and a preparation for the future. The outgoing leader addresses the people for the last time, 1 stressing that he has fulfilled the people's request for a king and has now "grown old and gray" (1 Sam. 12:2). Both points allude to 1 Samuel 8, where the elders come to Ramah and tell Samuel that they want a king—since he has "grown old" and his sons have not followed his ways (1 Sam. 8:5). Samuel then recounts his honest service through a series of rhetorical questions. Five times in succession he hammers out the question mi—"whose" animals has he taken, and "whom" has he defrauded, or robbed, or misjudged through a bribe (1 Sam. 12:3)? Thereupon the people repeat his points and confirm the honesty ofhis service. Samuel concludes his peroration with an appeal for a public acquittal before God as witness, and the people grant this, as well. The event recorded here may reflect a customary or formal ceremony undertaken by outgoing leaders.2 Whatever the case, Samuel's honesty and his refusal of any unjust gain while in office indirectly counterpoint the "rules of the monarchy" that he has himself announced to the people as a warning. Responding to their initial request, Samuel tells the nation that the kings will require their subjects to plow royal lands and provide other services; moreover, they will commandeer the people in forced labor, seize their property, and take a percentage of their crops and herds. "The day will come," he concludes, "when you will cry out because of the king whom you yourselves have chosen; and the L O R D will not answer you on that day" ( 1 Sam. 8 : 1 1 - 1 8 ; cf. 1 0 : 2 5 ) . There is thus palpable irony in Samuel's final assertion of his judicial integrity. But Samuel was not only a sitting or circuit judge. During the recent Philistine menace, he first led the people in fasting and confession "before the L O R D " and then "acted as chieftain of the Israelites at Mizpah" (1 Sam. 7:5-6) —thus inspiring his people to military victory (v. 11). As he grew older, however, the people feared a lack of adequate leadership. He thus states in his speech that the people requested a king when they feared the Ammonite advance (12:12). But his point contradicts the narrative account, in which the people's request for a king precedes the Ammonite attack. Samuel's version seems to give a more sensible sequence of events. Not only does he provide a more detailed motivation for the people's request for a king, but the nature of Saul's victory against the Ammonites is similar to the heroic exploits of the chieftains. One can thus appreciate the people's call for a king after this display of prowess. Such a request had been made earlier of Gideon, although he refused, asserting that "the L O R D alone shall rule over you" (Judg. 8:22-23). Commitment to a theocracy was also Samuel's position, but he was ultimately humbled by public pressure and divine authority. HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)172
Samuel's speech concludes with an emphasis on the covenantal conditions for divine favor ( 1 Sam. 1 2 : 1 4 - 1 5 ) and a warning not to "turn away to follow worthless things, which can neither profit nor save" (v. 2 1 ) . The comfort offered is that "the L O R D will never abandon His people" (v. 22). Two reasons are offered: one refers to divine steadfastness "for the sake of His great name;" the other adds that He "undertook to make you His people" (v. 22). This double motivation evokes the transcendence of God's glory and the immanence of His historical care. Biblical theology moves between these poles.
COMMENTS 1 Samuel 11:14. Come, letusgo to Gilgal and there inaugurate The collective invocation ("Come, let us") dramatizes the nation's involvement in the coronation. Earlier, Saul is selected as king by divine lot and the people ratify him with the shout "Long live the king!" (1 Sam. 10: 20-24). Several malcontents then demur, and so the present event effectively "renews" rather than simply "inaugurates" the monarchy (so Rashi; Kimhi; R. Joseph Kara). 3 Gilgal is an old site with sacral connotations. After the entrance into Canaan, Joshua performs a mass circumcision there—and therewith initiates the settlement of the Land (Josh. 5:2-9). 4 It also serves as a home for the Tabernacle and Ark, and so is a center of national life (Kimhi). The monarchy is now inaugurated at the same place. 15. they declared Saul king The Hebrew verb va-yamlikhu ("they declared . . . king") suggests more than a verbal pronouncement. In fact, a whole complex of rituals establish Saul as king, including sacrifices of well-being. 1 Samuel 12:3. " Whose ox"haveI taken ?" Samuel's declaration of probity includes a denial of robbery and bribes. This reflects an old code of judicial honor and standards. When lethro advises Moses to appoint judges in the desert, he tells him to seek out "capable men who fear God, trustworthy men who spurn ill-gotten gain" (Exod. 18:21). A more formal statement of proper conduct appears in the legal ordinances, where the Israelites are told not to "subvert the rights of your needy in their disputes," to "keep far from a false charge," and "not take bribes, for bribes blind the clear-sighted and upset the pleas of those who are in the right" (Exod. 23:6-8). Later sources repeat these matters with some variation (Deut. 1:13,16-17; 16:18-19). ludges may have been initiated into office with a proclamation of these standards by a king or other notable (see 2 Chron. 19:4-7). Misuse of money and bribery were violations to which all were accountable, as shown by exhortations to pilgrims to the Temple (see Ps. 15:5). Prophetic rebukes and instructions aboutjustice are rootedin these same moral demands (cf. Isa. 1:17, 21-27). 3. to look the other way Hebrew ve-'a'aliym 'einaybo (lit., "that I hid my eyes from him"). The Septuagint reflects another tradition, in which Samuel denies taking a bribe "or shoes." This puzzling reading suggests that the translation was made from a Hebrew consonantal text with the letters vn'lym (ve-na'alayim), rather than one with the letters v'lym. In fact, Ben Sira 46:19 (in praise of Samuel's honesty) preserves just this Hebrew word (:vn'lm). The different reading traditions thus derive from a scribal variation between ,alef(in-pe-,acaliym) and nun (in na'alayim). The notion of getting unjust gain by appropriating the shoes (NIPS: "sandals") of the needy is the subject of a rebuke by the prophet Amos (Amos 2:6). 5 5. They responded,"He is/" Hebrew reads, "He responded." In Kimhi's view, the people responded as one person. Prompted by the singular form, an old tradition regarded this as an instance of divine intervention in human legal proceedings. Since in the preceding verse God was invoked as a witness on behalf of Samuel, this verse was explained as a heavenly voice responding that God is indeed a witness (B. Makkot 2313; Genesis Rabbah 85:12). 8. Whenjacob came to Egypt... [Transl.].
The Septuagint adds, "the Egyptians oppressed them"
6-12. Samuel's review oflsraelite history and divine graciousness makes strong use of the technical terms for apostasy, punishment, and deliverance found in the Book of ludges. 6 The 173
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
list of chieftains implies Deborah and Ehud (in the references to Sisera and the king of Moab [v. 9]) and specifically mentions Jerubaal, Sedan, Jephthah, and Samuel (v. 11). Jerubaal is another name for Gideon (Judg. 7:1), whereas Bedan is otherwise unknown, though traditionally identified with Samson of the tribe of Dan (B. Rosh Hashanah 25b; cf. Targum Jonathan; Rashi; Kimhi; Ralbag). 7 Josephus mentions only Gideon and Jephthah [Antiquities 6:90). Notably, Samuel mentions "Samuel" among the chieftains. Saul is also presented as a heroic savior, like the chieftains. 17. It is the season ofthe wheat 'harvest Heavy rain during the harvest season was rare and unwelcome. Its occurrence here serves as a sign from God that the people sinned in asking for a king (Rashi; Ralbag). CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D THE
PARASHAH
In the context of Korah's rebellion, Moses sends for Dathan and Abiram, Korah's co-conspirators. They refuse to come and insult Moses to boot. Thereupon "Moses was much aggrieved and he said to the LORD, 'Pay no regard to their oblation. I have not taken the ass of any one of them, nor have I wronged any one of them"' (Num. 16:15). These words of self-defense before God are a briefer version of Samuel's litany (1 Sam. 12:3). Both men thus epitomize their leadership in terms of justice and respect for other persons' property. The personalities of Moses and Samuel were linked from early biblical tradition. They are grouped together in Ps. 99:6 as intercessors before God, and it is in this role that the Lord mentions them to Jeremiah in the final days of the kingdom o f j u d a h (Jer. 15:1). Early rabbinic homilies note the similar recitations of integrity in xhepamshah and haftarah and present the two men as paragons of the righteous judge (Tanhuma Shofetim 3). In this regard, both Moses and Samuel are portrayed as resistant to any compromise of their virtue (cf. Tanhuma Buber, Korah 19). 8 A midrash on Jer. 15:1 preserved in the Yalkut Shimoni summarizes these traditions and arranges them in catalogue form. 9 Both men were Levites (Exod. 2:1-2, 10 and 1 Chron. 6:12-13), built an altar (Exod. 17:15 and 1 Sam. 7:17), offered sacrifices (Leviticus 8 and 1 Sam. 7:9), called upon the Lord (Ps. 99:6), and answered the divine call with the response hineni ("here I am" [Exod. 3:4 and 1 Sam. 3:4]). The homilist then asks why these two prophets are exalted above all others and answers that neither took a bribe or expropriated property. He concludes with the observation that it was their honesty that gave them the strength to reprove the people. The para-shah and haftarah thus underscore an ideal common denominator for leadership: selfless service on behalf of justice and a commitment to righteousness in social affairs.
Haftarah for Hukkat
npn
ASHKENAZIM JUDGES 11:1-33 SEPHARDIM JUDGES 11:1-33
For a discussion of the Book of Judges and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Judges" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For other passages from the Book of Judges recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah describes a matter of controversy and contention between the Israelite and nonIsraelite populations of Gilead during the early period of settlement (eleventh century B.C.E.). The religious and historical background is summarized in Judg. 10:6-18:Israel abandons the Lord, serving other gods, and is punished with years of oppression by the Philistines and Ammonites (10:6-9). Eventually the nation repents and the people "removed the alien gods from among them and served the L O R D " (W. 10-16). Meanwhile, the Ammonites again muster their troops HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)174
against Israel (v. 17), leading the officers of Gilead (who were encamped atMizpah) to say: "Let the man who is the first to fight the Ammonites be chieftain over all the inhabitants of Gilead" (v. 18). The events reported in the haftarah detail the emergence of that "man" and describe the initial diplomatic maneuvers and ensuing war with the Ammonites. PART 1. THE H E R O (ludges 11:1-11) a. ludges 11:1-3 The scene is set with an account of the hero-to-be: lephthah is described as an able warrior, born of a man of Gilead and a prostitute. When his siblings by his father's wife grow up, they announce their intention to completely block any inheritance he might hope for. Thereupon the lad flees to the land ofTob and becomes the leader of a group of raiders. b. ludges 11:4—11 After the Ammonite oppression is renewed, and the leaders of Gilead seek out lephthah to lead them in battle. A brief negotiation ensues, during which lephthah reminds them ofhis past banishment at their hands; they in turn insist upon their honorable intentions and modify the proposal reported in ludg. 10:18. Then they promised leadership to a military victor; now they rephrase their request and say: "If you come with us and fight the Ammonites, you shall be our commander over all the inhabitants of Gilead" (11:8). lephthah repeats this condition (adding: "and the L O R D delivers them to me" [v. 9]), and the deal is concluded with the Lord as witness (v. 10). The pact is then ratified by the people, after which "lephthah repeated all these terms before the L O R D at Mizpah" (v. 11). PART 2. NEGOTIATIONS W I T H THE AMMONITES (ludges 11:12-28) lephthah begins his career as headman with a diplomatic mission to the king of the Ammonites, who is asked for an explanation of the hostilities. The answer is returned in no uncertain terms. The Ammonites demand the return of the land "from the Arnon to the labbok as far as the lordan," which they contend the Israelites had seized en route to Canaan. A second phase in the exchange begins with lephthah's reply. He denies that the Israelites had seized "the land of Moab or the land of the Ammonites" and proceeds to give his own account of events. First, he says, there was an envoy to the Moabites. This people refused free passage to the Israelites, who were required to skirt the lands of Moab and Edom. Accordingly, the Israelites never entered the Moabite lands bordered by the Arnon river (w. 15-18). lephthah adds that there was also an envoy sent to the Amorites. This nation also refused a request for free passage and even waged war. As a result, they were defeated and dispossessed by the Israelites of "all the territory from the Arnon to the labbok and from the wilderness to the lordan" (w. 19-22). lephthah then goes on to sneer that if the god of the Amorites could not protect his lands, the Ammonites themselves could surely not hope for better; and further, if the king of the Moabites feared fighting the Israelites, the Ammonites should think twice about starting a feud (w. 23-25). Moreover, lephthah stresses that the Israelites have held the lands in question for "300 years" with no counterclaim—the implication being that present hostilities are using this old issue as a pretext. The Ammonite king pays no heed to this envoy and discussions break off. PART 3. WAR (ludges 11:29-33) lephthah is filled with the spirit of the Lord and marches off to battle, sweeping across the Gilead lands toward the Ammonites. He then utters a vow, promising to the Lord that which first departs the door ofhis house upon his safe return from battle (w. 29-30). Thereupon lephthah fights victoriously and defeats the Ammonites with the help of the Lord (w. 31-33). The haftarah ends here because the rabbinic focus is on territorial issues. (lephthah's return and the tragic fulfillment ofhis vow through sacrifice ofhis daughter [w. 34-40] are not recited.)
CONTENT AND MEANING The narrative moves from external threat to its resolution, and from leaderless oppression to military victory. In the process, lephthah develops from an outcast freebooter to the acknowledged leader ofhis people. (A subsequent notice reports that he would go on to rule Israel for six years and be 175
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
buried in the territory of Gilead [Judg. 12:7]. Nothing is said about Israelite piety after his victories or about any period of peaceful respite—as is otherwise characteristic of the Book ofjudges.) The episode is dominated by negotiations and reports of negotiations. Issues of inheritance and property dominate. In the first and opening situation, involving Jephthah's own inheritance, the future hero is dispossessed and treated as an outsider. The brethren successfully conceal their greed behind the mask of law. In response, Jephthah goes beyond the pale and becomes an outlaw, marauding with his gang until brought back to Gilead as the head of its army. The negotiations between himself and the officers of the Gileadites redress the original imbalance and the parties seal their reconciliation with oaths and deals. In the second case, involving Jephthah's negotiations with the king of the Ammonites, a pair of diplomatic exchanges tries to redress an international property dispute. He rebuffs the claims put forward by recounting long-ago exchanges between the Israelites and the kings of the territories through which they hoped to pass. The Ammonites allege that the lands east of the Jordan (between the Arnon and Jabbok Rivers) are theirs alone and thus hope to dispossess the Israelites from lands that the latter had conquered from the Amorites long before (when that nation refused free passage to the wandering tribes and attacked them without cause). The Ammonite desire to establish dominion over lands lost by the Amorites many years before (and concerning which the Ammonites have never since laid claim) strikes Jephthah as so contrived as to suggest dubious intent. The Ammonite refusal to justify their claim against this challenge serves as proof of their bad faith—and Jephthah goes to war. Reviewing the negotiations that stand at the center of the narrative, many modern commentators have been puzzled by the emphasis on the Moabites and Amorites when the envoy was sent to the Ammonites. They have therefore concluded that the information is either without historical basis1 or a later document displaced from another set of circumstances and inserted here.2 But this assumption will not explain what an editor could have imagined to be the substance of the Ammonite claim and why Jephthah feels constrained to articulate such an elaborate counterargument. Yehezkel Kaufmann may therefore have been correct to suppose that the underlying issue was the Ammonite claim of rights to a status quo ante—that is, to lands lost by them to the Amorites before the Israelites arrived on the scene.3 That this "hard case" may have some merit (despite Jephthah's ironical conclusion) is clear from the factual counterclaim made by the envoy. What might be involved? Assembling the biblical evidence, Kaufmann proposed that while Num. 21:26-31 clearly states that a portion of the lands that the Israelites conquered from the Amorites were originally Moabite (and wot Ammonite), the evidence mentioned in Josh. 13:25 must be taken into account. We read there that in the time ofMoses the Israelites conquered "part of the country of the Ammonites up to Aroer, which is close to Rabbah." This would suggest that there was substance to the formal claim of the Ammonite king but that his factual claim was grossly exaggerated.4 Nevertheless, from Jephthah's point of view, the real legal issue was the status of land conquered from conquerors. In his view, Israel has every right to the land, and the fact that the Moabites never raised any question about lands that the Israelites had conquered from the Amorites (who had conquered them from the Moabites), and that the Ammonites themselves had never made claims before this, only reinforces his case. Common law had thus accepted it as fact that conquered lands belong to the victors; to proceed otherwise would start an endless cycle of claims and recriminations. Jephthah is therefore suspicious of Ammonite motivations and goes to war justified in the merit ofhis decision. His sense of right is rooted in natural law. No other appeal is offered.
COMMENTS Judges 11:8. commander Hebrew ro'sh. This is the term used by the Gileadites among themselves (Judg. 10:18 [NJPS: "chieftain"]) and later when Jephthah is presented to the tribes for confirmation (11:11). The term is an old designation used to indicate tribal elders as judges (cf. Exod. 18:25 [NJPS: "chiefs"]; Deut. 1:15; Num. 30:2 [NJPS: "heads"]; 32:28); it also indicates the elders of patriarchal clans (e. g., 1 Chron. 5:7, 12, 15, 24). Both senses are pertinent in this case. The designation "ro'sh of the tribes oflsrael" is applied to King Saul (1 Sam. 15:17). HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)176
10. witness ...we will do This language expresses the reciprocity of a treaty, with God as the witness. Similar terms occur in the pact between Jacob and Laban (Gen. 31:50). The term for witness here is shome'a (lit., "hearer"), that is, one who hears the terms of the treat}': The Gileadite elders add: "we will do [na'aseh] just as you have said." This clause is clearly part of the operative language of the agreement. Both terms together shed light on the famous formula of compliance made by the Israelites at the conclusion of the Sinai covenant: na'aseh ve-nishma' (Exod. 24:7). The phrase would thus seem to have a more precise force than the general attestation "we will faithfully do" (NJPS; or even the more literal "we will do and obey"). The formula apparently attests to an agreement to fulfill the covenant and be responsible for the terms heard. The language would thus preserve the formulary of aural agreements (as against treaties seen and signed). 12. Jephthah then sent messengers The account of the envoys repeats the traditions in Numbers 20-21 (concerning the Edomites and Amorites, but not the Ammonites), with slight differences. lephthah's envoys specify boundary points (w. 18, 22), pertinent to the present conflict but not necessary to the original Pentateuchal narratives. 24. Chemosh yourjyod Chemosh was in fact the god of the Moabites (cf. Num. 21:29) but is referred to here as the god of the Ammonites. Perhaps lephthah's intent is ironic: if the Ammonites claim Moabite land, then they must worship their god as well. But it was just this deity that lost the land to the Amorites (Kimhi). 26. three hundred years lephthah presumably uses a round figure here as a rhetorical hyperbole. Otherwise, lephthah is factually mistaken: archeological evidence puts the Exodus in the late thirteenth century B.C.E. and the beginning of the conquest some half-century later. A fifteenth-century date is difficult to account for. 30-31. vow to the LORD This vow constitutes a conditional votary offering "to the LORD." The technical language is precisely similar to Israel's (national) vow at the onset of its battle with the king of Arad during the desert wandering (Num. 21:2-3). R. David Kimhi (in his father's name) softens the harsh vow by distinguishing between a sanctification and an offering to the Lord. The first would apply if the "object" for sacrifice was ritually inappropriate; the second, if conditions proved proper. On this view, lephthah's daughter was not sacrificed, but secluded in solitary confinement. 5 This solution is a tendentious reading of verse 39 (NIPS properly distinguishes between the father's fulfillment of his vow and the daughters virginal condition: "and he did to her as he had vowed. She had never known a man"). 6 For the idiom ve-ha'alitihu 'olah ("shall be offered by me as a burnt offering"), cf. veha'alehu . . . le-'olah (Gen. 22:2). The old Targum takes this language literally and condemns lephthah's deed. Compare the midrashic rejection of the false vow in Leviticus Rabbah 37:4 and Genesis Rabbah 60:3 (especially the judgment of R. Yohanan). 7 Pseudo-Philo follows this tradition and has God add that Israel will be delivered because of its prayers—not because of lephthah (BiblicaAntiquities 39:11). 8
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
The pamshah and haftarah refer to common historical events occurring in the period of desert wanderings. Moses' solicitation of the Edomites and Amorites to pass freely through their territory in the time of the desert trek (Numbers 20-21) is cited by lephthah's embassy to the king of the Ammonites. He does so in order to reject the claim that the Israelites now occupy Ammonite lands. Indeed, the historical facts are recited in order to indicate that the land under dispute had been conquered by the Israelites from the Amorites. The events thus serve as evidence for the Gileadite defense, and the failure of subsequent Ammonite (and Moabite) generations to challenge this situation seems to lephthah further proof that the status quo had long been accepted as legitimate. Nevertheless, lephthah does not resort to hostilities in the first instance but tries to 177
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
offer a reasoned response to the moral-legal challenge. H o w a nation negotiates use of another people's territory (Moses) and deals with competing land claims (Jephthah) —especially those arising from war and going back to an earlier period—reveals something of its sense of right and the righteousness ofits sensibilities.
Haftarah for Balak ASHKENAZIM MICAH5:6-6:8 SEPHARDIM MICAH 5:6-6:8
Haftarah for Hukkat-Balak
p^3-.npn
ASHKENAZIM MICAH5:6-6:8 SEPHARDIM MICAH 5:6-6:8
For a consideration of Micah's life and message and a discussion of the themes and theology of the Book of Micah as a whole, see "The Book of Micah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." Other material from Micah used in haftarah readings is listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah provides a vision of the restored community of Israel. Renewal will come like the dew, says the prophet, an unbidden gift of God. The old enemies will be defeated. Israel's reprehensible practices will end. As part of this process, God calls upon the people to recall His past acts of beneficence on their account. Chagrined at their own ingratitude, the people propose various sacrificial gifts with which they might approach God. These are dismissed by the prophet, who reminds them of God's ancient demands of justice, goodness, and humble piety. With simple directness, this instruction encapsulates the essence of Sinai—reorienting the people to the covenant and to a God-centered life. The date of Micah's prophecy is unspecified. According to the superscription, he lived and labored during the mid-eighth century B.C.E. (Mic. 1:1). This was a time of expanding Assyrian power, and the prophet's words of doom (1:2-3:12) may anticipate or reflect the invasions that led to the dispersion of the northern kingdom (722 B.C.E.). Looking beyond exile, Micah envisions a reversal of fortune for the nation at home and abroad. PART 1. THE RENEWED REMNANT (Micah 5:6-14) a. Micah 5:6-8 Iwo oracles celebrate the renewal oflsrael "among the nations" (v. 7). The first likens them to "dew" or "droplets on grass" which "do not look to any man nor place their hope in mortals" (v. 6). Renewal will thus be extensive and God-given. The second likens the people to a "fierce lion," so fearsome will they be (v. 7). b. Micah 5:9-14 On the day of restoration, the Lord will destroy Israel's military weapons and fortresses, and their idols and sorcery (w. 9-13); war and false worship shall thus cease in the Land. In addition, the Lord will "wreak retribution" upon all the nations that have not obeyed Him (v. 14). PART 2. A CALLING TO ACCOUNTS (Micah 6:1-8) a. Micah 6:1-5 The Lord addresses the people with His past acts of salvation. They are called to remember their deliverance from the Egyptians, from the plot of Balak and the prophecies of Balaam, and much more; and they are asked to testify if God has ever failed them or caused them hardship. b. Micah 6 : 6 - 7 In response, the people ponder how best to "approach the LORD" and do Him homage (v. 6). They assume that He may want sacrificial gifts—animals of the flock or even the child of one's womb (v. 7). HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)178
c. Micah 6:8 This supposition is categorically rejected. The nation is told that the Lord only requires justice, kindness, and modesty (v. 8); not gifts of the earth, but proper action and attitude are the way to "do homage to God on high" (v. 6).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah opens with two prophecies addressed to the remnant of Jacob. The first turns on the image of dew and gives hope that national renewal comes directly from God (Mic. 5:6). As dew comes from heaven without the intervention of any mortal, so may Israel hope in a resurrection among the nations through divine grace. The mysterious appearance of dew drops thus serves as a figure for national transformation. The second prophecy introduces the simile of a "fierce lion," "which tramples wherever it goes and rends, with none to deliver" ( 5 : 7 ) . This figure is one of power and gives a sense of strength to the nation in exile. Its tone of brute physicality stands in contrast with the first prophecy. The prophet adds that in times to come, God will destroy Israel's military arsenal and its idolatrous practices (Mic. 5 : 9 - 1 3 ) . Hammering this intent, the verb "destroy" (ve-hikhmti) is repeated four times by Micah, together with four other verbs of wrack and ruin. The divine intervention will be total—eradicating the people's reliance upon physical force and false worship. As the medieval commentators surmised, this sequence of dooms anticipates a future era of peace, reliance upon God, and the eradication of idolatry (Rashi; Ibn Ezra; Kimhi). In his next teaching, the prophet confronts the nation with God's past deeds of salvation (Mic. 6 : 1 - 5 ) . From earliest times, the Lord has been the people's savior and strength: He redeemed them from Egypt; sent leaders like Moses, Aaron, and Miriam to guide them in the desert; perverted the evil plan of Balak and the doom prophecies of Balaam; and helped them repeatedly "from Shittim to Gilgal" (see Text and Comments). Speaking in a forensic style, Micah summons the natural world to testify, and Israel itself to state, whether God has ever failed the nation in their time of need. The rhetoric is earnest, but the effect is somewhat ironic. The God who "brought you up [he'elitikha] from the land of Egypt" (6:4) has not caused "hardship [hel'etikha]" (6:3) to His people. The prophet is sure that memory will only yield recollections of the "gracious acts of the L O R D " ( 6 : 5 ) for the people. Hearing this challenge, the people ponder how to "approach the L O R D " and "do homage to God on high" (Mic. 6:6). Various proposals are made: "Shall I approach Him with burnt offerings" or "myriads of streams of oil," or "shall I give my first-born for my transgression?" (6: 6-7). The pathos of the proposals leave no reason to doubt their earnestness. Something of the religious mentality of the folk is captured here—and then reversed. Rejecting the human desire to assuage divine wrath or offer one's earthly goods as entreaty, the prophet recalls God's word from of old: "He has told you, O man, what is good, and what the L O R D requires of you: only to do justice [mishpat] and to love goodness [}.ahavat hesed], and to walk modestly [hatzne'a lekhet] with your God" (6:8). This instruction represents a digest of covenantal obligations. Other summaries of covenantal behavior occur in the teachings of Micah's contemporaries. In a dramatic speech, Amos similarly counterpoints justice (mishpat) and righteousness (tzedakah) to sacrifice (Amos 5 : 2 1 - 2 4 ) ; 1 and his own contemporary Hosea enumerates God's betrothal gifts to Israel in terms of righteousness (tzedek), justice (mishpat), and goodness (hesed,) (Hos. 2 : 2 1 ) . 2 Following the same line of emphasis, the prophet Jeremiah encapsulates the traits that the Lord wants of His people. Rejecting human wisdom, physical strength, and riches, the one thing needed is "earnest devotion" to God; "For I the L O R D act with kindness [hesed], justice [mishpat], and equity [tzedakah] in the world; for in these I delight—declares the L O R D " (Jer. 9 : 2 3 ) . 3 The "primacy of morality" is thus stressed as the quintessence of covenantal loyalty, along with critiques of the improper use of sacrifices.4 Particularly instructive is the similarity between Micah's speech ( 6 : 1 - 8 ) and the opening arraignment ofhis prophetic contemporary in Jerusalem, Isaiah ben Amoz. Both men use a similar literary form and express similar concerns: 179
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
Micah (1) calls upon features of nature (mountains, the pillars of the earth) to "hear" (as ancient witnesses) (2) God's riv (legal controversy) with Israel;5 he (3) goes on to present God's account of His beneficent deeds on behalf of Israel and challenges the nation to contradict this account if possible; the (4) sin or disloyalty of the people is not explicitly stated here, though it is indicated byMic. 5:11-13 and the people's own reference to their "sins" (6:7); this (5) leads the people to propose sacrifices to effect their reconciliation with God; but (6) this offer is rejected, and acts of justice and righteousness are stressed instead. Similarly, Isaiah (1) calls upon features of nature (the heavens, the earth) to "hear" (as witnesses) (2) God's word against Israel (Isa. 1:2); he (3) goes on to contrast His beneficence (v. 2) with (4) Israel's sin and rebellion (w. 3-6); in particular, the prophet (5) lambasts the people's misuse of sacrifices, for providing offerings to heaven even though their hands are stained with crimes (w. 11-14); but (6) this is rejected (God will not "listen" [v. 15]), and the people are told to learn to act uprightly, to do justice, and to provide legal aid for the needy (w. 16-17). For Micah, what is distinctive is that his rzy-structure turns on a powerful stylistic alternation between use of the particle mah (what) for interrogative and substantive purposes. Thus, in God's initial query to the people, He asks them "what" (mah) He has done wrong and through "what" (mah) acts He has wearied the people (Mic. 6:3). The posture is rhetorical, though with the semblance of a legal presentation, since God appeals to the people to remember "what" (mah) Balak plotted against them and "how" (meh) Balaam responded on their behalf (6:5). Taken aback, the people's concern to serve the Lord properly ironically echoes the divine style—but to ill effect. They ask how or with "what" (mah) earthly means they may approach the Lord and entreat His favor (6:6). Proposing acts of licit and illicit sacrifice, their intentions are rejected, and an instruction is given that takes the people's query and turns it into the basis of an answer: they ask "what" they may offer God, and the prophet answers that God "has told [higgid]" them "what [mah] is good [TOY], and what [mah] the L O R D requires" of them (6:8). Clearly the nation is as unmindful of "what" the Lord has taught them as of "what" He did for them in the past. Deftly, the prophet undermines the people's query and shows their spiritual deafness at the same time. God's demand here may be juxtaposed to the question often posed in the Book of Ecclesiastes concerning "what" (mah) is the best or "good" (toy) course that a person might follow in the world. Within the framework of human wisdom, the determinant of "what" act is right or "good" lacks divine authority—and is decided solely on the utilitarian principles of human pleasure and benefit. One is particularly struck by the lament in Eccles. 6:12, in which the speaker wonders "who can possibly know what [mah] is best [toy] for a man to do in life—the few days ofhis fleeting life? For who can tell him [yaggid] what [mah] the future holds for him under the sun?" Micah offers an answer. It is a teaching of tradition ("He has told you" [Mic. 6:8]) and invokes the divine demand for ethics and humility as the essential tasks to be performed. Such behavior cannot be measured by personal benefit, but only by the moral and spiritual ideals it seeks to realize. And if this alternative may not dispel the anxieties of death so humanly expressed by the preacher Ecclesiastes, it nevertheless offers a godly path for personal life and social living.
COMMENTS Micah 5:6. The •remnant ofjacob In its original context, these references to the remnant refer to the contemporary exile of Israelites in Assyria and elsewhere. Later generations read the hope messianically (cf. Kimhi). like dewfrom the LORD Israel's remnant shall be graced with divine sustenance. This image of nurturance was given an eschatological application by Rashi: as dew comes from God, and not from mortals, so will Israel turn only to God in times to come. R. Menahem bar Helbo read the simile in terms of Israel's salvation coming directly from God. The verbal parallelism "dew // droplets" recurs in Deut. 32:2. Dew is elsewhere a figure for resurrection (Isa. 26:19). This notion is explicitly formulated in the targumic phrase "the dew of resurrection" (talin de-tehiyyuta} [see Ps. 68:10]); also compare B. Hagigah 12b. HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)180
8. Your hand shallprevail overyourfoes Most commentators regard this as God's promise to Israel; but it can also be interpreted as Israel's prayer to God (cf. Yalkut Shimoni 1:183, 553). 6 13. sacred posts Hebrew dsherim, masculine plural for the feminine singular noun dsherah. This object is prohibited by the Torah (Deut. 16:21-22), and the destruction of Canaanite dsherim is stressed (Exod. 34:13). 14. the nations that have not obeyed The introduction of the nations here and the reference to disobedience are puzzling. Some commentators propose emending the wordjwyz'w (nations) to read ge'im.7 The prophet would then refer to the "arrogant ones" oflsrael. Orthographic and pronunciation variants of the wordgoyim led to frequent midrashic plays of this type. For example, the keri (Scripture as recited) and ketiv (Scripture as written) variants in Gen. 25:23 are^wyzw (^pyw) andgeyim (gyym). Where the latter was pronounced likege'im (arrogant ones), certain ancient homilists spoke ofge'eygoyim, "the arrogant of the nations" (Genesis Rabbah 63:7). 8 Micah <5:3. Testify against Me Hebrew 'anei -pi. This is a technical expression and is used in a similar legal sense in Samuel's final oration ('anu -pi [ 1 Sam. 1 2 : 3 ] ) . Both texts also refer to the "gracious acts of the L O R D " ( t z i d k o t T H W H [Mic. 6 : 5 ; 1 Sam. 1 2 : 7 ] ) . 4.Moses, Aaron, andMiriam Three whom God "sent before" Israel, to lead them on their way from Egypt to Canaan. Their formulaic combination is unique to this passage. Also unexpected is the use of the verb "to send" with Aaron and Miriam, since it is commonly used in connection with a prophet or divine messenger (cf. Exod. 3:10; 23:20; Num. 20:14; Isa. 6: 8). In the earlier historical review by Hosea (Hos. 12:10-14), only Moses is alluded to (v. 14); however, Moses and Aaron both appear as pastors of God's flock in Ps. 77:21 and as "priestly" intercessors inPs. 99:6. 5. From Shittim to Gilgal That is, the crossing of the Jordan; see Josh. 3:1, 14-14: 19 [Transl.]. This is a synopsis of the places of divine beneficence. Shittim refers to the place of Israelite settlement when Balak called Balaam to prophesy for him in the wilderness (Num. 22:1; 25:1; 33:48-49); whereas Gilgal refers to the cult site where the kingship of Saul was renewed after his victory against the Ammonites (1 Sam. 11:14). 6-8. A classic expression of the primacy of morality over sacrifice. In the Prophets, see also Amos 5 : 2 1 - 2 5 , Hos. 6:6, and Isa. 1 : 1 0 - 2 0 . A similar attitude is developed in Ps. 5 0 : 7 - 2 3 and counseled in Prov. 2 1 : 3 : " T o do what is right and just is more desired by the L O R D than sacrifice." 8. He has told you Or, "It has been told to you." The grammatical construction refers to what is good and what the Lord requires (so NJPS). The Masoretic accentuation, however, puts a major disjunction after the first phrase ("what is good"); the result is that the second phrase may be interpreted as a new query ("and what does the L O R D require of you: only to do justice," etc. The latter reading is adopted by Franz Rosenzweig at the conclusion of The Star of Redemption.9 He perceives two teachings here: the first ("He has told to you, O man [ddam], what is good [to^])" refers back to the affirmative "good" of existence repeated in Genesis 1; the second ("and what the L O R D requires of you") refers to the covenantal obligations given at Sinai. In this view, the prophet alludes both to the creation and to the revelation of the Law in his instruction. justice.. .goodness... -walk modestly The first two references to do justice and act with goodness or loving-kindness are common elements in other covenantal synopses. The third demand is less certain. The phrase ve-hatzne'a lekhet }im 'elohekha may refer to modesty or humility, insofar as the verb hatzne'a seems to mean something done in a secret or hidden manner. An old rabbinic teaching understood it to refer to those actions done in modesty and in secret, namely burying the dead and providing a dowry for poor brides (B. Sukkah 49b). Don Isaac Abravanel interprets the triad as a graded series of obligations: the first being the demands of justice, which refer to the formalities and externals of the civil and criminal law; the second being the need for loving-kindness, which he says refers to supererogatory acts performed 181
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
according to the spirit of the law, beyond its fixed or formal features; and the third element, hatzne'a lekhet, refers to the inwardness of true piety, hidden from the world-at-large. For Franz Rosenzweig, justice and goodness are tasks and as such speak of an unrealized goal in the course of life. By contrast, humble living before God is the unconditional starting point of all true living: it is a standing before the world in a "wholly present trust" and a daring to "say 'Truly! ' to the truth" at every moment. According to his rapturous formulation, the command to walk humbly with one's God is inscribed over the gate that leads from God's holy sanctuary, in which no one can remain alive, into the challenges and mysteries of everyday life. For Rosenzweig, this teaching is the ultimate revelation. C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Theparashah and the haftarah are doubly entwined. For one thing, the specific verb 'anah used in the Pentateuchal narrative to indicate Balaam's "response" to the king's request (Num. 22: 18; 23:12), is used by the prophet Micah to mark the same situation. In his riv (controversy), he recalls to the people "what Balak king of Moab plotted against [their ancestors], and how Balaam son of Beor responded ['anah] to him" (Mic. 6:4). For Micah, the Moabite seer's refusal to curse Israel is evidence for God's "gracious acts" (Mic. 6:5) on behalf o f H i s people. One of the primary features of Balaam's answer to the Moabite king is that he could not contradict the word of the Lord in his mouth. He thus blesses Israel with fertility and growth, boughs dripping with moisture, and roots with abundant water. Looking out upon the plain, Balaam even utters the momentous words of praise: "How fair [mah tovu] are your tents, O lacob, your dwellings, O Israel!" (Num. 24:5). It is a depiction of harmony and abundance, an idyllic vision before the aesthetic eye. The echo of Balaam's words in the haftarah provocatively juxtaposes the contemplative sight of the seer with the moral demands of the prophet. The evocation of the wondrous gaze, mah tovu \ohalekhaya'akov, "How fair are your tents, O lacob," is now balanced by Micah's statement of "what is good [mah toy]" behavior in God's sight. The visions of the world thus stand to one side and are expressed with the rhetoric of wonder; the tasks of covenantal responsibility appear on the other and are formulated with cadences of instruction and the hierarchies of obligation. For all that, struck by the repetition-within-variation of the phrase mah tov/u, the reader of the pamshah and haftarah may also seek a creative integration of the aesthetic and moral—beyond the polarities of either/or.
Haftarah for Pinhas (before 17th ofTammuz)
ttn^D
ASHKENAZIM I KINGS 18:46-19:21 SEPHARDIM I KINGS 18:46-19:21
For the discussion of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah readings taken from this work (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is part of the cycle of narratives dealing with Elijah's prophetic career (mid-ninth century B.C.E.). After his dramatic victory over the prophets ofBaalonMount Carmel (1 Kings 18: 1-39), and their subsequent slaughter (v. 40), 1 Elijah predicts the end of a long-standing drought and warns King Ahab to flee before the downpour (w. 41-45). With the onset of the haftarah, we find the prophet running ahead of the king's chariot from Mount Carmel down to the Valley of lezreel. Elijah is forced to flee further south in order to escape the curse of death uttered by Ahab's wife lezebel, upon hearing that the prophets ofBaal had been slain. He travels down to HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
182
Beer-sheba and the desert of Judah, eventually arriving at Mount Horeb. There he receives an awesome revelation, and God's announcement ofhis future tasks (1 Kings 19:9-21). PART 1. FEARAND FLIGHT (1 Kings 18:46-19:4) a. 1 Kings 18:46 Inspired with divine power, Elijah runs ahead of King Ahab from Mount Carmel to the Valley ofjezreel—as both flee the approaching storm. b. 1 Kings 19:1-4 Back home, the king informs Queen Jezebel that Elijah slaughtered the prophets ofBaal. She utters the curse of death, and Elijah flees for his life. PART 2. ANGELIC CARE (1 Kings 19:5-8) a. 1 Kings 19:5-6 The first angelic appearance. Elijah is told to "arise and eat" (v. 5); after the divine succor, the prophet lays down again. b. 1 Kings 19:7-8 The second angelic appearance. Again the prophet is bidden to "arise and eat" (v. 7); but on the strength of this meal Elijah leaves, arriving at Mount Horeb. PART 3. THEOPHANYAND INSTRUCTION (1 Kings 19:9-21) a. 1 Kings 1 9 : 9 - 1 0 God speaks to Elijah at his cave, asking "Why are you here?" (v. 9 ) . The prophet answers that he was "moved by zeal for the L O R D " (V. 1 0 ) and recounts the destruction of God's shrines and prophets—adding that he alone remains alive, though hounded and threatened by his enemies. b. 1 Kings 19:11-12 Thereupon, the Lord "passed by" Elijah in a series of awesome theophanies (v. 11), culminating in a "soft murmuring sound" (v. 12). c. 1 Kings 1 9 : 1 3 - 1 8 God again addresses Elijah at the entrance to his cave and again asks, "Why are you here?" (v. 13). As before, the prophet answers that he is "moved by zeal for the L O R D " (V. 1 4 ) . On this occasion, God tells him to return to the north and anoint Hazael king of Aram, Jehu king oflsrael, and Elisha his prophetic successor (w. 1 5 - 1 6 ) . A new purge of idolators is anticipated, leaving but seven thousand Israelite survivors—persons who have "not knelt to Baal" or "kissed him" in worship (w. 1 7 - 1 8 ) . d. 1 Kings 19:19-21 Elijah fulfills the third task first, appointing Elisha son of Shaphat his "attendant" and future successor. The haftarah ends with the prophetic future secured.
CONTENT AND MEANING Flight and theophany recur throughout the haftarah and structure its content. At the outset, Elijah runs before Ahab and the storm all the way to the Valley ofjezreel (1 Kings 18:46). When he learns that the queen wants him dead to requite his slaughter of the prophets ofBaal, Elijah flees next to Beer-sheba and then deeper into the wilderness, stopping at Mount Horeb (19:3, 8). Each stage of the flight from Jezebel is marked by the prophet's fear for his life or his desire to die. Even at Mount Horeb the threat of death dominates his thoughts. The crises are highlighted by repetitions of the word "life" (nefesh). Thus: (1) Jezebel informs Elijah (through a messenger) that she intends to make "your life [nafshekha] like the life [nefesh ] of one of them" (1 Kings 19: 2; NJPS: "made you like one of them"); (2) Elijah reacts with fear "for his life [nafshoY (v. 3); and (3) flees to Beer-sheba, where he prays to God to "take my life [nafshi]":, and later, (4) when God finds him in his cave, he twice states that the Israelites who have abandoned God's service "are out to take my life [nafshi]" (w. 10, 14). A series of revelations also mark Elijah's movements, guiding him in different forms. At the beginning of the haftarah, when the prophet runs before Ahab to Jezreel, it is God's silent "hand" upon him that gives Elijah the power to perform this heroic feat (1 Kings 18:46). Later, during his encampment in the desert, Elijah is twice visited by an angel who speaks sparingly to him ("arise and eat"), manifesting God's succor through food and sustenance (19:5-8). And finally, upon Elijah's arrival at Horeb, God Himself appears to him—at first through a "soft murmuring sound" (a distinct but inarticulate presence) and then through an extended articulation of the prophet's new task: to anoint new kings and a prophetic successor, who will bring about the destruction of God's enemies (19:15-18). 2 183
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
Since antiquity, God's theophany to Elijah has been perceived as one of the most dramatic expressions of monotheism in Scripture. Just as God appeared to Moses and all Israel at Sinai in storm and thunder, only thereafter speaking His words to the people (Exodus 19-20), so now at Horeb, Elijah first experiences the terrors of a storm and fire before the sound of God's voice is heard (1 Kings 19:llb-12). In reporting the event, the narrator makes a pedagogical (and polemical) point. God was wot in the storm and fury—for God is not a natural element, and these forces are merely expressions of His will.3 Like a vanguard, they pass before the prophet, and they leave a "murmuring" silence in their wake. From this depth the voice of God is heard.4 The structure of the theophany conforms to established norms: three initial elements (the storm, earthquake, and fire) are followed by a climactic fourth feature (the "murmuring sound"). 5 A similar climactic form (3 + 1) organizes the prophecies of Balaam (Numbers 22-24), the riddles of Delilah (ludges 16), and the disasters befalling lob's family (lob 1); and a rhetorical reflex of this pattern is found in such disparate utterances as the prophecies of Amos (Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2:1, 4, 6) and the proverbs ofAgur (Prov. 30:15-16, 18-20, 21-28, 29-32). Observing this triadic prologue to the theophany, traditional (Malbim) and modern commentators have noted that Elijah subsequently receives a threefold instruction (1 Kings 19:15-17). 6 The onset of the divine word and its content thus mirror each other: God is first (silently) manifested in the storm, the earthquake, and the fire; and He then (verbally) specifies that the prophet anoint a new king over Aram (Hazael), a new king over Israel (lehu), and a new prophet (Elisha) to replace himself. Like the destructive powers of nature, these three individuals shall destroy the enemies of God: "Whoever escapes the sword of Hazael shall be slain by lehu, and whoever escapes the sword of lehu shall be slain by Elisha" (v. 17). And just as the violent manifestations of the theophanic triad culminate in a "soft. . . sound," God concludes His instruction to Elijah with the salvific assertion that "I will leave in Israel only seven thousand—every knee that has not knelt to Baal and every mouth that has not kissed him" (v. 18). The divine judgment thus concludes with a promise that the faithful shall be delivered from the slaughter.7
COMMENTS 1 Kings 18:46. He tied up his skirts The Hebrew is obscure. Alternatively, "he girded up his loins" (cf. Kimhi, Kara, Ralbag), a military figure. Elijah ran before the chariot to accompany the king (Rashi), expressing respect for his majesty (Kimhi). Compare B. Zevahim 102a. 1 Kings 19:1. all theprophets
Of Baal; see 18:40 [Transl.].
2. Thus and more may thegods do A formula of imprecation. Many Hebrew manuscripts and the Septuagint add "to me" [Transl.]. The plural is used because of lezebel's belief in many deities (Kimhi; Ralbag). For the singular form, see 2 Sam. 3:35. 3. Frightened So many Hebrew manuscripts and Septuagint; most manuscripts, and the editions, read "And he saw, and" [Transl.]. 4. He came to a broom bush The prophet sat under a tree and prayed that he might die, like lonah in Ion. 4:3 (R. loseph Kaspi). 8.forty days andforty nights Medieval commentators have pointed out a variety of similarities between Moses and Elijah, (1) Moses spent forty days and nights without food on Sinai/ Horeb (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:8-9); Elijah goes the same period without food on his journey to Horeb. (2) Moses hid in the crevice of a rock (Exod. 33:22) as the Lord "passed" (va-ya'avor) before him on the mountain (Exod. 34:6); Elijah was called by God from his cave as He appeared and "passed ['over] by." (3) In God's presence, Moses expressed his humility by hiding his face (Exod. 3:6); Elijah wrapped his face in his mantle. (See Rashi; R. loseph Kara; Kimhi.) am moved by zealfor the LORD "Moved by zeal," kanno} kinne'ti. The prophet expresses his religious passion. The same language is used to indicate Phinehas's zeal at Baal-peor (Num. 25:11) —again in connection with idolatry. Moreover, in the Decalogue God proclaims 10.1
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
184
Himself an "impassioned God" (}el kanna') immediately after prohibiting false worship (Exod. 20:5). Hence, Elijah's language is deliberately chosen. But the tense is debatable. Following the divine query "Why are you here?" one might expect the answer "Because of my great zeal for the Lord" (NEB) —that is, the prophet says that he has come as a consequence of his passion and the vengeance it provoked. Kimhi also regards Elijah's words to have a past reference. By contrast, NJPS understands Elijah's response as something continuous; that is, he claims to remain zealous for God. This interpretation comports with a midrashic tradition that understands Elijah to have remained an impassioned prosecutor against Israel, without the least desire to intervene on his people's behalf—even after God tried to change his mood through a torrent of wind and fire. For this unabated zeal, he was censured and lost his prophetic mantle (Yalkut Shimoni 2, Kings, 217). Compare Rashi, verse 16. Clearly, the force ofElijah's words in verses 10 and 14 is to appeal for divine vengeance. God's response is in verses 15-17. torn down Tour altars Elijah's references to the destruction of "Your altars" and slaughter o f " Your prophets" refer to 1 Kings 18:13 and 30 (Rashi). 11. agreat and mighty wind "Splitting mountains and shattering rocks." The narrator employs storm imagery here—comparable to the "voice" or "thunder" (kol) of the Lord in Psalm 29, which produces similar natural effects.8 But the depiction stresses that the wind and fire went "before \li-jhei\ the LORD" (NJPS: "by the power of the LORD"). The elements are thus something like His military retinue, a troop of destructive powers that surrounds the divine Throne. Compare the account in Psalm 97, which exalts God's kingship on high: "Dense clouds are around Him, . . . Fire is His vanguard [le-fanav], burning His foes on every side. His lightnings light up the world; the earth is convulsed at the sight" (Ps. 97:2-4). 12. a soft murmuring sound Hebrew kol demamah da-kkah. A famous, unresolved crux. (The King James translation rendered, "a still small voice.") The phrase may be a deliberate paradox— an attempt to articulate the voiced silence of God's presence, through reference to a sound (kol) that is both silently still (demamah) and audibly thin (dakkah). In context, the solecism has an anti-mythological ring. But it also hints at a type of religious experience, otherwise inexpressible. Job 4:16 provides a striking parallel. Recalling the terror of divine dreams and their forms, Eliphaz refers to the audible portion with the expression demamah ve-kolJeshmaNJPS translates, "I heard a murmur, a voice," but this seems a weak formulation. Alternatively, these words express another experience of divine sound within dreadful silence. Comparing 1 Kings 19:12 and Job 4:16, Rashi juxtaposed two types of prophetic experience: for Elijah the monotheist, the divine voice speaks from the silence; whereas for the pagan Eliphaz, the silence predominates. 15. anointHazael In fact, Elijah does not appoint either Hazael or Jehu; Elisha does. Elijah thus will become the indirect cause (cf. Kimhi). 17. shall be slain byjehu In fact, Jehu kills all the worshipers ofBaal and the household of King Ahab (see 2 Kings 10:17) (Kimhi). shall be slain by Elisha In fact, the people are attacked by their enemies after ignoring Elisha's admonition (2 Kings 13:20). According to Kimhi, this is why their death is attributed to him here. 18. not knelt to Baal Genuflection before Baal and kissing his statue were two forms of adoration of this god. See 1 Kings 8:54; Isa 45:23; and Hos. 13:2. 20. Go back. What"haveI done toyou?
That is, I am not stopping you [Transl.].
21. thegear ofthe oxen That is, using it as firewood; compare 2 Sam. 24:22 [Transl.]. C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D
PARASHAH
Both theparashah and haftarah concern zeal against false worship. This is underscored by the verbal stem kana' (see Text and Comments). In the Torah reading, this term is part of God's 185
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
approbation of Phinehas, who was so enraged by the rites at Baal-peor that he murdered the perpetrators in the act. God says: "Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the Israelites by displaying among them his passion for Me (be-kan'o } et kin'nti), so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people in My passion (be-kin'nti)'" (Num. 2 5 : 1 1 ) . For this he is rewarded with the high priesthood. Accordingly, Phinehas's "impassioned action for His God [kinnei' le-'lohavY is deemed a fit trait for leadership (Num. 25: } 1 3 ) . For his part, Elijah tells God at Horeb that he was "moved by zeal for the L O R D \_kanno kinnei'ti la-THWH]" and killed the false prophets at Mount Carmel ( 1 Kings 1 9 : 1 0 , 1 4 ) . He also regards such behavior as exemplary—as must the biblical narrator, who gives the matter prominence. Based on this similarity, the rabbinic imagination actually identified Phinehas with Elijah: "Phinehas is Elijah, the High Priest, who will be sent to [gather] the exiles oflsrael at the end of days" (Targum lonathan, Exod. 6:18; cf. Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer 47). Thus Phinehas and his pious passion were believed to have an afterlife into messianic times. But a countertradition rejected the fanatical zeal of this religious type. Already in Ps. 1 0 6 : 3 0 , Phinehas's bloody intervention at Baal-peor is rewritten as a prayer-like intercession (va-yifallel).9 Similarly, in several midrashic sources Elijah's failure to seek the repentance ofhis people is emphasized, and God is portrayed as actively involved in trying to assuage the prophet's intractable passion (see Yalkut Shimoni 2 , Kings, 2 1 7 ) . 1 0 According to other rabbinic traditions, Elijah is seen in the light of Moses—on the basis of several thematic and verbal parallels (noted earlier). This connection is first found at the end of the Book ofMalachi, which stresses both the Mosaic Torah of the past and the advent ofElijah in the future (Mai. 3:22-23). 11 The link was considerably reinforced in classical and later lewish thought. lust as Moses helped deliver his people from Egypt, Elijah will do so in days to come; and just as Moses' deed was not the final redemption, Elijah will return for "an everlasting salvation" (Pesikta Rabbati 4; Yalkut Shimoni 2, Kings, 209). For these reasons, "Moses and Elijah are comparable" (sha-vin zeh la-zeh le-khol davar). By contrast, Abravanel rejected this typology and went to great lengths to differentiate the two men. Nothing, he contended, could be gained from such generalizations. The spiritual life is marked by its individual achievements, and by this measure there is "no comparison" ('ein shivuy). Moses was absolutely superior.12
Haftarah for Mattot mtttt ASHKENAZIM I E R E M I A H l : l - 2 : 3 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3
Haftarah for Pinhas (after 17th ofTammuz)
on^D
ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 1:1-2:3
For leremiah's life and times and a consideration of the content, styles, and theology of the Book of leremiah, see "The Book of leremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings from leremiah's prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah consists of the opening portions of the Book of leremiah. After an opening summary of the dates of leremiah's career, there follows an account ofhis prophetic commission as a messenger of God's word. This complements the commission of Moses in xhepa-mshah and dramatizes the continuity of divine guidance over the generations. leremiah's inauguration is reinforced by two visionary signs that introduce the theme of divine providence and imminent doom. A positive prophecy underscoring the special status oflsrael concludes the haftarah. HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
186
PART 1. HISTORICAL PROLOGUE (Jeremiah 1:1-3) The prophet Jeremiah son of Hilkiah is introduced, and his period of service noted—from the thirteenth year of King Josiah (627 B.C.E.) to the eleventh year of King Zedekiah (586 B.C.E.), "when Jerusalem went into exile." PART 2. THE PROPHETIC COMMISSION (Jeremiah 1:4-19) a. Jeremiah 1:4-10 The prophet is addressed by God, who informs him ofhis destiny since "before you were born"—to be a prophet. Jeremiah responds anxiously, claiming an inability "to speak." God counters this response with words of support and encouragement: God will put His words in Jeremiah's mouth and will be with him on his mission to "nations and kingdoms." b. Jeremiah 1:11-16 God shows Jeremiah two things, the branch of an almond tree and a steaming pot. Both are interpreted symbolically: the first in terms of God's attentive presence; the second to portray the disaster to come. c. Jeremiah 1:17-19 The announcement of doom concludes with God's reaffirmation of protection during the prophet's mission. PART 3. ISRAELS SACRED STATUS (Jeremiah 2:1-3) A final divine word is addressed to Jerusalem, proclaiming God's remembrance of Israel's faithfulness in her youth (at Sinai and in the wilderness) and His protection of this "holy" nation against its enemies.
CONTENT AND MEANING Each of the three parts of the haftarah is complex in form, style, and content. Part 1 is an objective, third-person historical superscription; it serves to summarize the chronological frame of Jeremiah's career. Part 2 is a subjective, first-person report of God's call to the prophet; it serves to describe and legitimate the onset of his prophecy for the readers of this collection. And Part 3 is a reported discourse of God's word to His people; it serves to highlight divine love and protection for Israel. The haftarah thus contains three genres: an opening historical notice, a concluding prophetic speech, and a dialogue between God and the prophet encased between them. These three genres also anticipate the three main modes of communication in the entire book: narrative reports by a historian (cf. Jeremiah 37-42); personal reactions of the prophet to God's presence in his life (cf. 20:7-12) and God's response (cf. 15:15-18, 19-21); and the voice of the prophet proclaiming God's teachings to the people. The call to prophecy in Jer. 1:4-10 is presented as an autobiographical fragment. In it, Jeremiah reports his divine consecration and response: God's word strikes terror in his heart, which is countered by the promise of protection and verbal inspiration. The tremulous mood is captured by the prophet's cry of woe 'ahah and by the divine exhortations not to fear. The promise is repeated at the end of the unit in the image of an inviolable city (1:18-19). The subjective tone of this passage echoes a literary pattern preserved in the prophetic calls ofMoses (Exod. 3:10-12; 4:15), Isaiah (Isa. 6:5-7), and Ezekiel (Ezek. 2:3-3:11). Its features include (1) an opening address by God, (2) the fear and statement of inadequacy by the prophet, and (3) God's response, promising support and promise of aid (through a consecration of the prophet's mouth and transfer to him of the power of divine speech).1 This common structure makes it difficult to separate the literary pattern from the personal dimensions of the report. Moreover, even such apparently unique elements as the report of Jeremiah's consecration from birth may be the product of literary convention; similar characterizations of destiny are found in accounts of royal births from Mesopotamia and Egypt. 2 In addition, Jeremiah's commission account is also influenced by the ideology of prophecy found in the Deuteronomic tradition. As in the Torah, where God tells Moses that the true prophet will speak what God commands and will have divine words put in his mouth (Deut. 18:18), God tells Jeremiah to "speak whatever I command you," for "I put My words into your mouth" (Jer. 1:7,9). 187
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
A literary pattern with traditional terms and ideology has therefore been used to represent this inaugural moment in Jeremiah's life. Such a formulation serves several functions. First and foremost, the commission scene presents Jeremiah to readers of the book as a true prophet in the standard mode: sent forth to prophesy against his personal inclination but with divine assurances, just like Moses and Isaiah before him. Moreover, as a true heir of Moses, he receives God's words in his mouth. A further function of the call scene would be to serve as a prologue to the personal themes of leremiah's prophetic career: the divine commission to destroy and to build (ler. 24:6; 31:28, 40; 42:10); the overwhelming divine word, which he has "eaten" and absorbed (cf. 15:16; 20:9, 23:28-29); and the divine assurances apparently forgotten (see 15: 17-18; 20:7-8, 10). The prophet was sent on a task of terrifying magnitude, and the violence done to him was, in part, a test of his faithfulness to the mission. "Arise and speak to them all that I command you," says the Lord. "Do not break down before them, lest I break you before them" (ler. 1: 17). leremiah's task was fated from the womb; it could not therefore be denied. "I thought, 'I will n o t . . . speak in His name'—but [His word] was like a raging fire in my heart . . . . I could not hold it in, I was helpless" (20:9). The haftarah closes with the prophetic proclamation of ler. 2:1-3. In it the prophet is commanded by God to speak to the citizens of lerusalem on His behalf, telling them how He remembers their covenant love and commitment in ancient days (v. 2). Immediately thereafter leremiah speaks in his own voice, asserting that Israel is "holy to the L O R D " and therefore protected by Him (v. 3). Despite the shift in voice and no explicit relationship between verses 2 and 3, a direct connection is clearly intended. In verse 2, God recalls Israel's past "devotion" to Him and accounts it in her favor, and in verse 3 leremiah enunciates God's commitment to her well-being. According to one view (NIPS), both Israel's loyalty and the ensuing divine protection are events of the past ("Israel •was holy to the LORD \kodesh yism'el la-THWH], the first fruits of His harvest, all who ate of it were held guilty tye'eshamu]; disaster befell them" [ler. 2:3]). ludged in terms of the prophecy that follows the haftarah, such past acts of protection justify God's dismay at Israel's present faithlessness (see 2:4-8). But this reading hardly explains the climactic force of this oracle in the haftarah. The phrase "kodeshyisra'el la-YHWH" is most naturally construed as a cultic formula: "Israel is holy to the L O R D . " In the same vein, the verb ye'eshamu is most naturally to be understood in a future sense, meaning that all who destroy Israel "shall be held guilty."3 The result is a prophecy of hope and protection based on past loyalty. The ancient Rabbis presumably concluded the haftarah here to make this optimistic point.
COMMENTS Jeremiah 1:1. Jeremiah The Hebrewyirmiyahu is derived from either ramah or mm-, the name leremiah thus means "the LORD loosens" or "the LORD is exalted."4 The stem of the latter (r-w-w) is also suggested by the Greek transcription Ieremias. The name is attested in Hebrew seals from the eighth century5 and also from the Lachish Letters from the time of the fall oflerusalem. 6 Anathoth A levitical city in the territory of Benjamin (cf. losh. 21:18). As a resident of Anathoth (ler. 29:27), leremiah's oracles incurred the wrath of the local people (11:21). His family also had land holdings there (32:7). 2. The word ofthe LORD This is evidently a new sentence, following the overall topic heading in verse 1. This section begins with the phrase 'asher hayah—a formulation that usually marks a relative clause ("that was") but functions here as an independent clause (cf. ler. 14:1; 46:1; 47:1; 49:34).
in the thirteenth year Of losiah, 627 B.C.E. At this time King Nebuchadnezzar I of Babylon revolted against his Assyrian overlord. Gradually, the Assyrian Empire was contained HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
188
and overcome. Babylon eventually rose to hegemony in the region, dominating Judah and destroying it in 586 B.C.E. 3. until the end ofthe eleventh year... in the fifth month This is evidently a generalization. Jerusalem fell on the ninth day of the fourth month of Zedekiah's eleventh year (Jer. 39:2; 52:5-6). 5. Before I created you This translation follows the keri,'etzorkha, which is derived from the stemy-tz-r. Rashi and R. Joseph Kara derive it from te-w-r (I formed you), but this etymology is only correct for the ketiv (Jetzowrekha).7 Nevertheless, the apparent difference between the keri and ketiv may simply be orthographic. In late writing traditions, a kametz katon vowel (in our case, the o of 'etzorkha) was often indicated by the letter vav. Such is regularly the case in the Qumran scrolls. For example, whereas Isa. 42:6 in the Masoretic text marks an act of creation with the verb ve-'etzorkha, the large Isaiah scroll from Qumran (lQIsa a ) spells it w'tzwrkh. Clearly the kametz katon vowel has been marked there with a vav to ensure its proper pronunciation (akin to an "o"). This spelling convention may also explain the keri/ketiv variation in Jer. 1:5; that is, the two forms are different spellings of one and the same verb ('etzorkha-, fromyatzar), and both refer to Jeremiah's creation in the womb. This motif is found in Assyrian and Egyptian royal annals, where it indicates the divine appointment of a king.8 a prophet concerning the -nations The phrase has long puzzled commentators, as Jeremiah clearly spoke to Israel (and not just to the nations) in the course ofhis career. Accordingly, Rashi and Kimhi refer to verse 7 in order to maintain that both Israel and the gentiles were included within Jeremiah's mission. However, the framing of the commission with reference to the nations who will exact divine judgment over Israel (v. 10) and the dominance of this theme in the pot image (w. 13-15) suggest that only the foreign nations are referred to in verse 5. As specified here, Jeremiah's role is to announce the northern enemy (and its allies; cf. v. 15) that will destroy Judah because ofher sins. 6-9. The commission scenario follows a standard structure that includes a divine confrontation and commission, a prophetic objection, and a divine assurance (see above). The statements that the prophet will go where God sends him and speak all that he is commanded (v. 7), as well as the promise of divine protection and salvation (v. 8), both recur in verse 17-19, thereby framing the two visions and the judgment (w. 11-16). After a later period of despair, this imagery of protection recurs in the context of a renewal of Jeremiah's task (15:20-21). In his complaint, the prophet also alludes to the import ofhis birth and the eating of divine words (15:10, 16). Call scenarios regularly include "signs" as well, and their functional equivalent occurs below in the almond tree and the pot. 7. speak -whatever I command you God tells Jeremiah to speak what he has been commanded, for "I put My words into your mouth" (v. 9). These words echo Deut. 18:18, where God tells Moses that the true prophet will speak what he is commanded—for the word of God is in his mouth. The allusion establishes Jeremiah as a true prophet in the tradition ofMoses. 10. To -uproot and to pull down This summation of functions is a leitmotif of the book (see Jer. 18:7, 9; 24:6; 31:28; 42:10; 45:4). The editorial integration of this motif with the first vision (the almond tree, shaked [v. 11]), which portends divine watchfulness (shoked [v. 12]), precedes their rhetorical combination in 31:28. For this form of vision, in which God uses natural elements to portend acts of providence, see Amos 7:8 and 8:2. The same form is also used with supernatural experiences; see Zech. 4:2 and 5:2. 13-14. steaming pot As in verses 11-12, the vision and explanation are verbally correlated (see preceding note). Thus the steaming (naphuah) pot, tipped from the north (v. 13), symbolizes the outbreak (tippatah) of the destruction from that region (v. 14). But the image is somewhat opaque. For one thing, the Hebrew depicting the orientation of the pot is puzzling (panav mi-pnei tzafonah), and some commentators have suggested that the pot was actually facing north to receive the evil 189
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
(Kimhi, R. Joseph Kara, Luzzatto). For another, the key verbs in verses 13 and 14 are etymologically different (naphuah refers to "steaming," tippatah to the "outbreak" of violence). The Septuagint offers a more harmonious connection between the verses, with its translation of the second verb "will be brought to boil" (this presumably derives from the Hebrew tuppah or tinnupah). north The designation is vague in this context. Jeremiah did not identify the enemy with Babylon until 605 B.C.E. (Jer. 25:9). An old contention that the northern enemy actually refers to Scythian invaders (based, in part, on Herodotus, 1, 105), remains inconclusive.9 15. For I am summoning Stylistically, the connective ki (for) introduces an expansion of the terse imagery of verses 13-14. 16. them
That is, Jerusalem and Judah [Transl.].
Jeremiah 2:2-3. The positive portrayal of Israel's youthful past and the marital symbolism of the covenant in verse 2 echo Hosea 2. However, this portrait contradicts the repeated episodes of faithlessness found in the Pentateuch. One must therefore suppose that different streams of tradition and different didactic motives have found expression. Verse 3 turns on a different metaphor. Instead of referring to Israel's relation to God as one of espousal and marriage (v. 2), that relationship is now imagined in terms of the donation of "first fruits." Jeremiah's identification oflsrael with first fruits also echoes a theme sounded by Hosea (Hos. 9:10). In this case, the prophet's rhetoric is a transformation of Lev. 22:14-16. The Pentateuchal law warns against the desecration of gifts (kodesh) devoted to the Lord and speaks of the guilt ashmah) that accrues through eating akhal) thereof. In the prophet's transformation, the cultic rule is read as a metaphor for God's relationship to his people. In Jeremiah's revision of the law, Israel is figured as God's sacral portion (kodesh) and the nations that destroy them ('akhal) are "held guilty" ('asham) —with disastrous consequences. 3. holy Jeremiah's depiction of the nation as a "holy" people is indebted to contemporary Deuteronomic theology, where the same notion is articulated (see Deut. 7:6). This categorical formulation is a revision of the conditional depiction of the people's holy status found in Exod. 19:4-6. In that context, Israel may become holy if it observes God's teachings. The Deuteronomic revision deems Israel holy per se and therefore holds it responsible for its covenantal observance. In any event, both of these depictions are metaphorical and without ritual implications. They stand in contrast to Korah's assertion that all the nation is "holy" in Num. 16:3. As this proclamation did carry cultic implications, it was intended and perceived as a rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is the first of three prophetic readings of admonition that precede the fast of Tisha b'Av. This three-week period begins after the fast of the seventeenth of Tammuz, which marks the first breach in the walls of Jerusalem by the ancient Babylonians (during the time of the First Temple). The interval between this fast day and the fast of Tisha b'Av is known in rabbinic literature as bein ha-metzarim, "Between the Breaches" (after the phrase in Lam. 1:3, "All her pursuers overtook her in the namwplaces"). This period is also designated as telata' de-pumnuta\ or "The Three [Weeks] of Admonition]," because of the warnings of divine punishment recited in the haftarot chosen for this time. After this cycle of admonitions, there follow seven weeks when prophecies of consolation are recited. This interval is known as shivata' de-nehemata\ or "The Seven [Weeks] of Consolation." The combined total of ten readings are in turn followed by other haftarah readings connected to the theme of repentance, which marks the holy days of the New Year. There is thus a major liturgical shift that begins this week (and continues for a quarter of the year) when the haftarah is not associated with thepamshah but with a specific theme. In the words of R. Abraham b. Nathan of Lunel, "From thepamshah of Genesis to the seventeenth of Tammuz we recite haftarot in line HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
190
with the topic of xhepamshah, in accordance with their similarity (domeh le-domeh)-, [but] from thence forward, all [haftarot are chosen] according to the time and occasion" (Sefer Ha-Ma-nhig, Hilkhot Ta'anit, xvi).10 This liturgical cycle was practiced in antiquity, though not codified until the Middle Ages. The earliest definite evidence occurs in the old Palestinian Midrash Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, where it forms a major component. This source dates from as early as the fifth century c. E.11—hence the practice preceded it by some time. In the Pesikta, homilies presupposing the reading of ler. 1. Iff. (the extent of the ancient readings is unspecified) are collected in piska 13 (entitled divrei yirmeyahu, "The words of leremiah," from the opening verse of today's haftarah). By contrast, in the Talmud, Rav Huna only refers to a custom of reading Isa. l:14ff. on the New Moon of Av that falls on a Sabbath (B. Megillah 31b) —and not to the cycle beginning with leremiah l : l f f . In response to this gap, the medieval Tosafists state that it was their custom to "follow the tradition of the Pesikta" and recite ler. 2:4ff. and Isa. l : l f f . before the fast day (ibid., s. v. "The New Moon"). They further state that they recited Isa. 1: Iff. "on the Sabbath before Tisha b'Av"—not on the New Moon of Av that falls on a Sabbath (in accordance with B. Ta'anit 29b). Nothing is stated regarding ler. l : l f f . Nevertheless, the liturgical treatisc Mahzor Vitry (which reflects medieval practices from the school of Rashi) does account for this reading as part of the three prophecies of admonition. It is alluded to there among a list of mnemonics for the several haftarah selections to be recited after the seventeenth of Tammuz. Maimonides also mentions our haftarah selection as the first pericope of the triad of admonitions in his .Mishneh Torah (Hilkhot Tefillah 13:19). 12 The present halakhic tradition of reciting the sequence ler. l:lff., ler. 2:4ff, and Isa. l : l f f . is explicitly formulated in the Shulhan Arukh (Orah Hayyim 428:7). In this group, each of the readings begins with admonition and ends with consolation; indeed, the conclusions to the second (ler. 4:1-2) and third (Isa. 1:27) haftarot deal with repentance. The reason the beginning admonitions were taken from the work of leremiah is undoubtedly because of the tradition that he composed the Book of Lamentations (recited on Tisha b'Av); 13 and the reason Isa 1:1-27 was selected as the concluding admonition is probably due to the fact that verse 21 reads "Alas Y'eikhah], she has become a harlot, the faithful city"—in tragic anticipation of the opening line of the Book ofLamentations, "Alas [Jeikhah]! Lonely sits the city once great with people!" 14
Haftarah for Mase'ei
^Ott
ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH 2:4-28 AND 3:4 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 2:4-28 AND 4:1-2
Haftarah for Mattot-Mase'ei
^Ott-mOtt
ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH 2:4-28 AND 3:4 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 2:4-28 AND 4:1-2
For leremiah's life and times and a consideration of his overall prophetic message and theology, see "The Book of leremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the other haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah delivers a scathing indictment of national faithlessness, ingratitude, and apostasy—addressed to the House of lacob and to the families of the House of Israel. N o date is given; but from the references to political alliances with Assyria and Egypt we may assume that leremiah spoke these words in the final decades of the ludean state (627-586 B.C.E.), when there were various attempts to ensure political protection against the Neo-Babylonian empire. 1 Otherwise, the accusation is without reference to specific historical events. The harsh judgments 191
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
of the haftarah are counterpointed by the concluding words of consolation and hope. These are taken from Jer. 3:4 and 4:1-2, according to Ashkenazic and Sephardic tradition respectively. PART 1. BETRAYAL AND APOSTASY (Jeremiah 2:4-28) a. Jeremiah 2:4-9 The accusation begins with a historical retrospective. First the ancestors of the present generation are criticized for apostasy, despite God's ongoing providence and protection. Priests, teachers, kings, and prophets all come under censure. b. Jeremiah 2:10-19 The prophet then turns to the present generation. Incomprehensibly, they too have abandoned their historical God and turned to other deities and nations for help. For such acts of folly and futility, the Land and people suffer judgment. c. Jeremiah 2:20-28 The accusation shifts to cultic apostasy, dramatizing the passion of the nation for Canaanite fertility practices—without any sense of shame or impurity. The hopes put in these alien gods will prove vain in times of trouble. PART 2. HINTS OF HOPE (Jeremiah 3:4 and 4:1-2) a. Jeremiah 3:4 Ashkenazic tradition concludes the diatribe with a hint that Israel has repented, calling again upon their ancestral God—"the Companion of my youth." b. Jeremiah 4:1-2 Sephardic tradition concludes on a conditional note of promise: if Israel repents of idolatry and swears allegiance to God alone, it shall be blessed and praised among the nations.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah opens with God's charge of apostasy and ingratitude. It is formulated as a riv or accusation addressed first to the ancestors ("your fathers") of the present generation and then to the present generation along with their descendants (Jer. 2:5, 9). Following the generic pattern, the prophet charges the people with disregard of God's benefits and infidelity in religious practice.2 Specifically, the riv begins with the ironic question "What wrong did your fathers find in Me that they abandoned Me?" and goes on to accuse them of never asking "Where is the LORD?" who brought them from Egypt, led them through the wilderness, and delivered them into the Promised Land. The implication is that the people have simply abandoned their historical God for no good reason, since the evidence o f H i s providence is incontrovertible. The accusation is rhetorically structured: The outermost frame rebukes the people for following false and useless gods (A / A 1 ); the innermost frame charges them with disregard of YHWH and never inquiring about Him (B / B 1 ); and the centerpiece recounts God's beneficence to the nation (C). Key words link the units. A. "They went after delusion" (va-yelkhu aharei ha-hevel) (v. 5) B.
"They never asked . . ., 'Where ['ayyeh] is the
LORD?
'" (v. 6)
C. God's historical guidance (w. 6-7) B1.
"The priests never asked . . ., 'Where [}ayyeh~] is the
LORD?
'" (v. 8)
A 1 . "They followed what can do no good" ('aharei lo'yo'ilu halakhu) (v. 8) Other instances of covenantal infidelity are specified. God has been rejected for alien gods oflittle worth (Jer. 2:11-13) and for political alliances that will come to naught (w. 16-19). And in an extensive diatribe against Israelite apostasy, Jeremiah depicts how the people have run after Canaanite fertility practices without shame or restraint: the nation is like a whore spread out on every hill (v. 20); like a pleasant plant turned foul (v. 21); like a she-camel in heat (v. 23); and like a thief caught red-handed (v. 26). The prophet's contempt and disbelief are punctuated by a series of questions: "what [mah] wrong did your fathers find in Me?" (v. 5), or "what, then, is the good [mah lakh]?" (v. 18), or "how" have you changed and "how" can you deny your sin (w. 21, 23). In several extensive queries he wonders how Israel could betray its God (v. 11) or HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)192
be like a slave left for plunder (v. 14). The force of this rhetoric is to express the dumbfoundedness of the prophet and the unassailability of his accusation. In a concluding act of derision, leremiah mocks the zest for idolatry of the people—who "said to wood, 'You are my father, ' to stone, 'You gave birth to me'" (ler. 2:27). And then, echoing his opening salvo, when he charged the people for not asking "Where ayyeh] is the L O R D ? " , leremiah ends on a similar rhetorical note. The query "Where are those gods [}ayyeh Jelohekha] you made for yourself}" (v. 28) ridicules the people's piety and the folly of their apostasy. The question gives the entire diatribe a ring form and brings it to a poignant conclusion. Following the denunciation, liturgical tradition appends a positive ending. Ashkenazic custom reads ler. 3:4 as a counterpoint. The divine statement that the people have now turned to Him and "called to Me, 'Father!'" ( 3 : 4 ) , reverses the preceding acclamation of wood as "my father" (2:27). The terminology signals a return to the divine patrimony and a forthright assertion of loyalty. Sephardic tradition follows a different course, articulating conditions for divine blessing. Hence, repentance is still an option—nothing concrete has changed. Four stages are marked off: a return to God, a rejection of idolatry, an affirmation of resolve, and an oath of loyalty. The sequence makes clear that religious transformation is a process, involving decision and resolve at each point. Such a scenario anticipates the later lewish tradition formulated by Saadiah Gaon and Maimonides, whereby repentance also goes through several stages—including the need to divest oneselfof negative practices and become firm in this resolve.3
COMMENTS Jeremiah 2:5. What wrong did yourfathers find in Me Such rhetorical questions are characteristic of the riv-accusation form. Compare the beginning of the accusation in Mic. 6:3, where God asks: "My people! What wrong have I done you?" leremiah's use of the term "find" (matza}) has a legal overtone. Compare Deut. 24:1. 6. Where is theLoRD? This type of query often invokes issues of divine might or presence. In ludg. 6 : 1 3 , Gideon ponders: "If the L O R D is with u s . . . [w]here are all His wondrous deeds?" Similarly, in loel 2:17 and Ps. 42:4 and 11, the nations mock Israel and ask, "Where is your/their God?" See further below, on verse 28. 7. defiled My land Acts of idolatry and false worship defile the land and the perpetrators. This is explicitly the case in Lev. 18:24-25. 8.guardians ofthe Teaching The "guardians" are included in a larger list of indicted persons (including priests, prophets, and kings; see also v. 26 and 18:18). The term itself, Hebrew tofsei ha-Tomh, literally indicates those who "take hold of the Torah." It most properly denotes a technical skill or ability (cf. Gen. 4:21; Amos 2:15). The cognate Akkadian verb (sabitu) and noun (sabittu) also apply a term for "taking" to the act of teaching. 4 10. isles ofthe Kittim
Refers to ancient Greek Kition, modern-day Larnaca on Cyrus.5
Kedar An old Arab tribe (Gen. 25:13); located in the east of Transjordan, in northern Arabia. 6 11. itsglory Hebrew kevodo. Alternatively, this phrase refers to God's heavenly Glory (i. e., "His Glory"), which the people denied and exchanged for "no-gods." In fact, rabbinic tradition considered this passage one of the so-called tikkunei soferim, or "scribal corrections," introduced into the biblical text for the sake of a divine euphemism (cf. the list in Mekhilta deRabbi Ishmael, Shirata 6 [on Exod. 15:7]). The original reading presupposed by this change is kevodi, "My Glory." Such a stark formulation presumably led certain scribes to soften the wording by a slight orthographic change. Many interpreters, however, do not regard the new reading to be a true scribal correction, but rather a midrashic conceit allowing references to God's Glory to be introduced into the text. 7 A similar "correction" occurs in the rabbinic lists for Hos. 4:7. 8 Compare also Ps. 106:20. 193
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
12. -utterly dazed Hebrew horvu. This verbal form is a retraction from harovu. Medieval Jewish grammarians called this phenomenon a nasog ahor. For another instance, compare the keri (the text as read) with the ketiv (the written text) at Judg. 9:12. 13. the Fount ofliving water This image may derive from the homily in Deut. 6:11-12, where the themes of hewn wells, forsaking God, the Exodus, and slavery are found. The Masoretic pointing is borot, "pits," though the orthography (with alef) requires a plural for "wells" (cf. Gen. 14:10; 26:15). The theme of God as a Fount of water and the overall motif of the well are developed in classical Jewish literature. 9 14. Is Israel a bondman? The accusation shows a preference for multiples. A double query occurs in verse 11; a triple rhetorical question appears here and in verses 31-32. Various formulations occur; in verse 14, the interrogative structure uses the particles ha-+ im + madud.10 16.Noph and Tahpanhes Cities in Egypt. The Egyptians, like the Assyrians, will prove a disappointment; compare 2:36 [Transl.]. 16,18. The Egyptian toponyms have been hebraized. Noph is a corruption of.Moph (see Hos. 9:6) or Memphis (Saqqara, in the lower Nile). Tahpanhes is literally two words: "fortress of the Nubian" (Tel Dafhe). The second word {panhes) is well-known from the name of the Aaronid priest Pinhas (Phinehas). The Hebrew form mey shihor, "waters of the Nile," derives from the Egyptian phrascp'sh-hr, "Pool o f H o r u s " (cf. Isa. 23:3). 20. you broke Hebrew shavarti. This is not the common first-person form "I broke," but the archaic (or aramaizing) second-person feminine singular form. Compare also nitakti, "you broke" in verse 20. Another archaic (or aramaizing) form in this piece is nitztah (v. 15) preserved in the ketiv (or written form). This is a third-person plural verb, meaning "they were laid to waste." The more common form (nitztu) is preserved in the keri (read form). Compare also Deut. 21:7. And said Hebrew im-to'meri-, literally, "and you said." This form recurs in verses 23 and 25, thus a threefold assertion of resistance and intransigence. Thus Israel incriminates herself. work
Following the ketiv; keri "transgress" [Transl.].
21. Ifind... into a base, an alien vine Paraphrasing the difficult Masoretic li, surey hagefen nokhriyyah. Alternatively, read le-suryah,gefen nokhriyyah—a regrouping of consonants that is supported by the Septuagint. This yields the lament, "[O, how then could you have changed] into a rebellious, alien vine?!" A divinely planted vine turning to rot occurs in Isa. 5:2 and 4, as S. D. Luzzatto has noted. In fact, the term sorek, "noble vine" (2:21), is also found there. The divine planting contrasts with the pagan boughs under which Israel sins (Jer. 2:20). The image also alludes to God's planting oflsrael in the Land at the time of settlement (Exod. 15:17, Ps. 80:9ff). 23. in the Valley That is, of Hinnom; compare 7:31-32; 32:35: "They have built shrines ofBaal . . . where they offered up their sons and daughters . . ." [Transl.]. 25. But you say, "It is no use" This idiom is used elsewhere in Jeremiah (18:12), also in connection with idolatrous practices. As an expression of resistance it is also found in Isa. 57: 10. Like in Jer. 2:28, that polemic also speaks of how the people's idols will be useless to save them when they need help (Isa. 57:12-13). A common rhetorical pattern may underlie both formulations. strangers
That is, other gods [Transl.].
27. "You are my father'^ This statement resonates with legal adoption formulas, as when God says to the king: "You are My son, I have fathered you this day" (Ps. 2:7; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14). HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)194
28. where are thosegods / You madefor yourself} A polemical query; compare above, on verses 6 and 8. The mockery here is against the many gods that claimed deliverance. In Isa. 36:19, a similar query was enunciated by Rabshakeh, an Assyrian envoy to lerusalem at the end of the eighth century B.C.E. Seeking to undermine ludean resistance to the upcoming Assyrian invasion, he asked: "Where were the gods of Hamath and Arpad? . . . And did they save Samaria from me?" Jeremiah 3:4.Just now In context, "at that moment [when you saw that I had stopped the rain, as mentioned in 3:3]" (Kimhi); or, "as of now" (with Targum; cf. Rashi). A shift to the theme of repentance is effected by a reversal of the false formula of patrimony ("They said to the wood, 'You are my father'" [2:27]) for the proper one: "lust now you called to Me, 'Father! '" Jeremiah 4:2. And swear This profession of worship echoes the covenant formulary of Hos. 2:21-22 after the renewal oflsrael's relation with the God of her youth (Hos. 2:17). The idea that "nations shall bless themselves by you" (Heb. "him"; see Kimhi) (ler. 4:2) echoes the divine promise to Abraham: "And all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you" (Gen. 12:3). The theme is thus a renewal of national destiny, promised here as a renewal of origins and blessing. As theLoRD lives
A fixed oath formula, denoting commitment to the national God. 11
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is read on the second week before Tisha b'Av and is the second of three recitations of admonition before that fast (see the discussion in the haftarah for Mattot). Rabbinic tradition gave close attention to the opening word shim'u (ler. 2:4) and its call to "hear" the word of God that calls them to account. This term evokes the formula na'aseh ve-nishmaarticulated by the nation at Sinai and affirming that the people "will do and obey" the covenant (Exod. 24:7). Several midrashic homilies go further and rhetorically challenge each limb of the body to "hear" and "heed" the duties and commandments appropriate to it. 12 The misbehavior of the nation as depicted by leremiah thus serves as a negative example. The prophet's challenge to the people is marked by the repeated query "how?": "How eikh] have you changed" from a noble vine into a base one? (ler. 2:21); 1 3 and "How ['eikh] can you say, 'I am not defiled'?" (v. 23). Repeating this word, leremiah expresses puzzlement at Israelite perversity and obtuseness in a way that ironically anticipates the opening elegy'eikhah ("O how?!" or "Alas!") of the Book ofLamentations.
195
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
deuteronomy
a n m
Haftarah for Devarim (Shabbat Hazon)
•''"Ql
ASHKENAZIM I S A I A H l : l - 2 7 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 1:1-27
For the life and times of Isaiah and a consideration of the content, style, and theology of the prophecies in Isaiah 1-39, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the discussion of the other haftarah readings taken from the Book oflsaiah (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is taken from the opening chapter of the Book of Isaiah, where the prophet accuses the people of infidelity to God, iniquity, and false reliance upon the Temple rituals. Divine doom is forecast. Judah and Jerusalem shall be laid waste, with few survivors. A vision of purgatory is also projected; after which Zion and her inhabitants shall be redeemed, and justice will be restored. The prophet does not specify the circumstances for his reproof. 1 According to the superscription, Isaiah's prophetic career spanned the reigns of several Judean kings during the last half of the eighth century B.C.E. These were decisive times, when Assyrian and Aramean foes repeatedly threatened Zion and its leaders. In the end, Jerusalem was miraculously saved (in 701 B.C.E.), and Isaiah's prophecies of doom were not realized in his lifetime. When the city finally fell to the Babylonians a century later (in 586 B.C.E.), the prophet's elegy of woe eikhah, "Alas" [Isa. 1:21]) came to symbolize that destruction and anticipate the identical cry of mourning eikhah, "Alas!") recited over the city at the beginning of the Book of Lamentations (Lam. 1:1). For that reason, later generations considered Isaiah's prophecy to be the appropriate reading for the Sabbath preceding the fast of Tisha b'Av, when that scroll of sorrows is chanted. PART 1. JUDGMENT AND D O O M (Isaiah 1:1-9) a. Isaiah 1:1 The superscription of the kings of Judah. b. Isaiah 1:2-9 The prophet begins with an accusation against the people in an indirect voice ("I reared children . . . and -they have rebelled against Me" [v. 2]) but then turns to direct speech in addressing them with their punishment ("Why do you seek further beatings, thatjyow continue to offend?" [v. 5]). They and their land shall be beaten and ravaged (w. 5-7) —with little to spare. "Had not the L O R D of Hosts left us some survivors, W should be like Sodom, another Gomorrah" (v. 9). 2 PART 2. ADMONITION AND INSTRUCTION (Isaiah 1:10-20) a. Isaiah 1:10-15 The prophet now admonishes the people who bring their offerings to the Temple and stretch forth their arms in prayer; for God rejects these unwelcome gifts of impure hands, stained with iniquity. b. Isaiah 1:16-20 The prophet counterpoints the reproof with a positive instruction: rejection of evil and acts of justice are the means to purification and plenty. The proper way is spelled out in detail. I f t h a t path is rejected, a devouring doom will ensue. PART 3. A LAMENT AND ITS REVERSAL (Isaiah 1:21-27) The prophet laments the transformation of Zion into a harlot and den of murderers. Injustice is rampant everywhere. God promises His judgment of purgation, to be followed by an ensuing restoration. 3 HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ) 196
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is composed of three separate pronouncements of doom. Each presupposes the sin and iniquity of the nation and their divine consequences. The first of these speeches (Isa. 1:2-9) is the most bleak, charging the people with rebellion against God. 4 N o qualification mitigates the condemnation and negative characterization. They are called a "sinful nation," a "people laden with iniquity," a "brood of evildoers," and "depraved children" (v. 4). Indeed, they are less mindful of their divine Lord than a dumb ox of its human master. Small wonder that a total punishment is envisioned. The nation will bear God's wrath as a sore wound over their body, and their eyes shall behold the devastation of their lands and cities. Zion shall be left like a solitary booth. N o positive traits are even hinted at, and it is only through divine grace that anyone survives—for by rights this evil nation should be destroyed utterly, like ancient Sodom and Gomorrah. The second speech (Isa. 1:10-20) is linked to the first one through several external features: both involve an opening appeal to an addressee to "hear" and "give ear"—the appeal is addressed to the heavens and earth in 1:2 and to the sinful folk in 1:10; both utilize the ancient trope of Sodom and Gomorrah—as a symbol of utter destruction in 1:9 and of inveterate sin in 1:10; and both signify the divine authority of the pronouncement with the phrase that says that the Lord has spoken—specifically, ki YHWH dibber ("for the L O R D has spoken") in 1:2 and ki pi YHWH dibber (lit., "for the mouth of the L O R D has spoken") in 1:20. These common features undoubtedly account for the editorial conjunction of the two speeches, though in content they are quite dissimilar.5 For example, the second speech is not a doomsday pronouncement like the first one, but a divine "instruction" that admonishes the people's misuse of the Temple and provides corrective counsel. God tells the people that He has no need of their sacrifices or incense or prayer—because He "cannot abide" their solemn assemblies while they are steeped in iniquity and will ignore the prayers uttered by those with crime on their hands. The nation is therefore advised to purge itself of evil and turn to acts of justice. Such behaviors will restore the people to God and earthly bounty, whereas rejection of them will result in doom. The prophet thus teaches that the people's abuse of religion and its institutions may be corrected and that their punishment is not irrevocable (as in the first speech). In Isaiah's words, the people's fate hangs on their decision to follow God's instruction of social justice. This is the core of divine concern. The third speech (Isa. 1:21-27) continues the themes of the second one but is distinct in genre and theological emphasis. Like its predecessor, this pronouncement emphasizes the injustice that fills the city and the rampant disregard of both orphan and widow (1:23; cf. v. 17). But unlike the second speech, the final one is a lament bewailing the destitution of Fair Zion and the doom that is yet to come. 6 Divine punishment will wreak vengeance, measure for measure: as the people's "silver has turned to dross" (1:22), cheapening the coin of exchange through deceit, so will God "smelt out your dross as with lye" (v. 25). But this bleak image of divine purgation is not the end. It is connected to a concluding promise that justice and judgment will ultimately be restored (Isa. 1:26). Moreover, the haftarah as a whole ends with a teaching of redemption and the renewal of right action (v. 27). According to one reading of that verse, God announces that "Zion shall be saved in the judgment \be-mishpat~]; her repentant ones \shavehah\ in the retribution \bi-tzdakahY (NIPS). This would suggest that the people of Zion who return to the Lord will not be destroyed in the divine fire and adds a codicil ofhope to the categorical doom pronounced in verses 21-26. Alternatively, and in keeping with the prophet's lament of how Zion has turned from a city of "justice" (mishpat) and "righteousness" (tzedek) to one of murder and deceit (v. 21), the final proclamation may rather state that "Zion shall be saved throughy^Jtzce, and those who dwell therein [or, repent] through acts of righteousness." This reading would counterpoint the judgment of immorality threatened in the lament; but the verse is opaque and has been so for readers since antiquity (see Text and Comments). Viewed synoptically, the three speeches express the inversion of cultural values, be it the betrayal of covenantal loyalty, the perversion of ritual, or the blindness of moral vision. Only the divine 197
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
voice spoken through the prophet is a witness to a lost direction, and only God's warning of doom attests to the need to purge the people of their sins. To the extent that positive action remains possible, it is the demand for social justice that is emphasized. Echoing older prophetic teachings, the sacrificial service is made secondary to moral deeds. But like no other biblical text, Isaiah champions the primacy of morality for true religion and speaks with pathos on behalf of the downtrodden and deceived. His teaching in Isa. 1:16-17 cuts through the vapors of deceit that infused contemporary Judean society and challenges it with first principles. Beyond vengeance and retribution, Isaiah's prophecy marks the high standard to which the nation shall be held accountable: Put your evil doings Away from My sight. Cease to do evil; Learn to do good. Devote yourselves to justice; Aid the wronged. Uphold the rights of the orphan; Defend the cause of the widow.
COMMENTS Isaiah 1:1. The prophecies of Isaiah The word "prophecies" translates Hebrew hazon, "vision." The generalizing use of hazon also occurs in the superscriptions to the prophecies of Amos, Micah, Nahum, and Habakkuk, although in these cases reference to the visionary experience of the prophet is linked to such terms as davor (word), and masa} (pronouncement). Kimhi also understood the word hazon here as a comprehensive designation, saying that "harsh rebukes are called hazon". But this interpretation is forced. Better is Abravanel's observation that hazon only refers to the immediately ensuing material—not to all the prophecies of the book (cf. OJPS: "The vision oflsaiah"). The import of the phrase is "[God's] vision" to the prophet (Saadiah Gaon). Given that the Book oflsaiah includes traditions of restoration (chapters 40-66), the term hazon may have been chosen by later editors to suggest that Isaiah of Jerusalem also envisioned the eschatology portrayed at the end of the work. This seems to have been the understanding of Ben Sira in the second century B.C.E., when he described Isaiah as one who "envisioned the end through the spirit of prophecy" (be-mah nevu'ah hazah 'aharit [Ben Sira 48:5]). concemingjudah andjerusalem prophecies to other nations. 7
This does not refer to the whole book, which includes
in the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham,Ahaz, and Hezekiah Kings of the eighth to seventh century B.C.E. (769-698 B.C.E.). The present chapter is not specifically dated. Since the Middle Ages it has been suggested that the commission scene in Isaiah 6 is the beginning of Isaiah's prophetic career; this event occurred after the death of King Uzziah (Rashi; Ibn Ezra). For modern arguments, see the haftarah for Yitro. 2.Hear,Oheavens.. .for the LORD has spoken The call to heaven and earth as witnesses to a divine admonition is also found in Deut. 32:1. Since antiquity, it has been surmised that Isaiah alludes here to this text, and the statement "for the LORD has spoken" was understood to reinforce this point (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Bo' 12). 8 In Mic. 6:1, a similar formulation introduces a riv (controversy) against the nation. 9 While in ancient Near Eastern treaties the divinities of heaven and earth were invoked as enduring witnesses, the invocation of natural phenomena in the Bible is largely a matter of rhetoric. According to rabbinic tradition, in Deut. 32:1 Moses refers first to the heavens and then the earth, since he was near to the heavens, whereas Isaiah reverses the order, since he was closer to the earth (cf. Kimhi, following Tanhuma Ha'azinu 2). I reared children ana brought them up "The parallelism is to strengthen the point with verbal variants; but the sense is the same" (Kimhi). HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ) 198
4.Ah, sinful nation The word "Ah" (hoy) is a cry of woe (Kimhi). It is a recurrent element of Isaiah's rebukes (cf. Isa. 5:8, 18, 21-22). A series of crimes are then imputed, listed without the connecting conjunction "and." This stark enumeration "heightens the force of the discourse" (Luzzatto). 10 Holy One oflsrael A characteristic divine epithet in the Book of Isaiah. God is called "holy" (kadosh) seventeen times in chapters 1 - 3 9 (cf. Isa. 5:16, 19) and fifteen times in chapters 40-66. An orison to the sanctity of God is the trisagion (threefold kadosh) in Isa. 6:3. The term is thus a defining feature of the Isaianic theological tradition. 8. like a booth in a vineyard The prophet says that after the destruction Zion will be "like" a booth. According to Kimhi, this means that God will abandon Israel as a watchman does his booth (at harvest's end). Alternatively, the figure bespeaks the desolation of the nation itself. 9.Left us some survivors This rendering takes sarid ki-m'at as one clause, following the Masoretic punctuation (so also Ibn Kaspi and Ibn Ezra). But the result is somewhat redundant. Alternatively, read sarid with the preceding clause (i. e., "left us a remnantfy) an&kim'at with the next one (i. e., "we should be somewhat like Sodom"). This reading is preferred by Rashi, Kimhi, and Luzzatto, among others (cf. Ps. 94:17); it has roots in talmudic exegesis (B. Berakhot 29a). like Sodom The story in Genesis 19 serves here, as elsewhere, as a paradigm of divine destruction (cf. Deut. 29:22; Amos 4:11). The perversity of the people of Sodom also serves as a negative model for the prophet in Isa. 1:10 (cf. Deut. 32:32). Reference in Isa. 1:7 to the land "as overthrown \ke-mahpekhat\ by strangers [zarim]" alludes to this scenario (for the phrase mahpekhat Sedom [the destruction of Sodom], see Deut. 29:22). Alternatively, mahpekhat zarim is a scribal error for mahpekhat Sedom, under the influence of the word zarim at the beginning of the phrase. 10. Give ear to our God's instruction The prophet uses the word torah (instruction) to mean prophetic teaching (Luzzatto). This is also the sense of the word in Isa. 2:3, "for instruction shall come forth from Zion," in the context of a vision of universal peace. The instruction given in 1:16-17 emphasizes moral-social matters after the denunciation of cultic impropriety (see Comment to w. 16-17). 11. What need have J? A wide-ranging rejection of God's need for or delight in animal sacrifices. The issue of "need" is also rebutted in Ps. 51:18, and the theme of "delight" is critiqued in 1 Sam. 15:22. The emphasis on morality over sacrifices is a theme stressed in Amos 5:21-24. Sacrifices per se are not rejected by the prophet, only hypocrisy and combining "assemblies with iniquity" (Isa. 1:13). The purification of self and the practice of moral rectitude were a condition for proper use of the Temple. This is strongly stressed in Psalms 15 and 24. 11 16-17. The prophet provides a list of proper actions. This is the positive core of the prophetic "instruction" (torah [v. 10]). Purification and purgation of evil are combined with the emphasis on justice and righteousness. Rabbinic midrash notes nine virtues in this list and links them to the nine days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur; and as the tenth day is the day of purification and atonement, so here the tenth feature of the list is "'Come, let us reach an understanding,'—says the LORD. 'Be your sins like crimson, they can turn snow-white'" (v. 18) (Yalkut Shimoni 2:389). Rashi refers to these ten topics as being ten warnings and exhortations to repentance. Both interpretations thus correlate Isaiah's list with the Ten Days of Repentance, beginning with Rosh Hashanah and climaxing on Yom Kippur. 17. Aid the wronged The meaning of the Hebrew 'ashru hamotz is uncertain (NIPS). The verb 'ashru has been understood to mean "strengthen" (M. Ketubbot 21:1; B. Gittin 87a); or "straighten" (taking the verb to be \ikcyashru) (Kimhi; Ibn Ezra); or "guide" (Kaspi). The word hamotz seems to have the sense of oppression (cf. Ps. 71:4). R. Isaiah di Trani considered it to be a variant of the word hamas (oppressive action). 199
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
18. let us reach an -understanding The verb indicates a legal specification of terms or conditions. Elsewhere the verb is used to provide the details of a case or admonition (Gen. 21: 25; Lev. 19:17; 2 Kings 19:4; Ps. 50:8, 21). For the term in a np-controversy, see Mic. 6:2 (Ibn Ezra; Ibn Kaspi). 18. Be your sins... turn snow-white This condition is used in liturgical supplications ("Purge me with hyssop till I am pure; wash me till I am whiter than snow" [Ps. 51:9]). A cultic, priestly background for this imagery of purification is likely (cf. Lev. 14:4, 49). The redness of sins portrayed here ("Be they red", ; imya'dimu) alludes to the accusation that the people's hands are "stained with crime" (lit., "blood" [dam]-, cf. R. Joseph Kara inv. 15). 19-20. The condition-result sequence is marked by wordplays. Thus the prophet says, "If, then, you agree [to'vu] . . ., you will eat [to'khelu] the good things [tuv] of the earth; but if you refuse . . . you will be devoured \te,ukklu\ [by] the sword." Kimhi succinctly adds: "You will not eat, but be devoured." 21-26. This unit opens with the reproof that Zion has turned from a "faithful city" where "righteousness dwelt" (v. 21) into a place of injustice and iniquity (w. 21-23), and it closes with the promise of Zion's restoration into a "faithful city" of "righteousness" (v. 26) —after a divine purification. The divine prophecy "I will restore your magistrates as of old, and your counselors as of yore" (v. 26) is reformulated as a request for the renewal of justice ("Restore our magistrates as of old," etc.) in the daily Amidah prayer (Benediction II). Rabbenu Hananel (on B. Megillah 17b) refers to this prayer as birkatmishpat, "The Benediction ofjustice." 22. Tour
Thatis, Jerusalem's [Transl.].
27. Zion shall be saved in thejudgment In this translation, the concluding verse of the haftarah complements the hopes of the preceding section by stating that the city will be saved during the purgation just described; the final phrase ("[and] her repentant ones [ve-shaveha], in the retribution [bi-tzdakah]n) adds the human action necessary for salvation. This view interprets the verb ve-shaveha as deriving from shuv (repent) (Rashi; Ibn Ezra) and presumes that the noun tzedakah alludes to the above-mentioned purgation (cf. 5:16, 10:22). But this is not certain. Other commentators understand ve-shaveha as referring to those who "return" to Zion (Kimhi) and interpret tzedakah in its regular sense of "righteousness" (the parallel word mishpat in the opening clause is similarly rendered as "justice," not "judgment"). This yields a quite different sense: "Zion shall be redeemed with justice, and they that return of her with righteousness" (OJPS). The alternative translations thus yield different theologies and emphases. The second version adds the necessary human precondition of justice, and this seems to fit best with the overall chapter. 12
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is a special reading for the Sabbath immediately preceding the fast of Tisha b'Av, this being the third and concluding week of the haftarah cycle known as the "Three of Admonition" (telata' de-pumnuta:').13 Indeed, this Sabbath takes its name (Shabbat Hazon) from the first word of the haftarah. The recitation of Isa. 1:1-27 was chosen because it anticipates the content of the Book of Lamentations, which is recited on Tisha b'Av. First and foremost, one will note that Isaiah cries, "Alas ['eikhah], she has become a harlot, the faithful city" (1:21) —a verse that presages the opening words of the scroll, "Alas [Jeikhah]! Lonely sits the city once great with people! She that was great among nations is become like a widow" (Lam. 1:1). But there are several other verbal tallies that thicken the intersection of the two passages. Thus, Isaiah speaks poignantly of the wounds of the people, whose "every heart is sick \levav davay]" (Isa. 1:5); and of the devastation o f j u d a h , whose "land is a waste \shemamah] . . . overthrown \mahpekhat\ by strangers [zarim]" (v. 7). To this he adds that "Fair Zion is left like a booth \sukkah\ in a vineyard" HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ) 200
(v. 8) —isolated and destroyed because of sins that made them like the people "of Sodom" (v. 10). Correspondingly, in the lament over "Fair Zion" in the Book of Lamentations (1:6), the city cries that her "heart is sick \libbi davay]" (v. 22), and that she is "forlorn [shomemahY (v. 13); and further, "Our heritage has passed \nehephkhah] to aliens [zarim]" (5:2), making "our hearts . . . sick [daveh libbenu]" (v. 17)—for God has destroyed his Temple, "he has stripped His Booth [sukko] like a garden" (2:6) because of the sins of the nation, which "exceeded the iniquity of Sodom" (4:6). The multiple resonances between Isa. 1:1-27 and the Book of Lamentations transform the haftarah into a prologue of woe, a prophetic "vision" of destruction confirmed by later experience. On Shabbat Hazon, anticipation and memory fuse.
Haftarah for Va-'ethannan (Shabbat Nahamu)
pnnxi
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH40:l-26 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 40:1-26
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). Isaiah 40:1-26 constitutes the opening section of what Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra called "the second part of the book" (in his comment on Isa. 40:1). It marks a major shift in time and focus from the concluding prophecies of the first part (Isaiah 36-39), which deal with episodes near the end of King Hezekiah's reign—especially the miraculous salvation of lerusalem from the Assyrians in 701 B.C.E. (Isaiah 36) and a visit to lerusalem by emissaries of the Babylonian king Merodach-baladan (Isaiah 39). By contrast, Isaiah 40 opens with prophecies of consolation addressed to the ludeans exiled to Babylon in the deportations of 597 and 586 B.C.E. and to the destroyed city of lerusalem. The proclamation states that the people's sins have been forgiven and the time of punishment is complete. The prophecies of Isaiah 40 thus postdate 538 B.C.E., after Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon and issued a proclamation permitting the restoration of subject peoples under his dominion. For this Cyrus is even designated the Lord's "anointed" (;meshiho) agent, strengthened and supported in his divine task (Isa. 45:1-2). An account of Cyrus's decree has been preserved on a cylinder inscription, 1 and transcripts of the proclamation (possibly even deriving from the ancient Persian chancellery) are found in the Bible. Ezra 1:2-4 preserves a record of the decree in Hebrew, while Ezra 6:3-5 gives a slightly different version of it in Aramaic. 2 From this source, we learn that the Persian king fostered a return of the ludean diaspora to lerusalem and permitted the rebuilding of their Temple there. He also allowed those lews who remained in exile to help finance the return of their compatriots to Zion. The haftarah does not use the language of political freedom, but announces God's heavenly word of comfort and restoration. The prophecy reorients the people to Zion and announces the advent of God's Presence—to confirm His word and guide His people to their homeland. This recitation inaugurates a cycle of seven readings that emphasize divine consolation and national renewal (see Connections between the Haftarah and the Special Sabbath). PART 1. WORDS OF COMFORT AND HOPE (Isaiah 40:1-11) a. Isaiah 40:1-5 The haftarah opens with God's word of comfort and forgiveness, addressed the people and the city of lerusalem (w. 1-2). A further word announces the advent of the Lord and His manifestation before "all flesh" (w. 3-5). b. Isaiah 40:6-8 Another proclamation announces that "all flesh" is like grass that withers, but the word of God stands firm. This pivotal prophecy gives assurance that the announcement of restoration can be trusted. 201
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
c. Isaiah 40:9-11 A final call to a divine herald to "announce to the cities o f j u d a h " that the Lord is coming with recompense for His people and Land. PART 2. THE INCOMPARABILITY OF GOD (Isaiah 40:12-26) The majesty and wisdom of God are portrayed. Nothing can be compared to Him in the heavens above and the earth below—neither the nations and their rulers, nor the idols made by men (w. 15-20, 23-24).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah has two main parts: an opening series of proclamations of consolation to the nation and Zion (Isa. 40:1-11) and a series of teachings emphasizing the unfathomable nature of God (w. 12-26). Each of these parts is diverse in form, style, and content, and each serves different rhetorical and theological functions. The pronouncements of the first part repeatedly specify the onset of reconciliation and hope—though the speakers and addressees are not always indicated. For example, the initial word of "comfort" (nahamu) is spoken by God for the people, but it is formulated in the plural—a fact that has led some interpreters to assume that the divine word is addressed to angelic emissaries. Equally puzzling is the second speech, which begins" A voice rings out" (v. 3) and goes on to announce the advent of God. This voice presumably belongs to one of the divine heralds, which the prophet hears and reports. Thereafter, another "voice rings out: 'Proclaim!'" and another asks, "What shall I proclaim?" (v. 6). Here, again, one may presume that the prophet overhears the voices of the divine messengers. The word of such an emissary, called a "herald of joy" to Zion and Jerusalem (v. 9), is proclaimed for a final time in the concluding unit of the first part. Thus the chapter arguably contains a series of divine charges to heavenly messengers—instructing them to bring God's word of comfort to Zion. The prophet overhears these proclamations and announces them to the people. Emphasis is also placed on the reliability of the divine word—a matter that reinforces confidence in the prophecies of consolation. Further reason to trust is given in the next part of the haftarah, which portrays the majesty and might of God. God's incomparable being is presented to the people through a series of rhetorical questions. Iwo groups of queries occur (Isa. 40:12-14 and 21-24), forming a theological frame of sorts. In the first group, the transcendence of God (w. 12-14) is juxtaposed to the nothingness of nature and the delusion of idol makers. "To whom," the question is summarily asked, "can you liken God?" (v. 18). In the second group, the might of God (w. 21-24) is juxtaposed to the limited knowledge of human beings (w. 25-26). Once again the question resounds, "To whom, then, can you liken Me?" (v. 25). N o answer is expected to these queries. The prophet's purpose is rather to elicit an assent to God's majesty as creator, vast in wisdom and might. As a rhetorical strategy, one may recall God's questions to Job (Job 38-39). There, too, the goal was to introduce a change of perspective and the human acknowledgment "that nothing . . . is impossible for You" (Job 42:2). Isaiah urges the people to "lift high your eyes and see: Who created these?" (Isa. 40:26). The people are thus urged to renew their wonder at God's creation—a wonder that will awaken assurance in "His great might and vast power," and thus inspire trust in His promise of redemption.
COMMENTS Isaiah 40:1. Comfort, oh comfort Hebrew nahamu nahamu. An address in the second-person plural. The double verb form is a hallmark of this prophet (cf. Isa. 51:9, 17; 52:11). It serves to express rhetorical intensification (Kimhi). In Ibn Ezra's opinion, it "indicates that the comfort will occur swiftly or repeatedly." The plural address has been variously interpreted. According to Ibn Ezra, it is spoken to the messengers of the people. Beginning with the Targum, the addressees have been presumed to be many prophets (Rashi; R. Isaiah di Trani; Ibn Bal'am; Metzudat David). Such prophetic messengers are otherwise absent from the book. Alternatively, Isaiah perceives God's address to His angelic emissaries and reports it to the nation. See Comment to verse 3. HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ) 202
According to R. Joseph ibn Kaspi, it is "right and proper" that the prophet announces restoration, having just spoken (in chap. 39) of the destruction. 3 Ibn Ezra made a similar observation but regarded the prophecies as referring to the exile of his own day. According to R. Moses ibn Chiquatilla, however, Isaiah 40-66 refers to the restoration from the Babylonian exile at the beginning of the Second Temple period. 4 This view is now generally accepted by modern historical scholarship. 2. That her term ofservice is over A series of three explanations for the comfort to come (each introduced by ki, "that", "for") intensifies the proclamation. The first states that Zion has completed her "service" or "labor" (tzeva'ah) (cf. Job 7:1 and Rashi). The second states that her iniquity is "expiated." The term used is nirtzah, which derives from the priestly vocabulary of divine acceptance of ritual acts (Lev. 1:4). It is used elsewhere by the prophet in a similar way (Isa. 58:5; 60:7), as well as to signal the propitious moment of divine redemption and favor (61:2). The third explanation refers to the fact that Zion has been doubly punished. A theology of divine punishment and forgiveness thus underlies this passage. God unilaterally determines the period involved; nothing is said o f h u m a n repentance. 3.A voice rings out This anonymous voice appears again as that of a divine messenger (cf. Comment to v. 1). Rashi proposed that it was the Holy Spirit; Ibn Ezra suggested that it was that of the messengers. According to Masoretic tradition, the clause that follows is the content of the voice; that is, "A voice rings out: 'Clear in the desert a road for the LORD! '" This fits with the poetic structure of the next phrase, "Level in the wilderness a highway for our God!" Another ancient tradition, first attested in the so-called Serekh Ha-Tahad of the Qumran Scrolls (1QS 8:14), interpreted the phrase as saying that "A voice rings out from the desert."5 On this basis, the faithful retreated to the desert to prepare for the advent of God. A similar interpretation underlies John 1:23 and is also found in Midrash Aggadat Bere'shit 68 and Zohar 1:118. 6. Another asks Hebrew ve-'amar. Apparently one messenger speaks to another, and the prophet overhears them. The reading of the Septuagint suggests an underlying va-'omar, "And I said (asked)." This reading is confirmed by the large Isaiah scroll from Qumran, which has va-'ommh. Such a formulation suggests that the prophet is addressed by one of the divine messengers. Allflesh isgrass A liturgical image (Pss. 90:3-6; 103:15-17). In this setting, it underscores human mortality and transience. The mutability ofhuman nature is further compared to the supernatural word of God. The purpose of the comparison is to support the truth of prophecy.6 9. Ascend . . . O herald ofjoy to Zion The phrase is difficult. The verb "ascend" is feminine ('alt lakh), as is the phrase "herald of joy" (mevasseret). The other voices are masculine. Medieval commentators resolved the difficulty either by asserting (without justification) that the verb mevasseret is not a true feminine form (Ibn Ezra) or by assuming that the call was to the "prophecy" (nevu'ah, a feminine noun) to ascend and heraldjoy to Zion (di Trani; Abravanel). Alternatively, the speaking voice goes back to verse 6, and the call is to Zion itself to announce the good news to the cities of Judah (Kimhi). 10. reward. .. -recompense The reward and recompense to the cities o f j u d a h ; compare Jer. 31:14 and 16 [Transl.]. 12. Who measured the waters? The repeated questions confront the listener with the unfathomable majesty of God and raise one's sights from the historical to the cosmological level. The work ofhuman hands is put in perspective, and the desire to create forms of God from the world of His creation is mocked. With profound stylistic effect, the anthropomorphic imagery provides a didactic device whereby all pretensions to see or understand divinity are transcended. 14. Whom did He consult? This may be an indirect critique of Gen. 1:26, where God apparently speaks to the heavenly court prior to creating man ("Let us make man"). Similarly, 203
HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ)
the emphatic point "To whom, then, can you liken \teda-mmeyun] God?" (v. 18; cf. v. 25) may be directed against the notion that man was created in the "likeness" (demutenu) of God and the angels (Gen. 1:26) 7 way of right Hebrew }orah mishpat. This apparently refers to the nature of the universe and its laws (Kimhi). 25. says the Holy One God is designated by the term kadosh. This epithet occurs frequently in the form kedosh yisra'el, "The Holy One oflsrael" (cf. Isa. 41:14; 43:14; 54:5). It expresses the prophet's theology of God's utter sanctity and transcendence. The epithet provides a link to the first half of the book, where God is repeatedly called kedoshyisra'el (cf. Isa. 5:19; 10:20; 12: 6). The theological emphasis echoes Isaiah's Temple vision, in which he heard the angelic host singing kadosh (holy) three times before God (6:3). 8 A reflex of this liturgical tradition occurs in 57:15:"For thus said He who high aloft forever dwells, whose name is holy: I dwell on high, in holiness; yet with the contrite and the lowly in spirit—reviving the spirits of the lowly, reviving the hearts of the contrite." This latter formulation underlies the rabbinic prayer Shokhen 'Ad, recited at the beginning of the Sabbath morning (Shaharit) service.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH This Sabbath takes its name (Shabbat Nahamu) from the first word of this haftarah. The haftarah is the first of seven successive haftarot after Tisha b'Av that contain prophecies of "consolation" (nehemta:') announcing Israel's redemption. 9 This seven-week cycle is preceded by three special haftarot of admonition (pumnuta') when warnings of impending doom are pronounced. Following these ten readings are others chosen for their relationship to the holy days of the New Year. Many codifiers and commentators thus spoke of a cycle of twelve special haftarot for this period. 10 A medieval account summarized the matter thus: "From the pamshah of'Genesis' to the seventeenth of Tammuz we recite haftarot in line with the topic of xhcpamshah, in accordance with their similarity \domeh le-domeh\ (But) from that time forward, all (of the haftarot are chosen) according to the time and occasion involved" (R. Abraham b. Nathan of Lunel, Ha-Manhig, Hilkhot Ta'anit 16). 11 All seven of the haftarot of consolation are taken from Isaiah 40-66. From gaonic times, the sequence was listed by means of a mnemonic. According to the Mahzor Vitry, which reflects traditions in the school of Rashi, the reason for this mnemonic was because the prophetic readings are in a different order than the sequence found in the Bible.12 To explain this fact, an inner-thematic progression was proposed—modulating the consolation through a sequence of psychological stages and climaxing with the proclamation of joy in the final triad. Abudarham proposed a more "midrashic" solution. In his view, the sequence of haftarot reflects an ongoing dialogue between God, the prophet, and Israel—beginning with Israel's desolation and ending with their consolation. God begins the exchange by telling the prophet to "comfort My people" (Isa. 40:1; the beginning of the reading for the first week). But Israel (Zion) is not comforted by this proclamation and responds (in the reading for the second week) that "the L O R D has forsaken me" (49:14). In response, the prophet turns to God (in the third week) and says that Israel is an "unhappy, storm-tossed one, uncomforted!" (54:11). The dialogue continues throughout the seven weeks and climaxes with Israel's final reconciliation and joy. Struck by the greater number of prophecies of consolation than judgment, the .Mahzor Vitry emphasizes that comfort is a gradual process and must be achieved in moderation. The cycle of seven haftarot of consolation is rooted in the liturgical traditions of the Land of Israel. Such midrashic collections as Pesikta Rabbati and Pesikta de-Rav Kahana show that many rabbinic homilies and interpretations of these prophetic readings had been collected and arranged by the early centuries of our era. Indeed, the synagogue poet Yannai (fifth to sixth century) wrote many kerovot (prayers) for these weeks and often used sermons found in these HAFTARAH FOR PINHAS (BEFORE 17TH OF TAMMUZ) 204
midrashic collections as his source. Later poets continued to composcpiyyutim for these special Sabbaths, thereby showing the wide range of creativity associated with this period in the Jewish ritual calendar. Nevertheless, the custom of seven weeks of consolation may not have spread to Babylonia. In his Siddur, R. Saadiah Gaon only mentions one haftarah after Tisha b'Av—the haftarah of nahamu, beginning at Isa. 40:1. 13 Several centuries later, Maimonides reports that this Babylonian custom was widespread in his day in Egypt (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Tefillah 13:19). On the other hand, his son, R. Abraham, reports that the custom of the Land oflsrael was practiced in Egypt and that his father despised it. 14 Along with other liturgical practices, the custom of the Land oflsrael spread to the communities of Ashkenaz and was followed by such Sages as R. Joseph Bonfils and Rashi. Even R. Samuel Ha-Nagid in Spain, who had close ties with Rav Hai Gaon in Babylonia, followed this practice. The recitation of seven haftarot of consolation is codified in the Shulhan Arukh, where an authoritative sequence is provided (Orah Hayyim 428:7). This haftarah boldly proclaims "comfort" (nahamu) for Zion and its inhabitants. Following the recitation of the Book of Lamentations on Tisha b'Av, it redresses the repeated elegy for Zion: "there is none to comfort \menahem\ her" (Lam. 1:2, 9; cf. w. 16, 21). For now there shall be no more complaint that "Zion's roads \darkhei Tziyon] are in mourning" (Lam. 1:4) and that the exiles "could only walk feebly [be-lo' koah]-, lit., "without strength"] before the pursuer" (v. 6). This lament is counterpointed by the proclamation, "Clear in the desert a road [derekh] for the L O R D ! " (Isa. 40: 3); while another announces that God "gives strength [koah] to the weary" and "they who trust in the L O R D shall renew their strength [koah]n ( W . 29, 31). A new era has dawned. The hope of Zion, that her "iniquity . . . is expiated" and God "will exile you no longer" (Lam. 4:22), is now realized in full measure: the people's "iniquity is expiated" and her "term of service is over" (Isa. 40:2).
Haftarah for 'Ekev ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH49:14-51:3 ISAIAH 49:14-51:3
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah enunciates the despair of Zion, personified as saying that she has been forgotten and abandoned by God since the destruction of the Temple (in 586 B.C.E.) and the exile of her people to Babylon. Divine consolation rejects this view with an assertion of God's care and a promise of the nation's return to its homeland. This prophecy of hope was delivered sometime after Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon and issued a proclamation (in 538 B.C.E.) permitting the restoration of subject peoples under his dominion. 1 This haftarah is the second of seven weekly haftarot of consolation following Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. 2 It begins with despair and concludes with divine comfort. PART 1. ZION'S CRY AND GOD'S ASSURANCE (Isaiah 49:14-26) a. Isaiah 49:14-21 Zion's sense of divine abandonment is enunciated (v. 14) and rejected in God's word of consolation. He could no more forget her than a mother her children; indeed, her walls are engraved on the palms of His hand and thus are always before Him (w. 15-16). This assurance is complemented by a promise of restoration: Zion's children shall return and her ruins shall be rebuilt. b. Isaiah 49:22-26 In another pronouncement, God again promises the return of the dispersed—this time brought home by the nations themselves. God swears His active involvement: against Zion's "adversaries" and for her "children." 205
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
PART 2. CHALLENGE T O T H E PEOPLE (Isaiah 50:1-51:3) a. Isaiah 50:1-3 The divine consolation now turns to challenge and rebuke. First, God tells the people that they have not been rejected, for indeed, though He came, there "was no one there" (v. 2). The people did not respond to the divine word of redemption and return. God's powers were never in doubt; hence the people's lack of responsiveness is the issue—not divine indifference. b. Isaiah 50:4-11 The prophet now asserts that he himself has been responsive to the divine word but has suffered for it grievously (w. 4-9). The prophet further challenges the people to be faithful and dooms their rebellion (w. 10-11). c. Isaiah 51:1-3 The haftarah concludes on a conciliatory note. The prophet tells the people that thay may draw confidence from God's care for Abraham—for though he was only one when called to come to the Land, he responded and became a mighty nation through Sarah and their descendants. This point is reinforced with the assurance that Zion shall become a new Eden, a veritable paradise in historical time.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah weaves a rich tapestry of consolation and exhortation. The dominant polarities are stressed at the beginning and end. The recitation begins with Zion's words of despair, "The L O R D has forsaken me" (Isa. 49:14), and concludes with the notice that "Truly the L O R D has comforted Zion" (51:3). Between these poles are divine assurances, remonstrations, and words of expectation. The unit gains dramatic force through a series of rhetorical questions. Each one marks a distinct stage in the argument. The first rhetorical question occurs at the outset, in the divine response to Zion's despair. God answers: "Can a woman forget her baby, or disown the child of her womb? Though she might forget, I never could forget you" (Isa. 49:15). Thus divine concern for Zion and her children transcends even the most fundamental instinct of maternal care.3 With deft irony, Zion's all-too-human despair is deemed baseless. The Lord is not one to forget fundamental attachments. The second rhetorical question is also designed to counter unwarranted assumptions. Promises of a national restoration accompanied by foreign kings tending Israelite children and foreign queens serving as their nursemaids (Isa. 49:22-23) might seem excessive. They are therefore reinforced by the query "Can spoil be taken from a warrior, or captives retrieved from a victor?" (v. 24). With little faith or normal instincts, one could be skeptical on this score. Hence the uncompromising conclusion, which begins in a way that seems to confirm this assumption—but then reverses it in no uncertain terms. "Captives shall be taken from a warrior and spoil shall be retrieved from a tyrant"; because it is the Lord who will contend for His people (v. 25). In His great might, success is assured. The third rhetorical question makes a different point. It comes in the context of God's rebuke of the people for having ignored His word of salvation. "Why," He asks, "would none respond?"—and goes on rhetorically to ask: "Is my arm, then, too short to rescue, have I not the power to save? With a mere rebuke I dry up the sea, and turn rivers into desert. Their fish stink from lack of water . . ." (Isa. 50:2). The issue here is Israel's lack of faith in divine salvation. With blatant mockery, God asks if His arm is too short to save. The point is deemed absurd, for it is immediately rebuffed by evoking God's powers over nature. Control of the sea is specifically mentioned—though it is uncertain whether the "rebuke" of the waters refers to some mythic moment at creation (cf. Ps. 104:7, where the same verb occurs) 4 or, as seems more likely here, to the splitting of the sea at the Exodus (cf. Kimhi). Elsewhere, the prophet refers to both of these acts together (Isa. 51:9-10). In the present instance, God claims that He is ready to save but that the people have not been responsive. Deaf to God's call, the people project an invalid theology of divine abandonment. HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)206
In these rhetorical tropes, God's presence is variously presented through the figure of a hand or arm. In the first case, the divine assertion that He could never forget Zion is reinforced by the remark, "See, I have engraved you on the palms of My hands, your walls are ever before me" (Isa. 49:16). This is a remarkable mythic image in which the pattern of Zion and her ramparts are etched on God's own hands as an eternal remembrance of her. God, as it were, meditates constantly upon Zion the way the faithful are bidden to bind God's teachings upon their own arms so that they may be ever mindful of their religious obligations (Deut. 6:8-9). The other two occurrences of the figure express power. One reports how God promised: "I will raise up My hand to nations . . . and they shall bring your sons [back to Zion] in their bosoms" (Isa. 49:22); the other, just mentioned, emphasizes the power of God's hand to save Israel—if they would only heed His call (50:2). In each case, the anthropomorphic imagery is stated boldly and without qualification—giving dramatic intensity to the claims made. The personified lament of Zion is met with the assurance of a personified God: a God of pathos and compassion, with the power to save. The bold imagery goes further and portrays God and Zion as a matrimonial couple whose children are the nation. This topic is anticipated from the first, where God invokes the relationship between a mother and her child to express His abiding concern for Zion (Isa. 49:15-17). It continues further through the promise that Zion shall bedeck herself in her returning children like a bride covered with jewels (49:18). And finally, these hints assume a more poignant assertiveness when God counters the people's sense of abandonment with the query "Where is the bill of divorce of your mother whom I dismissed?" (50:1). The question is rhetorical, to be sure, but expresses an unbroken bond between God and His city—a bond dramatized elsewhere through the figures of marriage, divorce, and erotic delight (62:1-5). Old mythological tropes about the relationships between deities and their cities or consorts thus palpably energize this material, despite the rhetorical reserve exercised by the prophet. Indeed, it is just this artful balance between personification, mythic realism, and theological restraint that gives the prophecies their dramatic effect.5 The haftarah ends with a series of speeches by the prophet, who affirms his own faithfulness to his prophetic task. By God's grace he has delivered "timely words to the weary" and "did not disobey" (Isa. 50:4-5) —despite persecution and abuse. He was beaten, scourged, and reviled, but he stood his ground and overcame the affliction through confidence in God's protection. "But the Lord GOD will help me—therefore I feel no disgrace; therefore I have set my face like flint, and I know I shall not be shamed" (50:7). The prophet goes on to exhort his compatriots in faith and confidence. He calls upon those who would revere the Lord to trust in the "voice of His servant" and "in the name of the LORD"—though they now walk in darkness and despair. Only God's supernatural word will give true light; those who rely on their own natural prowess, to "walk by the blaze of [their own] fire," shall be doomed in sorrow (Isa. 50:10-11). In a further word, those who "seek the L O R D " are given an example of faith upon which to model themselves. They are told to "look to the rock you were hewn from"—to "Abraham your father" and to "Sarah who brought you forth." For the patriarch heard God's word of promise of a mighty nation in a new land, and though "he was only one when I [God] called him," he was "blessed" for his trust and "made . . . many" (Isa. 51:1-2). Abraham's faith may thus instruct his descendants in exile. They too can respond to God's word of promise and return. 6 To bolster the nation's resolve, the prophet concludes with a proclamation of assurance and Utopian vision: "Truly the LORD has comforted Zion, comforted all her ruins; He has made her wilderness like Eden, her desert like the Garden of the LORD. Gladness and joy shall abide there, thanksgiving and the sound of music" (v. 3). Looking to the past, the people may restore their future; acting for the future, the nation may overcome their past. The renewal of Zion is imagined as nothing less than a renewal of Eden—a transformation of exile and the blight of history. The homeland will be paradise regained.
COMMENTS Isaiah 49:14. Zion says, "The LORD hasforsaken me" This lament is one of several prophecies of comfort addressed to Zion (cf. Isa. 51:12-23; 52:1-2, 7-10; 62:1-7, 8-12). 207
HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)
The theme of being forsaken is also mentioned in other words of hope to Zion (cf. Isa. 54: 6 - 7 ; 62:4, 12). In context, Hebrew va-to'mer tzion is literally "But Zion said" (OIPS) —a statement that rebuts or rejects the immediately preceding assertion that "the L O R D has comforted His people, and has taken back His afflicted ones in love" (Isa. 49:13)7 In the haftarah, however, verse 14 is now set off from this context and given an independent status. In this way, the phrase loses its polemical tone and gains one of pathos and despair. 15. Can a womanforget her baby... ? This query introduces the first of two parallel rhetorical questions, which are followed by an assertion (v. 15). Customarily, in such sequences the first two questions begin with ha-(is)) and }im (or), and the assertion is introduced by such particles as hen (indeed [Isa. 50:2]),gam (surely [Isa. 49:25]), orw-(yet [ler. 2:32])—and even by the further query madu'a (why then? [ler. 2:14, 31]). In the present case, ha- (can) and gam (though) begin and end the form—but a marker for the second question is lacking. It is thus solely on the basis of sense that many commentators construe the second phrase as "Or [can a woman] disown the child o f h e r womb?"; its initial word me-mhem, literally means only "from having compassion" (cf. Targum and Rashi). Given the stylistic form of rhetorical questions in the Bible, where }im introduces the second query', it may be proposed that me-mhem is the remains of an original }im rehem ("Can a mother . . .?"; lit., "womb"). 8 When the initial calef(yi) was lost (due to scribal error or pronunciation elision) the consonants rhm would no longer have been pronounced rehem but mhem (compassion) in order to make sense of the broken phrase. Reconstructing the original question form simplifies the rhetorical and semantic structure of the unit. her baby Hebrew 'ulah derives from the stem c-w-l (cf. Isa. 65:2), a biform of 'ollel (ler. 6:11) (Ibn Ezra). In a striking homiletic transformation found in the Midrash, 'ulah is related to Israel accepting the "yoke" (col) of the Kingdom of Heaven at Sinai—a fact never to be forgotten in her favor (Tanna de-Bei Eliyahu 17). 16. I have engraved you God has engraved the image of Zion upon His palms, as a constant memorial. This bold anthropomorphic figure was later softened by the qualification "as if" (Targum; Rashi; Kimhi) 9 or by understanding kapayim (palms) as "clouds" (cf. lob 36: 32; R. Saadiah Gaon and Rashi). Ibn Ezra rejects this view on the basis of the parallel phrase and interprets the figure as an expression of God's constant remembrance of Zion. Regarding body engravings, the prophet elsewhere says that a devotee may mark God's Name on his arm to signify allegiance (Isa. 44:5). 10 17. Swiftly your children "Your children," Hebrew banayikh. The large Isaiah scroll at Qumran reads bonayikh, "your builders." 11 The term is juxtaposed to "those who ravaged and ruined you." A similar reading is indicated by R. Saadiah Gaon. 23. Kings shall tend your children A vision of social reversal in which the powerful shall serve the (now) powerless people oflsrael. This theme is expanded in Isa. 60:14. There, Zion's being forsaken is also reversed: "Whereas you have been forsaken . . . I will make you a pride everlasting" (Isa. 60:15). 24. Can spoil be takenfrom a warrior... ? The speaker is unclear. For some, these words are imputed to the nations (Kimhi), or the words of the prophet may be on behalf oflsrael (Ibn Ezra). This may also be a divine query (followed by the answer in v. 25). Isaiah 50:1. Where is the bill of divorce... ? Hebrew sefer keritut,12 The question is rhetorical. N o divorce took place; there was only a temporary dismissal for sins. By contrast, the theme of God's divorce oflsrael recurs in Hosea 2; ler. 3:1, 6-10; and Ezekiel 16 and 23. Traditional commentators resolved the contradiction by distinguishing between God's divorce of the northern tribes oflsrael (many of which did not return to the homeland) and His banishment of ludah until the time of their reconciliation (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi). The marriage motif also underlies God's promised reconciliation with the people (Isa. 54:4-7) and the Land (62:3-5). HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)208
4. a skilled tongue The prophet affirms that his tongue has been shaped by God "to know how to speak;" that his ear is aroused to hear the divine instruction, and that he has obeyed the word of God to him (v. 5). Though stated differently, this is a theme of prophecy first found with Moses (Exod. 4:11-12). Later tradition understood this "skilled tongue" to be the ability to speak favorably in defense oflsrael (Yalkut Shimoni 2:406). 8. Let us stand up together! That is, as opponents in court; compare Num. 35:12, which speaks of standing trial "before the assembly" [Transl.]. Isaiah 51:1. Look to the rock According to Joseph ibn Kaspi, verse 1 constitutes a mashal (parable) and verse 2 (applying the imagery to Abraham and Sarah) its nimshal (application). 13 Rashi, Kimhi, and Ibn Ezra understood a similar relationship between the verses. 2. who broughtyouforth In context, teholelkhem, which is in the future tense, should be understood as if it were the past tense holelatkhem (Ibn Ezra). 3. Truly the LORD has comforted... has made The verbs are in the so-called prophetic perfect, where the assurance of a future event is depicted as having already occurred (cf. Kimhi).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is the second in a cycle of seven weeks of consolation that follow Tisha b'Av (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). It follows a bold proclamation of comfort to Zion and the people in the first week. Echoing the despair that concludes Lamentations (recited on Tisha b'Av), "Why have You forgotten us utterly, forsaken us for all time?" (Lam. 5:20), Zion is cited by the prophet as saying, "The LORD has forsaken me, my Lord has forgotten me" (Isa. 49:14). This assertion is rejected—for even if "a woman forget her baby" the Lord "never could forget you" (v. 15). This image is poignant and reminds readers of laments of moments in the siege when "babes and sucklings languish in the squares of the city . . . as their life runs out in their mothers' bosoms" (Lam. 2:11-12)—and more horrible to say, the accusation that God's wrath caused "women [to] eat their own fruit" (v. 20), in fulfillment of ancient curses (Deut. 28:53-57). If once it seemed to the people that the Lord "acted like a foe" and "laid waste all [Zion's] citadels" (Lam. 2:5), He now asserts that "your walls are ever before Me"—for indeed, "I have engraved you on the palms o f M y hands" (Isa. 49:16).
Haftarah for Re'eh
nxn
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH54:ll-55:5 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 54:11-55:5
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 44-66" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah gives comfort to Zion and her inhabitants, destroyed and dispersed after the Babylonian conquest in 586 B.C.E. The prophecy was proclaimed at least a half-century later, after Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon and issued his decree (in 538 B.C.E.) allowing the Jews and other subject populations to return to their native lands. 1 The prophet promises the restoration of "unhappy . . . uncomforted "(Isa. 54:11) Zion and protection against all harm. He also delivers God's promise to renew "an everlasting covenant, the enduring loyalty promised to David" (55: 3). This haftarah is the third of seven prophecies of consolation recited after the fast of Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. HAFTARAH FORPINHAS(BEFORE17THOFTAMMUZ)209
PART 1. RENEWAL AND PROTECTION (Isaiah 54:11-17) This unit promises a spectacular rebuilding of Zion and the religious devotion of its inhabitants. "Righteousness \tzedakahY will be the basis of renewal (v. 14), and God's own protection will be His servants' "triumph \tzidkatamY (v. 17). PART 2. GOD'S CALL AND N E W PROMISE (Isaiah 55:1-5) A call to the people to "heed" (v. 2) the Lord and partake of His sustenance; to "hearken" and be revived with the covenantal "loyalty promised to David [hasdeiDavid]" (v. 3).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah begins with bold promises of physical and spiritual transformation, presented in unilateral terms. God announces a rebuilding of Zion (Isa. 54:11-12) and the transformation of her children into disciples of the Lord—to be protected by Him from every danger (w. 13-17). In the second part, there is a shift to a more bilateral relationship. God repeatedly calls upon the nation to turn to Him: "Give heed to Me" (55:2) and "Incline your ear and come to Me" (v. 3). This call for religious renewal contains the condition for change. "Hearken, and you shall be revived. And I will make with you an everlasting covenant" (55:3). Obedient to God, the people will be "a leader of peoples"—a "commander" to whom all "shall come running" (55:4-5). A rhetoric of assurance marks the prophet's style. It is effected through the strategic use of two particles. In the first part, the particle hineh or hen (behold; truly) serves to punctuate the promise of Zion's riches (Isa. 54:11) and the people's freedom from fear because of God's great power (w. 15-16). In the second part, hen emphasizes the new role oflsrael among the nations (55:4) and her worldwide attraction to them (v. 5). The particle gives a sense of the immediacy to God's actions and a tone of certainty to the prophecies. In a different manner, the modulation from a disconsolate condition to one of confidence in God's redemptive gifts is underscored by the particle lo} (no). From her low estate as one "uncomforted" (lo} nuhamah [Isa. 54:11]), the city is told that she (and her inhabitants) "shall have no fear" (lo'tim'i [v. 14]): "No weapon formed against you shall succeed [lo'yitzlah]" (v. 17). Moreover, the state of spiritual want, when all searches and expenditures will "not satisfy" (lo} le-sov'ah [55:2]), will end with the attraction to Israel of every "nation you did not know" (lo} teda' [v. 5]). Thus, the uses of the particle lo} highlight the dialectic of national transformation in the haftarah: from lack to its negation, and from discomfort among the nations to being the commander over all.
COMMENTS 13.And all your children shall be disciples Hebrew limmudei means "disciples" (cf. Isa. 8:16). The ensuing promise, "and great \rav\ shall be the happiness of your children \banayikhY bears comment. A well-known rabbinic midrash on this verse puns on the assonance between banayikh, "sons," and bonayikh, "builders." On this basis, it was taught that knowledgeable children are the culture builders of the next generation (B. Berakhot 64a). In fact, the word's original sense may have been "your learned ones" (from the verb ^jyw, "to know"). 2 It would thus have paralleled "disciples" in the first line. 14. You shall be established thromyh righteousness This phrase recalls Isa. 1:27, "Zion shall be saved by justice, her repentant ones by righteousness." 3 The divine word established a condition to be fulfilled in the future; the ensuing imperative rahaki ("be far" or "safe from oppression") reinforces this predictive aspect.4 15. Surely no harm can be done Understanding Hebrewgoryagur from the root sense o f g u r , meaning "be afraid." Alternatively, "Behold they may gather together, but not by Me" (OJPS), understandinggur in the sense of "to gather" (cf. Hab. 1:15). See the paraphrase of Ibn Janah 5 and the comment o f l b n Ezra. 17. their triumph Hebrew tzidkatam. The force of the noun is justification in court and counterpoints the opening clause (cf. Exod. 23:7; 2 Sam. 15:4; Isa. 5:23; Prov. 17:15). God is HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH210
the vindicator oflsrael and thus the One who brings them triumph. Both senses recur in Isaiah 40-66 (cf. 42:21; 45:25; 50:8; 58:2, 8; 63:1). Isaiah 55:1. all who are thirsty The appeal is either to those oflsrael who yearn for the Lord or to the nations who desire God's teaching (Ibn Ezra). The imagery of hunger and thirst indicates a state without divine instruction, as in Amos 8:11 (cf. Kimhi). 3. The enduring loyalty promised to David The royal covenant given to David (2 Samuel 7) is now transferred to the entire people. The phrase employs hesed in the sense of covenant faithfulness (see Comment to Isa. 54:6-8 in the haftarah for Noah). The divine pact with David promised unconditional commitment. 6 4. a leader of peoples Hebrew ''ed, "witness." The figure combines images oflsrael's mission as a "light of nations" and "witnesses" to God's power for all (cf. Isa. 42:7; 43:10). 7 5. a nation that did not know you / Shall come running to you (Ps. 18:44): "Peoples I knew not must serve me" [Transl.].
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH
Compare 2 Sam. 22:44
AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH
This haftarah is the third prophecy in a cycle of seven weeks of consolation that follow Tisha b'Av (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). In the preceding week, the Lord reassured disconsolate Zion that He would remember her; in this week's consolation He adds the assurance of repopulation, piety, and peace. She is called here "uncomforted [lo} nuhamah]" (Isa. 54:11), in line with her state of desolation so frequently mentioned in the Book of Lamentations (Lam. 1:2, 9, 16, 21). That situation is ended: Zion's comforter has come, with the promise ofbecoming a "leader of peoples" (Isa. 55:4). N o longer will the memory of hunger and thirst be elegized (Lam. 1:19; 2:11-12, 20; 4:10); for now water and food will be available in full measure—and the people are urged to satisfy a greater need: spiritual hunger. "Incline your ear and come to Me; hearken, and you shall be revived" (Isa. 55:3).
Haftarah for Shofetim ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH51:12-52:12 ISAIAH 51:12-52:12
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings from Isaiah's prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is a series of pronouncements of divine comfort to Zion and the nation. The city was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E., and a major portion of the population went into exile. After Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon, he issued a proclamation (in 538 B.C.E.) that allowed subject populations to restore their religious heritage and return to their homeland. 1 Israelite prophets were active in Babylon during this period, and the present prophecy reflects an attempt to instill hope in a new future. The haftarah emphasizes the renewal of Zion and the redemption of the people. The Lord will also return to Zion, renewing His kingship there for all to see. Isaiah 51:12-52:12 is the fourth of seven weekly haftarot of consolation recited after the fast of Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. 2 PART 1. DIVINE COMFORT (Isaiah 51:12-16) The Lord announces that He is the comforter of Zion and the people and exhorts them not to fear. He is the creator and able to redeem the oppressed. Reinforcing this assertion is God's affirmation to Zion: "You are My people!" (v. 16). 211
HAFTARAH FOR SHOFETIM
PART 2. AROUSAL AND RENEWAL (Isaiah 51:17-23) Jerusalem is called upon to arouse herself, for the Lord has removed the cup of wrath from her and given it to her tormentors. She who is reeling with woe shall arise to new dignity. N o more shall Zion be oppressed and walked over "like a street for passersby" (v. 23). PART 3. ZION AWAKENED AND GOD'S R E T U R N (Isaiah 52:1-10) a. Isaiah 52:1-6 Again Zion is bidden to arise from her sorrow; and the people who have been "carried off" (v. 5 ) t o exile are told that the moment of deliverance is nigh (v. 6). b. Isaiah 52:7-10 The advent of the "herald announcing happiness" and "good fortune" to Jerusalem is portrayed, and his proclamation to Zion "Your God is King!" is announced (v. 7). God's redemption of Zion and His return to it are proclaimed: even "all the nations . . . shall see the victory of our God" (v. 10). PART 4. BACK TO ZION (Isaiah 52:11-12) Earlier themes are reemphasized in the conclusion: The Lord will be the vanguard and rear guard of the people as they leave their exile. Protection and presence are the signs of the new exodus.
CONTENT AND MEANING Each part of the haftarah is characterized by a double proclamation. At the outset, God tells the people that "I,1 am He who comforts you" (Isa. 51:12); then Jerusalem is exhorted to "Rouse, rouseyourself' from the travail of sorrow and to "Awake, awake" to her new destiny of splendor (51:17 and 52:1); and finally, the exiles are called upon to "Turn, turn away" from Babylon and begin their journey to the homeland (52:11). These repetitions intensify the proclamation and exhort the nation to new action. God's personal address ("I, I am He" [Isa. 51:12]) introduces the theme of presence and consolation. The Lord comes as a comforter to the bereaved city (51:12) and as the one who "champions His people" (v. 22)—contending on their behalf against the nations. Speaking of Himself as the fulfiller of promises, God says: "I, the One who promised, am now at hand [,hineni]" (52:6). This remark gives added immediacy to the divine prophecy and alludes to earlier uses of this phrase to specify presence and readiness. For example, at crucial points in their lives, the patriarchs Abraham (Gen. 22:1) and Jacob (Gen. 31:11; 46:2) respond to God's call with the word hineni; and Moses also responds in this way when he hears the divine voice at the thorn bush in the Sinai wilderness (Exod. 3:4). In the present case, God's own assertion of hineni sharpens the sense of imminent comfort and renewal and reinforces this proclamation to Zion that "Behold [hineh], the Lord GOD" has come (Isa. 40:10). Zion will again be a place for God's Glory, the place where the nation shall find rest from its sorrows. The second theme of the haftarah is national transformation. This is presented through exhortation and contrast. The city is bidden to raise itself from its stupor, for it shall no longer reel from the wrath of God (Isa. 51:17, 23; 52:2). Various images of lowliness and degradation are evoked as memories of the past (51:23), and the people are called upon to "loose the bonds" (52:2) and "put on your robes of majesty" (52:1). The cup of sorrows shall be passed to their tormentors, as national torpor shall be exchanged for a new vigor. The third theme is return from exile, which is given specificity by means of evocative images of the past. God refers to the nation's first servitude in Egypt ("Of old, My people went down to Egypt to sojourn there" [Isa. 52:4]) and then promises a departure that is nothing less than a new Exodus. 3 Indeed, in the prophet's depiction, it will supercede that ancient event; for whereas the older Pentateuchal tradition states that the people "departed from the land of Egypt hurriedly [be-hipazon]n (Deut. 16:3), the exiles in Babylon are now told that "you will not depart in haste [be-hipazon]n (Isa. 52:12). The unpressured pace of the new redemption serves as a special sign of divine care, and this theme is resumed in the depiction of the journey itself. The statements that "the L O R D is marching before you \holekh lifneikhemY and that "the God oflsrael is your HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH212
rear guard" (52:12) clearly allude to the traditions of the Lord "marching before" the people (.holekh lifneikhem) on the way to the Promised Land (Deut. 1:30, 33) and o f H i s protection of their flanks (Exod. 14:19). These allusions convey the sense that the new redemption will be like the old one—a reiteration in the present of that great event of liberation.
COMMENTS Isaiah 51:12. am He Hebrew hu\ A striking midrash attempts to fill in such an assertion, stating that "with that which Israel sinned they were punished and comforted." Various sins involving the head, the eye, the ear, and so on are enumerated and linked to their subsequent tribulations and healing. At the theological level, Israel sinned against God when they were "false to the L O R D and said: lo}hu\ ' H e i s n o t s o ! ' " (ler. 5:12). 4 Consequently, "He became their enemy and hu} [Himself] made war against them" (Isa. 63:10). But in the end "hu } [He]" became their comforter—as we read here (Lamentations Rabbah 1:57). who comforts you Hebrew 'menahemkhem. This expression counterpoints the lament that "Zion spreads out her hands, she has no one to comfort her ['ein menahem lah]n (Lam. 1:17). In this verse, the divine voice shifts from the collective plural "you" (menahemkhem) to the feminine singular "you" ("What ails you that you fear?" mi }at va-tir'i)-, and in the next verse, the addressee shifts to the masculine singular "you" ("You have forgotten the L O R D your Maker," va-tishkah YHWH 'osekha). This variation evokes a sense of totality that includes the people and city of Zion. R. David Kimhi tried to formulate a comprehensive principle: "When [Scripture] speaks in the plural, the individuals [of the community of Israel] are addressed; when it utilizes the masculine singular form, the group as a whole is meant; and when the feminine singular form is used, the addressee is the 'synagogue. '" 5 In the haftarah, and generally in the prophecies of comfort in the Book of Isaiah, this "synagogue" is the personified city or people of Zion. likegrass Literally, "grass" (hatzir), the comparison being implied (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi). For the comparison of humans to grass that vanishes, see Isa. 40:6. The image has entered modern lewish consciousness through the admonishment of Hayyim Nahman Bialik, in his poem, "Truly, the Nation Is as Grass" ('akhen hatzir ha-'am). 13, 16. Who stretched out the skies... who planted the skies The former phrase (noteh shamayim) is an image of the creation that is common in Isaiah's rhetoric (also 40:22; 42:5; 44:24) and elsewhere (Zech. 12:1; Ps. 104:2; lob 9:8). It has a central position in thcAleinu prayer. The latter phrase (linto'a shamayim) in verse 16 is difficult. Many modern commentators assume that linto'a is an error for lintot (to stretch), from the same stem as noteh in verse 13. Compare the Syriac version. 14. Quickly the crouching one isfreed For the sense of tzo'eh as meaning "crouching" or "lying low," compare ler. 2:20; but the image is odd. Some medieval commentators understood the verb as indicating something constrained or closed that is subsequently opened. For example, Ibn Ezra and R. Eliezer of Beaugency see the issue as being released from a siege or incarceration, respectively. Such a metaphorical understanding of the verb here is already proposed by Ibn lanah. 6 The verb has Arabic cognates with just this sense (Luzzatto). 7 16. HaveputMy words in your mouth The beginning of this phrase is "For I the L O R D your God" in verse 15. It is interrupted by the epithet and designation "Who stirs up the sea . . . whose name is L O R D of Hosts." In the Torah and preexilic prophecy, this phraseology is used to indicate God's verbal inspiration of the prophet (see Deut. 18:18 and ler. 1:9). In the present context, it is applied to the nation as a whole—suggesting that they shall be graced with God's prophetic word (R. Isaiah di Trani). This would also be the case in Isa. 59:21. Abravanel takes a different approach and regards the "words" to be the study of Torah, through whose merit the people will be redeemed from exile. Luzzatto combines both views.8 You are My people\ A formula of adoption and covenant relationship. Compare Lev. 26:12; Deut. 4:20; ler. 7:23; andEzek. 36:28. 9 213
HAFTARAH FOR SHOFETIM
17. Rouse, rouse yourself! This image of Zion's renewal, along with that in 52:1-2 ("Awake, awake . . . put on your robes of majesty . . . arise, shake off the dust"), has become part of the Jewish liturgical imagination through the Sabbath hymn "Lekhah Dodi" (written by R. Shelomo Halevi Alkabetz, ca. 1540). 10 17. the cup ofHis wmth The motif of the cup as an image of punishment is important in this prophecy (w. 17-23), since redemption is signaled by its transfer to Israel's oppressors. Compare also the use of the motif in Jer. 25:15-29 and in Ezek. 23:32-34, where the cup is transferred from Israel to Judah. The word kubadt as "bowl" (NJPS) follows the opinion of R. Eliezer of Beaugency; a dominant medieval tradition understood it to refer to the "dregs" or "lees" of the cup (Saadiah Gaon; Rashi; Ibn Ezra; Ibn Bal'am; Kimhi; Kara; di Trani). reeling Hebrew tar'elah. For this rendering, see Kimhi. The image of a "cup of reeling" recurs in v. 22, where God promises the withdrawal ofhis wrath. 18. She has none toguide her... of all the sons she reared To guide a drunken parent home was a recognized filial duty in ancient Canaan and Egypt [Transl.]. 19. how shall I comfort you? Hebrew mi \anahamekh. Medieval commentators saw here an elliptical expression and rendered it: "by means of whom shall I comfort you?" (cf. Rashi; Ibn Ezra). The large Isaiah scroll from Qumran reads miyenahamekh, "who shall comfort you?" Such a reading parallels the preceding query, miyanud lakh, "who can console you?" Isaiah 52:1. Jerusalem, holy city! This transfer of holiness to the city as a whole is a late development; another postexilic prophet refers to the land of Judah as "the Holy Land" (Zech. 2:16). For the uncircumcised... shall never enter you again This assertion that the foreigners will never again "enter" {yavoJerusalem inverts the ancient lament. "The foe has laid hands on everything dear to her [Zion]. She has seen her Sanctuary invaded [ba'u] by nations which You have denied admission asher tziwita lo'yavo'u] into Your community" (Lam. 1:10). 2. sit [onyour throne], Jerusalem This paraphrastic rendition ofshevi (sit) is an attempt to relate to the preceding call to "arise." The divine imperative would then be a call to Zion to rise from her mourning and sit in royal splendor (Targum; Rashi). Kimhi, however, does not regard shevi as a verb, but as a noun. Compare "the captives [shevi], the booty" in Num. 31:12. On this basis, the phrase should be rendered: "O captive, Jerusalem." This (masculine) noun would thus be a variant of the parallel line, "O captive one [shivyah], Fair Zion" (Isa. 52:3), where another form of the noun (feminine) occurs. 4.Mypeople went down / To Egypt to sojourn there The term "sojourn" (la-gur) recalls the statement of Joseph's brothers to Pharaoh about their residence in Egypt (Gen. 47:4) and the liturgical recitation in Deut. 26:5—now the core of the Passover haggadah elaboration. 6. My people shall leam My name This phrase has been traditionally understood to mean that when the prophecies of redemption are fulfilled and God will be manifest as a redeemer (Ibn Ezra), the people shall know that He fulfills the words (Targum; Rashi) spoken in His name by His prophets (Kimhi). The expression is thus a variant of "and all mankind shall know that I the LORD am your Savior" (Isa. 4 9 : 2 6 ) . 8. For every eye shall behold the LORD'S -return An expression of the concrete experience of God's might (Targum Jonathan; Abravanel), echoing Num. 14:14 (Ibn Ezra). In both cases, the reference is associated with God's guiding presence (Num. 14:14; Isa. 52:12). The direct public witness to God's advent to Zion also figures in Isa. 40:5. 10. The LORD will bare His holy arm A mythic image depicting divine power, as at the creation and the Exodus. Such an arousal of the divine arm was invoked in Isa. 51:9-10. 1 1
HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 1 4
11. Keep pure... You who bear the vessels oftheLoRD Compare Ezra 1:7-8; 5:14-15: "King Cyrus . . . released the vessels of the LORD'S house which Nebuchadnezzar had taken away from Jerusalem . . ." [Transl.].
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH This haftarah is the fourth prophecy in the cycle of seven weeks of consolation that follow Tisha b'Av (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). It opens with the divine assertion that "I, I am He who comforts [menahem] you" (Isa. 51:12)—which counterpoints the despair of Lamentations (recited on Tisha b'Av), "there is none to comfort [menahem] her of all her friends" (Lam. 1: 2). Among other notable reversals is the promise that "the uncircumcised and the unclean" shall never again "enter" {yavoZion (Isa. 52:1), since one of the elegies was that "the foe has laid hands on everything dear to her [Zion]. She has seen her Sanctuary invaded [ba'u] by nations which You have denied admission ['asher tziwita lo} 'yavo'u] into your community" (Lam. 1: 10). Of further comfort to the distraught is the promise that God will take the "cup" (kos) of wrath from Zion and give it to her persecutors (Isa. 51:22-23). This image evokes the desire of the downtrodden that the "cup" (kos) of reeling pass to Edom (Lam. 4:21)—one of the brutal destroyers oflerusalem and her people (Ps. 137:7).
Haftarah for Ki Tetze' N^n ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 54:1-10 ISAIAH 54:1-10
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah contains a series of promises and assurances to Zion and her inhabitants. The city had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E., and much of the population went into exile. A major change occurred shortly after Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon and issued a proclamation (in 538 B.C.E.) that allowed subject populations to restore their religious heritage and return to their homeland. 1 The present prophecy follows that occasion, and is marked by an exhortation to Zion to rejoice—since she will soon be rebuilt and repopulated. Assurance is provided in the name of "the LORD your Redeemer" (Isa. 54:8). In addition, God's new covenant (berit) of reconciliation is compared to His ancient pact with Noah after the flood. lust as that oath promised the end of universal destruction, Zion is now promised an end to its present desolation. This word of assurance is given by "the LORD, who takes you back in love" (v. 10). This prophecy serves as the fifth of seven haftarot of consolation recited weekly after the fast of Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. PART 1. PROCLAMATION OF RESTORATION (Isaiah 54:1-8) The prophecy opens with an exhortation to personified Zion to rejoice, "for the children of the wife forlorn shall outnumber those of the espoused [be'ulah]" (v. I). 2 With the expansion of Zion's population will go the expansion of her dwelling and territory. A glorious transformation will replace the shame of widowhood, as the Holy One of Israel will again "espouse you [iho'alayikh]" (v. 5). "Anger [ketzef]" will be replaced with "kindness [hesed] everlasting" (v. 8). PART 2. THE OATH (Isaiah 54:9-10) The affirmation that anger has passed is now reinforced by a vow. The permanence of God's oath, that He will nevermore "be angry [mi-ketzof]m with Israel (v. 9), is compared to His oath 215
HAFTARAH FORKI TETZE'
after the Flood, when He swore never again to destroy the world. The people may thus trust that the promise of divine "loyalty [hesed]" will similarly endure (v. 10).
CONTENT AND MEANING Figures of assurance dominate the prophet's style. On the one hand, assurance in God's word is underscored by the divine oath of an everlasting covenant of hesed. In the first part of the haftarah, the people are promised "kindness everlasting [hesed 'olam]" (Isa. 54:8), while in the second part God promises them that neither "My loyalty [hesed] . . . nor My covenant [bent] of friendship [shall ever] be shaken" (v. 10). Assurance is also conveyed by a series of dramatic imperatives ("shout," "enlarge," "lengthen") and by an exhortation "Fear not!"—followed by an announcement that Zion's fortunes shall be reversed. The barren one, "who bore no [lo}] child" and "did not [lo}] travail" (v. 1), is now told that she will "not [lo}] be shamed" or "disgraced" and that she will "remember no [lo}] more the shame" of her past (v. 4). The concluding verse reinforces this counterpoint with the statement that God's covenant shall "never [lo}] move from you" (v. 10). The valences of the particle lo} thus mark the transformation of national destiny. Another stylistic feature of the haftarah is the use of comparisons. The prophet begins by comparing the exile and national restoration oflsrael with a marriage relationship. God will take back Fair Zion just as an angry husband will restore the bride ofhis youth. The simile derives from an older prophetic tradition, in which God's relationship to His people is likened to a groom and his bride. Close analysis also shows that the terms and themes used in Isa. 54:6-8 occur in a more elaborated form in Hosea 2, Jeremiah 3, and Ezekiel 16 and 23 (see Text and Comments). In this connection, the prophet's reference to "kindness everlasting" and "love" in Isa. 54:8 recalls the terms of espousal in Hos. 2:21 and must therefore also be understood as indicating a covenant renewal.3 The notable difference is that here the marriage bond is between God and the city ofjerusalem. The marriage motif allows the prophet to focus on the dynamics of love and rejection, and on anger and its assuagement. God is presented here as a faithful bridegroom who is able to overcome betrayal and anger. Two cases of divine commitment emphasize this very point. In the first instance, the oath of God to Noah and his descendants provides a model of God's everlasting stability. Never again will there be anger and destruction (Isa. 54:9). In the second case, natural imagery is used to highlight God's future steadfastness with Israel. "For the mountains may move and the hills be shaken, but My loyalty shall never move from you, nor My covenant of friendship be shaken" (v. 10). A similar motif occurs in Jer. 31:35-36, also after a promise of covenantal renewal. But whereas in the latter case the promise of covenantal constancy is equated with the duration of the cosmos, in the text of the haftarah God promises that His hesed toward Israel will even exceed the existence of the natural order.
COMMENTS Isaiah 54:1. children ofthe wifeforlom The juxtaposition in w. 1 and 2 - 6 of a "forlorn" (shomemah) or "forsaken" ('azuvah) wife with an "espoused" bride (be'ulah) is a motif also found in Isa. 62:4-5 and 12. The presentation of God as bo'alayikh, the one who "will espouse you" (54:5), is echoed in 62:4-5. The terminology has roots in Pentateuchal law (Deut. 24:1) and was used by other prophets as well (see Jer. 3:14, following the marriage imagery in 3:1, 6-10). 4 The form bodlayikh is a plural with the sense of a singular (Ibn Bal'am). 5 3. -nations That is, the foreigners who had occupied regions from which Israelites had been exiled (cf. 2 Kings 17:24) [Transl.]. 6-8. The reference to Israel as "wife ofhis youth" (ne'urim) recalls the terminology in other uses of the marriage motif in prophetic literature (Hos. 2:17; Jer. 2:2; Ezek. 23:8, 19). The word hesed alludes to the covenant response found also in Hos. 2:21 and Jer. 2:2. The word conveys the idea of "loyalty" and commitment (cf. Isa. 54:10; 2 Sam. 7:15; Ps. 89:34). Through hesed, one deals faithfully or keeps faith with another; it is so used of divine-human and interpersonalrelationships (Deut. 5:10; 1 Sam. 20:8). 6 HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH216
7. For a little while Hebrew be-rega' katon. The brief (katon) abandonment is juxtaposed to the length (gedolah) of reconciliation (Kimhi). But this leaves a broken parallelism ("little while" / "vast love"). Possibly the word should be read be-roga"with anger." Ibn Ezra supported this solution on the basis of the resulting parallelism: "with a little anger" contrasted to "vast anger." 7 This would yield a symmetry between verses 7 and 8, in accord with Kimhi's sense that in verse 8 the prophet "repeated the theme in different words." 8. In slight anger, for a moment The Hebrew be-shetzef ketzef is difficult. The word ketzef is unknown and interpreted by context. "Slight anger" follows the Targum. Rashi adduces R. Menahem ben Helbo's interpretation of "fury" 8 and the rendering of Dunash ibn Labrat as "for a moment," which is "just like 'for a little while I forsook you. '" The same point is made by Kimhi. 9 NIPS produces a double rendition. 9. like the waters ofNoah This follows the received text, which has two separate words: ki mey. Kinihi notes that other manuscripts read one word,fe'-jywey,"like the days of [Noah]." This reading is presupposed by the Targum and Septuagint. Ibn Ezra and Kimhi blend both readings when they observe that the oath refers to the Flood in the days of Noah. Rashi correctly notes that the second half of the verse is explanatory. This understanding supports the Masoretic reading.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH This haftarah is the fifth prophecy in the cycle of seven weeks of consolation that follow Tisha b'Av and its public recitation of Lamentations (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). The promise of Zion's renewal in the preceding week is now dramatically reemphasized. God's word of hope counterpoints the lament of decimation, solitude, and destruction in Lam. 1:1 and 4. In particular, Zion, who became like a "widow ['almanahY (Lam. 1:7), will overcome the "shame" of her "widowhood ['almanutayikhY (Isa. 5 4 : 4 ) . The theological assertion of the ancient elegist, that "the Lord does not reject forever, but first afflicts, then pardons [ve-riham] in His abundant kindness [hasadav]" (Lam. 3 : 3 1 - 3 2 ) , is now assured by the divine statement that though He "forsook" the people "for a little while," now "with kindness [hesed] everlasting I will take you backinlove [rihamtikh]" (Isa. 5 4 : 7 - 8 ) .
Haftarah for Ki Tavo' ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH60:l-22 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 60:1-22
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions of Isaiah 4 0 - 6 6 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 4 0 - 6 6 " in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks to the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah announces the wondrous restoration of Zion, illumined by divine light and filled with worldly splendor. This illumination is nothing less God's redemptive Presence and redemption, and the munificence is the gift of the nations who had formerly oppressed the city and its inhabitants. The prophecy is marked by a universal vision and the expectation of physical and spiritual transformation. The prophet speaks these words of hope sometime after Cyrus the Mede has conquered Babylon and issued an edict (in 5 3 8 B.C.E.) that allows the ludean exiles (among other subject populations) to return to their homeland and restore their religious heritage. 1 We are told that Zion will be called "the city of the L O R D " (Isa. 6 0 : 1 4 ) , and its ancient Sanctuary will be adorned by the majestic trees of Lebanon. 217
HAFTARAH FORKI TETZE'
This prophecy is the sixth of seven haftarot of consolation recited weekly after the fast of Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. 2 The present reading calls upon Zion to "arise" from its sorrowful state (Isa. 60:1)—an appeal also found elsewhere in this collection (51:17; 52:2). 3 PART 1. THE LIGHT OF GOD (Isaiah 60:1-3) The haftarah opens with a proclamation, announcing the advent of new light over Jerusalem—this being God's shining and redeeming Presence. It will shine over all who will follow the splendor to Zion. PART 2. INGATHERING T O ZION (Isaiah 60:4-18) a. Isaiah 60:4-9 The prophet now specifies the ingathering and splendor to come. On the one hand, the gentiles will come streaming to Zion, bearing the exiles like babes in arms (v. 4); and in addition, traders will come with their flocks and wealth, and sea-peoples will arrive with splendor and with the "sons" and "daughters" of Zion in their ships' holds. b. Isaiah 60:10-18 Foreigners shall rebuild Zion's walls, and their kings shall serve her; what is more, the city's gates shall ever more be swung wide—as a sign of safety and ingathering. Glorious wealth shall flow to Zion (v. 16), and peace and victory will replace violence and ruin (v. 17). PART 3. LIGHT EVERLASTING (Isaiah 60:19-22) Zion's glory shall transcend nature. In the glorious time at hand, the sun will not be needed— for the Lord Himself will be Israel's light forever (w. 19-21). Thus shall the city be renewed, and the Land and nation prosper.
CONTENT AND MEANING The imagery of light frames the haftarah, dominating parts 1 and 3. This light is portrayed as God's own Glory (Isa. 60:2, 19-20), a splendor that will illumine Zion and attract all nations to her (v. 3). In earlier prophecies, Israel as a whole and the prophet in particular are the designated bearers of the light o f h o p e and direction to the exiles (42:6; 49:6; 51:4). N o w the light is wholly divine; and God, the creator of light (45:7), tells Zion to arise and shine, for He has cast a supernatural light upon her (60:1). Earlier commentators interpreted this illumination variously as a symbol of joy and beneficence (Kimhi, on 60:1, 19), of the forthcoming salvation (Targum Jonathan), or of the new era of royal restoration now at hand (Ibn Ezra, onv. 1; Targum Jonathan, on v. 16). In contrast to the announcement of light at the Creation ("Let there be" [Gen. 1:2]), the light ofRedemption is personal ("Arise, shine, for'yourlight has dawned" [Isa. 60:1]). This direct tone is maintained throughout the prophetic proclamation. The people are repeatedly called upon to heed the heavenly manifestation now breaking forth—whose advent and imminence are underscored by the theme-word bo} (come [w. 1, 4-5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17, 20]). This manifestation is more than natural; it is not a creation in the world like the sun, but a supernal effulgence of God's redemptive reality. Thus Zion shall have no further need of natural light, of a light that waxes and wanes, or that comes and goes with daybreak and dusk. Their redemptive state will not alternate like created light, but shall be a permanent illumination. An eternal radiance shall be cast over the city—lighting all things in full clarity. Light imagery is found in other genres of Israelite literature and finds expression in such personal exclamations as "The LORD is my light and my help [lit., my salvation]; whom should I fear?" (Ps. 27:1) and in such theological statements as "With You is the fountain of life; by Your light do we see light" (Ps. 36:10). Speaking to the nation centuries earlier, Isaiah of Jerusalem announced a future of justice and invited them to "walk by the light of the L O R D " (Isa. 2:5). And in another word of hope, he also consoled the people oppressed by Assyrian dominion with the prophecy, "The people that walked in darkness have seen a brilliant light; on those who dwelt in a land of gloom light has dawned" (9:1). Harking back to these promises, the present prophet HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH218
gives Isaiah's words a new national application. 4 Indeed, his vision of redemption as a heavenly and enduring illumination marks a new moment in biblical theology.5 The manifold splendor to come is also marked by terms of glory. Thus, through the gifts brought to the Temple, God "will add glory S^apha'er] to My glorious House [beit tiph'artiY (Isa. 60:7), and will "glorify [le-pha}er] the place where My feet rest" (v. 13). Like doves to their cotes, ships laden with gold will bring their wealth to Zion—the city that God "has glorified" {phe'amkh [v. 9]). Restored and glorified, Jerusalem will "no longer . . . need the sun for light by day . . . for the L O R D shall be your light everlasting. Your God shall be your glory [le-tiph'artekh]" (v. 19). At this time, Israel, the shoot that God has planted, will truly be the "handiwork in which I glory [le-hitpa'erY (v.21). The foci of the redemption are God, Zion, the Temple, and Israel. Each shall be glorified by God and permanently transformed. The idiom that marks this new reality is lo}'od, "no more." "No more" (lo} 'od) shall the cry of "wrack and ruin" be at hand (Isa. 60:18); and "no longer" (lo} 'od) shall Zion need an earthly sun (v. 19)—for the Lord shall be her shining glory. "Your sun shall set no more [lo} 'od], your moon shall no more [lo} 'od] withdraw; for the L O R D shall be a light to you forever" (v. 20). This expectation of renewal and permanence seals the prophet's words and points to a new and transformed future.
COMMENTS Isaiah 60:l-2.Arise, shine, for your light has dawned This proclamation is dominated by verbal plays and repetitions. Note the assonance between }ori (shine), 'or (light), andyem'eh (be seen). See also verses 4-5. A similar assonance is found in Isa. 9:1, "The people that walked in darkness have seen [rayu] a brilliant light [^or]." This is one of several links between the earlier and later sections of the Book oflsaiah, suggesting that the oracles are about to be fulfilled.^ 6 Note also the link between nagah (shine) i n 9 : l and nogah (shining) in60:3. arise
Spoken to Jerusalem concerning her imminent salvation (Kimhi).
His Presence Literally, "His Glory" (kevodo). In the initial haftarah of consolation, this advent of the Glory (kevod) of the Lord is also announced (Isa. 40:5). Manifestation of the divine Presence in Zion is noted in other postexilic prophecies as well. Zechariah tells Zion that the Lord shall again "dwell in your midst" (Zech. 2:14); and Ezekiel envisions the return of the Glory to its place in the Sanctuary (Ezek. 43:4). 4. like babes on shoulders The Hebrew te'amanah is difficult; NJPS paraphrases. Many medieval commentators propose understanding the verb in light of the noun in Num. 11:12 ("as a nurse ['omen] carries an infant"). Hence OJPS translates "borne." The small Isaiah scroll from Qumran (lQIsa 6 ) apparently corrects and simplifies the word with the reading tnsynh (tinnasenah), "shall be borne" or "carried." 6. Dust clouds of camels Hebrew shif'atgemalim. For shif'ah as dust cloud, compare Ezek. 26:10. Alternatively, it can mean "multitude"; compare Job 22:11, "flood" (and Kimhi on Isa. 60:6). 7. Kedar..
.Nebaioth
Sons oflshmael (Gen. 25:13); pastoral tribes in North Arabia.
They shall be welcome offerings onMy altar Hebrew_y«Ww 'al mtzon mizbehi; literally, "They shall come up with acceptance on Mine altar" (OJPS). This phrase may be a stylistic variant forya'alu le-ratzon 'al mizbehi (Kimhi); many manuscripts, the Septuagint, and the Targum actually reflect this formulation (NJPS follows this sense, as well). The matter of using gentiles' animals for sacrificial offerings generated a long talmudic discussion, with Rabbi Eliezer taking a dissenting position (B. Avodah Zarah 22a-24a). 9. ships ofTarshish their 219
Probably a type oflarge ship [Transl.].
That is, of the people of the coastlands [Transl.].
HAFTARAH FORKI TETZE'
15.forsaken, /Rejected These verbs hint at the motif of Zion as a banished bride. This is developed explicitly in the third and seventh haftarot of consolation (Re'eh and Nitzavim, respectively; see Text and Comments on those passages). In this context, the metaphors are subordinated to the trope of Zion being an abandoned site. 20. Tour sun shall set no more This prophecy recalls Isa. 30:26, "And the light of the moon shall become like the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall become sevenfold, like the light of the seven days, when the L O R D binds up His people's wounds and heals the injuries it has suffered." In that passage, nature is miraculously transformed and augmented, whereas in 60:20 there is no more need for natural light, since the radiance will be God's own Presence. Earlier and later prophets exploited the contrast between light and darkness in order to dramatize impending doom and death (cf. Amos 5:18-20; 8:9-10). Isaiah 60:1-2 must be understood as part of this rhetorical tradition—though with exclusive emphasis on the advent of blessing and renewed life. For Franz Rosenzweig, the final redemption will complete the creation of daily light at the beginning of time. In his view, the redemptive truth of this ultimate light is that all the partial perspectives and opacities of human vision will be transformed—and the fullness of God's world, with its infinite intricacies and miracles, shall be manifest with "eternal stellar clarity."7 N o w we see with light; but then we shall be in the light, so that the everyday world will be revealed in its divine fullness. 22.1 the LORD -will speed it in due time The Hebrew syntax, which puts "in due [lit., in its] time" before "will speed it," seemed a paradox to older commentators. If the redemption will occur "in its time," what does "will speed it" add or mean? The clauses were therefore divided and given new motivation: "[if] the people have merit—'I [God] will speed it'; [but if] they do not have merit—'[redemption will come] in due time'" (B. Sanhedrin 98a; see Rashi). R. David Kimhi interpreted the syntax according to the Masoretic accents and explained the clause to mean that when redemption comes "in due time" God "will speed it" to a complete conclusion. The two interpretations represent two theological poles concerning redemption. According to the first, human merit may hasten God's hand; according to the second, redemption is a divine mystery whose "time" is not influenced by human actions (cf. also Genesis Rabbah 65:12). Many messianic movements in lewish history have swung between these poles.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is the sixth prophecy in the cycle of seven weeks of consolation that follow Tisha b'Av and its recitation of Lamentations (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). The new "light" (/or) that shines for Zion is God's redemptive Presence—as against the "darkness" (hoshekh) that shall benight the rest of the earth (Isa. 60:1-2). This promise counterpoints the elegy of exile, afflicting the people with "darkness (hoshekh) and no light (ve-lo} }or) [NIPS: unrelieved darkness]" (Lam. 3:2). Indeed, the great consolation is the restoration of the lost "majesty" (uferet) oflsrael (Lam. 2:1), by the grace of God. N o w the roads of Zion that were "in mourning" ('avelot) because they were "empty of pilgrims" (Lam. 1:4) shall be repopulated: Israel and the nations shall come again to Zion in droves, for her "days of mourning Yevlekh] shall be ended" (Isa. 60:20). The hunger and horror of the devastation is over, when "babes and sucklings languish" in the streets and their "life runs out in their mothers' bosoms" (Lam. 2:11-12). N o w Fair Zion, mother of the people, is consoled with God's healing word: "You shall suck the milk of nations, suckle at royal breasts. And you shall know that I the L O R D am your Savior" (Isa. 60:16).
Haftarah for Nitzavim ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH61:10-63:9
SEPHARDIM
ISAIAH 61:10-63:9
HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH220
Haftarah for Nitzavim—Va-yelekh ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
^VO^Xl
ISAIAH61:10-63:9 ISAIAH 61:10-63:9
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions of Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks to the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah opens with the exultation of Zion after generations of desolation and exile. The onset of redemption is dramatized by the advent of the Lord to Zion, after the defeat of Israel's enemies; His oath proclaims that never again shall Israel suffer ignominy or defeat. Rather, Zion and her environs shall be espoused by God, who shall rejoice over them like a bridegroom. In a poignant climax, God's enduring care for Israel is proclaimed. In times past, "He was their Deliverer. In all their troubles He was troubled . . . . In His love and pity He Himself redeemed them, raised them, and exalted them all the days of old" (Isa. 63:8-9). A renewal of this beneficence is the theme of this haftarah, charging every verse with confident expectation. The restored nation shall be called "The Holy People," and Zion "Sought Out, A City N o t Forsaken" (62:12). Isaiah 61:10-63:9 brings to a conclusion the liturgical cycle of seven weekly haftarot of consolation recited after the fast of Tisha b'Av, when the destruction of Zion is mourned. 1 It is replete with themes and phrases from the previous readings. PART 1. CELEBRATION OF ZION (Isaiah 61:10-11) Zion exults in the God of her salvation; for He has robed her in garments of victory; and she is adorned like a bridegroom with a turban, like a bride bedecked in finery. PART 2. ANTICIPATION AND PROMISE (Isaiah 62:1-7) a. Isaiah 62:1-3 The prophet now proclaims his enduring concern for the fate of Zion and says that he shall not keep silent (lo} 'ehesheh [v. 1]) on her behalf until her victory is complete and she is given a new name by God Himself. b. Isaiah 62:4-5 The new names are announced: Zion shall be called "I delight in her" (heftzi -pah) and "Espoused" (be'ulah) (v. 4), for the Lord shall rejoice over her and the land shall be espoused—just as "a youth espouses a maiden" and "a bridegroom rejoices over his bride." c. Isaiah 62:6-7 The prophet adds that he has set watchmen on the walls of lerusalem who shall also not be silent (lo'yeheshu), but shall serve as continual "remembrancers" (mazkirim) of Zion and her plight before God (v. 6), "until He establish lerusalem and make her renowned on earth" (v. 7). PART 3. OATH AND ADVENT (Isaiah 62:8-63:6) a. Isaiah 62:8-12 The prophet dramatizes God's deliverance by citing two divine speeches. The first is an oath "by His right hand" that the enemies of Zion shall "nevermore" harvest the grain of the land for which the nation has labored; rather, they who have sown and reaped shall rejoice in the Temple before God (w. 8-9). The second speech is God's word to the prophet to "announce to Fair Zion, your Deliverer is coming!" In this statement we learn of other names to be given to the people ("The Holy People, the Redeemed of the LORD") and to the city ("Sought Out, A City Not Forsaken") (w. 11-12). b. Isaiah 63:1-6 Following the oath and proclamation, the prophet beholds a wondrous sight and asks: "Who is this coming . . . majestic in attire?" God answers that "It is I, who contend victoriously" (v. 1). And to the further question, "Why is Your clothing so red?" God answers that His clothing is stained with the blood of the peoples (w. 2-3)—"trampled" in "anger" on a terrible rampage of"vengeance" (w. 3-4, 6). 221
HAFTARAH FOR NITZAVIM—VA-YELEKH
PART 4. PRAISE AND PROCLAMATION (Isaiah 63:7-9) In counterpoint, the haftarah concludes with a note of thanksgiving for the "kind acts of the L O R D " (V. 7). God has remained faithful to His own people and been their ever-present "Deliverer" (v. 8): troubled by their troubles, He redeemed them in love "and exalted them all the days ofold" (V. 9).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah develops through a succession of speeches that move from hopeful expectation to thanksgiving. At the beginning, either Zion (Targum Jonathan) or the nation personified (Ibn Ezra) speaks of rejoicing in the Lord, who has clothed her with garments of triumph. The tone is one of anticipation—marked by the future tense of the verbs "rejoice" and "exult" (sos }asis\ tagel) and through verbs announcing growth and sprouting (totzi,:! tatzmiah; yatzmiah). Until that time, the prophet states that both he and the watchmen set over Jerusalem shall "not be silent" (Isa. 62:1, 6). 2 The content of their words is not given and may include both the mourning for Zion and the appeal for its redemption. 3 The watchmen are called the Lord's mazkirim, or "remembrancers"—a title that may refer to their role in recalling divine deeds in the past or reminding God o f H i s vanquished city (see Text and Comments). The future hope is intensified by subsequent revelations. The prophet delivers two divine speeches. The first enunciates God's oath promising Israel new bounty, when she shall reap what she sows and bring it to the Temple (Isa. 62:8-9). The second speech announces God's imminent advent and giving the people and Zion new names (62:11-12). This advent is then portrayed through a spectacular manifestation of God in His blood-spattered garments (63:2-6). This depiction of violent rage against Israel's enemies is juxtaposed to a prayer of thanksgiving for God's ongoing "mercy," "kindness," "love," and "pity" for His people (63:7-9). The polarities of divine destruction and care are starkly drawn: what is doom for the outsider is deliverance for Zion and Israel. The transition from Zion's hope to God's advent is marked by the motif of the garment. At the outset, the city exclaims that God "has clothed me with garments of triumph [bigdeiyesha^], wrapped me in a robe of victory [me'il tzedakah]" (Isa. 61:10). The significance of these garments is extended through their comparison with the turban of a bridegroom and the finery of a bride (61:10) and also the crown and diadem of royalty (62:3). This new reality is further expressed by the divine garments of victory—the "crimsoned garments [hamutz begadim]" of God, "majestic in attire [hadur bi-lvusho]" (63:1). The fate of Zion is thus figuratively correlated with acts of divine victory, thereby linking the two ends of the haftarah. The marital imagery conveyed through the garments of bridegroom and bride is further developed in the prophets subsequent word of encouragement. God shall take back His city and land—espousing the one and taking delight in the other—as a bridegroom does his bride (Isa. 62:4-5). This correlation is not simply left to a social simile ("as a youth espouses a maiden, your sons shall espouse you"), but is repeated in bold theological terms: "And as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God rejoice over you" (62:5). The victory and adornment thus constitute God's renewed bond of marital commitment and care—for His city and His people. The new reality begets new names. The prophet announces that "you shall be called by a new name which the L O R D Himself shall bestow . . . . Nevermore shall you be called 'Forsaken' ['azuvah], nor shall your land be called 'Desolate'; but you shall be called 'I delight in her [heftzi vah]; and your land 'Espoused \^eculah]y" (Isa. 62:2, 4). This terminology links the poles of divorce ('azuvah; cf. Isa. 54:6 and 60:15) 4 and marriage (be'ulah; cf. Isa. 62:5 and Deut. 24: 1) to Zion's ongoing fear that "the L O R D has forsaken me ['azavani]" (Isa. 49:14) and God's assertion of an enduring relationship. As elsewhere in this cycle of consolations, the spectre of divorce is denied. 5 The other new names reinforce the transformed physical and spiritual reality at hand. The people shall also be called "The Holy People, the Redeemed of the L O R D " and Zion shall be renamed HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH 222
"Sought Out, a City Not Forsaken" (Isa. 62:12). Like the renaming of Abram as Abraham, "the father of a multitude of nations" (Gen. 17:4-5), and of lacob as Israel, the inheritor of ancestral blessings (Gen. 35:9-12; cf. 32:29), Zion and the nation stand on the brink of a new divine destiny of bounty and blessing. This state—"nevermore" to be lost (Isa. 62:4)—is part of the "recompense" to come, brought by Israel's Deliverer on His return to Zion (Isa. 62:11; cf. 40:10).
COMMENTS Isaiah 62:1. For the sake of Zion I will not be silent This is apparently the word of the prophet, who reports that the people shall receive a new name "which the L O R D Himself shall bestow" (v. 2) and that they shall be a "glorious crown in the hand of the L O R D " (v. 3). 6 Nevertheless, Ibn Ezra and Kimhi suggest that the speaker is God. Ibn Ezra reports a further suggestion identifying the voice with the captive people. This statement, that the speaker will not be silent ('ehesheh) until the divine victory, anticipates verses 6-7, where we learn of appointed watchmen who shall also not be silent (yehesheh) until God establishes lerusalem again. The nature of the speakers words in verse 1 is not indicated. 4. "Forsaken" Hebrew 'azuvah. This negative term parallels the sobriquet "Desolate" and indicates God's abandonment of the city and people—a situation lamented in Lam. 5:20 and Isa. 49:14. The term also indicates "divorced" and thus serves as the counterpart to the marriage similes and the new names of "Espoused" (be'ulah) and "I delight in her." For similar uses of 'azuvah (abandoned) as divorced, see Isa. 60:15, where it is found together withsenu'ah (rejected) —a legal term for divorce (cf. Deut. 24:3). Compare also Isa. 54:5-6, where Zion is 'azuvah but shall be restored by God, the one who "will espouse you" (bo'alayikh; cf. Deut. 24:1). 7 6. Oyou... •remembrancers Hebrew ha-mazkirim. The force of the prefix ha-is ambiguous. If it is connected to the previous clause, then it should be construed as referring to those "who are . . . remembrancers" (cf. R. Isaiah di Trani). Alternatively, it introduces a new addressee and functions as an invocative ("O you"). So NIPS and already R. ludah ibn Bal'am.8 The "remembrancers" may refer to the watchmen [Transl.], or to the "mourners in Zion" mentioned in Isa. 61:3, or to those others who reminded God of His promises to Israel and of Israel's present state. 9 According to 1 Chron. 16:4, the Levites had the function to "remind/ invoke [le-hazkir], to praise, and to extol the L O R D God oflsrael." This would have included the recounting of divine actions and beneficences, as in Isa. 63:7, "I will recount azkir] the kind acts of the L O R D . " According to Rava bar Sheila, these remembrancers said: "You will surely arise and take pity on Zion" (Ps. 102:14); while according to Rav Nahman bar Isaac, they said: "The L O R D rebuilds lerusalem; He gathers in the exiles oflsrael" (Ps. 147:2) (B. Menahot 87a). Compare R. Eliezer of Beaugency, who said that they remind God of His "love of lerusalem and her desolation, that He take pity over her, as [in the verse] 'How long will You withhold pardon from lerusalem' by Zechariah" (Zech. 1:12). 8. His mighty arm The oath taken by God by His own arm anticipates the destruction "wrought" by His "own arm" (Isa. 63:5). Earlier, the prophet had appealed to a renewal of divine might, symbolized by His arm (51:9). 10. Pass through,pass through A reformulation of the "highway" theme in Isa. 40:3. In the former case, the preparation is for the divine advent; here the expectation is for the return of the people from captivity. In both texts, God comes with His "recompense" (see Isa. 40:10 and 62: 11). Rabbinic tradition gave the image of removing stumbling blocks a moral and spiritual sense, thereby indicating the human action required for redemption (Numbers Rabbah 15:16). 11. •reward. .. •recompense The reward and recompense to the cities of ludah; compare ler. 31:14 and 16 [Transl.]. 12.And they shall be called The people are called "The Holy People" ('am ha-kodesh), which is an intensification of the description in Deut. 7:6 ('am kadosh, "holy people"). The new name for Zion, "A City N o t Forsaken," recalls Isa. 54:6 and 62:4. 223
HAFTARAH FOR NITZAVIM—VA-YELEKH
Isaiah 63:1. Who is this comingfrom Edom In context, the query appears to be that of the watchmen on the walls (62:6), awaiting the advent of the Lord. 3-5. The imagery of God trampling a vineyard and bespattered with blood (63:2-3) is connected with Edom and Bozrah (v. 1) through puns on the toponyms: me-'edom (from Edom) sounds like me'udam (reddened; cf. v. 2), and mi-botzmh (from Bozrah) sounds like mi-botzer (from picking grapes). A similar sense is suggested by the Septuagint. Compare also the imagery in Jeremiah's oracle against Edom (Jer. 49:9): "if vintagers [botzrim] were to come upon you." This image of a violent divine advent is a variant of the theme and terminology in 59:16-18. Edom's downfall is attributed here to divine vengeance for evil conduct and because of Israel's merit (Rashi). In rabbinic tradition, Edom is a symbol for Rome and Christendom (see Ibn Ezra). 10 This identification gave the haftarah ongoing relevance in late antiquity and the Middle Ages.11 7-9. This is the first part of a hymn of praise extolling divine favor. The concluding part refers to Israelite rebellion and divine disfavor, followed by the eventual return of God's grace (w. 10-14). Only the positive first part is used in the haftarah. 8-9. The Masoretic text and cantillation notes suggest a reading that refers to God who "was their Deliverer" and which then says that "In all their troubles He [lo, according to the keri, or text as traditionally "read"] was troubled" (w. 8b-9a). After this are two apparently contradictory remarks: first, that "the angel of His Presence delivered them," and then, that God "Himselfredeemed them" (v.9). By contrast, the Septuagint version reflects a Hebrew text that reads verses 8b-9a as a continuous thought: "He was their Deliverer in all their troubles; no [reading /o']12 angel or messenger [was with Him], [but] His own Presence delivered them." This version is characterized by a clear stylistic structure. Note that the first and last phrases are correlated through the noun moshi'a (Deliverer) and the verb hoshi'am ("delivered them"); while the middle two phrases echo each other through the verb tzamtam (their troubles) and (presumably) the nountezV(angel; instead of the vocalization tzar, "was troubled," found in the Masoretic version). Moreover, there is a singular emphasis on God's exclusive deliverance—with no reference to the intermediate activity of an angel. This theology is similar to that found in the Passover haggadah and the statement there that God alone delivered the nation from Egypt—"I and no angel, I and no messenger."13 The foregoing account of an exclusive divine redemption is compromised somewhat in our Masoretic text, due to the intrusion into it of a reading that speaks of divine sorrow during the sorrows of Israel. Such a theology had an active midrashic life—particularly in its portrayal of God's heavenly participation in Israel's Egyptian servitude14 or the Shekhinah's sorrow on earth during the period of Israel's exile.15 This later theology presumably influenced the copying of the text, resulting in the version lo (Him) and the aforementioned contradiction concerning the agents of deliverance.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The haftarah is the seventh and concluding prophecy in the cycle of seven weeks of consolation after Tisha b'Av and its recitation of Lamentations (see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan). It has climactic force—emphasizing deliverance, comfort, and renewal for Zion and its inhabitants. Indeed, many specific passages and images revise or recall other haftarot in the cycle. For example, the call to "Clear the road \panu derekh] for the people; build up, build up the highway! . . . Raise an ensign over the peoples!" for the advent of God who comes with "His reward" (sekharo) and "recompense" (u-fe'ullato) (Isa. 62:10-11) echoes the proclamation in the first haftarah of consolation: "Clear in the desert \panu derekh] a road for the LORD! Level in the wilderness a highway for our God!" (40:3)—who has "His reward" (sekharo) and "recompense" (u-fe'ullato) with Him (40:10). In addition, the theme of transforming Fair Zion from one "forsaken" ('azuvah) to one HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH 2 2 4
espoused by God (Isa. 62:4-5) develops the themes of abandonment and marriage found in the second and fifth haftarot of consolation (see Isa. 49:14, 18; 50:1 and 54:1, 6, respectively).16 Because of this emphasis, as well as the renaming of "abandoned" Zion as "Espoused," and the baring of God's "arm" of victory, the old laments over God's abandonment and the withdrawal of His saving arm (Lam. 2:3; 5:20) are reversed. The city that was once called "Perfect in Beauty, Joy of All the Earth" (Lam. 2:15) shall soon be restored to splendor—"a glorious crown in the hand of the LORD" and blessed with new names of love and delight (Isa. 62:3-4).
Haftarah for Va-yelekh ASHKENAZIM
H O S E A 14:2-10; JOEL 2:15-27
SEPHARDIM
H O S E A 14:2-10; M I C A H 7:18-20
See the haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah.
Haftarah for Ha'azinu (between Yom Kippur and Sukkot) IPTXH ASHKENAZIM
2 SAMUEL 22:1-51
SEPHARDIM
2 SAMUEL 22:1-51
For the haftarah for Ha'azinu on Shabbat Shuvah, see the haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah. For the contents and theology of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from Samuel (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah is King David's great hymn of victory and thanks to God, for having "saved him from the hands of all his enemies and from the hands of Saul" (2 Sam. 22:1). The designation "after" marks the hymn as a retrospective account, even as the phrase "all his enemies" gives the piece a cumulative tone. The style is charged with mythic imagery: God is portrayed as a mighty Lord of Battles—storming to the aid of human armies with the arrows of heaven. The hymn also conveys a deep religious spirit, replete with theological sensibilities found in other biblical prayers. 1 It is virtually identical with Psalm 18, save for minor textual variations. PART 1. PROLOGUE (2 Samuel 22:1) The opening superscription presents the hymn as a summary celebration of all God's beneficence to David during a lifetime ofbattles. PART 2. DISTRESS AND DELIVERANCE (2 Samuel 22:2-20) a. 2 Samuel 22:2-7 God is praised as a "rock" and "savior," for He heard David's cry of distress in the face of"Death" and delivered him from his enemies. b. 2 Samuel 22:8-20 God's act of salvation is described—beginning with His mighty indignation and fury and continuing with His advent and victory upon the wings of storm clouds. The earth "quaked" in terror at the roar of the Lord (w. 8, 16), and the hero was delivered. David speaks o f h i s salvation "out of the mighty waters" (v. 17), which corresponds to the water and storm imagery in verses 5 and 12-16. He rejoices that the Lord "rescued me because He was pleased with me" (v. 20). PART 3. H U M A N MERIT—DIVINE GLORY (2 Samuel 22:21-46) a. 2 Samuel 22:21-28 Developing the last point, David elaborates that he was rewarded by God for his "merit" and "cleanness" or "purity." He repeats these matters in verses 21 and 24-25 and also mentions his devoted service to the divine laws (w. 22-23). A more abstract formulation of divine rewards and punishment is then offered (w. 26-28). 225
HAFTARAH FOR HA'AZINU
b. 2 Samuel 22:29-46 Returning to a personal voice, David extols God for giving him the skills and powers to defeat his enemies. In the process, earlier themes are repeated—such as praising God as a "refuge" and "stronghold"; stating that "the way of God is perfect, the word of the L O R D is pure" (v. 31); and pronouncing the supreme and incomparable greatness of God ("who is a god except the L O R D . . .?" [v. 32]). The unit concludes with a reference to David's own might as a "ruler of nations" (w. 44-46). PART 4. EPILOGUE (2 Samuel 22:47-51) a. 2 Samuel 22:47-50 The conclusion repeats key themes of the hymn: the Lord is a "rock" who gives "victory" (v. 47) and a savior who rescues His people from their enemies (w. 48-49). "For this I sing Your praise among the nations and hymn Your name" (v. 50). b. 2 Samuel 22:51 In a more impersonal coda, God's help to "His king" and "His anointed" is mentioned. The sudden shift to the third person suggests that these words come from another voice. This sense is reinforced by the reference to divine grace for "David and his offspring evermore." The hymn of retrospective thanksgiving thus ends with prospective hope for David's dynasty in the future. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
David's hymn addresses God as "my crag" (snl'i), "my fastness" (metzuda-ti), "my deliverer" (:mefalti), and "the rock" (tzuri). Similar terms occur in other biblical prayers, which suggests that this language served as a formulaic means of addressing God as a dependable savior (cf. Psalms 61 and 71). The most notable difference between such prayers and 2 Samuel 22 is that the former beseech God's intervention and promises to recite hymns of thanksgiving for victories to come (Pss. 61:9; 71:18-19, 23-24). By contrast, David's song is a recitation of thanksgiving—which concludes with the words: "For this I sing Your praise among the nations / And hymn Your name" (2 Sam. 22:50). Of the various terms used for God's invincible protection, the word tzur (rock) is notable. It recurs in various forms: in neutral designations of God as a sheltering rock (2 Sam. 22:3) and as a source of personal safety ("my rock" [v. 47]), but also in formulations that equate the epithet with God Himself. "Who is a rock except God . . .?" asks David at one point (v. 32), and later he praises his Lord with the words "Exalted be God, the rock / Who gives me victory" (v. 47). Clearly, the primordial fastness of mountain rocks was the hymnist's preferred metaphor for inviolable stability on earth. Standing firm with the face of eternity, the shadow of their presence suggests to him something of God's everlasting power. The image of God as a tzur stands at one pole of the hymn, marking a movement of religious consciousness from earth to heaven. At the other pole is the image of God as a heavenly being who descends upon the wings of the storm clouds to save His people on earth. This figure is not telluric but atmospheric—deriving from ancient Near Eastern depictions of storm gods riding to battle upon their heavenly chariots. In the cosmic arsenal are swirling blasts of wind that stir the depths and "expose" the "bed of the sea" (2 Sam. 22:16), fiery bolts that furiously fly like arrows out of dark thunderheads (w. 10-12, 15), and awesome peals of thunder that bark out an earth-shattering divine voice (v. 14). In this manner did the Lord also rescue his people at the Reed Sea, when He blasted the waters with the wind of His fury and uncovered the dry bed below (Exod. 15:8, 19); and likewise did the prophet Habakkuk envision God's advent to save Israel in later days (Hab. 3:8-10). 2 David's hymn excels in these depictions. Their dramatic vitality contrasts sharply with the scene of stability established by the mountain rocks at the beginning of the hymn. Their fusion in this song produces a visual and visceral tension that draws the reader toward the vastness of God's power that the speaker celebrates. Other cultural expressions may be detected in this hymn. Especially notable is the language of confession found in 2 Sam. 22:21-32. 3 Several strands are interwoven. The first comprises verses 21-25. In this unit, David announces that the Lord has rewarded him according to his HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH226
merit and the purity o f h i s deeds (w. 21, 24-25). Within this framing repetition, the speaker says how he has fulfilled God's laws and guarded himself from sin. The whole unit has the character of a liturgical proclamation, similar to the recitation of proper behaviors intoned by pilgrims to God's Temple in Psalm 15. Significant in this regard is the speakers personal statement about the "cleanness" ofhis hands and his "purity" (bor) (w. 21, 25) and that he has "been blameless \tamim~Y before the Lord (v. 24). These words are followed by the more impersonal remark that "with the blameless \tamim\ hero [You (God) deal] blamelessly \tittamamY and "with the pure [navar] You act in purity \tittavar\" (w. 26-27) —but "with the perverse You are wily . . . and You look with scorn on the haughty" (w. 27-28). This sequence (w. 21-25 + 26-28) reinforces the connection between a general theology of reward and punishment and its specific manifestation in David's life, "according to [his] merit" (v. 21). Echoing this passage, David concludes his thanksgiving with the overall statement that "The way of God is perfect \tamimY (v. 31) and then says, more personally, that the Lord has "kept my path secure [tamim]n (v. 33). In thanks for God's beneficence, David poses a rhetorical question: "[W]ho is a god except the LORD, / Who is a rock except God . . .?" (2 Sam. 22:32). At first sight, this query recalls the words ofMoses in the midst ofhis own hymn of thanksgiving: "Who is like You, O LORD, among the celestials; / Who is like You, majestic in holiness, / Awesome in splendor, working wonders!" (Exod. 15:11). However, a more compelling parallel may be found in Hannah's song of thanksgiving. Grateful to God for granting her a son, as she desired, Hannah exults "There is no holy one like the LORD, / Truly, there is none beside You; / There is no rock like our God" (1 Sam. 2:2). 4 The similarity between David's and Hannah's songs is even more precise. For one thing, Hannah's hymn emphasizes God as one who breaks the bows of the mighty in battle (1 Sam. 2:4, 10) and speaks of God who "will thunder against [His foes] in the heavens" (v. 10). Both themes recur in 2 Samuel 22. In addition, there is a striking similarity to the conclusion of both hymns. As noted, David's words end with a shift to a more impersonal praise: "Tower of victory to His king [malko], / W h o deals graciously with His anointed [meshiho],/ With David and his offspring evermore" (2 Sam. 22:51). In a comparable manner, Hannah's hymn also ends in praise of God, who "will give power to His king [malko],/And triumph to His anointed one [meshiho]" (1 Sam. 2:10). 5 Both codas look to a messianic future. In the haftarah, the hope is for God's beneficence upon David's heirs. Initially, this meant the royal dynasty of King David. But with time, as the term for God's "anointed one" (meshiho) came to connote the mashiah (or "messiah" figure) expected in the end of days, David's song took on an eschatological expectation. One may assume that the rabbinic circles who selected David's hymn as a haftarah had this thought in mind. Moreover, the haftarah reminds the people that God will "deal loyally" with "the loyal" (2 Sam. 22:26) and "with the pure" He will "act in purity" (v. 27). A life of spiritual perfection is thus the religious path offered later readers of the hymn, who may place their hope in a future vindication by God. COMMENTS 2 Samuel 22:1. after the LORD ... all his enemies According to medieval tradition, David recited this song in his old age, in thanks to God for all his kindness and protection (Rashi, Kimhi). A midrash notes ten enemies of David and suggests that the ten expressions of praise in Psalm 147 correspond to each of them (Yalkut Shimoni 2, 2 Samuel, 157).
5. Flood imagery ("breakers"; "torrents" [v. 6]) combines with figures of hunting ("snares"; "coils" or "traps" [v. 6]) to express the speaker's sense of overpowering and hidden dangers. Before his foes, he is "encompassed," "terrified," "encircled," and "engulfed" (w. 5-6). The figure of Death (mavet) in verses 5 and 6 retains a personified quality, echoing the ancient Canaanite godMot (Death). Such a mythological trace recurs in Isa. 25:8 and ler. 9:20. 6 The other figures of the netherworld mentioned by David in 2 Sam. 22:5-6 are Belial and Sheol. lob (in lob 26:5-6) also speaks of the Rephaim (or shades) and of Abaddon (the realm of Abandon). 227
HAFTARAH FOR HA'AZINU
The torrents ofBelial This refers to the powers of the netherworld; "Belial" functions like "Death" in this verse and "Sheol" in the next. 8-16. For the mythic imagery used here and elsewhere in Scripture, see the discussion in Content and Meaning; see also the haftarah for the second day of Shavuot (Hab. 3:1-19). 10. He bent the sky Despite the figurative imagery, commentators have attempted to correlate the hymn with events in David's life. Rashi saw a reference in this verse to David's defeat of the Philistines and in verse 12 to the pillar of cloud that protected Israel after the Exodus (Exod. 14:19). By contrast, Gersonides reads these phrases as figures for God's intervention for and protection of David. Such readings historicize (and neutralize) the mythic language of the song. 11. He was seen Hebrew va-yem'. The version ofthe song in Ps. 18:11 has va-yede', meaning "gliding" or "swooping." The latter reading is more appropriate to the atmospheric figures used here. The visual term found in the Masoretic text may be the result of a small orthographic error or an attempt to bring this imagery into line with others where God is manifest upon His heavenly chariot (Exod. 24:10; Ezek. 1:26). God rides upon His heavenly chariot in Pss. 68:34 and 104:3. A full list of the variant readings in "the song of Psalms" and the "song of Samuel" was compiled by the Sages and is recorded in Massekhet Soferim 6:8. 7 15. them
That is, the enemies in verse 4 [Transl.].
17. mightywaters
Compare verse 5 [Transl.].
33. Who kept my path secure The Hebrew, va-yater tamim darki, is difficult. Rashi and Kimhi understood the verb va-yater in the sense of unfettering; but Ps. 18:33 preserves the preferable reading va-yitten, "He established" or "made." 36.And Yourprovidence has made megreat The Hebrew, va-dnotekha tarbeni, is difficult, literally yielding something like "and Your answer [to my prayer] has raised me up." Psalm 18: 36 reads ve-dnvatkha tarbeni, "and Your humility has raised me up" (NJPS: "Your providence has made me great"). But the image of divine humility is not the theme of this song, 8 and Rashi and Ibn Ezra therefore construed the phrase to refer to the humility that God gave the speaker. This is also Rashi's understanding of the formulation in 2 Sam. 22:36. The problem is resolved by the preferable reading 'ezratkha in the Qumran scrolls (4QSam a ), meaning "Your help" or "valor." The combination in the verse of "Your protection" or "salvation" {yishe'kha) with "Your help" Cezratkha) would replicate a common pairing of these terms (see Josh. 10:6; Ps. 79:9). 44. peoples So some manuscripts and the Septuagint; most manuscripts and the printed editions read "my people" [Transl.]. 51. Tower of victory This follows the keri, or text as recited, migdol (tower); the ketiv, or text as written, preserves magdil and reads, "He accords great victories" (also Ps. 18:51). The image of God as a tower does not occur earlier in the song but is not out of keeping with it. Nevertheless, one would expect a verbal form here, complementing the sequel "Who deals graciously." Both the keri and ketiv readings are preserved liturgically, at the close of the full Grace after Meals; the ketiv is recited on weekdays, the keri on Sabbaths and festivals. dealsgraciously C O N N E C T I O N S
As promised (2 Sam. 7:15).
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D
PARASHAH
The song ofMoses in Deuteronomy 32 and David's song of thanksgiving in the haftarah praise God's providence in history. They are each spoken near the end of a hero's life and thus each closes an era during which that leader was the dominant figure. The main distinction between the two compositions is one of focus. Moses' song reviews God's past beneficences for the entire HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH228
nation (Deut. 3 2 : 7 - 1 4 ) , while David's prayer thanks God for personal help against his enemies. In addition, Moses chides the people for their rebellions against their divine protector (Deut. 3 2 : 1 5 - 1 8 ) and in this context portrays God as one who requites sinners with vengeance and doom (Deut. 3 2 : 1 9 - 4 3 ) . By contrast, David believes that God's benefits to him are rewards for his faithful service and obedience ("The L O R D has rewarded me according to my merit" [ 2 Sam. 2 2 : 2 1 ] ) . Divine vengeance is against His enemies ( 2 Sam. 2 2 : 4 1 ) . Despite the differences between the songs, both are bound by common theological images and vocabulary. Most notable is the emphasis on integrity, blamelessness, and perfection through the term tamim, and on stability, power, and protection through the word tzur. Thus, in Moses' song, God is proclaimed at the outset as "The Rock!—His deeds are perfect" (tzur tamimpo'olo [Deut. 3 2 : 4 ] ) , whereas faithless Israel is called a "crooked, perverse generation" (dor 'ikkesh uphetaltol [v. 5]) that "spurned the Rock [tzur] o f h i s support" (v. 15) and "neglected the Rock [tzur] that begot" them (v. 18). Therefore will God, "their Rock" (tzumm [v. 30]), give them over to their enemies—"for their rock [tzumm] is not like our Rock [tzureinu]" (v. 31). Israel has "sought refuge" in false gods (tzur hasayu [v. 37]) and will be duly punished. 9 David echoes this theology from his own standpoint. He too glorifies God as a "rock" (2 Sam. 2 2 : 4 7 ) whose way is "perfect" (tamim [v. 3 1 ] ) and juxtaposes this "rock" to all other gods (v. 32). But no falsehood or faithlessness escapes his lips. God is for him "the rock wherein I take shelter" (tzurieheseh bo [v. 3]), the one to whom he has "been blameless" (tamim [v. 24]). Indeed, David proclaims God as acting "blamelessly" with the "blameless hero" ('imgibbor tamim tittamam [v. 26]), but "with the perverse" He is "wily" (ve-'im 'ikkesh tittapal [v. 27]). As a reward for his piety, God has "kept" David's path "secure" (tamim [v. 33]) and crowned him with success and victory. These similarities are striking and reflect a common theology of God as a mighty and sustaining power, whose way is tamim. David maintains allegiance to his divine source and neither forgets the rock of his strength nor rebels through success or perversity. By contrast, the people ofMoses turn against God—and this condemns them to doom. The contrast could not be more stark. Indeed, through the liturgical juxtaposition of this haftarah an&pamshah, the reader is faced with two religious paths: a God-centered way of remembrance and humility, and a self-centered way of forgetfulness and pride. Every spiritual seeker stands before this duality.
Haftarah for Ve-zo't Ha-berakhah ASHKENAZIM J O S H U A l : l - 1 8 SEPHARDIM JOSHUA 1:1-9
See the haftarah for Simhat Torah.
229
HAFTARAH FOR HA'AZINU
HDnnn nXTl
HAFTAROT FOR SPECIAL SABBATHS
Haftarah for Shabbat Rosh Hodesh
^ i n ^Xn nn^
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH66:l-24 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 66:1-24
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see the "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks to the several haftarah readings from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is a collection of diverse prophecies of judgment and salvation from a late section of the Book of Isaiah. The reference to the building of the new Temple (66:1) reflects the concerns of the restoration period, after an edict by Cyrus the Mede (in 538 B.C.E.) permitted the ludean exiles in Babylon to return to their homeland and renew their religious heritage. 1 More precisely, the period in question may be closer to 520 B.C.E., when discussions of rebuilding the Temple intensified within the postexilic community (see Haggai 1-2). Visions of the future shrine also preoccupied Ezekiel's attention (Ezekiel 40-48), and specific guidelines are found there (chapter 44) regarding the role of priests and foreigners in the cultic worship to be reestablished. Other late prophecies in the Book of Isaiah reflected this issue and took a more inclusive approach to the ritual involvement of foreigners or to persons whose cultic participation was prohibited according to Pentateuchal law (Isaiah 56). 2 The present haftarah adopts just such a position. At the same time, the haftarah condemns hypocritical and false worship and projects a punishment of divine fire for this behavior. Occurring in the final chapter of the Book of Isaiah, these condemnations recall the acts and attitudes rejected in the opening chapter of the work. 3 Numerous verbal and thematic links connect these chapters (Isaiah 1 and 66) and suggest a deliberate editorial intent. The haftarah also brings to climactic expression the prophecies of consolation begun in Isaiah 40—particularly those emphasizing the repopulation of Zion and the ingathering there of Israel and the nations (cf. Isaiah 54 and 60). This grand ingathering will continue into the future, when "new moon after new moon, and sabbath after sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship Me" (Isa. 66:23). In anticipation of that eschatological event, this prophecy is recited when the New Moon (Rosh Hodesh) falls on a Sabbath day. PART 1. THE TEMPLE AND TRUE WORSHIP (Isaiah 66:1-4) a. Isaiah 66:1-2 God proclaims His world-encompassing stature and the incapacity of any earthly temple to be His abode. But despite this transcendent magnitude, He will attend to the pious and brokenhearted—to those "concerned" with the divine word. b. Isaiah 66:3-4 By contrast, those who combine legitimate and illegitimate worship are utterly despised and condemned. Their ritual is blasphemous and of their own doing, and they disregard God's call to repent of their ways. PART 2. JOY AND JUDGMENT (Isaiah 66:5-18a) a. Isaiah 66:5-6 The reward of the faithful and the judgment of the sinners are now anticipated. At the outset is a word of promise to those "concerned" with God's word, and a prophecy of retribution against those who "hate" them. b. Isaiah 66:7-14 A more detailed announcement of restoration and disaster now follows. The imagery of renewal centers around the maternal figure of Zion, who shall give birth without 231
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT ROSH HODESH
travail (w. 8-9) and give suck to all those who mourned over her (w. 10-11). God will comfort His people as does a mother her son. They shall wax strong through divine beneficence (v. 14a); but the foes of Israel shall receive God's rage (v. 14b). c. Isaiah 66:15-18a A divine doom through fire and fury is envisioned, decimating the enemies of God's people (w. 15-16). A special condemnation is reserved for those engaged in false worship, performing abominable rites in sacred groves (w. 17-18a). PART 3. THE FUTURE IN ZION (Isaiah 66:18b-24) All nations shall come to Zion, bringing Israel to its ancient shrine like an offering to the Lord (v. 20). New priests will be taken into service (v. 21), and a universal service of"all flesh" will be celebrated in Jerusalem—"new moon after new moon, and sabbath after sabbath" (v. 23). The celebrants shall also gaze at the corpses of the condemned—whose enduring doom shall be a sign of the fate "of the men who rebelled against Me" (v. 24). The prophecy ends with this apocalyptic coda, but tradition subverts it by ordaining that the preceding promise of an ingathering of all peoples in Zion be repeated. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The various prophecies of the haftarah are integrated by a symmetrical structure. Iwo frames enclose a centerpiece of consolation for Zion. Starting with the outermost frame, we note at the outset God's proclamation of His omnipresent majesty throughout the heavens and earth and the incapacity of any earthly Temple to contain Him (Isa. 66:1). This theme is balanced at the conclusion by another reference to the heavens and earth—this time a new creation that God will make as a sign of Israel's permanence (v. 22) and by a prophecy of the ingathering of all nations to the rebuilt Temple (v. 23). Thus the opening statement about the inability of mortal man to build a Temple for God is counterpointed at the end by the expectation of Temple worship by "all flesh" (v. 23) —announced and guaranteed by God Himself. Within this framework, whose overall theme is the transcendence of God and His worship, lies a second topic: God's involvement with the world, through acts of judgment against those who would reject Him and perform improper rites (Isa. 66:3, 17). As described, divine wrath erupts from the Temple itself (v. 6) and consumes its victims in "flaming fire" (v. 15). The martial imagery used here frames and contrasts the themes of divine grace and human joy at the center of the haftarah (w. 7-14). The key figures are those of birth (w. 7-9), suckling (w. 11), and maternal care (v. 13). Zion shall bear her children without pain and nurture her mourners with delight—through God's help, in His role as a beneficent midwife who brings on labor and easy birth (v. 9). This feminine focus extends to God's care for the nation, giving them comfort "as a mother comforts her son" (v. 13). Such divine imagery tempers the figures of male rage and complements attributes of stern justice with those of mercy for the faithful. Punishment and nurturance are the theological signs of the new age. For the sinner, this means death; while for the favored of God, birth and life are the horizon ofhope. The haftarah thus mediates between several spatial poles, each with its own theological dimension. The first of these is the contrast between God's omnipresence and the human desire for His localization in an earthly shrine. As the prophecies unfold, the initial rejection of a dwelling fit for the Lord of all Creation gives way to a vision of the future Temple as a place of universal worship. In the process, the spatial periphery of the diaspora is relocated into the center of the homeland, as the nations bring Israel back to Zion and worship God with them there. The contrast between the nations and Israel is also overcome through their joint pilgrimage to Zion and shared worship at the sacred shrine. In the prophet's universalist vision, the Temple is the symbol and site of divine dominion and ecumenism. For him, a "House" for all peoples is the fit dwelling for God. The theme of universal worship is central to the final chapters of the Book of Isaiah. It is particularly evident in the polemical inclusion of aliens, or those otherwise disbarred, in the service HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHH A S H A N A H232
of the Temple. For example, Isaiah 56 states that if such persons as eunuchs or foreigners keep the Sabbath and hold fast to the divine covenant, then they shall be accepted into the precincts of the Temple. In fact, the eunuchs shall find a dwelling within the walls of the shrine, and the foreigners shall come to the Temple mount and offer sacrifices on the altar—"for My House shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples," declares the Lord (56:1-8). 4 Through divine fiat, older Pentateuchal rules prohibiting the physically maimed and the stranger from access to the holy shrine are disregarded. 5 This dramatic inclusion of foreigners in Temple worship goes further than other universalist visions found in Scripture. For example, the great prophecy of Isa. 2:2-4, which envisions all the nations flowing to Zion in the end of days, projects a scene of divine instruction, justice, and future peace—but says nothing about shared rituals. Even Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the First Temple (preserved and found in a late historiographical source) shows significant reserve. Although the king begins his evocation with a tone of piety that rings close to God's word in Isa. 66:1 (when he says: "But will God really dwell on earth? Even the heavens to their uttermost reaches cannot contain You, how much less this House that I have built!" [1 Kings 8: 27]), Solomon extends to foreign pilgrims who shall come to lerusalem in reverence of God the right of prayer only and makes no mention of sacrificial service (w. 41-43). By the same token, the postexilic prophecy of Zechariah that enjoins the nations of the earth to come to lerusalem during the Feast of Booths emphasizes divine adoration and reverence but says nothing about inclusive worship in the shrine (Zech. 14:16-19). All this casts into high relief the bold words of Isa. 66:21, found near the end of our haftarah. They are of a piece with the sentiment found in Isaiah 56 but are fraught with ambiguity—not all of which are due to syntactical features. It would seem that later factors of transmission also played a role. The particular line in question comes directly after the account of the ascent of foreigners to lerusalem, when they bring the exiles of Zion home and devote them in the shrine "as an offering to the LORD" (v. 20). As we now have it, the ensuing Masoretic Text reads as follows: "And from them likewise I will take some la-kohanim la-leviyim, said the LORD" (v. 21). Two questions arise: Who are the people referred to here as "them," and what indeed is the purpose for which they are taken? A straightforward reading of the passage leads one to conclude that the people "likewise [gam]" taken by God into His service include the foreigners of all the nations along with the returning Israelites. But such a divine word is difficult. For even were we to construe the phrase la-kohanim la-leviyim to mean "levitical priests" (NIPS), it would be necessary to assume that the pedigree of exilic priests taken forcedly into exile would have to be searched and the individuals involved restored to their older service. Such in fact is the position taken by several medieval commentators, though without explicit textual warrant. However, even this solution does not blunt the implication that some foreigners would "likewise" be inducted as priestly officiants, and so the major ritual difficulty is not resolved. Indeed, given that the prophet Ezekiel expressed a strong contemporary denunciation of the sacral service of foreigners (Ezek. 44:6-14) and that he allows only the scions of (the priestly line of) Zadok to serve as the legitimate "levitical priests \loa-kohanim ha-leviyimY in the new Temple (v. 15), it would seem that our Isaianic prophecy is in fact a polemical response to this position—giving a universalist spin to the very priestly designation used by Ezekiel for exclusivist purposes. But if this is the original intent of the prophecy transmitted by the Masoretes, it remains puzzling from a grammatical perspective. One would have expected that the phrase announcing the appointment of foreigners "as levitical priests" would have read la-kohanim ha-leviyim, or "to be ha-kohanim ha-leviyim" For that reason, other medieval commentators construed Isa. 66: 21 as indicating that the foreigners would be taken "for the priests and for the Levites" (OIPS) —somewhat like the induction of the ancient Gibeonites into menial shrinal service (loshua 9). But this alternative is also difficult, since there is no conjunction "and" in the text, and Scripture provides no provision for servants for the Levites. Moreover, the Israelites are not mentioned as 233
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT ROSH HODESH
new officiants, and one would have to conclude that the particle^ww would have to mean "even" and not "likewise." Such a reading makes sense of the text but backs off considerably from the statement about foreign inclusion in Temple worship found in Isaiah 56 and as suggested by the (aforementioned) assumption that la-kohanim la-leviyim means "levitical priests." A final possibility may be proposed, based on a scribal tradition found in many medieval Bible manuscripts—including the one that Rashi used in his commentary. According to this version, the consonantal text read Ikhnym v-llvym. The inclusion of the conjunctive particle ve(and) suggests that the text was pronounced le-kohanim u-le-leviyim and meant "for priests and for Levites." That is, the prophecy announces that foreigners would also (or especially) be taken as ritual officiants in the new Temple. It is hardly likely that such a radical tradition (and legal difficulty) would have been added to the text by later scribes; and Rashi is himself so amazed by this divine word that he calls the projected inclusion of Israelites and foreigners in conjoint cultic service a "mystery [sod]" of God for the future. Other scribes were apparently less disposed to such a reading and from early times preferred l-khnm l-lvym (vocalizing it in different ways). In any event, we noted earlier that such a reading could also imply that foreigners would serve as cultic officiants—specifically as "levitical priests." We can no longer decide the historical case. Both readings make their strong polemical claims and give a glimpse of the universalist vision that flourished in the Judean community of the late sixth century B.C.E. C O M M E N T S
Isaiah 66:1. The heaven is My throne The image of the heavens as God's throne and the earth as His footstool is one of divine omnipresence and transcendence. This sense of God in the heavens and beyond is radicalized in Solomon's prayer of dedication for his Temple: "But will God really dwell on earth? Even the heavens to their uttermost reaches [lit., 'the heavens and the heavens of the heavens'] cannot contain You, how much less this House that I have built!" (1 King 8:27). The parallel version of this prayer in 2 Chron. 6:18 begins, "Does God really dwell with man on earth?" This query is answered in Isa. 66:1-2. After the transcendence of God is stressed in verse 1, His presence with the "poor and brokenhearted" is emphasized in verse 2. This is the profound theological balance ofbiblical monotheism (cf. Isa. 57:15). Elsewhere we find the image of a "footstool" used as figure for the Temple as a whole and the place of divine indwelling (Ps. 132:7; Lam. 2:1). For his part, Jeremiah envisions a time when people shall call Jerusalem itself " 'Throne of the LORD,' and all nations shall assemble there, in the name of the L O R D , at Jerusalem" (Jer. 3:17). Where... What? These are posed as rhetorical questions. Hebrew }ey zeh is used twice. The term bears the sense of "where?" (cf. Gen. 4:9) and, given the topic of divine omnipresence, could be translated twice with this connotation (OJPS). It also bears the qualitative sense of "what kind of}" (cf. Rashi, Kara) 6 and could have this sense in both questions here. NJPS conveys both meanings, but it would appear that "the same point is repeated" in both cases (Ibn Ezra, Kimhi). 2. Who is concerned about My word Designating the faithful as hared, "concerned" may reflect a technical term of the period. Inan early postexilic act, the people "who are concerned [haredim] over the commandment of our God" are exhorted to make a covenant and to expel their foreign wives (Ezra 10:3). A desire for divine service is involved (R. Eliezer of Beaugency). The ensuing reference to "all you who mourned" (mit'abelim) over Jerusalem (Isa. 66:10) may also have technical overtones, since this group is called "the mourners in [or: of] Zion" avelei tziyon) in Isa. 61:3. 3. The structure of the condemnation juxtaposes four pair of deeds: the first (of each pair) is a legitimate cultic act, the second an abomination that the people "have chosen." The form is difficult. Many moderns have assumed that those who do the proper sacrifices are "like" those who do the abominations. 7 But this reading presumes an implied comparison and would only make sense if the cult were condemned outright—a feature not found in these HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHH A S H A N A H234
chapters (cf. Isa. 56:7; 60:7, 13; 66:20-23). Where such an attitude existed, as at Qumran, we actually have the reading in lQIsa a : "those who slaughter oxen are like [ke-] those who slay humans." According to Rashi, the offerings of sinners are like ritual abominations before God. Compare Ibn Ezra. 18b-21. A universal ingathering of nations is prophesied here. This attitude is characteristic of this postexilic prophet (cf. 56:1-8 and 60) but is also reflected in the earlier chapters of the book (Isa. 2:1-4). The decision to take some of the foreigners as "levitical priests" for the Temple (Isa. 66:21) expresses the universalistic tenor of the prophet whose concern for foreign involvement in Israelite sacrifice is also mentioned in 56:7. The position was sharply at variance with certain priestly proclamations of the time (cf. Ezek. 44:9). 8 The phrase "levitical priests" (la-kohanim la-leviyim; cf. Ezek. 44:15) may itself be a softening of the reading "priests and Levites" (le-kohanim u-le-leviyim) found in many manuscripts and in the Targum. Rashi understood the prophetic signature "said the L O R D " (Isa. 66:23) to mean that this daring eschatological innovation was a mystery of God, stated long before (he refers to Deut 29:28). C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E
A N D T H E SPECIAL
H A F T A R A H
SABBATH
The haftarah announces that on the occasion of the ingathering oflsrael from exile "all flesh shall come to worship" the Lord "new moon after new moon" (Isa. 66:23). Therewith, the ancient New Moon rites (Num. 28:11-15) are given an eschatological and universalist dimension. The monthly renewal of heavenly light thus comes to symbolize the hope for a future fellowship of all nations on earth. In antiquity, special feasts marked the sighting of the new moon and the people were encouraged to attend the event in lerusalem (M. Rosh Hashanah 2:5). According to a late aggadic tradition, God gave the New Moon festival to women especially, as a reward for not contributing their jewelry to the making of the Golden Calf (Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer 45). That is, these faithful souls and their descendants are enjoined to observe this day more stringently than males in this world, so that in the world to come they shall "be renewed \le-hithadesh] like the new moons [lit., months, hodashim\\ as it is written, 'He satisfies you with good things in the prime of life ^'ad^yikh, a pun on jewelry], so that your youth is renewed [tithadesh] like the eagle's' (Ps. 103:5)." According to lewish mystical tradition, from medieval times on, the waxing and waning of moonlight reflects the increase and decrease of holiness and unity in the divine and human realms. The lunar cycle thus symbolizes transcendent truth and is not simply a feature of the natural order. Already in antiquity, profound cosmic significance was given to sacrificial offerings given at this occasion (B. Hullin 60b), and prayers still recited in the morning .Musaf service on Rosh Hodesh show the important aspect of atonement that was connected with the day. By the fifteenth century it became customary to observe a period of fasting and repentance on the day before the New Moon, a day known in fact as Yom Kippur Katan (Minor Day of Atonement). The cycle of the moon has thus offered the opportunity in lewish ritual and spirituality for a periodic renewal of the one's inner light and wholeness. As the moon is not the source of its own light, the symbolism of the New Moon invites worshipers to deepen their receptivity to a higher radiance, so that they may be connected to a divine dimension and reflect it outward into the world. This is the movement from the private to the social realm. In this respect, the haftarah for Rosh Hodesh reminds the single self of its commonality with all creatures. Its proclamation of the cyclic celebration of God by "all flesh" in Zion, "new moon after new moon," is thus a prophecy of a unified humanity that repeatedly renews itself through ecumenical reciprocity and common concerns. 235
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT ROSH HODESH
Haftarah for Mahar Hodesh ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
^innntt
ISAMUEL20:18-42 I SAMUEL 20:18-42
(Omitted on Shabbat Shekalim and Shabbat Ha-Hodesh; also on Parashat Re'eh in many congregations) For the contents and theology of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings from Samuel (listed in "Index in Biblical Passages"). The haftarah occurs within the cycle of narratives depicting the rise of David in national esteem and his corresponding decline in favor with Saul (ca. 1000 B.C.E.). A S this balance shifts, violence and intrigue come to the fore. A key factor in this change is Saul's jealousy over David's fame as a soldier. It is something the king cannot abide and drives him mad with rage. Thus after the defeat of the Philistines, Saul returns with his troops only to hear the women sing: "Saul has slain his thousands; David, his tens of thousands!" In the grip of an "evil spirit," Saul throws a spear at David "thinking to pin [him] to the wall. But David eluded him twice" (1 Sam. 18:5-11). The second occasion alluded to here also occurs in the context of the Philistine wars. Since "David was more successful than all the other officers of Saul, his reputation soared" (1 Sam. 18:30). 1 In response, Saul urges his courtiers to kill his rival. But David fortunately escapes this danger through the intervention of Jonathan with his father (19:1-6). Nevertheless, after David leads another round of military successes, Saul is again smitten by an evil spirit and, as he had done before, "tried to pin David to the wall with [his] spear" (w. 8-10). Once again David escapes. But this does not end the danger. Obsessed, Saul tries once again to kill David. This time he sends messengers to guard David's house, with orders to strike him dead in the morning. But again he is thwarted. This time Michal (David's wife and Saul's daughter) warns David of the plot and through a ruse covers up his escape (w. 11-16). Doubly foiled by members of his own family (son and daughter), Saul himselfsets out in hot pursuit ofDavid, accompanied by a band of messengers. As events develop, David flees to Jonathan and begs him to explain Saul's anger toward him. Jonathan cannot quite believe that Saul would kill David without first confiding the matter to him, but he nevertheless agrees to David's plan to test the matter. David sets the following conditions: on the morrow, the feast of the New Moon, he will not go to the palace as usual, but will make himself scarce for three days. If and when Saul should note the absence ofDavid, Jonathan is advised to tell his father that his friend has gone to celebrate the feast with his own family. Saul's reaction is to serve as an omen. "If he says 'Good' your servant [David] is safe; but if his anger flares up, know that he is resolved to do [me] harm" (1 Sam. 20:7). This omen would then be reported to David by a secret sign. Jonathan swears that he will test his father through the ruse agreed upon and disclose the results to his friend. In his vow, he adjures David to continued faithfulness to all his descendants. Thus the covenant between the friends becomes a bond between their "houses" for generations to come (w. 12-16). Indeed, "Jonathan, out ofhis love for David, adjured him again, for he loved him as himself" (v. 17). With this reaffirmation of their commitment, Jonathan tells David what signs he will use to communicate his father's intentions toward him. At this point the haftarah begins. PART 1. THE PLAN (1 Samuel 20:18-23) Jonathan repeats David's plan concerning the latter's absence from court and his flight to a place of hiding. Jonathan further specifies the signs he will use to communicate Saul's reaction to David's absence. Jonathan will shoot arrows at a stone and ask his servant to fetch them. If he tells the youth that the arrows are nearby, this is to be a sign to David that all is well for him; but if Jonathan remarks that the arrows are further "beyond," David should understand that his life HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHH A S H A N A H236
is in danger and he should flee. After articulating the two parts of the plan, Jonathan reaffirms his personal covenant with David—as a sign of trust and faithfulness (v. 23). PART 2. THE EVENT AT COURT (1 Samuel 20:24-34) a. 1 Samuel 20:24-29 The plan is put in motion: David hides, and Jonathan returns to the court on the New Moon. Saul indeed takes note of David's absence but says nothing while thinking, "It's accidental. . . He must be unclean and not yet cleansed" (v. 26). But when David is absent on the following day as well, Saul asks lonathan about it, and he answers that David has gone off to celebrate the feast with his family. All this is according to plan (see v. 6). b. 1 Samuel 20:30-34 Saul then erupts in anger—just the sign of danger that the friends spoke of earlier (v. 7). The king curses his son as a traitor to his lineage and a fool for putting his inheritance of the kingship in jeopardy through support of David. Saul then issues an order for David to be summoned to court and executed. lonathan's intervention has little effect this time (cf. 19:4-6) and even brings his father's violence down on him. When Saul takes his spear to strike him, lonathan rises and leaves the court. Earlier spear attacks against David make this event too ominous to ignore. PART 3. THE EVENT IN THE FIELD (1 Samuel 20:35-42) a. 1 Samuel 20:35-41 lonathan signals the danger to David by means of the arrows he shoots and the instructions he gives his servant. When the servant is dismissed, David comes out ofhiding, and the friends separate in tears. b. 1 Samuel 20:42 The episode concludes with lonathan's blessing to David that he "Go in peace!" lonathan then repeats their covenantal commitments to one another—made before God, for all generations. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
All the elements of the opening part of the haftarah recur in the second and third parts: the absence of David at court during the New Moon, the ruse of the arrows in the field, and the covenantal commitment between David and lonathan. In fact, these elements recapitulate the dialogue between David and lonathan in 1 Sam. 20:5-17—immediately prior to the haftarah. There, too, the issue of David's absence at court is mentioned, along with a plan to test Saul's feelings about David (w. 5-9, 10-11). Moreover, this narrative also concludes with an emphasis on the covenant between the friends (w. 12-17). Accordingly, the same features unfold in 1 Samuel 20 in triplicate.2 These repetitions underscore the complicity of the friends in their plot and pact. They also highlight the essential polarities of the episode: trust and distrust; court and field; anger and love; filial bond and friendship. The haftarah moves back and forth between these poles in various combinations. Particularly important is the contrast drawn between the established kingship at court and the bond of friendship in the field. This is as much a contrast between past and future leadership as between age (Saul) and youth (David). In various ways, lonathan mediates between the poles. 3 He is at once the trusted son of the king and the beloved friend of the hero, and he is the one who sits at court with his father and stands in the field with his comrade. Nevertheless, his intermediation between the two sides is not symmetrical, for he betrays his father's confidence out of loyalty to David, as King Saul comes to realize during the New Moon feast. lonathan's fate is sealed when he tries to annul Saul's decree that David die. It is at this point that the king takes up his spear against his son. Recalling earlier episodes when Saul made the same gesture against David, the reader perceives lonathan through the eyes ofhis enraged father: as the decoy and double ofDavid. The signal cast by means of the arrows symbolically reinforces this perception and ironizes it. For at one and the same time, the arrows shot by lonathan and the escape plan recall the spear-wielding king (Saul) and the ever-elusive hero (David) who repeatedly escapes. lonathan's role as archer thus mocks his father's actions and puts him in cahoots with his fleeing friend. Little wonder that lonathan again 237
HAFTARAH FOR MAHAR HODESH
mentions his pact of loyalty with David. His destiny made precarious, Jonathan now depends completely upon David's promise of support to him and his lineage "forever" (1 Sam. 20:42). David remains loyal and fulfills this obligation in good faith—long after the death in battle of his beloved companion. As king of Judah, David supports Jonathan's son Mephibosheth at his royal table in Jerusalem and even restores to him the lands of his dead grandfather Saul (2 Samuel 9). C O M M E N T S
1 Samuel 20:19. the other time Hebrewfe-jyowha-madseh~, literally, "on the day of the incident." This presumably refers to the time when Jonathan interceded with Saul for David's life (1 Sam. 19:2-4). Thus Kimhi, R. Joseph Kaspi, and Gersonides. the Ezel stone verse 41, below.
A cairn of sorts, apparently used as a signpost for travelers. Compare
20. to one side ofit Hebrew tzidah, without mapik in the final letter to indicate possessive pronoun, though grammar requires it (Kimhi). 23.Asfor the promise we made Literally, "as for the matter [davar] we spoke about." The reference is to the covenant mentioned in verses 14-17 (cf. Rashi, R. Isaiah di Trani). The phrase "between you and me" is a technical legal phrase found in verse 42 and other covenant formulations; compare Gen. 26:28 (between Isaac and the Abimelech, king of the Philistines) and 31:50 (between Jacob and Laban). In the latter case, God also serves as the witness between the parties. This is implied in our verse (cf. Targum Jonathan). 26. It's accidental Hebrew mikreh hu\ The subsequent clause, "He must be unclean and not yet cleansed," suggests that mikreh has here the more technical sense of an "accidental (seminal emission)." This is also Rashi's understanding (cf. B. Pesahim 3a). For the overall phenomenon, see Deut. 23:11, where just such an accident can make the agent "impure." The clause "He must be unclean and not yet cleansed" is redundant and may combine two textual readings.4 One clause stated "he is unclean"; the other, "for (surely) he is unclean." NJPS reads the phrases together and thus introduces the new meaning "notyet cleansed." OJPS: "surely he is not clean." 27. But on the day after the new moon, the second day This renders the difficult Hebrew phrase mi-mahamt ha-hodesh ha-sheni. This follows the old Targum tradition (be-yoma} de-vatrohi de-hu} 'ibburyarha,tinyana:') and agrees with the position of R. Isaiah di Trani.5 R. David Kimhi understood it to mean the day after the New Moon. At issue here is whether the New Moon was celebrated in biblical times for two days. This was not the case in later rabbinic law (but could occur where Jews in outlying districts counted thirty days from the previous new moon and celebrated it, only to learn from messengers from Jerusalem that the official sighting of the new moon set it for the next day; this second day was then celebrated as well). Among the divisions separating the Rabbis and Karaites in the Middle Ages was a debate as to whether the phrase ha-hodesh ha-sheni meant "the second day of the new moon." 6 The Septuagint rendered ha-sheni as the "second" day of the month, thus assuming one day for the New Moon. the son ofjesse
To avoid the first name is slighting; cf. 10:11, Isa. 7:4-6 [Transl.].
30. Tou son of a perverse, rebellious womanl Saul's harsh criticism of Jonathan and the subsequent gesture of aggression against him provided the basis for rabbinic and medieval discussions about the limits of reproof. According to ancient traditions preserved in B. Arakhin 16b, Sages variously placed the limit at cursing, rebuking, shouting, or smiting. The Sefer Ha-Hinnukh (:mitzvah 239) and Maimonides {Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot De'ot 6) put the limit at actual smiting—thus leaving room for threatening (but inconclusive) gestures like that of Saul in verse 33. 41. eme^gedfrom his concealment at theNegev This rendition is interpretative. "Emerged," literally, "arose [from]" (Hebrewkam). "From his concealment at the Negev" construes the phrase HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHH A S H A N A H238
me-'etzel ba-Negev, taking me-'etzel as referring to moving "from near" some place. Alternatively, this is the same place (cairn) referred to in verse 19 as the Ezel stone (see above). 7 If so, the phrase is best understood as saying that "David arose from [his place of concealment near] the Ezel [stone in] the Negev." Compare R. Isaiah di Trani. David wept the longer Hebrew 'adDavid higdil. OIPS: "until David exceeded" lonathan in his grief (Rashi, Gersonides, R. loseph Kaspi). 42. For Hebrew 'asher. OIPS: "forasmuch as." For the usage, compare 1 Sam. 15:15 and 26:23. This verse is an expansion of the contents in 20:23. we two Or, "even we"; Hebrew shenenu 'anahnu. The force shenenu is literally "the two of us." The phrase is a type of independent personal pronoun ('anahnu) in apposition to a suffixed pronoun (shenenu) that serves as an emphatic. 8 May the LORD be {witness] David Kimhi; R. Isaiah di Trani).
This is a citation of the oath undertaken in verse 23 (R.
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E A N D T H E SPECIAL
H A F T A R A H
SABBATH
The haftarah was chosen to be recited on a Sabbath followed by the New Moon, since this scriptural reading uses the very words mahar hodesh ("Tomorrow will be the new moon" [1 Sam. 20:18]) that now designate that day. Moreover, though the Torah only designates the types of sacrificial rites performed on the New Moon (Num. 10:10; 28:11-15), our haftarah indicates that more popular gatherings and communal meals were undertaken. We read both that the king sat down to "partake of the meal" (lehem [1 Sam. 20:24]) and that David is purported to have gone to his hometown of Bethlehem in order to participate in the "family feast" (zevah mishpahah [v. 29]) there. Ancient rabbinic sources also preserve evidence of celebrating the New Moon with festive meals (J. Megillah 1:4, J. Sanhedrin 8:2). This practice was later codified (Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 419:1). From the haftarah, we also learn that "unclean" persons could not participate in this communal meal (v. 26). Other biblical passages indicate customs of abstaining from work (Amos 8:5) and visiting (a prophet at) a sacred shrine on the New Moon (2 Kings 4:23). It was clearly a time of joyful celebration (Hos. 2:13), though no specific injunction is found in the Torah to rejoice on that day (for later justifications of celebration on the New Moon, see lur, Yoreh De'ah 401). Since on the New Moon an additional sacrifice was offered, an additional prayer (Musaf) is now recited. It opens with the statement: "The beginnings of months Thou did assign for Thy people as a time of atonement throughout the generations." This indicates a further dimension of the festival, in which the atonement from sin was linked to the renewal and restoration of the moon. In this way, ancient lunar considerations were spiritualized. Maimonides even emphasized that the striking reference to a sacrifice brought as "a sin offering to the L O R D " (Num. 2 8 : 1 5 ) was to counter old rites that gave offerings to the moon on that day (Guidefor the Perplexed 3: 46), though some ancient authorities saw in this biblical phrase bold hints of a more radical purpose for the rite (see Resh Lakish, B. Hullin 6ob). Kabbalists found great spiritual meaning in the waxing and waning of the moon, and by the sixteenth century it was customary to observe the day before the New Moon as a time of fasting and repentance. It came to be known as Yom Kippur Katan (Minor Day of Atonement), and the waning of the moon was believed symbolic of the exile of the divine Presence (Shekhinah) and the weakening of the powers of holiness during the time oflsrael's exile. Thus the waxing of the moon correspondingly symbolized the renewal of holiness and divine restoration. On a human plane, the new moon thus takes on the symbolism of redemption and eschatological hope. The renewal of human life and community so fundamental to the messianic age is anticipated in the haftarah through its emphasis on friendship. Indeed, the bond between David and 239
HAFTARAH FOR MAHAR HODESH
Jonathan is emblematic of the renewal ofhuman community through love and devotion. For the ancient Rabbis, their relationship was paradigmatic of a "wholly disinterested love" capable of withstanding all circumstances (M. Avot 5:16). Such acts of love and loyalty may even transcend commitments to family and family loyalty. In a powerful manner, the haftarah develops a contrast between the obligations owed to one's kin (father-son) and those that develop between friends (surrogate brothers; cf. 2 Sam. 1:26) —and privileges in this case the love of the latter. In this way, the haftarah invites reflection on the limits and nature of primary loyalties and on the role of friendship as a surrogate family. While not inherently opposed to family bonds and the responsibility of blood ties, the haftarah points to a wider horizon—to a community built up through the loyalty of friends and comrades. Fundamental to the love and commitment between David and Jonathan is the divine Presence that unifies them (cf. w. 23, 42), and it is this commitment to a transcending reality that allows Jonathan to rise beyond self-interest in his loyalty to David. For medieval commentators on Pirke Avot (M. Avot 5:16), it is precisely a commitment to a love rooted in higher principles that allows true friendship to endure the changing vagaries ofhuman existence (cf. Maimonides; R. Jonah Gerondi; and R. Menahem Ha-Meiri).
Haftarah for Shabbat Shekalim ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
wbpw nn^
2KINGS12:1-17 2 KINGS 11:17-12:17
For an introduction to the structure, contents, and historiography of the Book of Kings, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For other haftarah selections taken from the Book ofKings, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." After a brief account of the revolt in Judah that deposed Queen Athaliah (842-836 B.C.E.), 2 Kings 11:17-20 describes how the priest Jehoiada established the rule of King Jehoash—who had been hid "in the House of the LORD" during Athaliah's reign. Jehoiada solemnized the covenant between the Lord, the king, and the people, on the one hand, and between the king and the people, on the other. After a popular rampage that decimated the temple of Baal, the priest set in motion the accession of Jehoash (836-798 B.C.E.). These events (2 Kings 11:17-20) serve as the prologue to the account of the king's reign and constitute the first part of the haftarah in the Sephardi rite.1 Ashkenazim recite only the ensuing report of the king's efforts to collect funds and repair the Temple (2 Kings 12:1-17). PART 1. RELIGIOUS REVIVAL (2 Kings 11:17-20) The fall of Queen Athaliah and the rise of King Jehoash conclude with a renewal of the covenant and rampage against pagan sites. PART 2. ROYAL PROLOGUE (2 Kings 12:1-4) A brief notice concerning the new Judean king's age at accession, synchronism with the Israelite monarch, and a religious evaluation of his reign. PART 3. TEMPLE REPAIR (2 Kings 12:5-17) a. 1 Kings 12:5-6 Jehoash instructs the priests to collect all monies brought to the Temple as "sacred donations," "money equivalent of persons" (v. 5), and freewill offerings and use them as needed for the repair of the Temple. b. 1 Kings 12:7-9 By the king's twenty-third year, repairs have not been done, and so Jehoash forbids the priests to collect funds any more. c. 1 Kings 12:10-17 A new system is instituted. Lay donations are put by priestly guards directly into a special container set "at the right side of the altar as one entered the House of the L O R D " (V. 10). The accumulated money is paid out to overseers, who pay subcontractors for their labor and materials. Sacred vessels may not be made from silver and gold accumulated by HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 4 0
such donations; the money is used only for repairs to the Temple. Money given for guilt or sin offerings, however, goes directly to the priests. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
Following the popular purge of the temple of Baal, the narrative focuses on Jehoash's attempts to provide funds to repair the Temple of the Lord. His first instruction is apparently disregarded because the priests see it as cutting into their regular emoluments. The new regulations require that sacred funds be put directly into a storage bin but also stress that sacred payments (for sin and guilt offerings) belong to the priests alone. Since the king is speaking to the priests, he uses a kind of"sacred shorthand" that refers to several terms and practices found in priestly sources. After the opening general statement "All the money [lit., silver] brought into the House of the } LORD," three items specified: ( 1 ) kesef'over, ( 2 ) ish kesefnafshot'erko, and ( 3 ) kesef'asherya'aleh 'al lev 'ish (v. 5). The first clause (1) is a precise though elliptic rendition of the phrase kesef ha-'over 'al hapekudim (the silver of those enrolled in the census) and not a reference to "current money" (NJPS) or the like. It thus refers to Exod. 30:14 and the poll price paid by all the males twenty years of age and up. It would best be translated "silver of the census tax." The second expression (2) refers to the technical term used in Lev. 27:2 for the payment of vows according to a fixed "valuation of persons" (be-'erkekha nefashot:, NJPS: "equivalent for a human being"). And the final phrase (3) alludes to all other votary gifts to the shrine by an idiom similar to those found in Exod. 25:2; 35:21 and 29. 2 Accordingly, King Jehoash's proclamation refers to three types of silver payments (see also Rashi and Kimhi). The reference in 2 Kings 12:17 to silver brought as a guilt or sin offering refers to the priestly practice that permitted substituting a silver "equivalent" (be-'erkekha) for livestock (cf. Lev. 5:18). 3 According to the narrative, the king claims certain powers over sacred donations—both with regard to their disbursement (initially the priests retain discretionary powers over "all silver" brought to the Temple) and with regard to their collection and use (ultimately the priests can only receive and retain silver given in exchange for sacrificial offerings). It thus hints at a balancing of powers between kings and priests of much historical interest (see Abravanel on 2 Kings 12:9). C O M M E N T S
2Kingsll:19.gateoftheguards Hebrew sha'ar ha-mtzim-, literally, "gate of the runners." This was the entrance to the Temple area through which the king passed. See 1 Kings 14:28. 2 Kings 12:5.All the money For a discussion of the legal expressions in this verse, see above in Content and Meaning. 6."hisbenefactor Hebrew makaro. The term makar is otherwise unknown in the Bible and refers to those who gave gifts to the priests—perhaps some personal "acquaintance" (like makkiro [Rashi]).4 The Talmud discusses the reception by priests of personal gifts and loans (B. Gittin 30a). make repairs on the House The Hebrew idiom hazzek bedek, "repair/strengthen damage" recurs in verses 7-9 and 13 (cf. 15). See also Ezek. 27:9 and 27 for other contexts. As Kimhi succinctly observes, the bedek refers to "(each) place of break or ruin"; he derives the noun from the verb meaning "inspect" (viz., "place of inspection"). This is unnecessary; the verb and noun in Aramaic (and commonly in rabbinic Hebrew) means "break" or "crack." 10. a chest The vocalization of }aron, "chest" (with }ehad, "one," "a") is difficult. It suggests a noun in construct form, but this is not required by normal Hebrew grammar. Kimhi's proposal of"a chest of someone" is a grammatically correct but awkward phrase. The punctuation thus seems in error. 241
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
A cash box (called aranu or kuppu) was located near the temple gates in ancient Mesopotamia and was a standard feature of temple organization during the first millenium B.C.E. 5 the priestlyguards ofthe threshold Literally, "the priests that guarded the threshold" (Heb. ha-kohanim shomrei ha-saf). The title shomrei ha-saf, "guardians of the threshold," is a preexilic title (see 2 Kings 22:4); it was replaced in later times by the designation sho'ar, "gatekeeper" (Neh. 7:45). 6 17.asajguilt offering or as a sin offering See Lev. 5:15:"bring as . . . penalty to the a ram without blemish from the flock, convertible into payment in silver . . ." [Transl.]. CONNECTIONS BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D T H E SPECIAL
LORD
SABBATH
The Sabbath known as Shabbat Shekalim is the first of four special Sabbaths before Passover. Shabbat Shekalim occurs on the New Moon of the month of Adar when it falls on a Sabbath or on the prior Sabbath when the New Moon falls on a weekday (in a leap year, this Sabbath is celebrated in the second month of Adar). This occurrence sets the timing for the other three Sabbaths: Shabbat Zakhor on the Sabbath before Purim, Shabbat Parah on the Sabbath prior to Shabbat ha-Hodesh, and Shabbat ha-Hodesh on the Sabbath nearest the New Moon of Nisan (in which month Passover falls). This sequence of Sabbaths is already specified in the Mishnah (M. Megillah 3:4), along with reference to breaks or skipped Sabbaths (if necessary) so that the four special Sabbaths conclude on the Sabbath before Nisan. The resulting sequence and possible adjustments led to complicated calculations (marked by diverse mnemonics; cf. Rashi on B. Megillah 30b, and J. Megillah 3:5). The Amoraim in the Talmud debated whether the special Torah readings for these Sabbaths (temporarily) displaced or supplemented the regular Sabbath portions (see B. Megillah 30b and Rashi). The halakhah follows the second alternative, so that the special readings are added to the weeklyparashah {Maimonides, Mishnek Torah, Hilkhot Tefillah 13:22; and Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 685). The supplementary Torah reading for Shabbat Shekalim is Exod. 30:11-16, which refers to a poll tax of "half a shekel" (mahatzit ha-skekel) for the building of the desert Tabernacle. In ancient Temple times, this tax was regularized as an annual donation "required of every one in Israel" and "announced on the first of Adar" (M. Shekalim 1:1). Setting the preparations one month in advance ensured that the new flock of animals sacrificed from the beginning of the month ofNisan would be paid for with the new shekels (B. Megillah 29b). The public reading of this portion served as a notification to the populace to bring their shekels. The haftarah for Shabbat Shekalim is mentioned in the Tosefta (Tosefta Megillah 3) as "Jehoiada the priest" (referring to 2 Kings 12:3). In the Talmud, the same phrase is cited to mark the haftarah when "the New Moon of Adar falls on a Sabbath"—with the explanation that reciting this haftarah with Exod. 30:11-16 is altogether fitting since the one "resembles" the other (de-da-mi leih)—"as it is written [in 2 Kings 12:5] kesef'over }ish kesefnafshot'erko" (B. Megillah 29b). This reference to a monetary payment enjoined for repair of the Temple was perceived to tally with the injunction of a poll tax levied against each person (}ish kofer naf-sho) who was "entered" ('over) in the census (Exod. 30:12-13) at the time of the building of the Tabernacle. Hence, along with the verbal tally, the passages display a thematic connection: a sacral donation in the wilderness in Moses' day, and a donation for Temple upkeep in the monarchic era. With the destruction of the Second Temple and the end of sacrifices (in 70 c . E . ) , the special Torah reading for Shabbat Shekalim was recited "in remembrance" (le-zekher) of the Temple (Sefer ha-Hinnukh 105). This annual occasion was used to solicit charity in support of lewish religious and physical existence. The fact that in this particular gift the people shall "take a census" (tissa} } et ro'sh) of themselves (Exod. 30:12) and "the rich shall not pay more and the poor shall not pay less than half a shekel" (v. 15) meant that a common commitment and obligation were assumed of all members of the lewish community. Moreover, just as old rabbinic homilies had hinted that the sacred donation of shekalim offset the sin of idolatry (with the Golden Calf), such that God would "account" (tissa}) the merit of the people and "forgive" them (tissa}),7 so the annual HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 4 2
occasion of Shabbat Shekalim came to mark the ongoing hope (in the absence of the Temple) that charity might serve as a sacrificial substitution—as a gift leading to religious renewal and divine forgiveness.8 Later hasidic masters went further and taught that such gifts may serve as a means of"raising" (tissn') the donor to a higher plane of spiritual consciousness.9
Haftarah for Shabbat Zakhor ASHKENAZIM
I SAMUEL 15:2-34
SEPHARDIM
I SAMUEL 15:1-34
~l*DT nn^
For the contents and theology of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the discussion of the several other haftarah readings taken from the Book of Samuel (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah deals with Saul's battle against the Amalekites and his rejection as king by God for not obeying His command of utter extermination of that nation and its livestock. The episode concludes a cycle of narratives that begins with the anointment of Saul (1 Sam. 9:1-10:16) after the people request a king and God acquiesces to their demand (8:1-22). The specific language of royal investiture, when "Samuel took a flask of oil and poured some on Saul's head and kissed him, and said, 'The L O R D herewith anoints you \meshahakha\ ruler over His own people'" (10:1-2), is recalled at the outset of the haftarah, when Samuel begins his instruction to Saul with the reminder that he is "the one the L O R D sent to anoint you \meshahakha\ king over His people Israel" (15:1). Moreover, after the rejection of Saul, Samuel is instructed to "fill" his "horn with oil" and "anoint" (;meshahehu) David as king (16:1, 12-13). Thus begins David's ascent (ca. 1000 B.C.E.). According to the text, "the spirit of the L O R D gripped David from that day on"; whereas "the spirit of the L O R D had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the L O R D began to terrify him" (16:13-14). Saul's leadership was marked by a continuous series of military ventures against enemies "on every side." These included "the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Philistines, and the kings of Zobah" (1 Sam. 14:47)—and notably by his defeat of the Amalekites (v. 48). This summary of victories suggests an interim conclusion to Saul's battles. The ensuing account of the war against the Amalekites, which constitutes the haftarah (15:1-34), would thus seem to detail events within the Amalekite campaign just summarized. It is elaborated here to dramatize the king's rejection. In light of a Pentateuchal injunction to destroy Amalek when all the enemies "roundabout" are defeated, the battle portrayed in our haftarah assumes a climactic significance in the saga of Israel's conquest and settlement of the Land. According to the Book of Exodus, "Amalek came and fought with Israel at Rephidim" (Exod. 17:8). After a national conscription, and with divine help, "Joshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek with the sword" (v. 13). To mark the moment, the Lord has the event inscribed in a document and stated that "I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven" (v. 14). Moses complies, builds an altar in commemoration, and dedicates it to his victorious God, whom, he says, "will be at war with Amalek throughout the ages" (v. 16). This revision of God's oath is striking, though not as transformative as the tradition preserved in Deut. 25: 17-19, read as the concluding (mnftir) Torah selection for the portion of Zakhor. In this version, the Israelites are asked to remember Amalek's attack against "all the stragglers" who made up the weary rearguard of the people during the desert trek from Egypt (w. 17-18). "Therefore," the people are told, "when the L O R D your God grants you safety from all your enemies around you, in the land that the L O R D your God is giving you as a hereditary portion, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under the heaven. Do not forget!" (v. 19). In the Deuteronomic account, it is the people who must remember the enemy and do the deed of destruction—not God; 1 and this must be done "when the L O R D your God grants you safety from all your enemies around you [}oyvekha mi-saviv].n The historian of the Book of Samuel 243
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
seems to suggest that this time has come; for in his summary of Saul's battles in 1 Sam. 14:47, he states that the king "waged war on every side against all his enemies [saviv be-khol fyyrw]." It is in this context that the battle against Amalek is mentioned (v. 48). The haftarah provides a fuller and theological perspective. In it, a blending of the two Pentateuchal traditions is evident: God announces that He will now requite Amalek for their actions against the Israelites "on their way up from Egypt"—a requital that Saul and the nation must exact (1 Sam. 15:2-3). God's own vendetta against the Amalekites (Exod. 17:14) is thus combined here with the people's responsibility to destroy Amalek for their attack upon Israel "on your journey, after you left Egypt" (Deut. 25:17, 19). Saul's incomplete execution of God's command, together with the subsequent inquest and judgment upon him through Samuel, constitutes the successive parts of the haftarah. PART 1. PROLOGUE (1 Samuel 15:1-3) This section sets the scene. Samuel confronts Saul, telling him that he is the one whom God sent to anoint him as king; therefore he should heed the message (v. 1). The instruction says that God now intends to requite the Amalekites for their attack upon the Israelites during their way up from Egypt (an allusion to Deut. 25:17). Saul and his army must therefore "proscribe" (,hakarimtem) all that belongs to that nation—sparing neither persons nor livestock (w. 2-3). Both parts of the "prologue" anticipate developments in the narrative (the person who anointed Saul will announce his rejection, and the king's failure to execute the proscription sets up his fall from divine favor). PART 2. BATTLE AND PROSCRIPTION (1 Samuel 15:4-9) The narrator summarizes the mustering of Saul's troops; the appeal to the Kenites to withdraw "from among the Amalekites" so that they might be spared (a favor to repay their kindness to "the Israelites when they left Egypt"—in contrast to the Amalekites); and the victory (w. 4-7). More attention is devoted to the fulfillment of the divine command: all persons were slain, save King Agag of Amalek; and all "cheap and worthless" livestock was destroyed, but the best of it was saved (w. 8-9). Some ambiguity in responsibility appears in the formulations, since verse 8 states that Saul saved Agag, but verse 9 has it that "Saul and the troops spared Agag and the best of the sheep." As Saul's defense unfolds, it would seem that he alone saved the king, whereas he and the people saved the animals (he pleads duress and fear of the crowd [v. 24]). PART 3. SAULS DEFENSE AND GOD'S IUDGMENT (1 Samuel 15:10-23) a. 1 Samuel 15:10-12 God appears to Samuel, saying that He regrets (nihamti) having appointed Saul king, for he has not "carried out" (hekim) the divine commands. Samuel entreats God on the king's behalf; and failing to win Saul's pardon, Samuel leaves to confront him at Gilgal. b. 1 Samuel 15:13-15 The first defense. Saul greets Samuel with a divine blessing and the words that he has "fulfilled" (hakimoti) the divine command. Samuel ironically responds that if so, what accounts for the bleating and lowing in his ears. Saul's defense is that the troops saved the best of the sheep and oxen to sacrifice to the Lord. He says nothing about Agag. c. 1 Samuel 15:16-23 The second defense. Samuel repeats to Saul God's word to him, even repeating the command to proscribe the Amalekites (nothing is said here of the livestock). Saul asserts that he did fulfill the divine command—now stating that he proscribed Amalek, as directed, though he saved the king; and that the people took the best sheep and livestock to sacrifice to the Lord. Samuel rejects this defense, stating that God does not "delight... in sacrifices as much as in obedience" (v. 2 2 ) . The verdict follows: "Because you have rejected the L O R D ' S command, He has rejected you as king" (v. 23). Clearly, no deviation from the divine word is permitted. Samuel does not contend with the purported motivation of the people, but rejects its very legitimacy. Moreover, as "the head of the tribes oflsrael" (v. 17), Saul is responsible for his troops. His guilt deprives him of the kingship. HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 4 4
PART 4. THE APPEALS AND FINAL FATES (1 Samuel 15:24-33) a. 1 Samuel 15:24-29 Saul confesses his sin and requests forgiveness; he also asks Samuel to worship with him before the Lord. Samuel repeats the decision of divine rejection (v. 26; cf. v. 23). As Samuel departs, Saul seizes his robe, which rips apart—thus provoking a doom oracle, stating that God has ripped his kingship from him. 2 God, he adds, "does n o t . . . change His mind" (yinnahem). b. 1 Samuel 15:30-31 Saul again confesses his sin and repeats his request that Samuel accompany him in worship (now appealing for his honor among the people). Samuel complies, and they go to the shrine of Gilgal. c. 1 Samuel 15:32-33 Samuel has Agag brought forth for execution (v. 32), and he performs the act himself (v. 33). PART 5. EPILOGUE (1 Samuel 15:34) After the death of Agag, Samuel returns to Ramah and Saul to Gibeah of Saul. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The narrative features several key words and phrases that reinforce the themes of the text and give expression to its ironies and allusions. Particularly notable is the opening phrase, when Samuel appears to Saul and tells him to "listen to the L O R D ' S command" (shema' le-kol divrei YHWH [ 1 Sam. 15:1]). Literally, he is advised to "hear" or "obey" (shema') the "voice" (kol) of the Lord. This is the absolute demand and it sets the tone for the subsequent events and judgment. Thus, though Saul greets Samuel with the claim that he has fulfilled the devar 'YHWH ("the L O R D ' S command" [v. 13]), Samuel refutes him with the sarcastic quip: "Then w h a t . . . is this sound [kol; NJPS: bleating] of sheep in my ears, and the sound [kol; NJPS: lowing] of oxen that I hear [shome'a\V (v. 14). To reemphasize the opening point and counterpoint these sounds, Samuel repeats the divine proscription and asks, "Why did you not obey [shamafta^ the voice [kol] of the L O R D ? " (V. 19; NJPS: "disobey the LORD"). And to reinforce the point, Samuel stresses that God does not want sacrifices so much as "obedience [.shome'a] to the L O R D ' S command [kol YHWH\" for "surely obedience [shemo'a] is better than sacrifice" (v. 22). The repeated use of kol and shama' highlights the element of absolute obedience. The punishment for not obeying the divine word is rejection. Samuel states: "Because you [Saul] rejected [ma'asta] the L O R D ' S command, He has rejected [vn-yimM'sekhn] you as king" ( 1 Sam. 1 5 : 2 3 ) . This fateful doom is repeated after Saul repents and begs forgiveness (v. 26). The language is unequivocal and striking; and through it the reader may hear allusions to the very onset of the monarchy. For when the people first requested a king and Samuel resisted, a divine oracle came to him saying: "Heed the demand [shema' be-kol] of the people in everything they say to you. For it is not you that they have rejected \ma,asu\ \ it is Me they have rejected [ma'asu] as their king" (1 Sam. 8 : 7 ; cf. 8 : 2 1 ) . The issue in both cases is the authority of divine kingship. God will accept human rulers only so long as God's own rule goes unchallenged. Saul disturbs this arrangement by his decision to revise or reinterpret the divine command of proscription. This leads us to the act of disobedience. The issue is puzzling. Despite the very clear and absolute nature of the proscription in 1 Sam. 15:3 (including the destruction of all persons, male and female, young and old; and all livestock, large and small), Saul saves Agag, and the people save the best of the livestock—and yet Saul tells Samuel that he has in fact fulfilled God's command (v. 13). Is this an outright lie or a misunderstanding? The narrator wants us to incline toward the first option, since his use of the verb "spared" (homal) to describe the action of Saul and the troops (v. 9) patently alludes to the same verb in the original proscription (v. 3). Moreover, in stating that the best livestock were kept and only the worst destroyed, we are led to think that this act of sparing was due to greed. But why did Saul so brazenly assert that he has fulfilled the command? Is Saul's further defense, that the animals were saved for a special sacrifice to God, also a lie? Samuel does not rebut the truth of this claim, but rather invalidates its legitimacy: the divinely 245
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
anointed leader of the tribes cannot do as he wants but must fulfill the command of God. Indeed, he goes on, God wants obedience more than sacrifices. The point is finely wrought. The rebuke, "obedience [shemo'a] is better than sacrifice \mi-zeva-h toy]" (1 Sam. 15:22), not only uses toy (better) as the adverbial complement to zevah (sacrifice), but alludes to the people's action as well, for according to Saul, the troops spared the "best" (meita-v) animals for sacrifice. The second aspect of the rebuke is thus that God wants obedience more that any "goodly" sacrifice of the people's choice. Saul now understands and repents (w. 24, 30). But why did he not understand earlier? By way of solution we may reconsider the term herem, used verbally in our text to refer to the proscription or utter ban and extermination of all Amalekite life and property.3 Technically speaking, the herem is a devoted thing, proscribed for human use because it is consecrated to God and thus irredeemable. The priestly rule in Lev. 27:28-29 distinguishes three categories: property (like land, which belongs to the sanctuary); animals (the pure are sacrificed on the altar, the impure remain part of the sanctuary); and persons (like prisoners of war, who must be killed).4 In pre-Deuteronomic war traditions, the property and persons of the enemy could be devoted as herem to the Lord (either as a vow before battle, as in Num. 21:1-3, or as a general rule). But it is significant that in pre-conquest war reports found in the Book ofDeuteronomy (see 2:34-37; 3:4-7), all the population and the cities themselves were destroyed—but the livestock was saved as booty. Further, in reports of proscription enacted during loshua's wars of conquest (losh. 8: 2, 28; 10:28-40; 11:10-20), both the livestock and property were taken as spoils. Clearly, the absolute extermination of everything (persons and property) is a later Deuteronomic innovation. According to one view, the command is the result of a synthesis between two earlier, distinct rules—the proscription and death of an idolator, found in Exod. 22:19; and the required expulsion of the native Canaanite population, as stated in Exod. 23:20-33. 5 By associating the Canaanites with idolaters, and thus subject to their penalty, a new rule was formulated requiring the utter proscription unto death and destruction of the life and property of the Canaanites (see Deut. 7:1-5, 24-26). It is this rule that Samuel applies to the Amalekites, who were not part of the seven native Canaanite nations (see Deut. 7:1), in combination with the rule to exterminate the inhabitants of surrounding cities who might incite the people to idolatry (see Deut. 13:13-19, where also the term herem is used [v. 16], and which follows an exhortation not to "spare" the life of an idolater in v. 9, in connection with individual inciters; notably, that passage refers to Israelite compliance as "heeding the L O R D , " tishma-'be-kol YHWH [v. 19]). 6 In this light, we may reconsider the actions and words of Saul and suggest that while Samuel articulates the absolute Deuteronomic rule at the outset, Saul's behavior reflects another stream of tradition, which did not destroy all persons and property and could even choose to sacrifice the latter later, at the shrine, or as a special votary offering to the Lord (i. e., as a personal act of devotion above and beyond what was required by the law). The clash between Samuel and Saul would thus be a clash either between two types of treatment of property in holy warfare or over Saul's interpretation of the rule (he spared the best of the livestock in order to sacrifice it separately to the Lord). 7 Saul's version is rejected; "obedience is better than sacrifice" (1 Sam. 15:22). His action seals his fate. There is therefore much pathos in the haftarah—first, because Saul's sin is not a flagrant rejection of divine authority; and second, because his repeated confessions and appeals for divine forgiveness are rejected. The reader is confronted with the austerity and stringency of God's demands and the required brutality of the Israelite nation. Mercy is prohibited; no one and nothing may be "spared." The war against the Amalekites is thus presented as a just war, punishing an offense centuries old. Rejection or reinterpretation of the absolute orders is absolutely forbidden. Whether as an actual event or exemplary (literary) case, 1 Sam. 15:1-34 confronts the reader with a fierce and uncompromising theology. Its annual liturgical recitation demands repeated moral and theological reflection. According to one rabbinic tradition, variously formulated, Saul himself began this process and tried to undermine the divine order through halakhic and moral reasoning (cf. B. Yoma 22b; Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7:16). 8 He argued, on the basis of the biblical role requiring a heifer HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 4 6
to be slain to atone for an unknown homicide (Deut. 21:1-9), that innumerable animals would be necessary to atone for the deaths of Amalek and that these animals were innocent. Moreover, he added, even if the adults were guilty of death, why include the children in the proscription? A divine voice then reproved him with the words of Ecclesiastes, "Do not be overly righteous" (7:16). The answer challenges the moral soul of the tradition. C O M M E N T S
1 Samuel 15:1-3. In the opening verses, Samuel refers to Saul as king and then tells him to attack the Amalekites and "proscribe all that belongs to him" (v. 3). According to an old tannaitic tradition, the Israelites were commanded to do three things when they came into the Land: establish a king; build the Temple; and destroy Amalek (Tosefta Sanhedrin 4:5; Sifre Deuteronomy 67). The sequence of the last two items is reversed in B. Sanhedrin 20b, and compareMaimonides,-Mw^w^ Torah, HilkhotMelakhim 1:2. 3.proscribe Thatis, put to death; compare Lev. 27:28-29: "Of all that anyone owns, be it man or beast or land . . . , nothing . . . proscribed for the L O R D may be sold or redeemed; every proscribed thing is totally consecrated to the L O R D . N O human being who has been proscribed can be ransomed: he shall be put to death" [Transl.]. See the discussion in Content and Meaning. Spare no one The Hebrew verb suggests a harsher command: "have no pity." See Deut. 13:9. The writer returns to this word to describe Saul's disobedience (1 Sam. 15:9). 4. Saul mustered the troops and enrolled them The narrative is tightly textured. Not only is the theme of "hearing" or "heeding" (shamac) repeated throughout the text (w. 1, 14, 19, 20, 22, 24), but it also appears through puns. Thus the initial command was to hear or "listen to" (shemac) the divine word (v. 1), and Saul proceeds immediately to "muster" (va-yshamac) the troops (for Rashi, this verb suggests an act of summoning; for Kimhi, it indicates the gathering of troops). Similarly, Samuel says that God remembers or requites (pakadti) the crime of the Amalekites (v. 2; the verb serves double duty here), and this feature is picked up in the reference to Saul's enrolling the troops (va-yipkedem). at Telaim Thus NJPS; compare Kimhi, who reads ba-tela'im as referring to "a place name, even though it is formulated with a definite article" (one would have expected be-tela'im, but compare ba-karkar in Judg. 8:10). Telem is a site in the Negev (Josh. 15:24). Alternatively, the word refers literally to the "lambs" with which the military census was taken. Animals were used so as not to count people directly (for the danger, and the use ofpakad to mean counting for a census, see 2 Samuel 24). This sense is discussed in B. Sanhedrin 20b and adduced by Rashi. Targum Jonathan renders "he (Saul) numbered them with the lambs for the Paschal offering,"' thereby giving this understanding and providing a dating of the event. 6. Saul said to the Kenites He told them to withdraw "from among the Amalekites," to recompense their kindness to Israel in the wilderness. The precise events are uncertain; possibly the reference is to the service that the Kenites provided as desert guides (see Num. 10:29-32). Some Kenites presumably encamped among the Amalekites. The association of these two tribal groups is also found in Balaam's prophecy (Num. 24:20-21). There we have the doom oracle against Amalek, stating that "its fate is to perish forever," whereas the "abode" of the Kenites (keini) will "be secure" and "your nest \kinekha\ be set among cliffs." Their name predicts their fate. 9. what was cheap and worthless Hebrew kol ha-mela'khah nemivzah ve-names }otah. The phrase is difficult and undoubtedly miswritten. This use of the noun mela'khah is unusual and seems to mean "cattle" (see Kimhi, and Gen. 33:14). The noun nemivzah looks like a mistake (or variant; so Rashi and Kimhi) for nivzah (cheap); names (worthless) is rendered in the masculine form, and the feminine is expected; and'otah (it) makes no sense here. The Septuagint allows us to reconstruct the Hebrew to the more sensible kol mela'khah nivzah ve-nim'eset (whatever was cheap and despised). 247
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
11.1 regret Hebrew nihamti. This usage sets up an ironical contrast with verse 29. After Saul begs forgiveness, Samuel refuses his appeal, stating that God "does n o t . . . change His mind [va-yinnahem]." But this change in divine favor is just what has produced his despair. Elsewhere, this verb does in fact indicate God's regret at having created sinful mankind (Gen. 6:6, va-yinnahem), as well as God's merciful forgiveness of penitents (Jonah 4:2, ve-niham). 21. the best Hebrew re'shit. In his second justification, Saul uses a more cultic term to indicate what he earlier called "the choicest" (meita-v) of the livestock (v. 15). Compare Num. 15:21 and Deut. 18:4; for noncultic sources, see Amos 6:6. Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings... ? The rhetorical question is a polemic for "obedience to the LORD'S command"—meaning here, fulfillment of the divine proscription. The language derives from prophetic rhetoric. Thus the same term hefetz (delight) is used in other prophetic polemics against sacrifice, but for other reasons. Thus Hosea says on behalf of God, "For I desire [hafatzti] goodness, not sacrifice; obedience to God, rather than burnt offerings" (Hos. 6:6). Also privileging morality over the cult, Isaiah contends, " 'What need have I of all your sacrifices? ' says the L O R D . . . ' I have no delight [hafatzti] in lambs and he-goats'" (Isa. 1: 11; see w. 16-17 for the moral charge; see also the discussion of the haftarah for Devarim). These polemics do not deny or rescind sacrifices, but relate them to other principles. Maimonides moves this argument to a more radical conclusion: sacrifices are not an end in themselves, but were given to the people oflsrael as an accommodation to the state of the people's religious development—so "that the trace of idolatry be effaced and the fundamental principle of My unity be established" (Guidefir the Perplexed 3:32). In this regard, Maimonides cites 1 Sam. 15: 22 and Hos. 6 : 6 t o support his claim. 22.
23. teraphim
Idols consulted for oracles; see Ezek. 21:26 and Zech. 10:2 [Transl.].
29. change His mind
See note to verse 11.
32. withfalteringsteps Hebrewma'adanot. The NIPS rendering derives from the verbal stem ma'ad, "to falter." Compare Ps. 37:31: "his feet do not slip [ma'adu]." The Septuagint had a similar understanding and presumably read the word as me'odenet. Alternatively, the word is a noun, meaning "chains" (cf. lob 38:31 and M. Kelim 2:7); this approach was taken by R. Isaiah di Trani and Gersonides. However, one must presume or restore to be-ma'ada-not. Targum lonathan derived the meaning from the verbal stem 'ada-n, "to have pleasure," and thus rendered, "he came forth joyfully" ("because he preferred his death to life" [Kimhi]; or "to the place where he had formerly had pleasure" [R. loseph Kara]). "Ah, bitter death is at hand!" Hebrew'akhen sar mar ha-ma-vet. NIPS appears to follow Rashi and Kimhi, who render sar as "draw near," but there is no basis for this. R. Isaiah di Trani and Ralbag interpret sar in the attested sense of "pass away" and thus understand Agag to have exclaimed that the bitterness of death has passed from him. According to an ancient midrash, this was recited as he expired, torn limb from limb (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 3:6). More likely, sar is a mistaken scribal doubling (dittography) of the similar-looking (in fact, sar is missing in the 9 Septuagint). On this basis, the king simply and poignantly cried, "Surely, death is bitter!" CONNECTIONS BETWEEN T H E HAFTARAH A N D T H E SPECIAL
SABBATH
The Sabbath known as Shabbat Zakhor is the second of four special Sabbaths before Passover (M. Megillah 3:4). It occurs on the Sabbath before Purim, even ifPurim itselffalls on the next Sabbath (Tosefta Megillah 3:1). The timing is determined by the onset of the first of these Sabbaths, Shabbat Shekalim. This Sabbath occurs on the New Moon of the month of Adar when it falls on a Sabbath or on the prior Sabbath when the New Moon falls on a weekday (in a leap year, this Sabbath is celebrated in the second month of Adar). In the event that the New Moon of Adar does occur on a weekday, the first Sabbath in Adar is not included among the four special Sabbaths, and this cycle resumes on the next Sabbath (Shabbat Zakhor)—this being the Sabbath HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 4 8
immediately prior to the holiday of Purim. The third of these Sabbaths is Shabbat Parah, and it occurs just prior to the fourth Sabbath, Shabbat ha-Hodesh. Shabbat ha-Hodesh occcurs on the Sabbath nearest the New Moon ofNisan (the next month, during which Passover falls). The sequence of Sabbaths and reference to the permitted breaks—so that the "four" readings conclude on the Sabbath before Nisan—are already specified in the Mishnah (M. Megillah 3: 4). This formulation is abbreviated and led to fuller discussions (cf. J. Megillah 3:5 and Rashi's extensive remarks on B. Megillah 30b, with mnemonics). The Amoraim in the Talmud debated whether the special Torah readings for these Sabbaths (temporarily) displaced or supplemented the regular Sabbath portions (see B. Megillah 30b and Rashi). The halakhah follows the second alternative, and the special readings are added to the weekly parashah (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Tefillah 13:22; and Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 685). The supplementary Torah reading on Shabbat Zakhor is taken from Deut. 25:17-19, in which the Israelites are enjoined to "remember" (zakhor) what Amalek did to the people on their way out ofEgypt and to "blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!" That remembrance and that act of destruction are articulated in the haftarah. In it, God Himself "remembers" or "exacts the penalty" (pakadti) for Amalek's crime, described in terms reminiscent of the Torah verses. This reference to divine remembrance is cited in the Tosefta (Tosefta Megillah 3:1) as the opening line of the haftarah. Ashkenazi custom continues to begin the reading with this verse (1 Sam. 15:2) and does not start with the opening address by Samuel to Saul (v. 1). The absence of this introduction gives a certain enduring force to God's stated readiness to punish Amalek. Indeed, since this haftarah is recited on the Sabbath before Purim, on which the Scroll of Esther is read and the evil plots against the Jews of Persia by Haman the Agagite are recalled, later generations could read in the assertion of divine remembrance some assurance that God remains steadfast to punish Amalek in all generations. The haftarah thus functions as a prototype of divine protection against this enemy "throughout the ages" (Exod. 17:16). The typological link between 1 Samuel 15 and the Scroll of Esther was already drawn in biblical times: for just as Saul is the son of Kish from the tribe of Benjamin, so is Mordecai's lineage traced to the line of Saul's father (Esther 2:5); and just as the Israelite king defeats Amalek and its king Agag, so does the latter-day hero of the Jews foil the plots of Haman "the Agagite" (Esther 3:1, 10). Later rabbinic tradition was not content to leave the connection at the literary level but developed the legend that between the capture of Agag by Saul and his execution by Samuel, he sired a child whose descendant was Haman himself.10 Thus what Saul failed to complete, Mordecai achieved for future generations. Amalek also became a prototype for all the enemies of the Jews in all generations. In early midrashic homilies and in liturgical poetry recited on Shabbat Zakhor, this foe is identified with Edom (the genealogy in Gen. 36:12 gave added proof) —and through that identification, Amalek served as a figure for Rome and Christianity, as well.11 Accordingly, the appeal to God to remember and destroy this foe was renewed in times of oppression, even as the duty to remember and destroy remained a religious imperative through the commandments of the Torah. In the latter case, the danger of a literal reading need not be exaggerated. As a counterpoint, "Amalek" was eventually reinterpreted in terms of the evil inclination (cf. Zohar 3:281b) and religious failure.12 The result was that the eradication of "Amalek" became part of a psycho-spiritual process. But this more personal reading of the term never displaced the national-historical one, and the two oscillate in tension. The carnival quality of Purim celebrations may thus dangerously mask the serious moral issues. Vengeance is not just the Lord's; it is enacted by persons.
Haftarah for Shabbat Parah HID nn^ ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL 36:16-58
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 36:16-36
For the life and times of Ezekiel and a consideration of the contents, style, and theology of his prophecies, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot 249
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
Cycle." See also the comments on the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). This haftarah is one of the prophecies of hope and consolation that Ezekiel addressed to the ludean exiles in Babylon. These oracles begin in Ezekiel 33 (dated Tevet 585 B.C.E., according to Ezek. 33:21) and evince a reversal of national fortune. 1 In particular, Ezekiel 35 and 36:1-15 provide consolation to the people for the taunts of their enemies—who hoped for their ruin (cf. Ezek. 35:10-12; 36:2-3, 5, 13). Now, by God's grace, the opposite will occur: the taunters will be destroyed (35:3-9, 12, 14-15; 36:5-7) and the land of ludea restored to Israel (36:8-12). Ezekiel 36:16-38 gives special expression to this theme. We are told that the nations mocked Israel, saying, "These are the people of the LoRD,_yet they had to leave His land." By this aspersion, God's holy name was profaned (w. 20-21). In response, the Lord determines to act for His own honor—promising the nation redemption from exile and restoration to its ancestral homeland (w. 22-28). At that time, the ruins shall become fertile fields (w. 29-36) and the people multiplied in great measure (w. 37-38). PART 1. PUNISHMENT AND PROFANATION (Ezekiel 36:16-21) God speaks to the prophet and refers to Israel's idolatries whereby they defiled the Land and were exiled among the nations. In just measure, He "poured" wrath upon Israel for having "poured" blood and practiced false worship. However, Israel's behavior has a negative consequence for God, for they cause His holy name to be profaned among the very nations among whom they are dispersed in punishment. In consequence, God is concerned for His holy name. The response follows. PART 2. CONSEQUENCES AND CHANGES (Ezekiel 36:22-32) a. Ezekiel 36:22-28 The people are now told that God will act "for My holy name" and "will sanctify i t . . . among the nations" (w. 22-23). His name shall be hallowed by a great act of ingathering oflsrael to its homeland, where they will be cleansed of their defilements and given a new heart and spirit. Thus shall God cause them to observe the Law and be His covenant people. b. Ezekiel 16:29-32 The new life in the homeland will be filled with abundance and induce self-loathing among the people when they recall their past iniquities. God says that Israel will "never again be humiliated" among the nations (v. 30); but He nevertheless exhorts them to be "humiliated because of your ways" (v. 32). This new state is presumably conditioned by the new heart and spirit given the people. PART 3. REBUILDING AND REPOPULATION (Ezekiel 36:33-38) a. Ezekiel 36:33-36 A reemphasis of earlier matters. God states that after the people's purification the "ruined places shall be rebuilt" (v. 33) and the land repopulated and refortified. b. Ezekiel 36:37-38 God again promises the repopulation of the House of Israel, who shall become as numerous as the sheep that fill lerusalem "during her festivals" (v. 38). C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The haftarah is composed of a divine speech in two parts (Ezek. 3 6 : 1 6 - 2 1 and 2 2 - 3 2 ) . At the outset, God speaks "the word of the L O R D " to the prophet (v. 1 6 ) , referring to Israel's sin and defilement of the homeland. As a consequence, the people were judged for their ways and banished into exile. This punishment, however, did not redound to God's glory—since it led to the profanation of God's holy name among the nations. This desecration was apparently due to the nations' interpretation of Israel's degraded situation as a sign of divine weakness or inability to save (see Text and Comments, Comment to v. 20). In reaction, God "had pity" (OIPS; NIPS: "was concerned") for His name (v. 21). The second half of the speech introduces God's determination to sanctify His great name through a unilateral act of redemption. 2 Israel will be brought back to the homeland and cleansed of its sins. The announcement opens with a lakhen clause ("therefore") and is reinforced by the HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH250
formula "Thus said the Lord GOD" (V. 22). The description of new events extends to verse 32. R. Eliezer of Beaugency observed that this entire unit is framed by an inclusio—beginning and ending with a statement of divine motivation: "Not for your sake will I act" (O House oflsrael). 3 The final two prophecies also begin with the same messenger formula used in the first speech ("Thus said the Lord GOD" [Ezek. 36:33, 37]). 4 These two oracles repeat earlier themes of national renewal. Sephardic custom recites only the first unit (w. 33-36), ending on a positive note after the preceding divine call to Israel to "be ashamed and humiliated because of your ways" (v. 32). Ashkenazic practice reads the second positive oracle as well (w. 37-38), thus ending with a comparison of the vast throngs of people in the homeland to the multitude of sheep in Jerusalem on a festival day. This image was already interpreted in antiquity as a reference to the flock of Israel "coming to Jerusalem at the time of the feast of Passover" (Targum Jonathan). Thematically, the haftarah unfolds through a series of contrasts. The topic of defilement and uncleanness appears first and is variously nuanced by the verb tame' (to defile) and the noun tum'ah (uncleanness [Ezek. 36:17-18]). These terms are drawn from technical priestly vocabulary and applied here to Israel's idolatrous behavior. In this way, the prophet expands the scope of this language. When the terminology recurs later on (w. 25, 29), it serves as the counterpoint of the process of divine purification conveyed by the corresponding priestly terms for ritual cleanness: the verb taher and the noun tehorim. Thus one dynamic of the prophecy is built around the cultic polarity of national defilement and purification. This counterpoint extends beyond the "body politic" of the nation, insofar as the impurity of Israel's ways defiled the Land and required their ejection from it—a result that follows standard priestly theology (cf. Lev. 18:25). Accordingly, the repurification of the people from their "uncleanness" by the "clean water [mayim tehorimY sprinkled upon them (Ezek. 36:25) is the necessary ritual prerequisite for their return to the Land and its fertility ("like the Garden of Eden" [v. 35]). Thus exile and restoration are also functions of defilement and purification. Within this overall framework of defilement and purification is another priestly polarity—applied to God's own name, which is either profaned or sanctified (Ezek. 36:20-23). The priestly terms used here are the verbs hillel (to profane) and kiddesh (to sanctify), as well as the adjective kadosh (holy). Being subject to different ritual states, the divine name is thus a spiritual entity or quality that may be defiled through human action or attitude and may even be the object of divine concern or pity (v. 21). For this reason, God Himself" will sanctify" His name when He manifests His holiness (be-hikkadshi [v. 23]) through the redemption oflsrael. A climactic component of the national transformation is a revivification of heart and spirit. God will give the people a new heart to know Him and will put His spirit within them as a concrete act of inspiration. Israel will thus be re-created, a new Adam to be restored to a land that is "like the garden ofEden" (Ezek. 36:35). This re-creation occurs at the center of the haftarah (Ezek. 36:26-32); it is the core of the national purification and the climax of the divine acts of sanctification. The destiny of God and Israel are thus mysteriously linked. The defilement of the one (Israel) leads to the profanation of the other (God's name); and vice versa, the purification of Israel results in the sanctification of God's name on earth. The relationship between the two entities is marked positively at the end of this prophetic unit by the anticipation of a covenant renewal. Reborn in heart and spirit, Israel will again serve God and His Law: "Then you shall dwell in the land which I gave to your fathers, and you shall be My people and I will be your God" (v. 28). The physical return to the homeland thus occasions a spiritual return to Sinai and a restoration of the divine-human relationship. C O M M E N T S
17. O .Mortal Literally, "O Son of Man" (ben \adam). This is a common characterization of this prophet. It is used from the outset ofhis prophecies (Ezek. 2:1), speaking to him generically rather than by name (compare Jer. 1:11). Ezekiel's mortal nature is emphasized, perhaps to counterpoint his difference from the divine beings he sees and has contact with (Ezekiel 1, 8-11, 40-42). 5 251
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
17-19. The prophet's priestly orientation is marked by his presentation of moral sins as causing impurity to the Land. Similarly, the purification of the nation in verse 25 is portrayed in cultic terms. The vocabulary of defilement, cleansing, sprinkling, and pure water are all used in connection with the rite of the red heifer—the special Torah portion read on this Sabbath (cf. Num 19:11-13, 17). The punishment for exile is thus presented here as recompense for ritualmoral crimes. "I punished them [shefatetim:, lit., "judged them" (OJPS) ] in accordance with their ways and their deeds" (v. 19). 17. like the uncleanness ofa menstruous woman The definite article (ha-niddah) personifies the simile, rather than having it indicate a general state of impurity.6 The motif is used elsewhere by the prophet to indicate moral and ritual pollution (Ezek. 18:6; 22:3-13). For Ezekiel, the theme has cultic consequences. As a result of their "menstrual impurity," the nation is banished from the Land. Another postexilic priest (Ezra) considered the land of Canaan to be affected with such niddah pollution before the Israelite conquest (Ezra 9:11). 19.1 scattered them... and they were dispersed This combination of verbs is used elsewhere by Ezekiel to describe the exile (Ezek. 20:23). The second verbal stem, zarah, is also used by the prophet in a symbolic act portraying exilic dispersal (5:2). This term and the image of an unsheathed sword derive from the divine punishment for covenantal infidelity found in Lev. 26: 33. The terms in Ezek. 20:23 and 36:19 are a more abbreviated allusion to this Torah passage. 20. they caused My holy name to be profaned The nations interpreted Israel's exile as a sign of divine impotence, not punishment (see Rashi; Kimhi). Referring to God in a demeaning way caused His holy name to be profaned (see Content and Meaning). Others have suggested that Israel's very exilic state profanes God's name by the way her situation reflects on God. 7 On this view, the response of the nations is not at issue; but the text itselfemphasizes the theological taunt of the nations, and this seems to be the desecrating consequence of Israel's state (see Abravanel). The cultic imagery of profanation-holiness in verses 20 and 22-23 extends the priestly language of purity-impurity used elsewhere in the prophecy. Divine action motivated by a concern lest the divine name be profaned publicly is also found in Ezek. 20:9, 14, and 22. Redemption as an expression of God's zeal for the sanctification of His name is thus the corresponding theme, both here (w. 22-23) and in other exilic prophecies ofEzekiel (39:25). 22.Notforyoursake Or your merits (Abravanel). The phrase is repeated at the end of the unit (v. 32), creating an integrating frame (R. Eliezer of Beaugency). The motivation for divine action is regard for God's own name alone. As an ideological component, see the refrain in Ezekiel 20 (w. 9, 14, 22). This chapter has many other terms found in our haftarah. 23b-38. This unit is missing in the oldest Greek textual witness. It may thus reflect a later component or redaction of the traditions preserved in the Book of Ezekiel. The passage is replete with some linguistically unusual features.8 Portions of verses 24-34 are, however, clearly evidenced in an ancient Hebrew manuscript ofEzekiel found at Masada.9 26.1 willgive you a new heart Along with Ezek. 11:19, other prophecies contemplate a radical transformation oflsrael's religious spirit after the exile through divine fiat. See ler. 24:7 and 31:32-33. In its focus on a unilateral divine action, this image seems to reflect some despair in the exilic period over the independent capacity of the human spirit to return faithfully to God, or at least a strong feeling that without divine initiative true repentance could not take place. Compare the ritual cry at the close of Lamentations: "Take us back, O LORD, to Yourself, and let us come back [return] . . ." (Lam. 5:21). On the heart of stone as a godless heart, see Targum lonathan (v. 26). According to an opinion recorded in B. Berakhot 32a, the "stone" here is one of seven terms used for the evil instinct—because it prompted Israel to stumble and sin. a new heart and... a new spirit This image follows the reference to God's purgation of the people from their uncleanness (v. 25). A similar theology, but expressed as a personal prayer, HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 5 2
is found in Psalm 51. There the speaker calls upon the Lord to "purify me of my sin . . . purge me with hyssop till I am pure . . . [and climactically: ] fashion a pure heart for me, O God; create [OJPS: renew] in me a steadfastspirit" (Ps. 51:4, 9, 12). 10 27. 1 will cause you A rare formulation. 11 Hebrew ve-dsiti }etasher. Literally, "I will d o . . . s o that" or "I will bring it about that." 12 Another use of the verb 'asah to express divine causation is found in Eccles. 3:14. 13 28. you shall be My people This is a technical covenantal formulary (cf. Jer. 11:4). Ezekiel anticipates a new covenant after the exile; see also in Ezek. 16:60 and 37:26. See further Isa. 55:3 andjer. 31:31-32. 35.garden ofEden Ezekiel returns to this Eden motif in 47:1-2. This motif recurs in other late prophetic texts. See Joel 4:18 and Zech. 14:8-11. C O N N E C T I O N S A N D T H E
B E T W E E N T H E
SPECIAL
H A F T A R A H
SABBATH
Shabbat Parah is the third of four special Torah passages appended to the regular Sabbath portion in the weeks before Passover.14 The theme of each reading is different, and rabbinic tradition correlated each of the four with prophetic selections that reinforce the main theme. There is a clear thematic link between the haftarah (Ezek. 36:16-38) and the special reading for Shabbat Parah (Num. 19:1-22). 1 5 The passage from the Torah, describing the ritual of the red heifer, presents an ancient rite of detoxification whereby persons who have become impure through contact with the dead are purified and restored to the community. 16 Correspondingly, the prophetic unit announces Israel's revivification (a new heart and spirit) and its purification by God. The technical language of purity-impurity, as well as the terms for sacred lustrations (among others), provides an even closer connection between the passages. The ancient rite of purification was recited at this season from early rabbinic times (M. Megillah 3:4) and was understood to signal to the entire community that the Passover sacrifice was to be performed in ritual purity (see Rashi on B. Megillah 29a; and cf. the discussion in J. Megillah 3:5). 1 7 The haftarah reading reinforces such a national applicatio—proclaiming an ingathering of the exiles to their homeland, where they shall be purified by God and renewed in spirit. The liturgical and thematic links between Numbers 19 and Ezek. 36:16-38 are explicitly marked in the Targum to Ezek. 36:25. This verse refers to God's lustrations and purification of the people. The Targum phrases the connection thus: "And I [God] will remit your sins like those that are purified with the waters of sprinkling and with the ashes of the heifer of the sinoffering . . ." And later, when Ezek. 36:38 compares the repopulation oflsrael to the multitude of sheep in Jerusalem on its festival days, the Targum extends the comparison by defining these sheep as "the holy nation: . . . the nation which purifies itself and comes to Jerusalem at the time ofPassover . . . " The link between the pure water of Ezek. 36:25 and the lustrations of the red heifer rite in Num. 19:18 is also noted by Rashi and Metzudat Zion, among others. R. Eliezer of Beaugency emphasized the parabolic nature of Ezekiel's image of purification, calling attention to the similarity between Ezek. 36:25 and Ps. 51:9 and 12 (see Text and Comments). In both cases, the language of physical cleansing and the creation of a new heart is found. The haftarah thus envisions a new era of purification and of a transformed religious consciousness. For at least one synagogue poet, the cleansing was even interpreted as a promise of the renewal of the red heifer lustrations ("I will sprinkle [ve-zamkti] clean water upon you" [Ezek. 36:25]; cf. Num. 19:20, also with the verb zarak]);18 and the new heart of flesh was taken to symbolize the recreation of inwardness—even the removal of spiritual deadness, represented by the heart of stone. 19 253
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHEKALIM
Haftarah for Shabbat ha-Hodesh ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL 45:16-46:18
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 45:18-46:15
^inn nn^
For Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration ofhis style, content, and theology, see "The Book ofEzekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the various comments to the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). An introduction to the content and structure of Ezekiel's restoration program (Ezekiel 40-48), of which this is a part, may be found in discussion of the haftarah for Tetzaweh. The vision of the future Temple and city is dated to 573 B.C.E. (Ezek. 40:1). The haftarah envisions various regulations pertaining to the rebuilt Temple. The Ashkenazi reading opens with the proclamation that the "entire population" must provide a regular contribution of products for the Temple service (Ezek. 45:16; see note in Text and Comments); and the text then goes on to state that it is the obligation of the prince to offer the requisite offerings for the New Moon, the Sabbath, and the festivals from his holdings, for the expiation of all Israel (v. 17). This emphasis on expiation continues in the next major unit, in which we learn of a series of purgation rites to be performed in the first and seventh months of the year (w. 18-25). Further details are then given of the offerings for the fixed occasions, and the decorum of physical passage within the inner court is regulated for the common people and the prince (46:1-15). Rules for inheritance gifts by the prince to his sons or subjects are also regulated (w. 16-18). The Ashkenazi reading thus begins and ends with matters of gifts (in the first case, the offering by the laity via the prince [Ezek. 45:16-17]; in the latter, the donation by the prince to others [46:16-18]) and focuses on the details of the Temple purgations and the sacrificial offerings (45: 18-46:15). Sephardi custom recites only the unit on purgations and offerings. PART 1. OBLIGATIONS (Ezekiel45:16-17) a. Ezekiel 45:16 The text states that the community must contribute the produce for Temple offerings. b. Ezekiel 45:17 We then learn that the prince is obliged to "prepare" these offerings for the people on all the fixed occasions of the year—"festivals, new moons, sabbaths." PART 2. PURGATIONS (Ezekiel45:18-25) a. Ezekiel 45:18-20 Special rites of purgation, to purify the Temple of uncleanness caused by "unwitting or ignorant persons" (v. 20), are to be performed on the first and seventh day of the first and seventh months of the year. The ritual requires the application of the blood of a sin offering to the doorposts of the Temple, the corners of the altar, and the doorposts of the gate of the inner court. b. Ezekiel 45:21-25 The fourteenth day of the first month is the occasion for the Passover offering; following it, fixed daily sacrifices are prescribed for the festival week. A similar cycle of offerings is set for the corresponding third week of the seventh month. PART 3. SACRIFICES AND THE COURT (Ezekiel 46:1-15) Rules pertaining to the proper movement within the inner court are delineated. The various gates to be used for entrance and exit are indicated, along with rules pertaining to the times these gates are to be open. The people and the prince have different regulations. The contents of the obligations for festivals and fixed occasions are also given. PART 4. THE PRINCE AND HIS GIFTS (Ezekiel 46:16-18) Rules for gifts of inheritance by the prince are stated: if the gift is to any of his sons, this is an inheritance gift in perpetuity; but if it is to any ofhis subjects, this shall only be from the time of the gift until the year of release (Lev. 25:10), when it reverts to the prince. The prince, for his part, may not take property away from the people for his personal enrichment or inheritance. HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH 2 5 4
C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The instructions in this haftarah vary considerably, despite the repeated concern for sacrificial purifications and the focus on the prince and his duties. Stylistically, three of the units (the Temple purification, beginning at Ezek. 45:18; the entrance-exit rule, beginning at 46:1; and the inheritance rules for the prince, beginning at 46:16) open with a prophetic introduction: "Thus said the Lord GOD" (the formula also occurs at 45:9, which formally begins the opening unit). The revelatory character of the rules is thus stressed, and legal style is frequently used (e. g., in 46: 12, 16-17). Grammatically, the addressees vary with the shift in subject matter, though in some cases these changes are unexpected (e. g., 45:19-20; 46:12-13, 15). The revealed nature of the prescriptions gives authority to the regulations but has perplexed traditional commentators, who have noted many contradictions with priestly rules in the Torah. These difficulties (see also the haftarah for Tetzaweh) contributed to an ancient rabbinic decision to withdraw the Book of Ezekiel from public use, but this act was canceled after the heroic exegetical effort of Hananiah ben Hilkiah (first century c . E . ) . "But for him the Book of Ezekiel would have been withdrawn, for its words contradicted the words of the Torah. What did he do? They brought up for him three hundred measures of oil, and he sat down in an upper chamber and expounded it" (B. Hagigah 13b). His interpretations are "no longer found among us" (said Kimhi), but the effort saved the day. In other cases, the Rabbis actually quote Ezekiel as an authoritative source on certain matters of ritual law (see B. Mo'ed Katan 5a, citing Ezek. 39:15 and 44:9). Particularly nettlesome is the account of the purgation of the Temple in the first and seventh months. Nothing like it is mentioned in the Torah. Some commentators have associated these purifications with the altar consecration mentioned in Ezek. 43:18-26 (Rashi; Kimhi) and judge this rite to be a one-time event like the Tabernacle purification of old (which also occurred on the first day of the first month; see Exod. 40:2). In this way, they tried to resolve any conflict between this ceremony and the rites of purgation on Yom Kippur, ten days after the New Year in the seventh month (Lev. 16:29). Notably, there is no reference to Yom Kippur in Ezekiel's teaching, nor is there any reference to the festival of Tabernacles, which began on the fifteenth day of the seventh month. The cultic traditions found in the haftarah also contradict specific sacrificial regulations found in the Torah. For example, according to Ezek. 45:24, the daily meal offering during the third week of the first and seventh months was to consist of"an ephah [ca. one and one-halfbushels] for each bull and an ephah for each ram, with a bin [ca. one and one-half gallons] of oil to every ephah." By contrast, the corresponding meal offering in the Torah is prescribed to be "of choice flour with oil mixed in: prepare three-tenths of a measure for a bull, two-tenths for a ram; and for each of the seven lambs prepare one-tenth of a measure" (Num. 28:20-21; 29:3-4, 14-15). 1 Such differences indicate that diverse priestly traditions existed in ancient Israel or mark innovations for the future. Despite the clear symmetry between the rites of the first and seventh months—purgations on the first and seventh days, and a week of sacrifices beginning on the fifteenth day of the month—special mention is made of the Passover offering required on the fourteenth day of the first month. The distinction between the sacrifice on that day and the week-long festival of unleavened bread agrees with ancient priestly regulations—as recorded in Exod. 12:1-20, the additional Torah reading for Shabbat ha-Hodesh. But Ezekiel does not give a precise time for the sacrifice; whereas Exod. 12:6 specifies that the requisite lamb was slaughtered at "twilight" of the fourteenth day. C O M M E N T S
Ezekiel 45:16-17. The language of v. 16 is difficult. The rendering above follows the Septuagint, because as a haftarah's prologue, "this offering" (v. 16) must be prospective, referring to the gifts that the people shall donate, which the prince must then prepare as offerings (v. 17; cf. OJPS). In contrast, in the biblical context "this offering" arguably refers back to gifts 255
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT HA-HODESH
provided by the people (w. 13-15) for the prince to offer (v. 16), which differ from offerings the prince himself must provide (v. 17); see NJPS. R. Eliezer of Beaugency suggests that all persons would contribute equally.2 17. the prince Hebrew nasi*. An ancient tribal title (Gen. 23:6), frequently used by Ezekiel to refer to Israelite kings (Ezek. 22:6) and the future scion ofDavid (34:24, 37:25). In Ezek. 44:3 and chapters 45-46 and 48, the prince is the future leader. This leader has a special role in the new Temple service, which may explain the choice of this term (cf. Lev. 4:22). Rashi (on Ezek. 45:18) considers the nasi* to be the High Priest. 21. afestival ofseven days So, already Targum lonathan. The Hebrew formulation (hag shevu'otyamim) is unusual; literally, "a festival of weeks of days."3 22-25. For some of the differences and difficulties of the formulations in this section, as compared with regulations in the Torah, see earlier (Content and Meaning). 24. ephah Of choice flour [Transl.]. Ezekiel 46:1. six working days Hebrew sheshetyemei ha-ma'aseh. This is a unique biblical expression, but is well-known in lewish liturgy from its use in the concluding benediction of the final Sabbath ceremony—the Havdalah service. 3. The commonpeople [Transl.].
That is, those other than the priests, the Levites, and the prince
5. as much as he wishes Hebrew mattatyado. This would appear to introduce a voluntary element into the sacrificial gift, otherwise unknown in priestly traditions.4 Alternatively, "as much as he is able to give" (OIPS); this is a Deuteronomic expression (Deut. 16:17), functioning like the common priestly usage ka-*asher tassigyado, "as much as he can afford" found in Ezek. 46: 7 (cf. Kimhi). 18. the prince shall not take property away This regulation seeks to curb such monarchic outrages as are feared in 1 Sam. 8:14 and documented in 1 Kings 21 (cf. R. Eliezer of Beaugency).5 C O N N E C T I O N S B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D T H E SPECIAL
SABBATH
Shabbat ha-Hodesh is the last of a series four special Sabbaths that begin on the first Sabbath of Adar when that is a New Moon or on the week preceding if the New Moon falls during the week. Shabbat ha-Hodesh occurs on the last Sabbath of Adar, unless the New Moon of Nisan falls on a Sabbath. Shabbat ha-Hodesh gets its designation because of the opening proclamation of the special portion from Exod. 12:1-20 read on that day: "This month [ha-hodesh] shall mark for you the beginning of the months" (Exod. 12:2). This portion contains the commandment to offer a paschal offering and its laws and thus anticipates the ritual to be performed on the fourteenth ofNisan (see Rashi on B. Megillah 29a). The haftarah from Ezek. 45:16-46:18 (or 45:18-46:15) has a central section dealing with the paschal offering and sacrifices during the ensuing week (45:21-24). If Shabbat ha-Hodesh occurs on a New Moon, the haftarah normally read when the New Moon falls on a Sabbath (Shabbat Rosh Hodesh) is deferred in favor of the special haftarah for Shabbat ha-Hodesh. 6 The special Torah reading from Exod. 12:1-20 and the haftarah from Ezek. 45:18-25 are clearly linked. Both stress the Passover ceremony and festival of unleavened bread. For its part, the Torah instruction describes the inaugural Passover ceremony in Egypt as well as provisions for subsequent enactments. The haftarah describes the festival for the New Temple period and stresses the formal purifications at that time. Taken together, the two descriptions reflect distinct historical poles. The first of these, the Passover of Egypt, recalls when Israel was liberated from bondage and called by God to be "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exod. 19:6). The HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH 2 5 6
Passover of the future anticipates a time when Israel will be restored to its homeland and its sacred duties. In the first ceremony, blood was smeared on the doorposts of each clan dwelling for the people's protection (Exod. 12:13). In the ritual found in Ezekiel, blood is to be (twice) smeared on the doorposts of the Temple (among other places) for the purification of the Temple (Ezek. 45:19). Building upon these thematic connections, other correlations may be noted. For example, the daubing of the entrance to the home and Temple with blood marks them off as two types of space. The first embodies the family, whose bonds are biological and legal. The family is the nuclear core of personal history and religious rite and preserves a parochial character by virtue of intimacy and a common name. Alongside this dwelling stands the Temple, whose space is communal and whose rites have an official and public status. The Temple opens its doors for collective worship and thus transcends the private histories of its worshipers. How one may live in both homes—standing firm in loyalty to hearth and blood, but open to the larger commitments a divine dwelling symbolizes—is a question each reader must answer repeatedly.
Haftarah for Shabbat ha-Gadol ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
^ m n nn^
MALACHI3:4-24 MALACHI 3:4-24
For Malachi's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Malachi" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments on the haftarah for Toledot. The haftarah presents God's word of promise to the nation sometime subsequent to the rebuilding of the Temple in 515 B.C.E. The prophet announces that the sacrificial offerings will again be favorably received, as in ancient times; but before that the Lord will contend against the nation's breach of moral and ritual law and bring the sinners to judgment (for an earlier condemnation, see Malachi 1, in the haftarah for Toledot). Hope lies in repentance and observance of the Torah. A redemptive role for the prophet Elijah is projected, who will return before the day of judgment to restore the hearts of parents and children—a healing reconciliation between the generations and with God (see Text and Comments). The dynamics and details of Malachi's speech unfold through three separate parts. PART 1. THE JUDGMENT (Malachi 3:4-12) a. Malachi 3:4 The positive concern of the prophecy is marked by its opening assertion of divine favor and reconciliation. However, this is immediately followed by a denunciation of the people for their sins. b. Malachi 3:5-12 The criticism begins with a list of cultic and ethical abuses, proving that the people show neither reverence for God nor social responsibility (v. 5) and goes on to condemn them of ritual fraud, whereby the people withhold the full bounty of "tithe and contribution" from God (w. 6-12). Cheating is a theme of both parts of the critique. A call to repentance and the promise of reward are mentioned only toward the end (w. 7b, 10). PART 2. HOPE FOR THE REVERENT (Malachi 3:13-21) a. Malachi 3:13-15 Alongside the sinners are the righteous, who complain that their piety is disregarded by God. Not only are they without reward, but the evil endure and escape doom. b. Malachi 3:16-18 God responds to this complaint and announces that the reverent will be remembered on the day of judgment. c. Malachi 3:19-21 The section concludes with a vision of weal and woe: fire will consume the wicked, but the sun of victory will heal the faithful. 257
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT S H E K A L I M
PART 3. FINAL ANNOUNCEMENTS (Malachi 3:22-24) a. Malachi 3:22 In a final coda to the speech (and the book as a whole), God tells the people to be mindful of the Teaching ofMoses, with its "laws and rules for all Israel." b. Malachi 3:23-24 God then announces that Elijah will appear before the final day of judgment, to bring divine reconciliation for all. The haftarah concludes on this note of healing.
CONTENT AND MEANING Though composed of distinct sections, the prophecies are complexly structured and interrelated. Parts 1 and 3 of the haftarah are structured around words of promise (Mai. 3:4, 24) and concerns for judgment (mishpat) and rules (mishpatim) (w. 5, 22). In between are a variety of verbal plays that create a rhetorical web of continuities and contrasts. For example, parts 1 and 2 are linked by the thematic contrast between those who have no "fear" of God (yire^uni) (v. 5) and those who do "revere" (yir'ei) Him (w. 16, 20); the former "are suffering under a curse" (ba-me'emh 'atem ne'arim [v. 9]), while the latter will come to "see" (re'iytem) their divine vindication (v. 9). In a different vein, two contrasting types of "testing" God (bahan) appear in these parts (w. 10, 16); and reuse of the verb asher juxtaposes the "happiness" that the righteous will enjoy to their present suffering and despair (w. 12, 15). In another set of connections, parts 2 and 3 are linked by references to those who do and do not "serve" God (coved [Mai. 3:14, 18]). as well as to His faithful "servant" ('avdi) Moses (v. 22). Further, two types of remembrance are mentioned: God's scroll of "remembrance" (zikaron [v. 16]) and the general call to the people to be "mindful" (zikhru) ofMoses' Teaching (v. 22). And finally, all three parts of the haftarah play on the verb shuv, "return." In the first part, God calls upon Israel to "turn back" (shuvu [v. 7]); in the second, the righteous are told that they shall "come" (ve-shavtem) to see God's justice (v. 18); and in the third, we learn that the great task of Elijah is to "reconcile" (heshiv) the generations to one another (v. 24). In this setting, the despairing words of the reverent, "It is useless \shav\ to serve God" (v. 14), is a jarring counterpoint—evoking a discordance between the divine and human voice. From a broader perspective, verbal echoes integrate the central themes of the Book of Malachi as a whole with those found in our haftarah. For example, the opening theme of condemnation for those who scorn God's name and have no "reverence" for Him (mom'i [Mai. 1:6]) is resumed at the end, where only those who "revere" God (yir'ei YHWH [3:16]) are promised protection and victory on the "awesome" (nora}) day of judgment (3:23). Similarly, just as those who cheat the Temple service are initially threatened with God's "curse" (me'emh) and the perversion of their "blessings" (birkhotekhem) (2:2), also those who bear a "curse" (me'emh) are ultimately promised bountiful "blessings" (berakhah) if they offer their dues to God in right measure (3:9-10). Thus will God's lack of "pleasure" (hefetz) in ritual perversion (1:10) and His furious "ban" (go'er [2: 3]) of impure offerings be reversed. As reward for true service, God will "banish" (ga'arti) the locusts (3:11) and turn Zion into the most "desired" (hefetz) of lands (3:12). The "offering" (minhah [1:10]) that God once threatened to refuse from his despising "son" (ben [1:10]) will again be accepted: "the offerings \minhah\ ofjudah and Jerusalem shall be pleasing to the L O R D " (3:4), who shall be gracious to His "son" (beno) who serves Him in truth (3:17). Overall, the theme of restoration predominates in the haftarah: the restoration of acceptable offerings in the Temple (Mai. 3:4), the repair of the covenant through repentance (v. 7), the renewal of trust in divine justice (v. 18), and the reconciliation of parents and children to God and each other (v. 24). A deep sense of estrangement or disharmony thus pervades the present order of things: disorder in society and in the divine-human relationship. Presumably a crisis of trust in God's just providence has perverted the people's soul and led them to callous indifference in the moral and cultic realms. This may be inferred from the poignant rebuke enunciated by the prophet just prior to the beginning of our haftarah. As Malachi presents it, the people are quoted as saying, "All who do evil are good in the sight of the LORD"; and they mockingly jibe, "Where is the God of justice [mishpat]?" (2:17). To rebut this blasphemy, God comes to redress the cause HAFTARAH FORFIRSTDAYOFROSHHASHANAH2 5 8
of "judgment" (mishpat [3:5]) and the God-fearers' sense that "It is useless to serve God" (v. 14). However, so deep and retrograde is the people's rebellion that God finally announces that He will send His prophet Elijah to renew their hearts (w. 23-24). This unilateral act of restoration provides a final proof of God's "love" of lacob, pronounced at the beginning of the book.
COMMENTS Malachi 3:4. Surely the offerings... shall be pleasing The term for offerings (minhah) usually denotes cereal or grain offerings; Malachi uses it in the generic sense of gift. These offerings will have a pleasing (:ve-'arvah) odor. Before the exile, leremiah provides a counterpoint formulation: "Your burnt offerings are not acceptable [le-ratzon] / And your sacrifices are not pleasing ['arvu] to Me" (ler. 6:20b; cf. ler. 14:12). 1 After the exile, a positive prophecy echoes this denunciation—now, remarkably, to indicate divine acceptance of the offerings of foreigners; see Isa. 56:7(cf.60:7). 5. Who practice sorcery... The condemnations of witches and false oaths and of the abuse of widows, orphans, and strangers find their echoes in Exod. 22:17 and 19-21. 2 It is possible that this list was known to the prophet in the "Teaching [Torah] ofMoses" known to him (3:22). 7. Turn back to Me, and I -will turn back to you This statement is a quid pro quo and is explicated by God's promise that if the people "bring the full tithe" He will "pour down blessings" upon them (v. 10). Thus, although the prophet began his divine rebuke with the general statement that "you have turned away from My laws" (v. 7), the answer to the people's query "How shall we turn back?" (v. 7) is given in terms of priestly dues. With this emphasis, there is a return to the cultic theme of chapter 1 (along with the phrase "and you ask"; cf. 3:7-8 and 1 : 6 - 7 , 1 3 ) . The issue of benefits for divine service is continued in the promise given to the Godfearers (see w. 1 4 , 1 7 - 1 8 ) . Malachi's exhortation presumes the people's ability to respond to God's initiative. Compare the humble desire of the prayer in Lam. 5:21:"Take us back, O L O R D , to Yourself, and let us come back." In this case, the sinful heart requests God's help. 8. defraud [Transl.].
Hebrew kabaa
play on the name of lacob (v. 6); compare Gen. 27:36
In tithe and contribution That is, the contributions to the priests from the new grain, oil, and wine; see Num. 18:12 [Transl.]. The rules of tithing are complex and contradictory in Pentateuchal sources. Leviticus 27:30-32 speaks of tithes of land produce and animals being sacred by nature and due the priests; only land produce may be redeemed, but with a one-fifth penalty tax added. Numbers 18:21-29 requires tithes to be given by Israelites to Levites in exchange for their divine service and by Levites to Aaronids; nothing is specified regarding the source of the tithe, how it was gathered, or its possible redemption. Deuteronomy 14:22-29 considers tithes only from grain, wine, and oil; these are to be brought by Israelites to the central shrine for their own consumption, with a proviso of permissible conversion of the gifts to money (without penalty) during a pilgrimage. In addition, the law in Deuteronomy specifies that every third year the tithe was to be left in local settlements for the poor, including the Levite, who was without private property. The tithe is thus conceived here as a charity and not fixed payment. The harmonious coordination of the sources is difficult3 and was subjected to intense rabbinic examination.4 The Sages called the gifts to the priests and Levites the "first" and "second tithe," respectively; whereas the tithe of the third year was called the "third" or "poor tithe." Whether on third years there were three tithes,5 or the last substituted for the second,6 double tithing seems to have been required, and this was an onerous burden. Postexilic sources show attempts to cheat on the dues (Mai. 3:10; Neh. 13:10). These sources also indicate different methods of collection. According to Mai. 3:10, the tithes were brought to collection depots; Neh. 10:38-39 describes the Levites as collectors in the cities and fields. 10. thestorehouse That is, the public storehouse; see Neh. 13:10-13 [Transl.]. 259
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT S H E K A L I M
12. you shall be the most desired oflands The desired land is termed 'eretz hefetz. A similar designation is found in another postexilic prophecy, where God consoles Zion and says that "you shall be called 'I delight in her' [heftzi -pah] . . . for the L O R D takes delight in you [hafetz bakh]" (Isa. 62:4). For Malachi, the term has special poignancy. It literally reverses the rejection of Mai. 1:10 and false assumption of2:17, and it fulfills the hopes of 3:1. For other plays on this word in Isaiah's rhetoric, see Isa. 58:2-3 and 13. 16. those who revere the LORD Hebrew jyzV^z YHWH. It is used as a technical designation for those who revere God's name (Mai. 3:20), as against those who despise it (1:6). They shall be vindicated on the day of judgment (3:20-21). In other sources, these people also trust God (Isa. 50:10; Ps. 115:11) and are promised reward for their piety (Ps. 112: 1, 3-4, 8). In addition, they are listed alongside Aaronids, Levites, and Israelites (Pss. 115: 9-13; 118:2-4; 135:19-20; cf. Ps. 22:24). Presumably, a group of particularly pious persons is indicated. By early rabbinic times, however, this term was used (among others) to refer to a class of semi-proselytes (cf. Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Nezikin 18; and Leviticus Rabbah 3: 2 ) 7 Such persons rejected idolatry and observed some of the commandments (like the Sabbath or dietary rules) but did not undergo circumcision or become full converts (see B. Avodah Zarah 64b). A Greek correlate of this designation is found in losephus (Antiquities 14:110) andelsewhere (cf. Acts 13:14-16).
19. the day that is coming References to the future "day" of judgment punctuate the speech (Mai. 3:2, 17, 19, 21, 23). A complex scenario is envisaged: the advent of an angelic messenger, the admonition of sins, the interventions of Elijah, the fiery purgation of sinners, the vindication of the pious, and the visible distinction between the righteous and evildoers. The scenario was variously explicated and ordered by medieval lewish commentators in light of other biblical and rabbinic evidence, and the images were variously understood in literal or figurative terms. 8 The prophet Malachi was heir to a long tradition of this rhetoric, produced over a span of 300 years and in various patterns. Notably, both the earliest (Amos) and latest (Malachi) of the writing prophets utilized this imagery. In both cases, the "day" is imminent and threatens doom for the sinner; but where Amos stresses the darkness of doom (Amos 8 : 8 - 1 1 ) , Malachi emphasizes the light of victory (Mai. 3 : 1 9 - 2 1 ) . The figure of a darkened sun also occurs in loel 3:4, where it signifies as a divine portent "before the great and terrible \ha-
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH The phrase "Shabbat ha-Gadol" (Great Sabbath) is a formulation of rabbinic liturgy, found in the special supplication (called retzeh) for the Sabbath day in the Grace after Meals. In context, it marks out the special holiness of that day. The term also traditionally designates the Sabbath prior to Passover, but in this setting its meaning is uncertain and has elicited much speculation. On one view, reported in the ShibboleiHa-Leket compendium (thirteenth century), the designation has its origin in the fact that on this Sabbath the people "tarry [in synagogue] to listen to the sermon of the Rabbi [on the laws of Passover] until past noon, close to the afternoon Minhah service . . . and this seems to them like a great and long day" (para. 205). 10 These Passover instructions were also performed liturgically as "warnings"; the earliest evidence for them is tenth-century Spain.11 Another explanation builds on a tradition that a "miracle" occurred when Israel took their sheep from the flock on the tenth day of the month, in anticipation of the paschal offering (see Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael on Exod. 12:6). 12 According to the Midrash Tanhuma (Buber, Bo' 18), this happened on a Sabbath, after the Egyptian firstborn threatened the Israelites with death and the latter were wondrously saved. "Therefore," say the Ba'alei ha-Tosafot, the day "is called Shabbat ha-Gadol because of the greatness \godel\ of the miracle" (Da'at Zekenim, to Exod. 12:3; also Tosafot to B. Shabbat 87b, s. v. ve-'oti). This late interpretation of the name of the day does not clarify the choice of Mai. 3:4-24 as its haftarah. Presumably, that prophetic reading was either unknown or disregarded by such authorities; for were it known, the designation there of God's day of judgment as gadol would have been a sufficient explanation. One may therefore suppose that the liturgical selection was originally due to thematic features linking this reading with the season. One likelihood is that the choice reflects the old tradition that the future redemption would occur on Passover, its prototype (B. Rosh Hashanah 11a). Since the haftarah could be construed to herald God's great day, it was proclaimed in hope and warning before the festival itself. The term "Shabbat ha-Gadol" would then simply be a shorthand designation for saying that on this Sabbath the haftarah proclaiming the final "great" (gadol) day is read—much like the formulation "Shabbat Shuvah," which designates the Sabbath prior to Yom Kippur when the theme of repentence (teshuvah) is stressed through a haftarah selection beginning with the word shuvah ("return" [Hos. 14:2]). Another feature ofMal. 3:4-24 would have reinforced the rabbinic selection, and that is its particular focus on the tithe obligations. Indeed, according to the Mishnah, "on Passover [the people] are judged with respect to [their] produce" (M. Rosh Hashanah 1.2); that is to say, at this time a divine determination of earthly blessing is made. The choice of this period naturally reflects a situation at the beginning of a farming cycle. But the Sages took this occasion to stress the relationship between tithes and divine beneficence (B. Shabbat 32b) and significantly conclude their discussion with a citation from Mai. 3:10 ("put Me to the test"). 13 Now since the law required tithes from agricultural produce gathered prior to Passover,14 recitation of our haftarah on the Sabbath before the festival would duly warn the people to fulfill their obligations to God and the poor and thus merit divine favor in the ensuing year. The custom of giving charitable gifts (ma'ot hittim) at this time, so that the needy may have grain for matzah, continues the relationship between philanthropy and piety at the Passover season. The haftarah thus signals that gifts have a divine dimension. From this perspective, Shabbat ha-Gadol calls attention to an ultimate or "great" accountability that all creatures bear for the resources of the earth and the sacred task of their redistribution. Don Isaac Abravanel evoked another aspect of the messianic theme of this day when he stressed that the Sages called the future spiritual world of ultimate perfection a "Great Sabbath."15 In this light, Shabbat ha-Gadol anticipates that great day and calls the Jew to a reordering of spiritual tasks. In hasidic piety, this also meant an "enlargement" (gadlut) of one's awareness to the reality of God. One great master, Rabbi Menahem Nahum of Chernobyl (1730-1797), even went so far as to say that this inner dimension is the full expansion of the divine "Day" in human con261
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT S H E K A L I M
sciousness. In this regard, he alludes to the great messianic day in Mai. 3:23 and offers a striking interpretation of the present-active force of the verb "send" (sholeah) used in connection with Elijah's advent ("before the coming of the . . . day of the LORD"). Spiritualizing the prophecy, he suggests that all persons have an Elijah quality, which continually awakens their desire for God, and that this inner call is a divine grace that elicits a process of spiritual search and prepares for the realization of God's Presence on earth. For this hasidic master, Malachi's word signals an invitation to each individual to overcome the fragmentation of self and realize the fullness of one's divine nature. On a public plane, this prophecy on Shabbat ha-Gadol is a liturgical reminder to heed a deeper wisdom, whose personal fulfillment has a messianic dimension. 16
Haftarah for First Sabbath ofHanukkah ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
b v "p^Nn nn^
ZECHARIAH2:14-4:7 ZECHARIAH 2:14-4:7
For text and commentary, see the haftarah for Be-ha'alotekha.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH Since rabbinic antiquity, we have the mishnaic ruling that "on the (Sabbath of) Hanukkah (one reads) from (the portion dealing with) the (portion about the) chieftains" (M. Megillah 3:6). On this basis, it was the ancient custom in the Land oflsrael to read from Num. 7:1-8:3, beginning with the words "On the day that Moses finished [kallot] setting up the Tabernacle" (v. I) 1 —and this was the verbal basis for a series of old sermons celebrating this occasion as the espousal of God with His bride (kallah) Israel in the bower of the shrine,2 as well as synagogue hymns glorifying this moment as the banishing (kalah) of evil and the refoundation of the world. 3 The reading from "the chieftains" supplements the regular pamshah and is customarily read from a separate Torah scroll (Shulhan Arukh, 'Orah Hayyim 684:2). Present practice is to recite from Numbers 7 the particular chieftains' offering pertinent to the day upon which the Sabbath of Hanukkah falls and to supplement it with a haftarah taken from the Book of Zechariah (2:14-4:7)—a practice first noted in the Talmud (B. Megillah 31a). The prophet's opening words, "Shout for joy, Fair Zion! For lo, I come; and I will dwell in your midst [ve-shakhanti ve-tokhekh],n echo the words of God to Moses when the Tabernacle was first commanded, "And let them make Me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them [ve-shakhanti be-tokhamY (Exod. 25:8). In this way, the prophet suggests that God's return will renew His intimacy with Israel and close the era of exile. Recitation of the offerings of the chieftains thus commemorates the "dedication" (hanukkah) of the Tabernacle of the desert (Num. 7:84) and anticipates the New Temple, when God will again be present among the people. Commenting on the aforenoted Mishnah, Rashi remarked that the portion of the chieftains' offerings was read on Hanukkah because "it also deals with the dedication (hanukkah) of the altar" (B. Megillah 31a). His observation thus reinforces the typology between the first shrine, built on the way to the Promised Land, and the Temple, restored after the exile and rededicated by the Hasmoneans centuries later. Moreover, just as the construction of the Tabernacle was interpreted by the Sages as atonement for the sin of idolatry (the Golden Calf), the later rededication of the Temple marks its purification from pagan pollutions. Symbolic interpretations of the seven lamps of the menorah in terms of the seven days of Creation and the seven heavenly bodies (sun, moon, and five visible planets) add a cosmic dimension to the typology.4 Read in this wider context, Zechariah's prophecy of a new and rebuilt Temple symbolizes a future restoration of the world, a rekindling of the lights of Creation through the pure worship of God. The themes ofHanukkah and the prophecy of Zechariah were liturgically linked in the Scroll of Antiochus (Megillat 'Antiyokhos). Originally composed in Aramaic, this ancient (and in mediHAFTARAH FOR FIRST
DAY
OFROSHHASHANAH
262
eval times, very popular) composition gave a detailed account of the victory of the Hasmoneans. It was recited on the Sabbath of Hanukkah and served as a historical prologue for targumic paraphrases of the haftarah. 5 Other works gave different expression to the people's yearning for redemption on Hanukkah. In one hymn (composed for the Sabbath of Hanukkah), R. Judah ha-Levi offered a poignant reversal of Zechariah's ancient prophecy—calling upon God Himself to proclaim the words hen hen to the people. In Zech. 4:7, this phrase celebrates the renewal of the Temple ("Beautiful! Beautiful!"). But for the poet, in the darkness of exile, it issues an appeal for divine "Grace" or "Forgiveness." Yahad be-'orekha }el na'or / nir'eh ^r 6 :"Together in Your Light, O God of Light / May we behold Light." For more on the menorah symbolism in Zechariah, see Be-ha'alotekha, Connections between the Haftarah and Parashah.
Haftarah for Second Sabbath ofHanukkah ASHKENAZIM
I KINGS 7:40-50
SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 7:40-50
nn^
For text and commentary, see the haftarah for Va-yak-hel (Ashkenazim)-Pekudei (Sephardim).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH Reflecting ancient practice, the Talmud in B. Megillah 31a enjoins the reading of the "candelabra of Solomon" (1 Kings 7:49) as the haftarah when a second Sabbath occurs during the festival of Hanukkah. Rashi's annotation of the rabbinic teaching cites the opening words of 1 Kings 7:40 and 49, thus outlining the scope of the reading. The conjoining of Numbers 7 (as the special Torah supplement for Hanukkah) with 1 Kings 7:40-50 links the Tabernacle in the wilderness with the great Temple of Solomon. They stand at two historical poles and represent two types of sacred space. The Tabernacle constructed by Moses is a feature of the era of wandering, when the house of God was reconstructed at various stations along the way—a portable sanctuary for an unsettled people. It revolves around a divine presence that is not fixed in time or space. By contrast, the Temple built by Solomon is the work of a monarch in the era of empires. It has mass and solidity and artwork befitting a cosmopolitan kingdom—the stable shrine of a divine King, whose Ark is His fixed throne on earth. Just as the Tabernacle provides a setting for God's ever-changing immanence, the Temple is an accommodation to His stable majesty and transcendence. These two great structures of biblical antiquity (the Tabernacle and the Temple) are recalled on the Sabbath of Hanukkah—when the rededication of the Second Temple by the ancient Maccabees is remembered and a messianic Temple of the future anticipated. In the absence of an external Shrine, many teachers spiritualized the symbolism of the Temple and its themes. For some, this imagery opened up cosmic and heavenly perspectives;1 for others, the act of kindling the lamps was interpreted more personally as a rededication of the selfto divine service. In this way, the Festival of Lights {Hag ha-'Urim) provided an occasion for the Jew to focus on spiritual direction and enlightenment. Toward this end, old halakhic topics were often remarkably transformed. For example, in old rabbinic law a distinction was made between the common wicks and oils permissible on Hanukkah and the more stringent specifications required for lights to be kindled on the Sabbath eve.2 This theme was spiritualized as well—to foster the hope that one might transmute natural desires ("base" wicks) into a refined service of God. In this way, say many hasidic masters, the body could be a true Temple for the soul.3
263
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST SABBATH OF HANUKKAH
264
HAFTAROT FOR THE DAYS OF AWE
Haftarah for First Day of Rosh Hashanah ASHKENAZIM
I S A M U E L I: 1 - 2 : 1 0
SEPHARDIM
I S A M U E L I: 1 - 2 : 1 0
mwn ^Xn bv "p^Nn DV
For the structure and contents of the Book of Samuel and a consideration of its overall historiography and theology, see "The Book of Samuel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from this book (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah deals with the birth of Samuel and his dedication to lifelong service at the shrine of Shiloh, in fulfillment of his mother Hannah's vow to God while still barren. Though the cherished wife of Elkanah, Hannah was despondent over her inability to bear a child and repeatedly expressed her anguish to the Lord during the family's annual pilgrimage to Shiloh. On one of those occasions, she encounters Eli the priest and reveals her plight. In response he invokes God's fulfillment of her desire, and a son is born in due course. The narrative is supplemented by Hannah's exuberant song of thanksgiving to the Lord. The episode appears at the beginning of the Book of Samuel—immediately after the depictions of tribal anarchy (when "there was no king in Israel" [Judg. 21:25]) that conclude the Book of Judges. It is followed by the rise of Saul to kingship (ca. 1020 B.C.E.). The haftarah thus marks a transition from the period of the chieftains (with its loose tribal confederacy) to that of the monarchy (and its centralized institutions) through its account of the birth of Samuel—who bridges both periods. He is at once the last honest "judge" of the first stage and the person to whom the tribes turn when they desire a king "to judge us" (1 Sam. 7:15-8:5). At God's instigation he first anoints Saul (1 Sam. 10:1); and later, after that monarch's fall from grace, he sanctions David as the successor (1 Sam. 16:12-13). PART 1. BACKGROUND (1 Samuel 1:1-8) a. 1 Samuel 1:1-3 The narrative begins with an account of Elkanah—his genealogical background and his two wives. Concerning these women, the narrator presents them as "one named Hannah and the other Peninnah," but reverses the order when describing their situation: "Peninnah had children, but Hannah was childless" (v. 2). This snippet is vital to the plot, as is the remark that Elkanah used to go up to the shrine of Shiloh "every year to worship and to offer sacrifice to the L O R D " (V. 3 ) . b. 1 Samuel 1:4-8 The narrator narrows the focus to what took place on those annual occasions when the family went to the shrine. Regularly, after the sacrifice and the distribution of food, Peninnah would taunt Hannah "that the L O R D had closed her womb" (v. 6) —and Hannah "wept and would not eat" (v. 7), though Elkanah tried to comfort her with expressions of love and devotion. This happened "year after year" (v. 7). PART 2. PRAYER AND PROMISE (1 Samuel 1:9-18) a. 1 Samuel 1:9-11 On one occasion, Hannah withdraws in wretchedness and prays to the Lord. She vows that if the Lord will remember her with favor, and grant her a male child, she will "dedicate him to the L O R D for all the days ofhis life; and no razor shall ever touch his head" (v. 11). b. 1 Samuel 1:12-18 Hannah continues to pray; but as her lips move silently, Eli thinks her drunk and rebukes her (w. 12-14). Hannah responds that she is a woman of sorrows speaking 265
HAFTARAH FORSECONDDAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
before the Lord in "great anguish and distress" (w. 15-16). With this assurance, the priest gives her God's blessing for a child, and the woman leaves, and eats, and is relieved (w. 17-18). PART 3. FULFILLMENT (1 Samuel 1:19-28) a. 1 Samuel 1 : 1 9 - 2 3 The family returns home to Ramah, and the Lord "remembered" Hannah and her prayer (v. 19). She bears a son and names him Samuel, to commemorate the fact that " I asked the L O R D for him" (v. 2 0 ) . When the time for the next "annual" feast in Shiloh comes, Hannah remains at home to wean the child. She promises Elkanah that in due time she will bring him up to the shrine to fulfill her vow. b. 1 Samuel 1:24-28 After weaning the lad, Hannah takes him to Shiloh with gifts for the Lord. Before Eli she declares that she is the "woman who stood here beside you and prayed to the LORD" (v. 26) and that "this boy" by her side is God's answer to her prayer (v. 27). Having "asked" (sha'alti) for him in a vow (v. 27), she now formally "lends him" (hish'iltihu) to the Lord "for as long as he lives" (v. 28). PART 4. SONG OF THANKSGIVING (1 Samuel 2:1-10) Hannah thanks God for His deliverance. Once barren, she was blessed with a child. "There is none beside You," she exclaims (v. 2), and she praises God for His justice and dominion. A king and "anointed one" are mentioned at the end (v. 10)—a point pregnant with anticipation.
CONTENT AND MEANING The context for the episodes in the haftarah is worship at the shrine of Shiloh. It is mentioned from beginning to end. In the initial presentation of Elkanah and his family, we are told that he "used to go up from his town every year \mi-yamimyamimah~] to worship and to offer sacrifice [,lizboah] to the L O R D of Hosts at Shiloh" ( 1 Sam. 1 : 3 ) . Based on these terms, and the reference to Elkanah's performance of the ceremony "year after year" (shanah ve-shanah [ 1 : 7 ] ) , it has been supposed that this was some sort of seasonal sacrifice. Some medieval commentators speculated that the reference is to one of the pilgrimage festivals. The use of the Tphraseyamimynmimah to denote the time of the matzah festival of new grains in the spring lends some support to this view (see Exod. 1 3 : 1 0 ) . But this designation is also used in ludg. 1 1 : 4 0 and 2 1 : 1 9 in connection with more popular rites at shrines (in the first case, a four-day ceremony when young girls in Gilead mourn the death of the daughter of lephthah; in the second, a harvest festival at Shiloh). We may therefore agree with the view that the otherwise unspecified ritual in 1 Samuel 1 is a cultic-familial observance.1 Elkanah celebrates this rite annually, and it is on this occasion that Hannah prays for a son and vows him to the Lord. Moreover, we further read that soon after the child is born ("at the turn of the year [y^wzw]" [1 Sam. 1:20]), Elkanah departs again to sacrifice to the Lord in Shiloh "the annual sacrifice \zevah ha-yamim\ and his votive sacrifice" [v. 21]). Hannah does not go this time but defers her journey until the lad is weaned. She then brings sacrifices to the Lord and fulfills her vow with the fruit of her womb. The fact that Elkanah also repays his vows at this time reinforces the popular nature of the occasion. Quite possibly this had to do with hopes for a successful agricultural year—or some other personal benefit. Hannah's prayer for bodily fertility would find its appropriate setting in these rituals of petition for earthly blessings. Hannah's vow is said silently before God. Even after Eli accuses her of drunkenness, she only says that she was praying out of personal anguish and gives no details. The priest rightly assumes that her distress involves a request for divine aid and says to her: "[M]ay the God of Israel grant \yitten] you what you have asked of Him" ( 1 Sam. 1 : 1 7 ) . The Hebrew phrase is even more powerful and ambiguous—for this use of the verb yitten can indicate either a wish ("May . . . grant") or a prophecy ("The God oflsrael will grant"). Commentators have given both options, depending on assumptions of Eli's prophetic powers. Without resolving this issue, one may note that this verb is also used in the formulation of Hannah's vow ("if You [God] will grant \ve-natata\ . . . I will dedicate him \u-netativ] to the L O R D " [ 1 : 1 1 ] ) and in her statement HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
266
to Eli in fulfillment of her vow ("It was this boy I prayed for; and the L O R D has granted [va-yitten\ me what I asked of Him" [1:27]). In fact, the verb natan (give) is precisely the term known from other vows recorded in Scripture (see Num. 21:2). Eli's statement to Hannah recalls other occasions where a barren woman is promised a child. Most notable are the prophecy to Abraham that in a year's time Sarah will bear a son (Gen. 18: 10) and the prediction of an "angel of the L O R D " to the wife of Manoah that she will "conceive and bear a son" (namely Samson; Judg. 13:5). 2 Like these cases, the annunciation (promise) and realization (fulfillment) of Hannah's prayer have a wondrous aspect. A further instructive parallel between the episodes of Hannah and the wife of Manoah may be noted. In the latter case, the divine being instructed the woman "not to drink [tishti] wine [y«ym] or other intoxicant [shehar], or to eat anything unclean. For you are going to conceive and bear a son; let no razor touch his head \momlo lo'ya'aleh 'al ro'sho], for the boy is to be a nazirite to God from the womb on" (Judg. 13:4-5). These prohibitions to the mother are precisely the same terms as those found in the narrative about Hannah (cf. 1 Sam. l : l l : " n o razor shall ever touch his head") —and also echo the strictures laid upon a person who personally takes on the nazirite's vow (Num. 6:1-8). The transfer of a personal vow of ascetic restraint to a pregnant woman was to ensure that the unborn child be pure in the manner required of a "born" nazirite. It is in this context of nazirite vows that Eli's accusation against Hannah has ironic effect. For when he says to her, "How long will you make a drunken spectacle of yourself [tishtakarin]? Remove your wine \yeynekh] from you," and she answers,"I have drank [shatiti] no wine \yayin\ or strong drink (shekhar)" (1 Sam. 1:14-15), we are again reminded of the nazirite rules. One may suppose that the narrator has cleverly used these legal details about drinking wine and other intoxicants prohibited to nazirites and their childbearing mothers in order to allude to Hannah's vow—and therewith underscore Eli's base assumptions. Close attention to linguistic usage also enriches other aspects of the haftarah. For example, when Hannah prays, she vows that if God "will remember me \u-zekhartani\r''' and give her a male issue, she will devote him to the Lord (1 Sam. 1:11). The narrator alludes to this vow subsequently (after Elkanah returned with Hannah to Shiloh) when saying that "the L O R D remembered her [va-yizkereha],n and she conceived and bore a son (w. 19-20). The verb zakhar also alludes to the woman's desire for a male child (zakhar)3 The term was strategically chosen. In a subsequent reference to Hannah's other children, a very different word was used to indicate God's attentiveness to her (see 1 Sam. 2:21, where the verbpakad means "took note"). Another verbal feature takes us further into the dynamics of the narrative. One will note that the verb sha'al is used in various ways in the haftarah. Initially, when Hannah articulates her vow, she states that if God will "grant" (ve-natata) her a son, she will "dedicate him" (u-netativ) to the Lord (1 Sam. 1:11). Later, however, when Eli speaks o f h o w the Lord will "grant you [yztten\ what you have asked [shelatekh 'asher sha'alt] of Him" (v. 17), the new verb is introduced. Hannah uses it herself after the birth of Samuel (shemu'el), whom she so names because "I asked [she'iltiv] the L O R D for him" (v. 20). The point is further underscored at the time of the dedication itself. Standing before Eli with her son Samuel, the woman adverts to her original meeting with the priest when she says, "It was this boy I prayed for, and the L O R D has granted me [va-yitten] what I asked [she'eilati 'asher sha'alti] of Him" (v. 27). And she forthwith fulfills her vow with the same terms:"I, in turn, hereby lend him [hish'iltihu] to the L O R D . For as long as he lives he is lent [sha^ul] to the L O R D " (V. 28). The verb sha'al thus connects elements throughout the narrative. It emphasizes the request, the dedication, and the object of dedication. Indeed, according to Hannah's popular etymology, the name shemu'el (Samuel) is related to the phrase sha'ul me-'el (requested of God), as R. David Kimhi noted. The grammatical difficulties with this derivation do not obscure the striking application of this name to this situation4 and to see in the word Samuel an indication of the lad's origin and destiny (both requested of and dedicated to the Lord). The verb even alludes to the name of the shrine, Shiloh, where the boy was requested and subsequently devoted.5 Another set of verbal allusions produces an even grander network of textual relations within the haftarah. Thus although there is no etymological link between the place name Ramah (the 267
HAFTARAH FORSECONDDAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
home of Elkanah and Hannah; 1 Sam. 1:19) or the taunting (hir'imah) of Hannah by her co-wife Peninnah since her womb (rahm-ah) was barren (1 Sam. 1:6), a suggestive similarity between these words hints at their thematic connection at the beginning of the narrative. Later on, the same sounds reverberate in the triumphant song of Hannah in 1 Sam. 2:1-10. Now everything is reversed or given a positive turn. Hannah opens her prayer in exultant joy, giving thanks to the Lord through whom her horn "is" raised "high \ramah~Y (2:1), and she concludes her words with an expression of confidence that the Lord will also "raise [ve-yarem] the horn of His anointed one" (2:10). In the middle of the praise, she exclaims how the Lord "raises the poor . . . [and] lifts up \ynrim\ the needy" from travail (2:8). Indeed, she proclaims, her Lord will shatter His foes and "will thunder \yar'em~\ against them in the heavens" (1:10). Hearing these terms, the reader joins Hannah's joy, knowing that the taunting has ceased and that she has been exalted through the fruit of her womb. "While the barren woman bears seven, the mother of many is forlorn" (2:5). These words express an exuberance that shouts from the depths of experience: "The LORD deals death and gives life, . . . He casts down, He also lifts high \meromemY (2:6-7). 6 The concluding song thus links Hannah's anguished past to her joyful present. Her gift to God is the child of her body and the words of her mouth. Critics may rightly ponder whether the hymn is authentically the words of this mother and whether the reference to an anointed king is original. But as readers of the narrative, we know that the words are rightly spoken. They are the words of a woman whose husband once consoled her in her barrenness, "Am I not more devoted to you than ten sons?" (1 Sam. 1:8). Her sorrow was not assuaged save by God's grace and her fulfillment as a wife. With her divine gift, she is like a "barren woman" who "bears seven" (2:5). She thus attests that God is "all-knowing" (2:3), for He has heard her cry of sorrow. Through divine help, she has overcome the "lofty pride" (2:3) of her rivals (as medieval commentators pointed out), and by her words the reader has the first hint of the kingship to come. Indeed, as an expression of hope, Hannah's concluding reference to the Lord's raising the "horn" (keren) of His anointed king (2:10) anticipates the role of Samuel, who "took the horn [keren] of oil and anointed" David king before his brothers (16:13). Her final words also raise a messianic hope—that God will destroy "the foes" of His people (2:10) and "guard the steps of His faithful" (2:9) in their need. Awaiting that moment, the community liturgically recites Hannah's words: "There is no holy one like the LORD, truly, there is none beside You" (2:2).
COMMENTS 1 Samuel 1:1. Ramathaim ofthe Zuphites Elsewhere (1 Sam. 1:19; 2:11; 7:17) the town is called Ramah. In antiquity, Eusebius identified it with Rempthis (modern Rentis, sixteen miles east of Tel Aviv), on the western slope of the hills of Ephraim, 7 but the precise location remains uncertain.8 Zuph is the greater district (cf. 1 Sam. 9:5). Basing itself on the biblical designation of prophets as tzofim (Ezek. 33:7), an old and persistent rabbinic tradition read the line to mean that Elkanah was from prophetic circles (see Targum lonathan, Rashi, R. loseph Kara, Kimhi, and Ralbag). According to 1 Chron. 6:12, Elkanah was a Levite. 3. Shiloh Modern Khirbet Seilun, about twenty miles northeast of lerusalem. It was an early shrine center.9 loshua set up the Tabernacle there (losh. 18:1), and the Ark remained there (with brief exceptions) until it was captured by the Philistines (1 Sam. 4:11). On its return, however, the Ark went to Kiriath-jearim (1 Sam. 7:1-2). Shiloh remained an important site in the prophetic tradition, most notably through the figure of Ahijah (1 Kings 11:29-39; 14:1-18). Later tradition referred to God's abandonment of Shiloh as a shrine (Ps. 78:60); and leremiah mentions the fate of this shrine as proof that God could do the same to His Temple in lerusalem (ler. 7:12-15). leremiah was himself descended from the Shilonite priestly line of Eli (as a priest from Anathoth, he was presumably related to the family of Abiathar; cf. ler. 1:1 and 1 Kings 2:26-27). 5. one portion only—though The meanings of "only" (Heb. 'apayim) and "though" (Heb. ki) are disputed in this context. Based on the Targum, Kimhi suggested that Elkanah gave Hannah "an honored portion to calm her anger \'apeyha\ and wrath." Others suggest that HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
268
Hannah accepted the portion with good grace or "countenance," severpanim (R. Joseph Kara, following R. Menahem ben Helbo). 10 Modern speculations connect it with a "paim" or unit of weight. 11 The NJPS translation echoes the Septuagint (B) readingphn hoti, "except that," which was apparently based on a Hebrew text reading 'ephes ki.12 The expression reflects a restrictive share given by Elkanah to Hannah, though he loved her well. Alternatively, ifapayim refers to a "double face" or "portion," the particle ki would mean "since" (i. e., Elkanah gave Hannah special treatment "for he loved her" [OJPS]). 9. after they had eaten... Hannah rose NJPS suggests a plural verb, followed by Hannah's action; but the subject is Hannah, and the verb "had eaten" is 'okhlah (in the singular). Rashi correctly notes that this cannot be a simple past tense, since it lacks a mapik (or dot) in the final letter (heh) to indicate a possessive pronoun (i. e., "after her eating"). He suggests that it is the absolute form of the verb (with a heh ending). This opinion is supported by the verb shatoh (drunk) that follows. Thus: "after she had eaten and drunk . . . Hannah arose." 11. if You willgrant... I will dedicate Hebrew }im . . . ve-natata . . . u-netativ. The language is that of a vow formula. See Num. 21:2 and Judg. 11:30-31. Hannah vows a male issue to be a nazirite, by alluding to one of the rules of that status ("no razor shall ever touch his head"; cf. Num. 6:5). There is no other indication in biblical sources that one could make a vow that another be a nazirite—especially before that other was born—and that the status could be lifelong. The case of Samson is different, for his status is a divine designation (like Jeremiah's status as a prophet from the womb [Jer. 1:5]). 13 No time period is indicated. In ancient rabbinic law, it is explicitly stated: "A man may vow his son as a nazirite, but a woman may not vow her son as a nazirite" (M. Nazir 4:4). This rule does not directly contradict Scripture, for the possibility of vowing an unborn child is not specifically mentioned. Nevertheless, R. David Kimhi was much puzzled by Hannah's action. 13. Now Hannah was praying Hannah's private prayer came to serve as a model for prayer more generally. "Rav Hamnuna said: How many important rules can be deduced from Hannah's prayer! That 'Hannah was praying in her heart' teaches that prayer requires devotion of the heart; that 'only her lips moved' teaches that one must articulate the words of prayer with one's lips; that 'her voice could not be heard' teaches that one may not raise one's voice in prayer; [and] that 'Eli thought she was drunk' teaches that it is forbidden for an intoxicated person to pray" (B. Berakhot 31a). The talmudic passage adds moral rules that may be deduced from features of Hannah's discourse, and an extended midrashic analysis of the prayer itselfprovides R. Eleazar an occasion to demonstrate various strategies of prayer used by Hannah (ibid., 31a-b). On the phrase "And Hannah prayed" (1 Sam. 2:1), a late tradition preserved in the Yalkut Shimoni (2, Samuel, 80) observed: "This teaches that woman are obligated to pray, for Hannah used to pray eighteen blessings." This point is in substance derived from Midrash Lekah Tov (Va-ethannan), where Hannah's song is said to include eighteen blessings—the name (Shemoneh Esreh) that designates the central Amidah prayer of Jewish liturgy. The details of this observation are spelled out and correlated with the Amidah prayer by the Yalkut Shimoni in a remarkable tour de force. 17. and may the God of Israelgrant "May . . . grant," Hebrew yitten. This alludes to the vow in verse 11. However, the Hebrew verb need not be construed as a wish or blessing. It can also be read as a prophetic premonition, that is, "the God of Israel will grant" (cf. Kimhi; Abravanel), or even as an assertion of the success ofher prayer (Rashi). 19. knew
Hebrewjy#^»f, often in a sexual sense [Transl.].
20. Samuel [Transl.].
Connected with sha'ul me'el, "asked of God"; compare 1:17 and 27-28
23.fulfill His word Aphrase regularly used for divine prophecy. See Deut. 9:5; 2 Sam. 7:25; and 1 Kings 2:4. This would suggest that the word ofEli was understood by Hannah as a prophecy (see note on v. 17; and cf. Kimhi). This prophetic formula may be a pious revision 269
HAFTARAH FORSECONDDAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
of the manuscript variant found in the Septuagint and a Qumran fragment: "the utterance of your mouth." 14 That version has Elkanah confirming and not cancelling his wife's vow (for this procedure, cf. Num. 30:4-9; in v. 3, a man's vow is called "the utterance ofhis mouth," like the formulation from Qumran). 24. three bulls The Hebrew pa-rim sheloshah is grammatically difficult. The Septuagint and 4QSam a read "three-year-old bull"; this suggests an originaler parmeshulash in our text (cf. Gen. 15:9). Notably, verse 25 only refers to one par (bull). 28. lend
From the same root as that of the verb rendered "asked for" in 1:20 [Transl.].
they Hebrew "he"; compare 2:ll:"Then Elkanah went home . . . " A reading in the Talmud (Berakhot 61a) implies that Elkanah was there [Transl.]. 1 Samuel 2:l.And Hannahprayed Hebrew va-titpallel. The same verb is used in Jon. 2:2, in connection with Jonah's song of thanksgiving. It appears earlier in connection with Hannah's words of supplication (1 Sam. 1:10, 12, 26, 27). 1,have triumphed Literally, "my horn is exalted" (ramah karni)\ an expression deriving from the figure of an animal in triumphant bearing.15 Compare Ps. 92:ll:"You [God] raise \va-tarem\ my horn [karni] high like that of a wild ox; I am soaked in freshening oil." The link between the horn and anointing occurs at the end of Hannah's song (v. 10). The image is reversed in ler. 48:25. The reference to "my enemies" led R. loseph Kara to hear a reference to Peninnah's antagonists. Other medieval commentators consider the arrogant speech of verse 3 to do the same (cf. Rashi; Kimhi; Ralbag). Ancient tradition considered Hannah to be imbued with a degree of prophecy and perceived allusions to historical enemies and a messianic victory in the verses of the song (Targum lonathan; followed by Rashi).16 2. no rock like our God This theological imagery appears in other early songs (cf. Deut. 32:30-31). References there to the incomparability of God (Deut. 32:12) who kills and makes live (Deut. 32:39) are also similar to themes found in Hannah's prayer (1 Sam. 2:2, 6). Most striking is a comparison between Hannah's prayer and David's victory song in 2 Samuel 22. lust as Hannah refers to a "horn" and rejoices in God's "deliverance" (1 Sam. 2:1); refers to God's uniqueness in terms of a "rock" (v. 2); praises God, who brings low the haughty and raises up the needy (w. 7-8); has God "thunder . . . i n the heavens" against His enemies (v. 10); and speaks of "His king" as "His anointed" (v. 10), the same issues and terms appear in David's prayer, 2 Sam. 22:3, 2, 32, 28, 14, and 51, respectively. Hannah's prayer thus conforms to a category of victory psalm of thanksgiving.17 The royal reference seems original to such hymns. 18 In Hannah's mouth, this topic assumes a prophetic tone. 5. the barren woman bears seven This reference is pivotal to the hymn and draws it toward Hannah's condition. It has often been compared to the passage in Ps. 113:9, referring to God as the One who "sets the childless woman among her household as a happy mother of children."19 lO.And triumph to His anointed one Literally, "raise the horn of His anointed one." The song opens and closes on this specific image of triumph (see Comment to 2:1, "I have triumphed"). In context, this anticipates Samuel's anointment of David with a horn of oil (1 Sam. 16:13). As a haftarah reading, this concluding reference to divine judgment, a strengthened king, and God's anointed one takes on a messianic tone of promise. It was in this sense that the imagery entered lewish liturgy. Thus, in the dailyAmidah, there is a prayer to God to "cause the Branch of David Your servant to sprout," which goes on to ask God to "raise up his horn with Your salvation." The two distinct images (natural and animal) are blended in the conclusion of the prayer, which gives blessing to the Lord, "who causes the horn of salvation to sprout." 20 A more national formulation appears in the Ashkenazi rite, in the ceremony for replacing the 270 HAFTARAH FORSECONDDAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
Torah scroll to the Ark. The congregation praises God's majesty and avers that "He raise up the horn o f H i s people."
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE HOLY DAY The Babylonian Talmud preserves old Palestinian traditions concerning the liturgical readings for Rosh Hashanah. "On Rosh Hashanah [the Torah lesson is] 'In the seventh month' (Lev. 23: 24) and the haftarah is 'Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to me' (Jer. 31:20); and according to others [the Torah reading is from] 'The L O R D took note of Sarah' (Gen. 21:1) and the haftarah is 'in [the story of] Hannah. '"A later comment adds: "And now, when there are two days [for Rosh Hashanah], on the first day we adopt [the position of] the 'others,' and on the second [day] we read 'God tested Abraham' (Gen. 22:1) and for the haftarah 'Truly, . . . a dear son'" (B. Megillah 31a). This is now present practice. The correlation between the Torah reading and the haftarah for the first day of Rosh Hashanah is no longer evident in most rites. Rashi's comment that the reading from "Hannah" was chosen "because she was 'taken note of [pekidetah] on Rosh Hashanah" derives from another talmudic teaching, which states: "On Rosh Hashanah, Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered [nifkedah]"—and specifically from R. Eleazar's comment that "we may prove this from the recurrence of pekidah [taking note] . . . It is written concerning Hannah, 'For the L O R D took note \pakad] of Hannah' (1 Sam. 2:21) and it is written concerning Sarah, 'the L O R D took note \pakad] of Sarah' (Gen. 21:1)" (B. Rosh Hashanah 11a). 21 We may thus assume that in early times the haftarah was configured differently that in most rites today.22 R. Eleazar also noted another tally. He remarked that the term zekhimh (remembrance) occurs in both the prophetic and special Torah readings of the day. Thus: "It is written concerning Hannah 'And the L O R D remembered her [va-yizkereha]' (1 Sam. 1:19)"—in the haftarah; and "it is [also] written 'A [day of] complete rest, an occasion of remembrance (zikaron) [commemorated by] trumpet blasts' (Lev. 23:24)"—in the Torah portion used erstwhile to mark the holy day. The second of R. Eleazar's correlations was geared to demonstrate the remembrance of Hannah on Rosh Hashanah. But it points further, encouraging the worshiper to engage in two types of reflection on context and continuity. One reflection focuses on the world as a created order, "conceived" (according to one rabbinic trope) "on this day." The other focuses on one's own birth, in the chain ofhuman generations. The cosmic or world consciousness is universal in scope and attends to the inclusiveness of all things; the human or bodily consciousness is familial, and attends to the specificity of one's birth—to specific parents, with specific names, and in a specific context. To defer one consciousness for the other shifts the lens of awareness and responsibility, just as to be inattentive to the one or the other invites spiritual or ethical atrophy of different sorts. The combination of liturgical readings on the first day of Rosh Hashanah conjoins both the cosmic and the creaturely aspects of our nature. Whether the two live together in mind and action affects how one is inscribed in the book oflife.
Haftarah for Second Day of Rosh Hashanah
H3WH ^Xn b v
DV
ASHKENAZIM JEREMIAH 31:2-20 SEPHARDIM JEREMIAH 31:2-20
For Jeremiah's life and times and a consideration of his theology and literary style, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from Jeremiah's prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is part of a collection of consolation oracles found in Jeremiah 30-32. According to the superscription (Jer. 30:2-3), these oracles deal with the return oflsrael (the northern tribes) 271
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
and Judah (the southern tribes) to their homeland. Prophecies addressed to both groups begin this collection (30:4-17), with others to either Israel or ludah following thereafter (see 30:18-31: 22 and 31:23-39, respectively). Each of the main sections of this collection are introduced by the formula "Thus said the LORD" (ler. 30:5, 18; 31:2s). 1 This formula also begins our haftarah (ler. 31:2), which closes with the authorizing assertion "declares the LORD" (v. 20). The haftarah emphasizes God's love for Israel and His promises to restore the nation to its homeland. This divine commitment is portrayed as ancient and ongoing—beginning with the Exodus from Egypt and continuing through the exile. In two dominant images, this care is marked by paternal terms: in one, God is deemed "ever a Father to Israel" (ler. 31:9); in the other, Ephraim is called His "first-born" and "dear son" (w. 9, 20). Because of this relationship, God says that He will deliver the people from the nations and will respond to their words of lament and remorse. By contrast, a poignant maternal image gives expression to the mourning of the ancestral mother of Ephraim for her absent children. Rachel cries out in "bitter weeping" and inconsolable sorrow for the nation in exile (v. 15). This grief is assuaged by God Himself, who comforts her with an announcement of the people's return to their homeland, and His own feelings of mercy—evoked by Ephraim's prayer for divine acceptance (w. 18-19). The prophecy ends with words of divine assurance, in which God says that His thoughts are ever with Ephraim: that He remembers him (zakhor ezkerenu) with favor and "will receive him back in love" (ler. 31:20). This formulation of divine remembrance is one of the key verses recited during the Rosh Hashanah ( M u s a f ) liturgy, wherein the people hope to elicit God's ongoing care and love. PART 1. DIVINE LOVE AND NATIONAL RETURN (leremiah 31:2-6) a. leremiah 31:2-3 The Lord refers to His favor for Israel in the past, after the Exodus, and adds that the eternal love He conceived for them "then" continues into the present. This affirmation sets the tone of care and consolation for the ensuing haftarah. b. leremiah 31:4-6 Referring to the northern tribes as "Maiden Israel" the prophet now enunciates God's promise of a future of joy and bounty—when the nation "shall take up [its] timbrels" (v. 4) and "plant vineyards on the hills of Samaria" (v. 5). From this new settlement, they shall again respond to announcements of pilgrimages to Zion, as in the past. PART 2. THE NATIONS AND THE HOMECOMING (leremiah 31:7-14) a. leremiah 31:7-9 The nations are asked to proclaim the news of Israel's salvation, after which God announces their full restoration from the northland—including the blind and the lame, and those with child or in labor. God's care for the nation is described here as the compassionate concern of a "Father" for His "first-born" son (v. 9). b. leremiah 31:10-14 The nations are again called upon to announce Israel's redemption. In the ensuing promise of return, we again learn that young and old alike shall be restored to their homeland, to enjoy God's "full bounty" (v. 14). PART 3. RACHEL, EPHRAIM, AND GOD (leremiah 31:15-20) a. leremiah 31:15-17 Rachel's lament for her children intones a mood of pathos. The ancestral matriarch mourns her ongoing loss and refuses to be comforted, but God's consolation breaks forth nonetheless with words of hope. He says that she should refrain from weeping, for the people "shall return from the enemy's land . . . t o their country" (v. 17). b. leremiah 31:18-20 God adds that He can hear Ephraim's words of remorse and their repentant appeals for mercy. On this account, He is filled with compassion and yearning for His "dear son" Ephraim and announces that He will "receive him back in love" (v. 20). With this reconciliation, the haftarah concludes.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is marked by divine assurances of restoration and reconciliation—the end of national sorrow and exile, and the onset ofjoy and bounty. In alternating images, God relates to the people 272 HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
and the Land in masculine or feminine terms—thus injecting a tone of personification and pathos into the prophecies. This double depiction occurs from the outset: Israel is both a masculine figure "who found favor in the wilderness" (after the Exodus) (Jer. 31:2) and a feminine recipient of God's "eternal love" (v. 3). The nation is also called "Maiden Israel" (v. 4) as well as Israel (Jacob) and Ephraim—the latter being a conflation of father and son imagery (w. 7, 9, 18, 20). Notably, the homeland is also personified in masculine and feminine terms. It is both mother Rachel (wife of Jacob-Israel), who weeps for her lost children (v. 15), and her son Ephraim, soon to be restored to his natural richness (v. 20). Each of these personifications carries a whole cargo of associations that complement the emotional power of the imagery. Particularly evocative are God's statements of love for Israel and Ephraim—both the opening proclamation of His eternal love ('ahavat 'olam) and the closing declaration that Ephraim will be received back in love (rah em } arahamenu). These assurances frame the haftarah and its promises of renewal. The prophecies of restoration pivot on the theme word 'od, "again." At the beginning, the people are told that God "will build you firmly again [cod], O Maiden Israel! Again [cod] you shall take up your timbrels . . . [and] again [cod] you shall plant vineyards on the hills of Samaria" (Jer. 31:4-5). This promise not only conveys a sense of imminent restoration, but also echoes the inaugural prophecy of the book, when Jeremiah is told that he will not only deliver words of doom and destruction, but also prophecies of comfort and hope—when the nation will "build and . . . plant" and renew its land (Jer. 1:10). This image of restoration is evoked several times by the prophet (cf. 18:9; 31:28). Later on in the haftarah, the particle 'od recurs in prophecies designed to convince the people that they shall never languish "again [W]" (31:12) and that God will hear their anguish and remember them "still \_'od\" (v. 20). This statement recalls the initial assertion of divine love and brings the promises of hope to an end. Interpreters of Jeremiah have often noted themes and terms that recall the prophecies of Hosea. 2 Especially well-known is the occurrence in both books of the motif of marriage and divorce, which serve to express God's relationship to Israel, on the one hand, and His reaction to her infidelity on the other (see Hosea 2 and Jer. 3:2-5). 3 But there are also instances where Hosea's prophecies of doom to the northern tribes apparently influenced Jeremiah's oracles of consolation to the northern exiles. The following features in Hosea 10-11 are suggestive. After characterizing Israel as a "ravaged vine" (Hos. 10:1; cf. Hos. 9:10 and Jer. 2:21), God goes on to say that He "broke in" Ephraim (ve-'essorem [Hos. 10:10]) as a "trained heifer" ('eglah melummadah [10:11]). He furthermore adds that because "I fell in love with Israel. . . and I have called [him] My son ever since Egypt" (11:1) and "drew them Yemshekhem]. .. with cords of love YahavahY (v. 4), total punishment is impossible. "How can I give you up, O Ephraim? . . . I have had a change of heart, all My tenderness [nihumay] is stirred" (v. 8). All this language reverberates in Jeremiah 31—albeit with a new focus. In these prophecies of comfort, God hears Ephraim lamenting: "You have chastised me, and I am chastised [va-'iwaser] like a calf that has not been broken ['egel lo} lummad].... I am filled with remorse \nihamtiY (Jer. 31:18-19). In response, God has compassion for Ephraim, His "dear son," who stirs up deep emotions of love (v. 20). These feelings recall the earlier reference to God's "eternal love YahavahY f° r I s r a e l—fi r s t conceived for her at the Exodus—because of which "I continue \meshakhtikh\ My grace to you" (v. 3). This recurrence of language suggests a chain of rhetorical tradition linking Jeremiah to Hosea, while the transformation of emphasis (from a word of doom to one of comfort) attests to the artistry of ancient Israelite prophecy and its reuse of earlier oracles.4
COMMENTS Jeremiah 31:2. chapter.
In some Bible editions, this verse is labeled as the first verse in the
The people escaped from the sword, / Found favor in the wilderness Traditionally, this passage has been connected to national events following the Exodus. The reference to the wilderness is taken as alluding to the trek in the desert for forty years and the motif of the sword as 273
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
indicating the battles with the Amalekites and Canaanites. For such historicizations, see Rashi and Kimhi. When Israel was marching homeward NJPS interprets the Hebrew expression le-hargi'o paraphrastically, with the nation assumed to be the subject and the pronoun suffix (o) functioning reflexively. Alternatively, God is the (implied) subject of the action and the people of Israel the direct object indicated by the pronoun suffix. On this reading, it is He who brings Israel to its rest (margo'a) in the Promised Land (so Rashi and Kimhi, following the Targum). The hif'il form of tile verb suggests that God will give His people—a remnant "escaped from the sword"—physical rest from their suffering (cf. Deut. 28:65; ler. 50:34). For a similar verbal form, compare va-ha-riho, "and inspire him with reverence for the LORD" (Isa. 11:3, which is interpreting v. 2; cf. Rashi).5 According to Rashi and Luzzatto,6 the prophecy is delivered by the prophet himself; whereas Targum lonathan, Kimhi, and Abravanel assume the speaker to be lerusalem. 3. The LORD revealed Himself to me ofold The Masoretic text implies that the object of the revelation ("me" [/?]) is leremiah. But many interpreters follow the Septuagint here and read "him" [&]. Either reading would fit with God's ensuing statement of grace and love for Israel since the Exodus (cf. ler. 2:2:"I accounted to your favor the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride-how you followed Me in the wilderness, in a land not sown"). The term me-mhok may have the meaning "of old" (cf. Isa. 22:11; Targum lonathan and R. Isaiah di Trani). Alternatively, it may be construed spatially; that is, "from afar" (Luzzatto). 7 I continue Mygrace to you Hebrew misha-khtikh hesed. This idiom has a positive connotation. SeePs. 36:ll:"Bestow Your faithful care \meshokh hasdekha] on those devoted to You" (also Hos. 11:4). In a negative formulation, the verb is used to express anger (cf. PS. 85:6). 4. again Hebrew 'od. This adverb is used repeatedly in the haftarah (cf. w. 4-5, 12, 20) and elsewhere in leremiah's prophecies of consolation (ler. 32:15; 33:10, 12-13). See the discussion under Content and Meaning. 5. Men shall plant and live to enjoy them Hebrew nate'u note'im ve-hillelu (lit., "Planters shall plant and harvest [the produce]"). This verse gives a positive turn to the curse intoned in Deut. 28:30, "If you plant \tittac\ a vineyard, you shall not harvest it." In turn, this curse subverts the rule formulated in Deut. 20:6 (in connection with conditions of exemption from war): "Is there anyone who has planted a vineyard but has never harvested it?" leremiah's point here is that the people who shall plant shall themselves reap the produce, and not another (Luzzatto).8 6. watchmen Hebrew notzerim. The prophet has chosen a word that is used elsewhere to indicate planting (cf. v. 5). See Isa. 11:1, netzer mi-shamshav (a twig . . . from his stock), and especially Prov. 27:18, woteer te'eina-hyo'kha-lpiry-ah (He who plants a fig tree will enjoy its fruit). 9 7. Save, OLORD The imperative verb hosha' (save) seems difficult in the mouth of the nations. For this reason, many commentators prefer tile Septuagint reading, "The LORD has saved."10 Luzzatto considers the verbal form to be an absolute, used here with a past sense. This suggestion yields the same result as the Septuagint version.11 9. For I am ever a Father to Israel This usage echoes an adoption formula commonly found in royal and covenantal contexts. Compare 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7; and Hos. 2:25. 15. Rachel weeping This verse inspired a midrash on the merit of Rachel, who intercedes before God in connection with Manasseh's sins. God responds mercifully, saying: "You defended [Israel] well; there is recompense for your labor and righteousness when you gave your [marital] tokens to your sister" (see Rashi). In this way rabbinic tradition explained the thematic conjunction of verses 15 and 16 (and the reference in v. 16 to "your labor" with the feminine suffix). 18. Tou have chastised me,andl am chastised Hebrewyissartaniva-'iwaser. The verb yasar has the sense of punishment; it is used here in the sense of accepting punishment or discipline. 274 HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
Compare Lev. 26:23. The particular pattern of two verbs used here (thc pi'el perfect followed by the nif'al imperfect, used in a reflexive sense) conveys an action-result sequence.12 Compare refa'eini YHWH va-'erafe', hoshi'eini va-'iwashe'ah, "Heal me, O LORD, and let me be healed; save me, and let me be saved" (Jer. 17:14; also 20:7). For 'You, O LORD, are my God This is the covenantal response of Ephraim—completing the legal statement of God. See note to verse 9, and also Hos. 2:25 (which corresponds to Hos. 1:9). 19.Now thatlhave turned back This statement of repentance is followed by an acknowledgment of "remorse." In traditional Judaism, remorse is a stage in the process of repentance (see the formulation of lAaimom&cs, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Teshuvah 2:2, where this very verse is cited).13 Istrike my thigh
That is, as a gesture of self-reproach [Transl.].
20. Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to Me NJPS renders this clause and the next as positive, affirmative statements. The Hebrew, however, is formulated as a double rhetorical question (ha-+ }im) that commonly implies a negative response (cf. Jer. 2:11, 14). Hence the force of the passage is that God first ironically asks, "Is Ephraim really like a dear son [who has not sinned]?" and then observes, "Nevertheless, whenever I speak against him [I find that] My heart yearns for him" (cf. Kimhi). 14 My thoughts would dwell on him still Literally, "I remember him still." The prophet has chosen a verb (zakhar) that also suggests the sense of "mention" or "say" and is used in conjunction with the verb dabber, "to speak" (cf. Jer. 20:9). This double meaning ofzakhar gives the present clause, "Whenever I speak [dabberi] against him, I remember [zakhor }ezkerenu\ him still," a charged and allusive quality.15
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE HOLY DAY The selection of Jer. 31:2-20 as the haftarah for the second day of Rosh Hashanah is already mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud (B. Megillah 31a), and in his commentary Rashi provided a thematic explanation for this tradition—suggesting that the prophetic unit from Jeremiah was chosen "because of [the phrase in v. 20] 'My thoughts would dwell on him' [zakhor }ezkerenu\, [and also] 'I will receive him back in love \rahem ,amhamenu\.'''':' It would appear that by stressing the theme of remembrance (zikaron) and mercy (rahamim) in the haftarah, Rashi wishes to allude to the designation of Rosh Hashanah as a day zikhron temdh (commemorated with loud blasts [Lev. 23:24]), when God wouldjudge all creatures (M. Rosh Hashanah 1:2). Since ancient rabbinic times, as attested by the Mishnah, three groups of biblical verses were recited in connection with the shofar blasts during Rosh Hashanah (M. Rosh Hashanah 4:5). The first group is known as Malkhuyot, since the passages deal with God's "Kingship." The second collection is known as Zikhronot, since the passages deal with God's merciful "Remembrance" of His covenant. And the last unit is known as Shofarot, since the biblical passages deal with "Trumpet Blasts" (at the Revelation, and heralding Redemption). The Mishnah adds that ten verses were selected for each unit from the Torah and Prophets; however, according to R. Yohanan b. Nuri, "If one recited three verses for each [one of the three groups], he has fulfilled the obligation" (M. Rosh Hashanah 4:6). Medieval sources preserve a custom of reciting three triads of citations (from theTorah, Writings, and Prophets—in this sequence) for each of the three groups; namely, theMalkhuyot, the Zikhronot, and the Shofarot. A climactic tenth verse for each group is taken from the Torah and incorporated into a final petition. While the verses and their order vary, it is notable that Jer. 31: 20 is commonly adduced in these lists—and in the traditional Ashkenazi mahzor (holiday prayer book), it occurs as the ninth biblical citation in the Zikhronot cycle.16 This position is rooted in an old tradition and can be traced back to the siddur of R. Saadiah Gaon (ninth century) 17 and even to a Rosh Hashanahpiyyut composed by Yose ben Yose (fifth-sixth century, Eretz Yisra'el).18 As 275
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF ROSH HASHANAH
the context of Yose's prayer makes clear, Jer. 31:20 was the last of nine biblical citations invoked to plead with God to remember His saints and people for good during the period of divine judgment on Rosh Hashanah. 19
Haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah (Sabbath before Yom Kippur)
HDl^ fQ^
ASHKENAZIM HOSEA 14:2-10; JOEL 2:15-27 SEPHARDIM HOSEA 14:2-10; MICAH 7:18-20
For the life and times of Hosea, Joel, and Micah and a consideration of their prophetic message and theology, see the discussions of each of these books in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah readings taken from Hosea and Micah's works (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). The haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah, the special Sabbath of Repentance before Yom Kippur, takes its initial selection from Hos. 14:2-10. The focus of that passage is a call for human repentance and the promise of divine healing and sustenance for those who have returned to God. Many Ashkenazim conclude with a selection from loel 2:15-27, which introduces rituals of penitence and another promise of divine restoration; most Sephardim (and some Ashkenazim) add a selection from Mic. 7:18-20, which celebrates God's attributes of mercy and forgiveness of sins. Both codas thus reinforce the opening passage by adducing material from the anthology of twelve prophetic books called the Trei 'Asar (or "The Twelve"). The combination of nonconsecutive passages occurs several times during the annual haftarah cycle, either within the same prophetic book or within a single scroll.1 "The Twelve" was considered one unit for such liturgical purposes. This collection of prophecies follows the works of Isaiah, leremiah, and Ezekiel and forms the conclusion to the Latter Prophets. Because of the brevity of the books in the Trei'Asar,they are also designated the Minor Prophets. This is an attribution of quantity, not quality. The superscription to the Book of Hosea (Hos. 1:1) indicates that this prophet spoke to his compatriots in the north ("Ephraim") during the reign of King leroboam H (789-748 B.C.E.). According to Mic. 1:1, Micah was a ludean contemporary who prophesied against Samaria and lerusalem. The Book of loel is undated, but internal features and considerations of language suggest that the speaker was a postexilic prophet who flourished sometime in the sixth to fifth century B.C.E. PART 1. CALLS FOR REPENTANCE AND WISDOM (Hosea 14:2-10) a. Hosea 14:2-9 The prophet urges the nation to return to the Lord and provides a statement of confession and supplication the people should recite (w. 3b-4). Israel should appeal to divine mercy and stress their trust in God's power and salvation. In response, the Lord promises to "heal" the people's affliction and be to them as "dew" and "shade" (w. 5-8). Hearing this, the prophet says that Ephraim will forswear idolatry forever, and the Lord affirms His providential care. b. Hosea 14:10 A final exhortation admonishes the people to "consider these words" and turn to the "paths of the LORD." This counsel is addressed to Hosea's contemporaries and to all those who would be instructed by his prophetic word. PART 2 (ASHKENAZIM). RITUALS AND PROMISES (loel 2:15-27) a. loel 2:15-17 A call for a national assembly and public fast. All are to be present, from the elderly to the newborn sucklings, and at this time the priests are to gather near the outer altar and attempt to arouse divine mercy through tears and supplications. b. loel 2:18-27 In response, God declares His gifts to the nation: abundance of food, banishment of the invader, and full recompense for former suffering. The Lord will do wondrously, and the people will exult in joy. PART 2 (SEPHARDIM). DIVINE MERCY PROCLAIMED (Micah 7:18-20) A liturgical exclamation stresses God's abundant mercy and forgiveness of sins—thus keeping faith with His promises to the ancestors in earlier times. HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHUVAH
276
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is dominated by the opening call for repentance in Hos. 14:2. This sets the tone and framework for all that follows. It introduces Hosea's instruction of a liturgy of confession and supplication through which the people may be reconciled with God (Hos. 1 4 : 3 - 4 ) ; it sets the context for Joel's call to "solemnize a fast" for all the nation and have the priests beseech God for mercy in the Temple court (Joel 2 : 1 5 - 1 7 ) ; and it precedes Micah's proclamation of the divine attributes of gracious forgiveness (Mic. 7 : 1 8 - 1 9 ) . The prophetic word exhorts the people collectively, calling upon them to "repent" by means of the singular and plural command forms shuvah and shuvu (Hos. 14:2 and 3, respectively). The subsequent acts of confession, prayer, and declaration then address God in more personal terms—appealing to Him with covenantal intimacy and trust (cf. "Since in Tou alone orphans find pity!" [Hos. 1 4 : 4 ] ; "Oh, spare Tour people, LORD!" [Joel 2 : 1 7 ] ; and "Who is a God like Tou!" [Mic. 7 : 1 8 ] ) . Hosea's call for repentance opens the discourse, but it is, in fact, the hinge of a human-divine dynamic. The prophet captures this by plays on the verb shuv (turn, repent). His opening appeal to "return to" God (shuvah . . . 'ad [Hos. 14:1] and shuvu }el [v. 2]) is a call to the people to turn from their sin and rebellion. This point is boldly captured in the sequel where God states that, consequent to the people's initiative of repentance, He "will heal their backsliding [meshuvatamY and take them back in love—for His "anger has turned [shavY from them (v. 5).2 The end result of such divine favor will be a period of national restoration and renewal. Not only will Israel be healed, but "they who sit \yoshevei\ in his shade shall be revived [ynshuvuY as well (v. 8). God's blessing to the people will sustain all who come in contact with them. Turning and transformation are thus the deep structure of the first part of the haftarah—embracing the people's turning from sin to God, and God's turning from wrath to loving care. As part of the process, several liturgical features are indicated. The first occurs in Hos. 14:2-3, where the prophet tells the people to come to God with "words" of confession and penitence. Appealing to Him to "Forgive all guilt [kol tissa} 'avon]n and accept their acts of contrition (see Notes and Comments), they reject reliance upon foreign nations and gods ("no more will we"; "nor ever again will we" [v. 4])—devoting themselves instead to the only One who sustains and aids the needy ("since in Tou alone orphans find pity" [v. 4]). The confession thus enunciates a radical monotheism: a turning to the God oflsrael as the sole power of love, forgiveness, and salvation. Coming after Hosea's instruction in repentance, the liturgical instructions of Joel articulate a deeper ritual structure: a shofar blast to assemble the nation for fasting and purification, and the priests' supplication to God on behalf of His people. This intercessory prayer of "the L O R D ' S ministers" (Joel 2:17) adds an official voice to the people's confession in Hos. 14:2-3—a priestly offering of the lips, "instead of bulls" (cf. Hos. 14:3). And just as the popular confession in Hosea is greeted by divine love and healing (Hos. 14:5-9), so the cry of loss in Joel is answered by God's compassion and care for His land and His people (Joel 2:18-27). By contrast, the liturgical proclamation of divine forgiveness in Mic. 7:18-20 supplements Hos. 14:2-10 in a different way. Here God's assertion of care is climaxed by a human declaration of divine incomparability. "Who is a God like You, forgiving iniquity [nose}'avon] and remitting transgression!" (Mic. 7:18). These words echo the words of supplication spoken earlier ("Forgive all guilt [kol tissa''avon]n [Hos. 14:3])—but now evoke the confidence of those who feel forgiven. Moreover, the assertion that "He will take us back in love [yashuvyimhamenu]" (Mic. 7:19)—or "He will again have compassion upon us" (OJPS)—echoes the polyvalent uses of the verb shuv in the prophecy of Hosea and the people's confession there that in God alone "orphans find pity [yeruham]" (Hos. 14:4). These intertextual resonances bring the haftarah recited by Sephardim to its conclusion. The final words express confidence in divine care because of ancient promises and commitments made to the patriarchs. Paradoxically, they shift attention away from God's gracious love (hesed,) for the sinner (Mic. 7:18) to His transcendent loyalty (hesed,) to ancestral obligations (v. 20). 3 277
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHUVAH
COMMENTS Hosea 14:2-4. The prophet Hosea calls upon the nation to repent. The cluster of elements includes: (1) the recognition of guilt and its rejection (w. 2b; 4); (2) repentance (v. 2a); (3) confession and appeal to mercy (v. 3); and (4) rejection of past practices and the decision never again to engage in them (w. 4, 9). It is noteworthy that this fourfold structure anticipates the teachings on repentance formulated by R. Saadiah Gaon 4 and Maimonides5 in the Middle Ages. A later spiritual disciple of Hosea, the prophet leremiah, also reflects this dynamic structure in the confession presented in ler. 3:22-25. Return . . . to . . . return to In verse 2, the expression is shuvah . . . 'ad-, in verse 3, it is shuvu }el. Both prepositions ('ad and }el) indicate movement "toward" something. A similar pairing of these variants occurs in loel 2:12-13. Usually only one term is emphasized (cf. %d in Amos 4:6-11, five times; or }el in 1 Sam. 7:3). It is difficult to determine the difference between the terms, though some interpreters have suggested that'ad is the stronger term. 6 References to repentance in the Torah differ from those in the Prophets. In the Torah, repentance is referred to as something the people may do after divine punishment has occurred and that may lead to God's merciful cancellation of the "distress" (cf. Deut. 4:29-31; 30:1-10); whereas in the Prophets, the call for repentance characteristically precedes the advent of punishment and is an act that may avert the divine decree.7 3. Take words with you The prophet instructs the people with appropriate words of confession (Ibn Ezra; Kimhi), appealing to them to ask God to "forgive all guilt" (kol tissa}'a-von).8 This latter phrase alludes to the same attribute of mercy known from Exod. 34:7 ("forgiving iniquity" nose} 'a-von) and is used in other citations of the divine attributes, especially in Psalms (cf. Ps. 103:8-11, 13, 17). Hosea's words thus reflect a liturgical formula. They occur in loel 2: 13, in the context of a call to repentance, and they underlie the language of Mic. 7:18, with its celebration of divine compassion and forgiveness.9 Hosea's odd syntax foregrounds his concern that "all" sin be forgiven. And accept what isgood Hebrew ve-kah tov. The meaning is obscure. It may indicate a request for God to accept the good deeds done (R. loseph Kara), or the good heart (Kimhi), or even the words of contrition (Ibn Ezra). 10 Instead of bulls we will pay / [The offering of\ our lips The Hebrew is obscure. Many moderns read: "We shall pay the fruit of our lips [i. e., confess]"—thus understanding parim (bulls) aspen (fruit of) + w, where the final letter is a poetic embellishment.11 The Septuagint also reads "fruit" (karpon). Thus prayer substitutes for sacrifice—confession being an offering of contrition. 4. on steeds That is, we will no longer depend on alliance with Egypt; compare 2 Kings 18:24 (Isa. 36:9); Isa. 30:16 [Transl.]. their affliction Rather, "their backsliding" (OIPS); Hebrew meshuvatam. The term alludes to the call for repentance from sin. The word meshuvah is also used in the contexts of rebellion and transgression in ler. 2:19 and 3:22, and it serves as a designation of Israel itself in ler. 3:8 and 12 ("Rebel Israel"). In response to Israel's confession, God returns to His people and forgoes (skav) His wrath. For different uses of the verb shuv (turn) in the haftarah, see Content and Meaning. 9. Ephraim [shall say] According to some commentators, most of the verse contains the words of Ephraim (so also NIPS). According to others, the initial confession is that of Ephraim ("What more have I to do with idols?"), while the sequel gives God's promise of protection (Targum; Rashi; Ibn Ezra). Still others perceive an ongoing dialogue between Ephraim and God (viz., Ephraim: "What more have I to do with idols?"; God: "I shall respond to him [Ephraim] and look to him"; Ephraim: "I have become like a verdant cypress"; God: "Your fruit is provided by Me"). 12 Either way, verse 9a brings the initial call for repentance (w. 2-3) to a climax.13 In HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHUVAH
278
fact, the whole verse is a fitting conclusion to that call, affirming the main point: spiritual fidelity leads to a thorough transformation ofEphraim's earthly life. The prophet underscores his message with wordplays on the name Ephraim (14:9). Thus the "bulls" {parim) of substitute prayer (v. 3) will lead to a divine healing (}erpa} [v. 5]) and flourishing {yiphmh [v. 6]) ofEphraim's fruit {peryekha [v. 9]). 14 10. He who is wise... these words A concluding exhortation. If "these" refers to the preceding counsel to repent (Rashi), then verse 10a is the rhetorical conclusion to the unit 14: 2 - 9 . Alternatively, if "these" refers to the "paths" ( N J P S ) or "ways [darkhei] of the L O R D " in the following phrase (Ibn Ezra), the reference is to the justice of God (for the use of "way" [derekh] to indicate divine providence, cf. Exod. 33:13). By contrast, Kimhi understood "these" to refer to the prophet's earlier words of reproof. On this view, the exhortation calls upon the people to take heed of God's judgment. It is also possible that the concluding words are a call to reflection by later disciples of the prophet. If so, Hosea's words have become part of traditional wisdom—preserved for recitation and study. Joel 2:15. Blow a hom A proclamation of alarm, invoking a national assembly. Several diverse terms are used to indicate the event. The announcement is to "solemnize [kaddeshu] a fast," "proclaim [kire'u] an assembly," "gather [}isfu\ the people," "sanctify [kaddeshu] the congregation" (OJPS), 15 and "bring together [kivtzu] the old" (w. 15-16). These are all technical terms used here to stress the significance of the ingathering. 16 They are dramatically counterpointed by the call for the bridegroom to come "out" ofhis chamber (v. 16) and join the ritual. This announcement privileges communal obligations over personal pleasure. By contrast, Pentateuchal law exempted a newly engaged man or bridegroom from certain public activities—like military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5). 16.purify themselves Compare Exod. 19:10:"Go to the people and warn them to stay pure . . . . Let them wash their clothes"; Zeph. 1:7 [Transl.]. 17. Between the portico and the altar The portico was an entrance area, or vestibule, opening onto a courtyard in front of the Temple; the outer altar stood across from the portico, at the other end of the courtyard (twenty-two cubits from the portico entrance on the eastern side, according to M. Middot 3:6). This area was used for public prayer (Ezek. 8:16, improperly in this case); later sources indicate that the priestly blessing was recited from the steps of the portico (M. Tamid 7:2). The choice of the courtyard for the priestly supplication may be because the Temple proper was deemed an unseemly place for wailing (Ibn Ezra; followed by Abravanel).17 Let not the peoples say The supplication is threefold: it begins with an appeal to "spare" (husah; cf. Jon. 4:10-11) the nation, then asks God to prevent the people from being taunted, and climaxes with an indication of such an act of mockery (by the question: "Where is their God?"). The theological dimension of the appeal is saved for last, with its suggestion of God's lack of power. Apparently in response, "the L O R D was roused on behalf of His land and had compassion upon His people" (v. 18). The appeal of the priests is based on an intercessory form. In Moses' prayer to God after the apostasy of the Golden Calf, he attempts to avert national destruction by invoking the mocking words of the Egyptians about God's ways ("Let not the Egyptians say" [Exod. 32:12]). In other contexts, the phrase "Let the nations not say, 'Where is their God? '" is also used to exhort God to overcome His wrath and show Himselfto be an effective savior (Pss. 79:10; 115:2). 20.1 -will drive the northerner As part of the promise of divine blessings the banishment of the "northerner" is mentioned. Many interpreters see this as a reference to the "enormous horde" prophesied in 2:2, whose devastation is now reversed. Other prophets also refer to an enemy from the "north"—though it is not always certain whether such threats are to be taken literally (as a historical people) or figuratively (with mythic overtones).18 279
HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHUVAH
Within the Book of Joel the issue is puzzling, since it begins with the threat of a locust plague (Joel 1:4). This suggests that a natural blight has devastated the earth; but this point is conjoined to a reference to an invading "nation" (1:6), which suggests that the locust is a metaphor for the destructive invader. A resolution of this matter is not necessary in the haftarah, and the "northerner" retains an ambiguous status. Some commentators interpret the reference as a metaphor for the locust (Rashi; Ibn Ezra; Kimhi; R. Eliezer of Beaugency);19 others read it as a historical nation (Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi).20 Eastern Sea The Dead Sea [Transl.]. Western Sea The Mediterranean Sea [Transl.]. 21-23.
The beneficence of rain will cause the earth, the animals, and the people to
rejoice. 23. early rain in [His] kindness Hebrew moreh li-tzda-kah. The phrase is unusual; first, becauseyoreh is the common word for "early rain" (as later in the verse and in Deut. 11:14); and second, because the noun tzeda-kah (aside for the sense of "justice") usually refers to historical victory (Isa. 45:8; 59:14, 17) and only rarely to natural phenomena (Mai. 3:20). These difficulties notwithstanding, the context of earthly bounty brought on by the moreh li-tzda-kah would support an interpretation of the phrase in terms of an early rain (Kimhi) that falls gently (Yalkut Shimoni 2:535) and unstintingly ("with kindness, and not in just measure" [Metzudat David]). NIPS relates the rain to its divine source, but the translation's sense that li-tzdakah refers to God's kindness rather that simply "for success" is a presumptive interpretation. Others have seen here a reference to a teacher who serves justice (Rashi; Ibn Ezra). Notably, the title "Teacher of Righteousness" (moreh ha-tzedek) known from the Qumran scrolls echoes the phrase in loel (and a similar one in Hos. 10:12, which refers to a just or gentle rain as ayoreh tzedek). But Qumran texts never use these sources with reference to their teacher.21 He makes the rainfall [as] formerly NIPS transforms the sentence, in effect emending Hebrew ba-ri'shon (at the beginning) to ka-riyshon[ah] (as formerly) and transferring it to the first part of the sentence. This is apparently because the former rain normally comes much earlier, in the month of Heshvan, whereas only the latter rain falls "at the beginning" of the year, i. e., in Nisan. Early rabbinic tradition, in contrast, considered this phrase to be no mere poetic hyperbole but rather the historical report of a miraculous double rainfall in the first month (see B. Ta'anit 5-6). More simply, read with the Masoretic notes, "He causes the rain to come down for you—the former rain and the latter, [both] at the beginning [of the rainy season]" (cf. Ibn Ezra; OIPS). 24.And vats shall overflow The Hebrew verb heshiku is difficult; the contextual sense of "overflow" follows Kimhi. Alternatively, the vats shall "channel" or "convey" new wine and oil (cf. Ps. 65:10). 22 This blessing of fertility reverses the plague oflocusts that "dash [yashoku] about in the city" (loel 2:9). 23 27. That I am in the midst oflsrael This is a concluding oracle of assurance, announcing God's manifestation among the people. 24 Divine immanence is revealed through the bounty ofblessing in the land. For a comparable usage, see Zeph. 3:15. The conjunction of the knowledge that there is "no other" than God with the end of national shame is also found in Isa. 45: 5-6. 25 Micah 7:18. Forgiving iniquity The prophet invokes the divine attributes of mercy, revealed to Moses in Exod. 34:6-7. Variations of the formulary recur throughout Scripture (see Content and Meaning). Customarily, Micah 7:18-19 is also recited during the Tashlikh ceremony, performed on the afternoon of the first day of Rosh Hashanah. On that occasion, a symbolic enactment of the reference to God's casting the people's sins into the sea is performed. HAFTARAH FOR SHABBAT SHUVAH
280
19. our sins The Masoretic text reads "their sins {ha-tota-mY here, but refers to "us" and "our iniquities" just earlier. Many emend to hatoteinu, "our sins," on the assumption that the final letters nun-vav (which make up the sound nu) were run together by a scribe, producing the letter mem (and the sound w). This error was subsequently perpetuated as the correct text. The Septuagint also reads "our sins." This reading (ha-toteinu) was already proposed in gaonic times. 26
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE SPECIAL SABBATH Shabbat Shuvah concludes the cycle of special Sabbaths that began months earlier, after the fast of the seventeenth of Tammuz. During that period, haftarah selections were chosen according to the theme of the day, and not because of any verbal tally with the Torah portion of the week. 27 The prophetic readings for Shabbat Shuvah highlight the issues ofhuman repentance and divine mercy. In particular, Hos. 14:2-4 expresses confession of sins and commitment to God; Joel 2:15-17 refers to rituals of contrition and purification, along with priestly prayers; and Mic. 7:18-19 celebrates divine forgiveness of sins. Both Hos. 14:5-8 and Joel 2:17-27 give unequivocal testimony to the divine blessings that may follow personal and public acts of contrition and, in so doing, provide models for future behavior. By contrast, Mic. 7:20 avers God's enduring loyalty to His covenantal commitments—beyond all national sin. The haftarah readings emphasize the activity of repentance, the exterior acts (verbal and behavioral) that announce and activate a transformation of religious life. The inward journey "toward" God is left for the individual worshiper, along with the "words" that must be taken to heart and spoken with integrity. According to one later master, this journey is a return to one's spiritual Source—to a transcendental point of integration symbolized on earth by the Sabbath. This day is thus the ideal time for repentance or returning to God, and most especially is this so for the great Sabbath ofRepentance—Shabbat Shuvah.28
Haftarah for Yom Kippur Morning
1123 m^W m n w
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH 57:14-58:14 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 57:14-58:14
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is part of the prophesies of consolation and exhortation addressed to the Judean community in the final decades of the sixth century B.C.E., after Cyrus the Mede conquered Babylon and issued a decree (in 538 B.C.E.) that permitted subject populations to return to their native lands and ancestral practices.1 It is unclear whether this group of prophecies is addressed to Judeans still in exile or to members of the restored community in Zion. The people are told of God's concern for the contrite and His healing forgiveness for the meek in spirit. This word of hope is followed by an exhortation and instruction to the House oflsrael. The people are told that though they seek God daily, they are nevertheless mindless of their duplicity and evil deeds. In an attempt to shatter the crust of ritual formalism and moral blindness, a teaching of proper piety follows. If the people hear and take these words to heart, the prophet promises them the light of God's presence and the healing waters of renewal. A concluding word celebrates the Sabbath as a sign of a correct religious consciousness and commitment to God. 281
HAFTARAH FOR YOM KIPPUR MORNING
PART 1. A CALL FOR CONTRITION (Isaiah 57:14-21) a. Isaiah 57:14-19 A prophecy of comfort, presenting God as transcendent in holiness yet concerned with the contrite and meek of spirit. He will forego wrath toward these penitents and give them comfort and well-being (shalom [v. 19]). b. Isaiah 57:20-21 The wicked will fare otherwise; for them there is "no safety" ('em shalom [v.21]). PART 2. A CALL FOR TRUE WORSHIP (Isaiah 58:1-14) a. Isaiah 58:1-7 The prophet arraigns the nation with its transgressions. Though they seek God daily and even fast, He is not present to them. The reason is due to their deceit: they fast while doing deeds of "strife and contention" (v. 4) at the same time. In a bold instruction, the nature of an acceptable fast is transvaluated. Religious formalism is rejected in favor of acts of social justice and charity. b. Isaiah 58:8-12 In recompense for such actions, God will send His healing presence and guidance. c. Isaiah 58:13-14 A further condition of divine beneficence is noted. Commitment to God's Sabbath day, and a rejection of all personal benefit at that time, will result in even greater gain for the heritage ofjacob.
CONTENT AND MEANING The main concern of the haftarah is to inculcate a transformation of religious consciousness and action. The Lord calls to the prophet: "Clear a road! Remove all obstacles from the road of My people!" (Isa. 57:14). This road is not a physical highway leading from exile to the homeland, but a path of inner renewal—leading from "greed" to a "contrite" spirit (57:15-17) and from duplicity and strife to compassion andjustice (58:3-7, 9-10). Inwardness involves the cultivation of humility and empathy, and these virtues are the keystone of a rebuilt religious life. God will bless such behavior with light and healing (57:18-19; 58:8, 10-11). The theme of a "road" or "way" (derekh) coordinates the dynamics of the instruction. Twice at the very outset does God exhort the prophet to "build up a highway \panu da-rekhY and to "remove all obstacles from the road [derekh] of My people" (Isa. 57:14)—both being metaphors for the path of repentance. God condemns outright those of the people who "follow the way [derekh] of their hearts" (57:17); 2 yet He notes their "way [darko]" (NJPS: "how they fare") and determines to "heal them" (v. 18). The transgressors dissemble—seeking God daily, eager to learn His "ways [derakhai]" (58:2)—even as they mistreat the needy and act with oppression. Their quest thus falls flat. Only acts of compassion and charity will restore them to God, as well as sanctification of the Sabbath day, when they devote themselves to God and not go their own "ways [derakhekha]" for pleasure or gain (58:13). To implement his pedagogical purpose, the prophet invests his language with wordplays that create webs of intertextual signification that reinforce and connect the divine teachings. Particularly notable are the associations generated by the people's contention against God: "Why, when we fasted \tzamnu\, did You not see? When we starved our bodies ['iniynu nafsheinu], did You pay no heed?" (Isa. 58:3a). These questions are provoked by the people's search for God—"eager \yehpntzuri\ to learn [His] ways" and "eager \yehpntzuri\ for the nearness" of Him (58:2). The reason for the divine rejection is clear: "Because on your fast day \tzomkhem\ you see to your business [hephetz] . . . . Because you fast in strife and contention [la-riv u-matzah tatzumu] (58: 3b-4). The double meanings of the stem hafetz, to indicate a religious search and business transactions, compresses the people's duplicity into one multivalent term; similarly, the jarring conjunction of matzah (contention) with tatzumu (you fast) brings together the opposites so condemned by God. The diatribe takes another turn through a rhetoric of question and answer. First the people are asked, "Is such the fast [tzom] I desire, a day for men to starve their bodies ['anot nafsho]?" 282 HAFTARAH FOR YOM KIPPUR MORNING
(Isa. 58:5). The details of a physical fast and expressions of mortification serve to set up the new teaching: "No, this is the fast [tzom] I desire: to unlock fetters of wickedness . . . to share your bread with the hungry, and to take the wretched poor ['aniyim] into your home" (58:6-7). Only then will the Lord "answer [ya'aneh]" the people's call (58:9)—only when "you offer your compassion [nafshekha] to the hungry and satisfy the famished creature [nefesh]" (58:10) will the Lord "guide you" and "will slake your thirst [nafshekha] in parched places" (v. 11). The instruction that God will answer only those who help the poor captures the essence of the prophet's words—twisting the people's own contention into a teaching of righteousness. At the conclusion, the commitment to God is condensed into an injunction to uphold the sanctity of the Sabbath. The people are enjoined to honor it and not look to their "affairs [heftzekha]" (Isa. 58:13). It is such a commitment that is desired, and not an eagerness for the nearness of God (cf. 58:2). The prophet's rhetoric uses the misuse of fasting in order to stress social responsibility. He does not condemn such ritual acts outright. Rather, it is the duplicity of piety that is condemned— particularly when performed alongside acts of oppression and wickedness. God does not desire such behavior any more than He condones "assemblies with iniquity aven va-'atzamhY (Isa. 1:13). Ritual must be grounded in moral sensibility and action. The prophet's transvaluation of self-affliction into acts of charity revolutionizes the religious life. Compassion is thus elevated to a path of piety, a religious attitude that arises from a lowly spirit to encompass all those in need.
COMMENTS Isaiah 57:14. [ The LORD] says The speaker is unspecified. The assumption that God is the speaker (R. loseph Kara; R. Eliezer of Beaugency) joins this verse to verse 15. Such a reading reinforces the literary coherence of the haftarah, which begins at verse 14. A Masoretic tradition puts a setumah, or minor paragraph break, after verse 14—a sign that connects this verse to the preceding one and assumes that the speaker is the one who "trusts" in God in verse 13 (Kimhi). Alternatively, it is the prophet who speaks God's word (Rashi). Build up, build up Doubling of words is a stylistic hallmark of Isaiah 40-66. Compare Isa. 40:1; 51:9, 12, 17; 52:1; 57:19. This feature serves to reinforce the speech (see Kimhi on Isa. 40:1). 15. He who high aloft / Forever dwells Hebrew ram ve-nisa} shokhen 'ad. A depiction of divine transcendence that is joined to a statement of immanence. These are the two poles of biblical theology. Tet -with the contrite and the lowly ofspirit Despite His exalted status, God is present to the lowly as well (Kimhi; R. loseph Kaspi). Elsewhere this theology is expressed in liturgy: "The LORD is close to the brokenhearted; those crushed in spirit He delivers" (Ps. 34:19). Later rabbinic teachings repeatedly celebrated this combination of divine attributes (B. Sotah 5a; Tanhuma Va-yera' 2; Yalkut Shimoni 1:856). Medieval lewish moral literature considers contrition and a lowly spirit to exemplify the ideal ofhumility and frequently invokes this passage. 17. their
Thatis, oflsrael, "Mypeople" (v. 14) [Transl.].
19. It shall be well, / Well with thefar and the near God's blessing of shalom is extended to all those who merit divine healing and comfort (v. 18). An old tradition interpreted "the far" as the righteous who observe the Torah from "of old," and "the near" as those who repent and now turn to Torah (Targum lonathan; and later, R. Isaiah di Trani). R. Abbahu used this passage to exalt the newly penitent over the righteous (B. Berakhot 34b), but Rashi stressed that "both are equal," as the formulation suggests. 20. the wicked are like the troubled sea The image is one of agitation, violently buffeted to and fro (Ibn Bil'am).3 The inner turbulence gives them no rest and keeps them far from God. 283
HAFTARAH FOR YOM KIPPUR MORNING
Isaiah 58:3-9. The instruction is dominated by patterns of question and answer. It begins with the query of the people, "Why [lamah], when we fasted, did You not see?" and the divine response, "Because [hen] you fast in strife" (w. 3-4). There then follows a rhetorical question, "Is such [hakhazeh] the fast I desire?" and the rhythmic answer that echoes it, "No, [surely] this [halo'zeh] is the fast I desire: . . . I t i s [halo'] to share your bread with the hungry" (w. 5-7). 13-14. These verses are an appendix to the rebuke in verses 1-12. They are linked to it by the key terms hafetz (w. 2-3, 13) and derekh (w. 2, 13). 4 See Content and Meaning. 13.go not your ways /Nor look to your affairs Hebrew me-'asot derakhekha and mi-metzo} heftzekha. These are technical expressions having to do with business affairs. Their exact Akkadian cognates (sibutam kashadu and harranam epeshu) are both used in mercantile contexts. 5 For the mouth of the LORD has spoken This is a technical formula; Hebrew ki pi YHWH dibber. It gives authority to the prophet's words and is used to cite and reapply an earlier prophecy or instruction. In the present case, the divine promise "I will set you astride [ve-hirkavtikha] the heights of the earth ['al bamoteiaretz], and let you enjoy \va-hayakhaltikha\ the heritage [:nahalat] of your father Jacob" evokes Moses' song in Deut. 32:9 and 13. There, with precisely similar language, the people are told that Jacob is the Lord's "allotment [nahalato]" and that He sustained him [va-yo'khal] and "set him atop the highlands \yarkivehu 'al bamotei 'aretz]."6 That account of divine care is now transformed into a prophecy of future beneficence—a new settlement in the land, made conditional upon Shabbat observance. For another use of this formula with a reapplied prophecy, see the citation of Num. 24:18-19 in Obadiah 1:18 (in the haftarah for Va-yishlah for Sephardim). 7 14.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE HOLY DAY This haftarah is cited as the prophetic reading for Yom Kippur morning in the Talmud (B. Megillah 31a). 8 Rashi adds that this is because it deals with repentance, emphasizing the phrase "No, this is the fast I desire" (Isa. 58:6), which introduces a series of instructions for a reformed religious life. According to an ancient tradition, the various phrases of Isa. 58:13 were reinterpreted in terms of various events in the sacral calendar. The words li-kdosh YHWH mekhubad, "the LORD'S holy day [you call] 'honored,'" are applied there to Yom Kippur (Leviticus Rabbah 34:16). 9 One may also observe that the language of fasting and self-affliction in Isa. 58:3-5, especially the phrase "we starved our bodies ['iniynu nafsheinu]," echoes the terminology of the Torah reading for the morning of Yom Kippur. Specifically, one of the injunctions for that day is "you shall practice self-denial \ve-'iniytem }et nafihoteikhemY (Lev. 16:31). It possible that the prophet himself had this Pentateuchal source in mind, even as he reinterprets it. 10 Whatever the case, the juxtaposition of these two readings in the synagogue service invites the listener to reflect on the relationship between ritual acts and their spiritual purpose. The moral challenge that this haftarah offers is at the center of Jewish piety.
Haftarah for Yom Kippur Afternoon
"I12D •T' ^
ASHKENAZIM
J O N A H 1:1-4:11; M I C A H 7:18-20
SEPHARDIM
J O N A H 1 : 1 - 4 : 1 1 ; M I C A H 7:18-20
nmft
For text and commentary for Jonah 1:1-4:11, see Uriel Simon, TheJPS Bible Commentary: Jonah (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1999). For text and commentary for Micah 7:18-20, see haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah.
HAFTARAH FOR YOM KIPPUR AFTERNOON
284
HAFTAROT FOR THE FESTIVALS
Haftarah for First Day of Sukkot ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
b v "p^Nn DV
ZECHARIAH14:1-21 Z E C H A R I A H 14:1-21
For the life and times of Zechariah and a consideration of his teachings and theology, see "The Book of Zechariah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the other haftarah reading taken from this book (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). Zechariah 14:1-21 is a late prophecy, deriving from sometime after 518 B.C.E. (Zech. 7:1). In its present context, this material concludes the anthology of visions and oracles that compose the Book of Zechariah. 1 The haftarah is marked by a strong apocalyptic tone of impending doom and purification. A repeated emphasis on "that day" of divine judgment conveys a tone of expectation and inevitability.2 The city of lerusalem stands at the center of these prophecies—having a pivotal place in the wars to come and in the universal pilgrimage proclaimed for all nations. When the battles conclude, the Lord will be king and all peoples shall be invited to celebrate the Festival of Sukkot in lerusalem. A prophecy that begins with visions of siege ends with a sacred convocation and worship. The themes of Zechariah 14 climax the preceding two chapters, where an apocalyptic climate is also evoked. Zechariah 12 and 13 are also marked by repeated emphasis on "that day" when there shall be battles in lerusalem (Zech. 12:3-4, 6) and divine might will bring victory over Israel's enemies (12:1-2,4). "In that day" heavenly blessings shall come (13:1) and the land will be purified of idols and false prophecy (13:2, 4). Seen altogether, Zechariah 12-14 constitutes a distinct thematic ensemble. These chapters also provide a climax for the key topics envisioned in the opening prophecies of the book: the return of God to Zion, after a seventy-year curse (1: 12-17; 2:14-17); the destruction of the destroyers through military might (2:1-4; cf. 6:1-8); the banishment of evil from the earth (5:5-8); and the worship of the Lord by all nations in lerusalem (2:15; 8:20-23). 3 Zechariah 14 reformulates these themes in a distinctive manner. PART 1. THE BATTLES OF IERUSALEM (Zechariah 14:1-5) a. Zechariah 14:1-2 "A day of the L O R D is coming" (v. 1) when lerusalem will be stormed and plundered by all the nations, whom the Lord "will gather . . . for war" (v. 2). b. Zechariah 14:3-5 Following this battle, the Lord will "come forth and make war" on those sieging nations (v. 3), arising majestically over the Mount of Olives and sundering the earth from north to south. 4 PART 2. APOCALYPTIC CONSEQUENCES (14:6-15) a. Zechariah 14:6-11 The day of the Lord will bring remarkable developments. A supernatural radiance will illumine the world in continual day, with neither sunlight nor moonlight as its source, and "fresh water" (lit., "living water") will flow from lerusalem, transforming the earth. At that time, the Lord will be king over the entire earth, and lerusalem will dwell in peace. b. Zechariah 14:12-15 Developing the theme of verses 3-5, the prophet describes in detail the plague and panic affecting "those peoples that warred against lerusalem" (v. 12) and their animals. Even ludah will be drawn into the fray, but it shall benefit from the wealth it shall accumulate. 285
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
PART 3. PILGRIMAGE AND PURITY (Zechariah 14:16-21) a. Zechariah 1 4 : 1 6 - 1 9 The prophet now addresses the survivors of the nations who had warred against lerusalem and announces that they shall make an annual pilgrimage there "to bow low to the King L O R D of Hosts and to observe the Feast of Booths" (v. 1 6 ) . Those who fail to perform this homage "shall receive no rain" (v. 17) or be otherwise punished. b. Zechariah 14:20-21 The prophecy concludes with the announcement that "in that day" even the bells of the horses shall become "Holy to the L O R D " (v. 20), and the metal pots of the people shall be sanctified for ritual use. As part of this general purification, traders will no longer sell their wares "in the House of the L O R D " (v. 21).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah begins with the siege of lerusalem by "all the nations" (Zech. 14:2) and ends with their survivors invited to lerusalem for Sukkot, "the Feast ofBooths" (v. 16). 5 The looting and plunder of Zech. 14:1-2 give way to a forecast of the security of lerusalem and its religious centrality for all (w. 11, 20-21). Marking this transition is a shift from the wars of the Lord and His army of "holy beings" (kedoshim [v. 5]) to the peace of lerusalem, in which even the meanest objects and utensils will be "holy [kadosh] to the L O R D " ( W . 20-21). Significantly, little is said of the Israelites themselves, or their worship, whereas much is made of the nations who shall bow before the Lord in lerusalem "year by year" (v. 16). The elevation of the Lord as "king over all the earth" (v. 9) is clearly of major concern to the prophet, as is the centrality o f t h e House of the L O R D " (v. 20) for all nations. "In that day there shall be one L O R D with one name" (v. 9). The immediacy of the forecast is registered by repetitions of the word "day." There will be a "day . . . coming," says the prophet, a "day" of plunder and salvation (Zech. 14:1, 4, 13), a "day" of continuous light and fresh waters (w. 6-7), and a "day" of divine kingship and the sanctification of everything in lerusalem (w. 9, 20, 21). These days combine in the course of the prophecy to produce one extensive day,6 when the darkness of doom will pass and a transcendent radiance will illumine the earth. Centuries earlier, the prophet Amos spoke of divine doom in terms o f t h e day of the L O R D " — A day of "darkness [and] not light!" (Amos 5:18; cf. 8:9). Isaiah had similarly given expression to spectacular effulgence of light in the final days (Isa. 30:26). For them the light was a brilliant shining of the created orbs, and the darkness their eclipse. It was only in the postexilic period that the imagery assumed a more metaphorical and spiritual sense, being used by prophets to depict the end of exile as a shift from darkness to divine light (Isa. 60:1-3). Zechariah extends this motif in an original way. Beyond the terrifying clamor of battles and death he envisages a time of unearthly splendor, unifying all times into one time and all days into one eternal day. The Creation is therewith reversed and transformed. God's first light will shine again and evermore, without setting or dawning. In this era, a heavenly effulgence will illumine all things. It is thus the time of God's universal kingship. In addition to the elemental quality of light, Zechariah's prophecy focuses on the lifesaving nature of water. It first comes to expression in a prediction announcing a time when "fresh water shall flow from lerusalem" to the eastern and western seas, throughout the summer and winter seasons (Zech. 14:8). This image echoes back to Ezekiel's vision of a stream of water issuing from below the platform of the new Temple and flowing outward to heal the natural world (Ezek. 47:1-12). A similar figure occurs in loel 4:18. Altogether they recall the primordial streams of Eden (Gen. 2:10-14) and dramatize the Temple as a virtual paradise at the center of the world. 7 Zechariah's prophecy oflerusalem is nourished by this mythic figure. But as an image of earthly bounty, the blessing of streams and flowing water derives from regions nourished by underground fountains and mountain torrents. Mesopotamia is such a place—but not ancient Israel, where the waters above the heavens are the decisive source of sustenance. It is therefore not for nothing that Elijah competes with the prophets of Baal for rain in times of drought (1 Kings 18) or that the Torah counts rain as God's great blessing and bronze skies a divine curse HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF SUKKOT
286
(Deuteronomy 11). The waters ofheaven are crucial for life in this region and must be coaxed to earth at crucial seasons. The prophet Zechariah therefore fulfills a national hope when he promises God's heavenly bounty of rain to all those who will worship the Lord in Jerusalem on the Feast of Booths (Zech. 14:16-17). This is the favor the Lord extends to those who acknowledge Him. It is the gift oflife from the Lord oflife. The survivors of death can appreciate its value (v. 16).
COMMENTS Zechariah 14:l.your
Jerusalem is addressed [Transl.].
4. He -will setHisfeet God appears as a warrior in battle. The stark anthropomorphism recalls Amos 9:1, in which the prophet envisages the "Lord standing by [or: on] the altar" prophesying doom. The divine manifestation for battle in Hab. 3:6 has God make the earth shake "when He stands" and the nations tremble "when He glances." Medieval commentators preferred to see in God's standing a metaphor for the mighty permanence of divine effects (Maimonides, Guidefor thePerplexed 1:13; and cf. Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi)8 or a figure dramatizing the splitting of the earth (Kimhi, developing Ibn Ezra). 5. stopped up Vocalizing ve-nistam with Targum, Septuagint, and an old Hebrew manuscript. Other manuscripts and printed editions read, "You [pi.] shall flee [to] the Valley in the Hills . . . . You shall flee as you fled because of the earthquake . . ." [Transl.]. the earthquake in the days ofKing Uzziah Mentioned in Amos 1:1, but otherwise unknown. Josephus elaborates the event, linking it to Uzziah's sinful offering of incense in the Shrine (2 Chron. 26:16-20) and using details from Zech. 14:5 (see-Antiquities 9:10, 4, par. 222-25). 6. nor cold moonlight Hebrewyekarotve-kipa'on (keri) is difficult. NJPS interpretsyekarot as a figure for moonlight based on Job 31:26 (and see Kimhi's explication) and combines it with the term for cold. This grammatical construction is exceptional. The Septuagint seems to have known a Hebrew text reading ve-kamtve-kipa'on, since it gives the translation "nor cold and ice" (cf. the Peshitta). The Targum's 'adi, "treasure," renders yekarot as an abstract noun for wealth. 9 The text remains obscure. 10 8. Eastern Sea... Western Sea respectively. Compare Joel 2:20.
This refers to the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea,
9. one LORD with one name That is, the LORD alone shall be worshiped and shall be invoked by His true name [Transl.]. The phrase prophesies a universal monotheism, when God's Name will be proclaimed by all (cf. Rashi). It is cited at the end of the Alenu prayer and thus serves as a liturgical climax to virtually every Jewish service. One may observe the literal resonance between the phrase "one L O R D " and the conclusion to the Shema proclamation (Deut. 6: 4) that avers that "the LORD is one" or "alone" (NJPS; see Rashbam and Ibn Ezra). Zechariah may well be citing this ancient formula, giving it an eschatological dimension. What Israelites affirm in the present is projected as universal reality in the time to come. (Cf. Micah 4:5, which foresaw a different reality.) Following an old rabbinic tradition (see B. Pesahim 50a), Ibn Ezra understood the promise of "one name" more literally. He interpreted Zechariah to mean that in the end of days there will no longer be two forms of the divine Name—one, the Tetragrammaton YHWH, written but unvocalized, and the other, the n&meAdonai, vocalized but unwritten—but one alone. Jewish mystical tradition considered the unification of these two forms a holy mystery and a matter of profound contemplative concern. The hasidic masters also developed penetrating homilies on the relations between the names, seeing in their difference the mystery of divine transcendence and immanence.
10. become like theArabah That is, all the earth will be depressed like the Arabah (the Jordan Valley), and Jerusalem will predominate above all, like a high mountain (Rashi). 287
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
from Geba to Rimmon That is, from the northern border of the kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 15:22) to the southern one (Josh. 15:32) [Transl.]. shall be inhabited 14. injerusalem
Brought up from verse 11 for clarity [Transl.]. Or, "on behalf ofjerusalem." Compare Abravanel.
18. Egypt... shall not be -visited by the same affliction Because Egypt is not dependent on rain, it will suffer some other punishment, presumably that described in verse 12 [Transl.]. 19. the punishment Hebrew hatta't, normally indicating sin but often also its consequence. Thus the Targum, Rashi, and Ibn Ezra; and compare Gen. 4:13, Num. 32:23, and Isa. 5:1s. 1 1 20. Holy to the LORD This will be the inscription on the bells of the horses, just as it was on the gold plate on Aaron's priestly mitre (Exod. 28:36; 39:30). The phrase indicates consecration and is used to indicate Israel's special status (ler. 2:3), a designated area of the restored city of lerusalem (ler. 31:40), and the territory allocated to the priests in the future (Ezek. 48:14). By the same token, the spoils of wars can also be consecrated to the Lord (losh. 6:19), as well as the profits o f t h e prostitute" Tyre (Isa. 23:18). Zechariah also indicates that even rude pots will serve sacred functions (for boiling sacrificial meat) in the new lerusalem and be as numerous as the sprinkling basins beside the altar (w. 20-21). Thus all worshipers will find pure vessels at hand and have no need of traffickers in holy things (R. Eliezer of Beaugency). 12 The prophet does not indicate whether the nations will participate in this sacrificial aspect of divine worship or have their divine service restricted to pilgrimage and obeisance in the Temple. The end of the Book of Isaiah is more explicit on this score, extending the privileges of cultic worship to all (Isa. 66:18b-23). 13 For Ezra and Ezekiel, such permissiveness was anathema. 14
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL Recitation of Zech. 14:lff. on the first day of Sukkot is ordained in B. Megillah 31a, though this reading may originally have extended only through verse 19 (as attested by the Mahzor Romania, which preserves old customs of Eretz Yisra'el).15 Present custom is to conclude the haftarah with verse 21 (mentioning the sacred vessels and the end of foreign traffickers in the Temple). Rashi comments that this reading was selected because "it is written in it 'to celebrate the festival of Sukkot'" (w. 16, 18-19)—Israelites and all the nations alike. The prophet thus envisages a universal pilgrimage to lerusalem. It is a practical consequence ofhis prophecy of a universal monotheism. "And the L O R D shall be king over all the earth; in that day there shall be one L O R D with one name" (v.9). The haftarah shows an old connection between the festival of Sukkot and rituals for rain. The pronouncement "Any of the earth's communities that does not make the pilgrimage to lerusalem to bow low to the King L O R D of Hosts shall receive no rain" (v. 17) is categorical—excluding only Egypt (a land not dependent upon rainfall), though promising it an appropriate scourge (see Ibn Ezra and Kimhi). Rain rituals associated with water libations and the four species taken on Sukkot (Lev. 23:40) are mentioned separately in such early rabbinic sources as Tosefta Sukkot 3:18 and B. Ta'anit 2b, respectively. Rashi combined them in his comment on Zech. 14:17. 16 Some of these rituals may derive from early biblical times, 17 but it was only in the course of the Second Temple that they seem to have been integrated into a multilevel service of celebration and supplication. Hopes were intense, for until the rains came, the community's livelihood and sustenance were held in the balance. "On the festival [of Sukkot the people] are judged in regard to water" (M. Rosh Hashanah 1:2). The anxiety of this time is poignantly expressed in a practice whereby the people hoped to divine in the last traces of the festival ritual some sign of their physical fate. In a tradition reported by R. Isaac b. Abdimi: On the night following the last day of the festival [of Sukkot] all [the people] were gazing upon the smoke arising from the pile of wood [on the altar]. If it inclined northward the poor HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF SUKKOT
288
rejoiced and the people of means were sad, because the rains of the coming year would be abundant and their fruits would rot [and they would be sold fast and cheaply]. If it inclined southward, the poor were depressed and the men of means rejoiced, for there would be little rain that year and the fruit could be preserved. If it inclined eastward, all rejoiced [for there would be an average rain, beneficial for all]; [and] if westward, all were depressed [because the seeds would dry, causing famine]. (B. Yoma 21b) 18 The seeds of divine blessing thus grow in the natural world. The haftarah directs attention to this fact and redirects the reader to the physical and spiritual components oflife. As natural beings, we eat and walk and labor on the earth, but this naturalness may be transformed by a path of piety focused on the House of the Lord. From this perspective, pilgrimage may be as much an inward movement of the soul as an outward act of the body. The divine kingship of which Zechariah dreamed then begins with a transformation of the heart.
Haftarah for Second Day of Sukkot mniD ^ ASHKENAZIM
I KINGS 8:2-21
SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 8:2-21
^
DV
For this haftarah's introduction, Content and Meaning, and its text with commentary, see the haftarah for Pekudei for Ashkenazim. This haftarah is the same as the one for Pekudei for Ashkenazim (1 Kings 7:51-8:21) except that it begins two verses later. The outline of this haftarah differs only slightly, as follows: PART 1. TRANSFER OF THE ARK (1 Kings 8:2-9) a. 1 Kings 8:2-5 The entire nation convenes in Jerusalem on "the Feast" (Sukkot) (v. 2), together with the priests and Levites—who carry the Ark, the Tent of Meeting, and the holy vessels to the Shrine. The occasion is marked by Solomon's auspicious participation and the pomp of many sacrifices offered in celebration (v. 5). b. 1 Kings 8:6-9 The final phase of this process is the installation of the Ark in the Holy of Holies. The report includes a depiction of the cherubim, a remark about the poles of portage, and a statement that the Ark contained the two tablets of stone upon which the Lord had made a covenant with the people. PART 2. LEGITIMACY (1 Kings 8:10-21) a. 1 Kings 8:10-11 The priests depart from the sanctuary. b. 1 Kings 8:12-13 Solomon declares before God the full execution of the task. c. 1 Kings 8:14-21 Solomon then declares before the nation that God has fulfilled through him the promise made to his father David (v. 19).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL The haftarah underscores a typology between the ancient Tabernacle and the First Temple. The Tabernacle was built by Moses and served as the movable pavilion of service during the desert wandering and initial phase of settlement. The Temple was built by Solomon with all the grandeur of oriental opulence, designed as a place where God "may dwell forever" (1 Kings 8:13). The transfer of the Ark of the Tabernacle into the Temple was thus meant as a public sign of continuity. Clear intertextual allusions reinforce the link between the shrines. For example, we are informed that after Solomon completed the Temple and had the Ark carried into the Holy of Holies and set upon its poles (1 Kings 8:3, 6-9), "the cloud . . . filled the House of the L O R D and the priests were not able to remain . . . because of the cloud [dnan], for the Presence of the L O R D filled the House of the L O R D " (W. 10-11). This echoes the events at the completion of the Tabernacle. At that time, Moses brought the Ark into the shrine, and "the cloud covered the 289
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
Tent ofMeeting, and the Presence of the L O R D filled the Tabernacle. Moses could not enter the Tent ofMeeting, because the cloud ['anan] had settled upon it and the Presence of the L O R D filled the Tabernacle" (Exod. 40:34-35). The image of the cloud in the shrine is thus a sign of God's abundant Presence. Ancient prophecy built on this theme in visions of the New Jerusalem. In days to come, said Isaiah, "the L O R D will create over the whole shrine and meeting place o f M o u n t Zion cloud ['anan] by day and smoke with a glow of flaming fire by night. Indeed, over all the glory [kavod] shall hang a canopy, which shall serve as a pavilion [sukkah] for shade from heat by day and as a shelter for protection against drenching rain" (Isa. 4:5-6). Such an eschatological image of hope projects the typology of the Shrine into the future—giving a proleptic dimension to the booths built by Jews on Sukkot. Perhaps an elegist had this imagery in mind when he cried out after the destruction of the Temple: "You [God] have clothed Yourself [sakotah] in anger and pursued us, You have slain without pity. You have screened Yourself [sakotah] off with a cloud ['anan], that no prayer may pass through. You have made us filth and refuse in the midst of the peoples" (Lam. 3:43-45). In this figure, ancient motifs were inverted, conveying the full horror of divine fury and absence. Jewish history has inherited both images (of God's immanence and withdrawal) —and experienced their realities. Their fusion in religious consciousness adds a dialectical dimension to the symbolism of the festival.
Haftarah for Intermediate Sabbath of Sukkot mniD b vTOlttH*7in nn^ ASHKENAZIM
EZEKIEL 38:18-39:16
SEPHARDIM
EZEKIEL 38:18-39:16
For an introduction to Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to other haftarot taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index of Biblical Passages"). Ezekiel 38:18-39:16 is part of an extended prophecy of doom against "Gog of the land of Magog" found in Ezekiel 38-39. This judgment follows oracles of hope for Israel's national restoration and purification (Ezekiel 36-37) and precedes a vision of the new Temple and priestly order to be inaugurated in the age to come (Ezekiel 40-48). The Temple vision is dated to 573 B.C.E.; the preceding Gog prophecies are undated but presumably stem from this time. The haftarah thus has a transitional position in Ezekiel's book—depicting a purgation of Israel's enemies to occur before a repurification of the land. The great battle against Gog is only mentioned here, though rabbinic tradition identified it with the wars envisioned in Zechariah 14—the prophecy read as the haftarah for the first day of Sukkot. The destruction of Gog came to symbolize the apocalyptic wars in subsequent Jewish literature and imagination. 1 PART 1. ADVENT OF GOG AND D O O M (Ezekiel 38:18-23) Sparked by the advent of Gog to the "soil oflsrael" God's "raging anger" (v. 18) will erupt. A terrible cataclysm and punishment are forecast. By this means, God announces that He shall manifest His "greatness" and "holiness" and be "known in the sight of many nations" (v. 23). PART 2. PROPHECY OF D O O M (Ezekiel 39:1-8) The prophet receives another prophecy against Gog—more specified than the last. The Lord will lead this people from the northlands to Israel, where they shall be destroyed. Through this defeat, the Lord will be "known" among the nations, and His "holy name" shall "never again" be profaned (v. 7). 290 HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
PART 3. PURGATION OF THE LAND (Ezekiel 39:9-16) Israelites will then burn Gog's weapons—with a fire that will rage for seven years. The enemy will be buried over a period of seven months. Special searches shall seek out and bury the unburied remains of the foe. In this way will Gog manifest God's glory and the land be purified (v. 16).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is a spectacle of doom against enemies of Israel. These hordes swoop upon Israel from the northlands and are utterly destroyed in a surge of divine fury that shakes the earth with earthquakes, pestilence, and bloodshed. In the end, the holy land will be strewn with the bodies of the dead, and squadrons of Israelite searchers will scour the land to bury the slain. After seven months of searching and burying, "the land shall be cleansed" (Ezek. 39:16). The background of this war is unspecified, as is the selection of "Gog of the land of Magog" (Ezek. 38:2) for the role of enemy. The whole scene breathes a mythic atmosphere of horrendous doom, with episodes presented and repeated without concern for sequence or logic.2 All that we are told—and told several times—is the divine motivation for the carnage. At the end of the first part, God states: "Thus will I manifest My greatness and My holiness [ve-hitkaddishti], and make Myself known [ve-noda'ti] in the sight of many nations. And they shall know [ye-yade'u] that I am the L O R D " ( 3 8 : 2 3 ) . A variant occurs at the end of the second part: "And they [the nations] shall know [ve-yade'u] that I am the L O R D . I will make My holy name [shem kodshi] known [Jodi'a] among My people Israel, and never again will I let My holy name [shem kodshi] be profaned. And the nations shall know [ve-yade'u] that I the L O R D am holy [kadosh] in Israel" ( 3 9 : 6 0 - 7 ) . And then finally for a third time, toward the end of the final part of the haftarah: "The day I manifest My glory shall bring renown [shem] to them [viz., all the Israelites who do the burying]" ( 3 9 : 1 3 ) . Two themes predominate. The first is the manifestation of divine power, such that the nations shall "know" the Lord. This is a signature feature of Ezekiel and his theology and derives from earlier priestly traditions—where knowing God serves as the repeated motivation for the excessive and oppressive plagues brought upon the Egyptians. In that context, the primary concern of the miracles and redemption is to convince the Israelites of God's might and His claim to be their deliverer (Exod. 6:7; 10:2), but also to influence both the Egyptian people (Exod. 7:5; 14:4) and their Pharaoh (Exod. 7:17). In the Book ofEzekiel, this acknowledgment formula is notably geared as well toward the public recognition of God by the nations and to counteract negative assessments of His power. It is just this issue that is at stake in our haftarah. Against the background of some international slander of divine power, God now arises to make His allegiance and might known before all. The haftarah's second theme is the desecration of God's "holy name" (Ezek. 39:7). A poignant expression of this matter is found in Ezek. 36:16-28. There Ezekiel gives God's account of Israel's sins and pollutions on the land, and their exile among the nations—where "they caused My holy name to be profaned, in that it was said of them, 'These are the people of the L O R D , yet they had to leave His land.' Therefore I am concerned [lit., have pity] for My holy name, which the House oflsrael have caused to be profaned among the nations" (36:20-21). In response, God avers that He will act "for [the sake of] My holy name" and "will sanctify My great name which has been profaned among the nations . . . . And the nations shall know that I am the 3 L O R D . . ." (36:22-23), History is thus the site where the defamation or acknowledgment of God is manifest—as well as His vindication. In an awesome and apocalyptic manner, human life recedes before God's shame or honor. The price of desecration is doom, whether leveled against Israel or the nations. The positive benefit for Israel, in the end, is their ultimate repatriation—a paradoxical consequence of the nations' defamation of divine glories, itself brought about by Israel's sin and rebellion.
COMMENTS Ezekiel 38:18. On that day A common prophetic formula used to introduce eschatological oracles and repeatedly used by Ezekiel in the Gog prophecy (cf. Ezek. 38:10, 14, 19; 39:11). 291
HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
Gog In popular lore, Gog is associated with Magog ("Gog and Magog"). It is clear from Ezek. 38:2 that the first name refers to a person (or persons) and the second to a geographical area ("Gog of the land of Magog"). Despite this, and the clear inclusion of Gog among the Aegean peoples mentioned in Gen. 10:2, 4 no precise identification has emerged. The most probable suggestion is to associate Gog with Gyges, a Lydian king mentioned (as Gugu) in the seventh century B.C.E. annals ofKing Ashurbanipal of Assyria (Rassam Cylinder 2:95f., 111-15). 5 19-22. The military advent of an enemy horde, to the accompaniment of tumultuous national upheavals, is a common stylistic figure of biblical prophecy (cf. Isa. 29:6; Joel 2:1-6, 10; Nah. 1:2-6; Hab. 3:3-6). This literary convention is also emphasized in Mesopotamian liturgies celebrating divine warriors. In the Bible, these portraits draw particularly upon imagery of seismic events and sea-tossed tempests (cf. Habakkuk 3, a haftarah for Shavuot; and Psalm 18). They dramatize the awesome, supernatural aura of God's manifestations (see also Exod. 19:18-19). 23. Thus will I manifest This topic of God's greatness and holiness (ve-hitgaddilti vehitkaddishti) continues in Ezek. 39:7 in connection with God's holy name. Both features combine and find expression in Jewish liturgy through the Kaddish prayer, the well-known exaltation of God and His holy name recited at various intervals in the service (to mark liturgical units; and as recitations by mourners, after certain prayers or rabbinic texts). It begins with the wordsyitgaddal ve-yitkaddash shemei mbba\ "May His great name be exalted and sanctified."6 Rabbi Simeon bar Yohai cited Ezek. 38:23 to prove that God is exalted and sanctified when He manifests His judgment against the wicked (Leviticus Rabbah 24:1). 7 Ezekiel 39:2. and drive you on The Hebrew shishei'tikha is obscure. The sense of being led or driven underlies the Septuagint and Vulgate. This stem is perhaps related to an Ethiopian verb with the causative sense "bring in." 8 Alternatively, it has the sense of "incite" or "push forward" (Genesis Rabbah 19:12). 9 7. let My holy name be profaned The spectre of gentile desecrations of God's name due to Israelite suffering (and thus the appearance of divine absence or impotence; cf. R. Eliezer of Beaugency),10 is a theme recurring in Ezekiel's prophecies (cf. Ezek. 20:9,14, 22; and 36:20-23). There are older echoes (cf. Exod. 32:11-13). Correspondingly, manifestations of divine power on behalf oflsrael will result in the sanctification of God (see Ezek. 39:27; also 20:41). A related instance of Ezekiel's concern with God's holy name climaxes his eschatological prophecies. The prophet says that the renewed Jerusalem will be named "The L O R D IS There" (48:35). This is a sacral name, to be compared with contemporaneous renamings of Jerusalem such as "I delight in her [heftzi-vah]" and "Sought Out [derushah]" in Isa. 62:4, 12. 8. this is that day thatl decreed Literally, "the day of which I prophesied \dibbarti\\ OJPS: "the day whereof I have spoken." This reference is a reprise of Ezek. 38:17. References to enemies from "the remotest parts of the north" who, "mounted on horses," will advance "like a cloud \ve-dlita . . . ke-dnan~\ covering the earth" (38:6, 15-16; cf. v. 9), suggest that the advent of Gog was understood as the fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecies. Jeremiah, too, spoke of an "enemy from the remotest parts of the north" (Jer. 1:14-15; cf. 6:22 f.) who, mounted on horses, "ascends like clouds \ka-dnanimyadlehY over the earth (Jer. 4:1s). 1 1
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL The theme of eschatological renewal, and especially of a divinely led battle, is a feature of haftarah readings for festival days. An image of destruction and transformation comparable to that found in Ezek. 38:18-39:16 is found in Zech. 14:1-21, the haftarah for the first day of Sukkot. Presumably because of the close liturgical association between Zech. 14:1-21 and Ezek. 38:18-39:16, and the reference in Zech. 14:16 to a grand celebration of Sukkot in Jerusalem after the awesome days of battle, Rashi (on Ezek. 38:17) identified the Gog prophecy with the "war spoken of in Zechariah in [the prophecy commencing]:"Lo, a day of the L O R D is coming" (Zech. 14:1). 12 292 HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
Since antiquity, the Gog prophecy has excited hope in a divine doom against the enemies of Israel. According to Rabbi Akiba, the judgment against Gog would last twelve months (M. Eduyot 2:10) —an event that would also bring disaster upon Israel (Tosefta Berakhot 1: 13). It was commonly supposed that this apocalyptic war would be the final battle, heralding the advent of the Messiah and a time when historical servitude would cease (Sifre Numbers 76; B. Sanhedrin 97b). According to other interpreters, the war of Gog and Magog is fundamentally a war against God, and all of Psalm 2 was interpreted in this way (B. Avodah Zarah 3b; Tan humaNoah 18). The gory details of the biblical prophecy, and later apocalyptic speculations based on it, were in part the fantasy of powerlessness. For at bottom the Gog prophecy rings the bleak notes of historical terror and the hope that God's spirit works silently in time—deluding the evil in their invincibility and sowing the seeds of their ultimate ruin. For such visionaries, these events of doom are the revelation of God's long-awaited presence in history. This dark mystery is already hinted at in God's word to Ezekiel: "I manifest My holiness through you, O Gog!" (Ezek. 38:16).
Haftarah for Shemini Atzeret m ^ y TBW ASHKENAZIM
I KINGS 8:54-66
SEPHARDIM
I KINGS 8:54-66
For the contents and structure of the Book of Kings and a consideration of its overall historiography and theology, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from this work (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). According to biblical law, the conclusion of the festival week of Sukkot was to have a special celebration. "On the eighth [shemini] day you shall hold a solemn gathering ['atzeret]" (Num. 29:35; Lev. 23:36 calls the time a "sacred occasion," mikm' kodesh). After his dedication of the Temple and celebration of Sukkot, Solomon apparently used this occasion to discharge the assembled people; for "on the eighth day he let the people go [back] . . . to their homes" (1 Kings 8:66). According to ancient practice in the Land oflsrael, this verse was the opening line of the haftarah; 1 today it marks the conclusion of the reading according to the Ashkenazic and Sephardic rites.2 According to the Babylonian Talmud (B. Megillah 31a), the (Babylonian) practice was to begin with 1 Kings 8:54, "When Solomon finished [
HAFTARAH FOR SHEMINI ATZERET
The praise then shifts to an expression of hopes, with three parts. Each section begins with the word "may": a. 1 Kings 8:57-58 "May" (yehi) God continue to be with His people, as He was with the ancestors, and inspire them to observe His commandments. b. 1 Kings 8:59-60 "May" (ve-yihyu) God hear Israel's requests and fulfill them, that all nations might know His unique greatness. c. 1 Kings 8:61 "May" (ve-hayah) Israel, for its part, be faithful to God and observe His will. Sections a and b are addressed to God Himself and request divine help for faithful service and daily sustenance; section c shifts the address to Israel and focuses on their national responsibility. PART 3. EPILOGUE (1 Kings 8:62-66) The historian now concludes—remarking that a great ritual celebration occurred (w. 62-64), after which the people left "on the eighth day" full of joy "over all the goodness that the L O R D had shown t o . . . His people Israel." (v. 66).
CONTENT AND MEANING While choice of the haftarah is conditioned by its reference to an "eighth day" after the onset of Sukkot, its formal structure centers on the blessing (part 2) enclosed within a narrative prologue and epilogue (parts 1 and 3). That blessing gives thanks to God for fulfilling His prophetic promise and then requests divine providence in the future. These requests form a literary frame: a (1 Kings 8:57-58) and c (v. 61) emphasize Israel's observance of the commandments (focusing on divine help and human responsibility), whereas the intermediate section b (w. 59-60) stresses the desire for God's sustenance and the manifestation of His fame to all people. Notably, Solomon asks God "to provide" for the mishpa-t (or "cause") of the people—"according to each day's needs" (v. 60). 3 This petition recalls the concerns in the inaugural Temple Prayer, where Solomon beseeched God to hear the requests of His people from heaven and attend to their mishpat (1 Kings 8:39, 43, 45, 49). The allusion to Shemini Atzeret in 1 Kings 8:66 is not without difficulty. The problem involves the sequence of events. According to 1 King 8:2, "All the men oflsrael gathered before Solomon at the Feast" of Sukkot to celebrate the completion of the Temple. Verse 65 certainly has this same occasion in mind when it says that "Solomon and all Israel with him . . . observed the Feast at that time." The confusion arises with the subsequent statement, "seven days and again seven days, fourteen days in all" and its sequel, "on the eighth day [Solomon] let the people go" (v. 66). If the first seven days comprised the festival week of Sukkot (and the second seven were devoted to the period of Temple dedication), then the eighth day of Assembly is wot mentioned (contra Lev. 23:36 and Num. 29:35); whereas if the second seven days mentioned were in fact the festival week of Sukkot (after the seven-day period of Temple dedication), then the eighth day was apparendy wot observed at all. How can this problem be resolved? One possibility is that the historian knew only the law in Deut. 16:15, which makes no mention whatever of a special day after the week of Sukkot.4 On this view, 1 Kings 8:66 simply follows the practice known to it, and the dismissal of the people on the eighth day has nothing to do with the sacred assembly stipulated by the priestly tradition. However, by the end of the biblical period (and certainly for classical Judaism), this answer was no solution. It only deferred the issue of how 1 Kings 8:66 could be understood in the larger context of biblical law. The Book of Chronicles shows that this problem was no abstract matter; for after citing his source from 1 Kings 8:65a, the chronicler goes on to insert his understanding of "seven days and again seven days" in verse 65 b and the meaning of the subsequent "eighth day" (v. 66). He says: "And on the eighth day they held a solemn gathering; they observed the dedication of the altar seven days, and the Feast seven days. On the twenty-third day of the seventh month [Solomon] dismissed the people to their homes . . ." (2 Chron. 7:9-10). It would thus appear that the postexilic chronicler resolved the problem with the assumption that the seventh day of Temple dedication 294 HAFTARAH FOR SHEMINI ATZERET
was the first day of Sukkot. 5 According to this view, the festival week of Sukkot extended from the fifteenth to the twenty-first day of Tishrei, the eighth day was the twenty-second of Tishrei, and the people departed for home on the twenty-third. In this way, difficulties were harmonized by the pious chronicler, who most certainly understood his role as explicating the implicit sense of 1 Kings 8:65-66. Later rabbinic tradition, which chose this passage as a haftarah for Shemini Atzeretprecisely because of its reference to an assembly on the "eighth day" understood the matter in a similar way (cf. B. Mo'ed Katan 9a). But the explication of the ritual ambiguity was not the main issue. For the Sages, the key concern was finding a reference to the special day of'atzeret in a prophetic source. Its occurrence in connection with the dedication of Solomon's Temple gave that occasion further prestige.
COMMENTS 1 Kings 8:54. all this prayer and supplication Both the demonstrative pronoun ("this") and the terms ("prayer," "supplication") refer to the Temple Prayer of 1 Kings 8:22-53. The terms appear as a pair (see w. 28, 30, 33, 38, 45, 49) and singly (see w. 29, 35, 42, 44, 47, 52). The prayer gesture in verse 54 complements that in verse 22, where Solomon "stood" before the altar at the beginning ofhis prayer dedication. At some point, he changed his physical posture. 58-61. walk in all His ways This formula appears at the beginning and end of the blessing and is part of standard Deuteronomic language (cf. 1 Kings 2:3; 3:14). This terminology dominates all other parts of the prayer, including the expressions of wholehearted obedience (v. 61; cf. Deut. 4:29) and the theology of a God who is near to the worshiper (v. 59; cf. Deut. 4:7) and incomparable (v. 60; cf. Deut. 4:35, 39). There is thus a strong similarity of theme and language between Deut. 4:1-40 and 1 Kings 8:56-61, and the topic of theological incomparability is also found in postexilic prophecy (cf. Isa. 45:5, 6, 18, 21, 22). A common liturgical tradition may be supposed. 6 The hope that God will not "abandon or forsake" His worshiper (v. 57) also has liturgical overtones (cf. Ps. 27:9). The blessing in 1 Kings 8:56-61 is absent in the Chroniclers version (2 Chron. 7:1-10). Instead, a fire descends to ignite the altar (2 Chron. 7:1), much as described in the dedication of the altar in the Tabernacle (Lev. 9:24). And just as the latter event was accompanied by a manifestation of God's kavod (Presence [Lev. 9:23]), so does this heavenly reality appear in the Chronicles account. The latter version is also replete with popular and priestly liturgies (2 Chron. 7:3, 6). Solomon's divine invocation in 2 Chron. 6:41-42 is another liturgical unit, with a striking variant in Ps. 132:8-10. The hymnody of the Second Temple has apparently affected the chronicler's depiction of Solomon's celebrations in the first one. the king consecrated the center ofthe court That is, Solomon sanctified the floor of the court with the sanctity of the altar dedicated there (see R. ludah in B. Zevahim 59a, followed by Rashi). The center of the court thus refers to the floor of the court of the priests. This special sanctification was because the "bronze altar" was "too small to hold" all the abundant offerings made at that time (Kimhi; Gersonides). According to tradition, Solomon established there an altar of stones affixed to the floor (B. Zevahim 59a-60a; and cf. R. loseph Kara and Kimhi). 65.from Eebo-hamath to the Wadi of Egypt the other [Transl.]. theFeast
That is, from one end of the country to
Thatis, ofBooths. Compare Lev. 23:34 [Transl.].
the eighth day [Transl.].
That is, of the second seven-day feast; compare 2 Chron. 7:8-10
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL The recitation of 1 Kings 8:66 ("On the eighth day he let the people go") as the haftarah for Shemini Atzeret is mentioned in the Talmud (B. Megillah 31a). Rashi's explanation ("because 295
HAFTARAH FOR SHEMINI ATZERET
of the eighth day he let the people go") is tautological; it simply connects the festival day with the notice of an eighth day at the end of the Sukkot season. The Rabbis understood this "eighth day" to be the festival of Atzeret itself, when the people performed their rites in the Temple and departed for home (see above for the explanation provided in 2 Chron. 7:9-10). Scripture says little about this holiday. According to Lev. 2 3 : 3 6 , the "eighth day" from the onset of Sukkot is marked off as a "sacred occasion" (mikm' kodesh)—the standard expression for a festival day in this calendar; but it is also called an dtzeret (or "solemn gathering"), without further explication. The list of festival sacrifices in Numbers 2 8 - 2 9 likewise uses the term mikm' kodesh to designate holidays, but it does not do so for the eighth day of the Sukkot season, which is only called an dtzeret (Num. 2 9 : 3 5 ) . Significantly, the cycle of sacrifices prescribed for the Sukkot week is drastically curtailed on that day. This fact, along with the references to the time as a mikm' kodesh and dtzeret, gave the impression that the "eighth day" was an independent holiday—the very last of the three pilgrimage festivals beginning in Nisan (with Passover). The Sages thus said: "The last holiday [yom top] of the Festival [Sukkot] has its own [priestly selection by] lottery; its own [benediction for the sacred] Occasion [zeman]-, its own [distinction as a] Pilgrimage Day [regel]:, its own [distinct] Sacrifice; its own Psalm; [and] its own Blessing—as Scripture says, "On the eighth day he let the people go, and they blessed the king [1 Kings 8:66]" (Tosefta Sukkot 4:17) 7 . In further elaborating the ritual and theological significance of the day, rabbinic homilies paid special attention to features found in Num. 2 9 : 3 6 and 1 Kings 8 : 6 6 . In their attention to detail, the Rabbis noted that according to Num. 2 9 : 3 6 only one ram was offered on Shemini Atzeret—whereas seventy rams were offered during the prior festival week. This fact, along with the designation of the 'atzeret as being "for you" (a locution not used on the other days), stands behind a midrash wherein "God said to Israel, 'on all seven days of the festival of Sukkot, you were busy with sacrifices for the seventy nations of the world; whereas now, [just] you and I shall rejoice together, and I shall not burden you overmuch, just one bull and one ram. ' When Israel heard this, they broke into praise of God and said, 'This is the day that the L O R D has made [special], let us exult and rejoice \ye-nismehah] on it! ' (Ps. 1 1 8 : 2 4 ) " (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, Shemini Atzeret 9). 8 This point was celebrated by synagogue poets, as well.9 For this reason, Shemini Atzeret came to mark an occasion of special intimacy between God and Israel. The conclusion of the haftarah notes that the people departed from the Temple "joyful [semehim] and glad of heart" (1 Kings 8:66). This theme was repeated in hymn and homily. For example, the ancient poet Yannai exulted: shillum simhah hi} kol simhah-, ve-tosefet simhah sason ve-simhah,10 By this he meant that the "completion" (shillum) of the Festival of Joy (Sukkot) is the "sum" (kol) of all joy (simhah)-, whereas the "supplementary" (tosefet) joy of Shemini Atzeret adds "gladness" (sason) to this "joy" (simhah). But Yannai also implies here that the "reward" (shillum) for joy on Sukkot is the "added measure" (tosefet) of joy experienced on Shemini Atzeret. According to one ancient sermon, the people received an "extra" token of heavenly grace on this day; 11 another states that the Day of Atzeret gave the people further occasion to request rain in the coming season.12 One midrash even proves that God hinted at this possibility in Scripture itself.13
Haftarah for Simhat Torah m m nntt^ ASHKENAZIM
JOSHUAL:L-18
SEPHARDIM
JOSHUA 1:1-9
For a discussion of the Book of Joshua and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Joshua" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other passages from the Book of Joshua recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah is taken from the beginning of the Book of Joshua. It is thus the first book after the Torah and the death ofMoses, to which it is explicitly "linked" (Josh 1:1; so Rashi and HAFTARAH FOR SIMHAT TORAH
296
Abravanel.1 To mark the transition, Joshua is called the successor of Moses and is commanded to bring the people into their ancestral homeland. Indeed, the land that Moses only saw from a distance (Deut. 34:1), but could "not cross there" (v. 4), loshua is told to enter ("cross . . . into") and walk its length and breadth (losh. 1:2-3). As a sign of spiritual continuity, the Torah, "charged" by Moses "as the heritage of the congregation of lacob" (Deut. 33:4), is enjoined upon loshua for observance and study (losh. l:7-8a). "Only" thus will the people "prosper" (v. 8b). Sephardim read only this portion of the chapter (w. 1-9); Ashkenazim also recite loshua's orders and exhortations to the tribes (w. 10-18). The haftarah is thus composed of two parts: God's command and loshua's obedient execution. PART 1. lOSHUA'S COMMISSION (loshua 1:1-9) a. loshua 1:1-5 This section provides a transition from the death of Moses (v. 1) to the divine command that loshua cross the lordan and inherit the Land. The divine promise to Moses is reconfirmed (v. 3), along with a promise of victory and support (v. 5). The geographical boundaries are also described (v. 4). b. loshua 1:6-9 loshua is exhorted to be courageous and to observe the Torah faithfully (w. 7-8). He is thus to combine resolute action and spiritual resolve. PART 2. COMPLIANCE AND FEALTY (loshua 1:10-18) a. loshua 1:10-11 loshua orders the officials to prepare for the crossing of the lordan and entrance into the Land. b. loshua 1:12-18 loshua reminds the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Menasseh of their promise to aid their compatriots in the possession of the Land before settling in their own inheritance in the Transjordan (w. 12-15). These tribes swear loyalty to loshua and encourage him to be courageous (w. 16-18).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is charged with the anxiety of continuity and new beginnings. "My servant Moses is dead," says the Lord to loshua at the outset. "Prepare to cross the lordan" (losh. 1:2). The divine promise of the Land to Moses is then emphasized to give assurance to the new leader (v. 3), and God repeatedly exhorts loshua to be strong and resolute, for He will be "with" him as he was with Moses (w. 5-6, 9). Echoing these concerns, the Transjordanian tribes exhort loshua to be courageous and express the hope that God will be "with" him as He was with his master (w. 17-18). The pervasive influence of tradition is indicated through quotes and allusions. Preeminent in the first part are references to the Book ofDeuteronomy. Thus losh. 1:3-5, in which God states, "Every spot on which your foot treads I give to you, as Ipromised.Moses," refers to earlier tradition and then adds the ideal physical boundaries of the Land. The passage concludes with the promise that "no one shall be able to resist you," which is a citation from Deut. 11:24-25. 2 The differences are not significant in this context and basically reflect the adaptation of Moses' address to the nation to suit God's charge to loshua. The ensuing statement in losh. 1:6 and 9 exhorting loshua to be courageous is also derived from a Deuteronomic speech by Moses—though in this case the citation from Deut. 31:7-8 is a direct address to loshua before the assembled people. The language is clearly that of a military exhortation, charging loshua the leader designate to be resolute in strength (cf. Deut. 1:29-30; 2:24-25). 3 A third citation is found in losh. 1:13-15, in which loshua reminds the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh of their commitment to fight with their brethren before settling in the Transjordan. Thematically, this episode is first found in Num. 32:16-27, but the summary formulation of it in loshua's mouth quotes from Deut. 3:18-20. 4 His purpose is twofold: to recall the old obligation and to invoke the authority of Moses. The language of the people's ratification, "We will do [na'aseh] everything you have commanded us and . . . we will obey you \nishmac\ just as we obeyed Moses" (losh. 1:16-17), makes this clear. The formulation must derive from HAFTARAH FOR SIMHAT TORAH 297
standard legal usage. The verb "do" is used by the people in the episode recorded in Num. 32: 25; the doubled formulation, to "do" and to "obey," occurs in the well-known conclusion to the covenant ceremony in Exod. 24:7. Another witness to the legal character of the oath is the fourfold repetition of the adverb kol (all; everything) —which marks its binding and comprehensive nature. The use of kol in Josh. 1:3-4, to emphasize that the Israelites would inherit "every spot" and the "whole" country, also evokes the language of ancient contracts (cf. the legal clauses in Gen. 23:17-19). 5 In this regard, the operative phrase "every spot on which your foot treads I give to you" (Josh. 1:3) suggests some practice whereby a real estate transfer was concluded (and validated) by circumambulation of the territory by the new owner. Such a concrete act of "taking possession" is, in fact, known from ancient Near Eastern documents and corresponds to the term hazakah in rabbinic law.6 A reflex of this language and procedure is also found in God's instructions to Abram in Gen. 13: 14-17:"Raise your eyes and look out from where you are, to the north and south, to the east and west, for I give all the land that you see to you and your offspring forever . . . . Up, walk about the land, through its length and its breadth, for I give it to you." 7 This feature and the operative legal terms are recapitulated at the end of the Book ofjoshua, in 24:3. 8 The theme word kol is also used in connection with the observance of the Torah. Joshua the military man is told to observe "all" the Teaching commanded him by Moses, "all" that is written in it—in order that he succeed (tatzliah) "wherever" he goes and that God be with him "wherever" he goes (Josh. 1:7-9). This emphasis is significant and part of the theology taught here. The old military commission language of verses 6 and 9 (quoted from Deut. 31:7-8) has been transformed through the insertion into it of the command to obey the Torah and "study" (ve-hagita) it "day and night" (Josh. 1:7-8). Success in battle is now conditioned upon faithfulness to the divine Teaching. Physical courage alone is insufficient; it must be coupled with spiritual vigilance for victory to occur. Only scrupulous study and performance will ensure divine favor in the campaigns to follow.9 This is hardly the language of a military exhortation and reflects later Torah piety.10 As a programmatic note, verses 7-8 set a tone for the fulfillment of Deuteronomic rules found throughout the book. 11 The theology in Josh. 1:6-9 echoes values enjoined elsewhere upon the whole community. For example, the nation is told in Deut. 11:8 that observance of the divine commandments will enable them "to enter and take possession of the land." And more broadly, in Psalm 1, study of the Torah is proclaimed to be a transformative activity. In precisely the same terms as found in Josh. 1:8, the psalmist says that one who studies (yehgeh) the Torah "day and night" will succeed (yatzliah) in all (kol) that he does (Ps. 1:2-3). 12 Joshua is thus enjoined to combine two ideals: that of action and that of study. He is asked to be at once a man of power and of piety—learning for the sake of action and acting in accordance with God's will. Becoming in effect a "new Moses" through study makes Joshua also the first "man of Tradition." The divine revelations received by Moses "face to face" (Deut. 34:10) must be learned and recited by his successor. Significantly, Joshua is not called a "prophet"—but one "filled with the spirit of wisdom" (Deut. 34:9). Revelation sets the tasks that tradition tries to realize.
COMMENTS Joshua, 1 :l.After the death The untranslated transition is effected by the Hebrew form w-jy^z; literally, "And it was." The conjunction -pa- links the phrase to the Book of Deuteronomy (Rashi). Kimhi regards this form in more purely stylistic terms (i. e., as a transitional phrase). I.Moses is dead See B. Kiddushin 38a.
According to rabbinic tradition, this occurred on the seventh of Adar.
3. Every spot on whichyourfoot treads See the discussion in Content and Meaning.
This is a technical phrase for taking possession.
4. Tour territory shall extend The ensuing description outlines the ideal boundaries of the land—limited only by geographical barriers on all sides (river, sea, desert-wilderness, mounHAFTARAH FOR SIMHAT TORAH
298
tains). It follows Deut. 11:24, which it explicitly quotes (losh. 1:3). The notable difference is the addition here of the summarizing designation "the whole Hittite country" (v. 4). This is identical to the term "Hatti land" used in Assyrian sources to indicate the Syro-Palestine region.13 Other delineations ofideal boundaries include Gen. 15:18-21, Exod. 23:31, and Deut. 1:7-8. 8. recite it day and night The ideal of perpetual study and recitation is enjoined upon loshua; inPs. 1:2, this is an ideal for all who delight in the Torah and would be righteous. The Book ofDeuteronomy reflects both goals. In Deut. 17:18-20, a leader (the king) is exhorted to study the Torah at all times that he be humble and pious; while Deut. 6:5-9 articulates the communal ideal of discussing or teaching the Torah at all times—when seated at home, walking on the way, lying down, and getting up. It marks a religious ideal of perpetual focus upon God through a constant preoccupation with His Teachings. This is the spiritual end that lies beyond the utilitarian motivation of God's word to loshua. 14 9. Bestrong
This phrase alludes to Deut. 31:23 (Rashi).
10.Joshua thereupongave orders The time is unspecified. Rashi suggested that this was after the period of mourning for Moses. Gersonides suggests that this was after loshua had sent out the spies. 12-15. This alludes to Numbers 32, but the language has been influenced by Deuteronomicphraseology (cf. losh. 1:13 andDeut. 12:9).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL The selection of a haftarah for Simhat Torah has clearly evolved. According to the Talmud, ancient Babylonian practice concluded the annual Torah lectionary cycle on the ninth day of the Sukkot festival season (the second day of Shemini Atzeret) with a haftarah from 1 Kings 8:22ff. (B. Megillah 31b) —thus correlating Moses' blessing before his death (in the Torah's finalparashah, Ve-zo't Haberakhah) with Solomon's blessing at the dedication of the Temple. By geonic times, some Babylonian-influenced communities took their haftarah for this festival day from loshua 1, and this selection is authorized in the work Halakhot Gedolot attributed to R. Yehudai Gaon. 15 Some early medieval European communities practiced a compromise—either reciting three verses from loshua 1 prior to reading 1 Kings 8:22ff., 16 or reciting the initial verses from 1 Kings 8:22ff. prior to loshua l. 1 7 The Rokeah (R. Eleazar of Worms) authorized the sole recitation of losh. 1:1-18, 18 which became normative among Ashkenazim (see Tur, }Omh Hayyim 669). Sefardim recite losh. 1:1-9, following the practice advocated by Abudarham. 19 The most likely reason for the choice of loshua 1 as the haftarah for this occasion springs from an ancient custom (preserved among modern lews of Babylon and Kurdistan) to read the Prophets and the Writings concurrently with the Torah cycle—and to conclude all three sections of the Tanakh simultaneously.20 lust as it is now customary to read from the opening portion of Genesis on the festival immediately after the conclusion of Deuteronomy, 21 we may presume a simultaneous custom of reading from the opening verses of loshua (the first book of the Prophets) on the festival after concluding the Book of Malachi. Over time, this practice took on a life of its own, becoming the official haftarah for Simhat Torah in many communities. In short, it appears that the reading from loshua 1 was initially intended to parallel the added lection from Gen. 1:1-2:4, rather than being seen as related to the end ofDeuteronomy. 22 A second factor in determining present liturgical practice was presumably the thematic continuity between the death of Moses and the leadership of loshua. This is evident from references in ancient liturgical poetry.23 Likewise in the sixteenth century, R. Mordecai laffe named the reference to Moses' death in losh. l : l a s the reason loshua 1 is read after Deuteronomy 34 (Levush Ha-Hur, 669). A third reason—this time ideological—was offered in the eighteenth century by R. Hayyim Yosef David Azulai; loshua 1 is read after the Torah is concluded, he opined, to aver that ludaism is not restricted to the Torah alone, but rather that "we believe in our teacher Moses and all the HAFTARAH FOR SIMHAT TORAH 299
prophets that came after him." 24 Indeed, Joshua 1 marks the beginning of the "chain of tradition" that begins with Moses and continues through the prophets to the Sages (M. Avot 1). Yet it also marks a shift from Revelation to Tradition. Moses received God's Teaching directly—"face to face"—while Joshua inherits it through the mediation of study and interpretation. Joshua becomes the first student to extend Moses' authority beyond the latter's death. The new leader's perpetual recitation of the divine words (Josh. 1:8) actualizes the Revelation for future generations.
Haftarah for First Day of Passover ASHKENAZIM
JOSHUA 5:2-6:1; 6:27
SEPHARDIM
JOSHUA 5:2-6:1; 6:27
nD9 ^
"p^Xn DV
For a discussion of the Book of Joshua and an overall consideration of its historiography, theology, and literary form, see "The Book of Joshua" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." For a discussion of other passages from the Book of Joshua recited as haftarah selections, see the listing in "Index ofBiblical Passages." The haftarah recounts the first events of the Israelites in the homeland—including a Passover ceremony at Gilgal (Josh. 5:10). This celebration is the center point of a series of episodes in Joshua that parallel the original Exodus and repeat it under new circumstances. For example, the crossing of the Jordan is portrayed as a miracle similar to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds in Moses' day. Like that event, "the L O R D . . . dried up the waters of the Jordan for the sake of the Israelites until they crossed over" (Josh. 5:l;cf. 3:13-17,4:17-18). On the other side, the ritual celebration at Gilgal marks the entrance into the Land in the same way that the Passover meal in Egypt marks the Exodus itself. And finally, the appearance of an angel to Joshua prior to his conquest of Canaan (Josh. 5:13-15) recalls the theophany to Moses at the burning bush (Exod. 3:1-5). On both occasions, the hero was bidden to remove his shoes because the ground is holy. The repetition joins the moment of God's promise (to deliver the nation from bondage into the Promised Land, Exod. 3:8) to the onset of its fulfillment. Joshua has become the new Moses for the nation. These similarities put the reader in mind of the recurrence of redemption—and mark off the continuities between the Exodus from Egypt and the ongoing occasions of liberation that compose sacred history. PART 1. GILGAL AND AFTER (Joshua 5:2-15) a. Joshua 5:2-9 Following the crossing of the Jordan River (on the tenth day of the first month), Joshua is commanded by God to circumcise the sons of those who "had perished" in the wilderness—because they had little faith and "had not obeyed the L O R D " (V. 6). This he does, and thus is "the disgrace of Egypt" removed (v. 9). b. Joshua 5:10-12 Soon thereafter ("on the fourteenth day of the month, toward evening" [v. 10]), the Israelites celebrate the passover offering and, on the morrow, eat unleavened bread "of the produce of the country" (v. 11). Thus is the manna of the desert finished. c. Joshua 5 : 1 3 - 1 5 After that, when Joshua is near Jericho, he receives a revelation from the "captain of the L O R D ' S host" (v. 1 4 ) . The figure commands Joshua to remove his sandals, "for the place where you stand is holy" (v. 15). This Joshua does. PART 2. THE FALL OF JERICHO (Joshua 6:1, 27) The haftarah merely notes the framework of the battle—the events prior to the attack, and the subsequent results. a. Joshua 6:1 The narrator records that before the battle Jericho "was shut up tight because of the Israelites." b. Joshua 6:27 After the victory, we are told ofjoshua's divine favor and his earthly glory. HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
300
C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The haftarah is pervaded by rituals, sacred space, and the hint of holy war. Each marks a stage in the transformation of the people and the Land. At the beginning, the young males of the wandering are circumcised—and with this the sojourn in Egypt (and its "disgrace" [losh. 5:9]) is ended. Following this ritual, the people eat of the passover offering and the new grain of the land—and with this the food of the desert (manna) is ended and the produce of the land consumed. And finally, there is a revelation from the heavenly "captain of the LORD'S host" (5:14-15), who tells loshua to remove his shoes from his feet—and with this, a chain of events beginning with Moses in the wilderness, who was similarity instructed by an angel at the beginning of the redemption, is concluded. The nation now stands at the brink of its inheritance. The various sections of the haftarah (the national circumcision at Gilgal, the passover offering and the new grain, and the revelation of the Lord's angel to loshua) deserve further comment—because they take us beyond the external acts of ritual to the inner processes of cultural and historical memory. 1 Indeed, the narrative and its episodes show the power of history to represent the great paradigms of the past. 2 In this case, the text portrays the entrance into the Land as a new exodus and loshua as the new Moses. 3 A close look at four aspects of the description of events show how this is achieved. 1. Immediately antecedent to our haftarah, the Book of loshua reports that the people cross the lordan River—whose waters were "cut off" from their normal flow and stood "in a single heap" (losh. 3 : 1 5 - 1 6 ; cf. v. 1 3 ) . This miraculous depiction recalls the crossing of the Sea ofReeds in Moses' day (Exod. 1 5 : 8 ) . Andjust in case the point is not sufficiently obvious, the narrator states the matter explicitly (losh. 4 : 2 1 - 2 4 ) . If, he says, future generations inquire concerning the cairn of stones that the tribes took out of the lordan, they should say that they recall how "the L O R D your God dried up the waters of the lordan before you until you crossed, just as the L O R D your God did to the Sea of Reeds . . ." (v. 2 3 ) . In its pedagogical form, this teaching echoes Deut. 6 : 2 0 - 2 5 , where precisely the same question-and-answer format is used to emphasize the Exodus itself. 2. In order to underscore further the typology between the Exodus and conquest, the narrator adds that "[t]he people came up from the lordan on the tenth day of the first month" (losh. 4 : 1 9 ) . This dating recalls the final events of the sojourn in Egypt—when each family was commanded to take a lamb "on the tenth of [the first] month" (Exod. 12:3) and sacrifice it as "a passover offering to the LORD" (v. 1 1 ) on "the fourteenth day" of the month "at twilight" (v. 6 ) . For a whole week thereafter, only "unleavened bread" was to be eaten (w. 1 8 - 1 9 ) . Similarly in the days of loshua, we learn that "the Israelites offered the passover sacrifice on the fourteenth day of the [first] month, toward evening" (losh. 5:10)—and on the morrow ate "unleavened bread and parched grain" from "the produce of the country" (v. I I ) . 4 The procedure conforms with the commandment found in the Torah: When you enter the land that I am giving to you and you reap its harvest, you shall bring the first sheaf of your harvest to the priest [and he shall elevate it as an offering on the day after the passover offering]. 5 . . . Until that very day, until you have brought the offering of your God, you shall eat no bread or parched grain or fresh ears . . . . (Lev. 23:10-14) 3. The paschal ceremony at Gilgal (losh. 5:10-11) also explains the conjunction of this celebration with the immediately preceding account of the circumcision of the Israelite males (5: 2-9). A legal factor underlies the narrative—and that is the rule that only the circumcised could participate in the paschal offering (see Exod. 12:43-50, especially v. 48b). By performing the rite of circumcision prior to the passover sacrifice, loshua is presented as a righteous observer of the law—a faithful follower of the statutes ofMoses. 4. A final scene further links loshua to Moses, and the events of the Exodus to the conquest. It occurs near lericho, after the passover ceremony. On that occasion, loshua is confronted by a "man" with a "drawn sword in hand" (losh. 5 : 1 3 ) . This figure identifies himself as the "captain of the LORD'S hosts" (v. 1 4 ) . loshua perceives in this individual an angelic messenger and pro301
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
strates himself upon the earth (v. 14). At this point, the figure merely says, "Remove your sandal from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy" (v. 15). N o oracle follows this enigmatic command—and the reader (like Joshua) is at first left to infer that this act is some symbolic rite of passage from the impurities ofEgypt and the desert to the holy land of Canaan. But the narrator no doubt wishes us to remember the similar divine command to Moses at the burning bush (Exod. 3:5). In that context, the holiness of the site (in the desert) is due to the theophany of God in the fire. In a comparable way, it is the revelation of God's messenger to Joshua that makes the particular spot near Jericho "holy." The reader is left to ponder the silent evocation of Moses through this scene—and thus to anticipate divine providence, as in days gone by. All told, the narrator of our haftarah is no naive historian—simply concerned to tell the past "as it was." Here is rather a religious writer who remembers in a deliberate way. As we have seen, the events of Joshua's day are so formulated as to evoke, at every point, the good old days ofMoses and the Exodus from Egypt. Indeed, at several points the comparison (be it between the Sea of Reeds and the Jordan, or the two heroes) is explicit. In this way, the great paradigms of the past are renewed for future generations. Indeed, what the narrator introduces as didactic advice ("In time to come, when your children ask their fathers . . . tell your children" [Josh. 4:21-22]) is thematized throughout the narrative (Joshua 3-5). That is to say, the entire -narrative is an answer to future generations concerning God's glorious deeds on behalf of Israel. The new events are memorable precisely because they conform to the old Exodus paradigm. For the historian, God's power in history is renewed in each generation, but His acts of redemption (or liberation) have one typical expression. That "type" is paradigmatically expressed by the Exodus from Egypt—the first great event of Israelite freedom. The conquest simply repeats that "prototype" in old-new ways. By this means, the memorable events ofhistory reveal their divine significance.6 C O M M E N T S
Joshua 5:2.Makeflint knives and proceed -with a second circumcision The use of flint knives (harbot tzurim) continues ancient practice (cf. Exod. 4:25). As with the ancient altars, this ritual object remained rough-hewn. Since antiquity, some have regarded the reference to be to a sharp knife (Targum, followed by Rashi); others suggest, "sharp like flint" (R. Joseph ibn Kaspi). The need for a second circumcision is indicated in w. 4-7, where we are told that the ritual was done on the children of those who had come out of Egypt—born after the Exodus, during the desert wandering (v. 5). The reason for delaying the ritual is not given. One rabbinic tradition suggests that the postponement was due to the hardships of the trek and the absence of a north wind (B. Yevamot 71b-72a; cf. Rashi). 7 Others have offered that the new command was to ensure the practice ofperidh (whereby the corona of the membrum is uncovered by splitting the membrane that covers it and drawing it downward), since this aspect of the ritual "was not given to Abraham" (B. Yevamot 71b). This opinion is contested by Abravanel and earlier by Kimhi, who reports a midrashic tradition that Abraham did in fact perform this procedure. 8 All commentators agree that "all [the male] Israelites were circumcised at the Exodus," as Scripture states (Metzudat David). 9 According to rabbinic tradition, the circumcision was required for entrance to the Land, "since this land was promised to the patriarchs on condition that their descendants would observe the rite of circumcision" (Genesis Rabbah 46:9). 10 3. Gibeath-haaraloth
That is, "the Hill ofForeskins" [Transl.].
4. this is the -reason Hebrew ve-zeh ha-davar. For this understanding, see Kimhi. 9. Today I have rolled awayfromyou This is part of a divine speech that explains the name of the shrine of Gilgal by a popular etymology (galloti, "I have rolled away"). 11 The remark that with the circumcision God has ended the "disgrace" ofEgypt is puzzling. If the issue concerns the circumcision itself, tradition reports that the males were already circumcised in Egypt and that those now circumcised were born after the Exodus (cf. Josh. 5:5). Moreover, extensive evidence (paintings, texts, mummified bodies) show that the ancient Egyptians also performed this operation, although in a different way than the Israelites.12 NJPS therefore suggests the possibility that the disgrace is "of the Egyptian bondage" (see next note). The episode of Joshua's HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
302
act of circumcision, and the meaning of the place name, must have circulated among the sacred stories of the shrine of Gilgal. the disgrace ofEgypt Gilgal
That is, of the Egyptian bondage [Transl.].
Interpreted as "rolling" [Transl.].
10-12. The narrator has woven together terminology from several legal sources. Thus the phrase "offered [or performed] the passover sacrifice . . . toward evening ['erevY is derived from Deut. 15:1 and 6, 13 and the terms "parched grain," "on that very day," and "on the day after" are all taken from Lev. 23:11 and 14-15. Thus the ceremony in Joshua is constructed to appear as the fulfillment of the latter passage (cf. "When you enter the land . . . [u]ntil that very day [of the new sheaves] . . . you shall eat no bread or parched grain" [Lev. 23:10, 14]). In the present case, the manna represents the old food. 14 11. On the day after the passover offering Hebrew mi-mahamt ha-pesah. In this context, it is clear that the eating of the new grain occurs the morning after the paschal meal. According to Rabbi David Kimhi, this is to be understood literally; that is, the eating may commence with daybreak on the fifteenth day of Nisan. He based his understanding of the idiom "on the day after the passover" on Num. 33:3, where it is clear that the Israelites left Egypt on the morning after the feast (so also Malbim). Since Josh. 5:11 is linguistically and legally linked to Lev. 23:10-14, it would be reasonable to conclude that the idiom "on the day after the sabbath \mi-maharat hashabbatY (Lev. 23:11) also refers to the day after the paschal meal—especially since the ritual is linked to this festival and the term "sabbath" (in biblical, Phoenician, and Mesopotamian sources) can mean the full moon (viz., the fifteenth of the month). 15 Whatever the original sense, by postbiblical times the meaning was subject to great differences and contentions. 16 The tannaitic Sages regarded "sabbath" as a figurative expression for "holiday" (yow top) and regarded the "day after the passover" to be the day after the first day (i. e., the first day ofholha-mo'ed, the intervening five days of the feast; outside oflsrael, it is the second day of the festival itself). 17 The Boethusians argued that the "sabbath" referred to was the first Sabbath day in the festival week,18 and Qumran sources interpreted the idiom to mean the first Sabbath day after the festival week.19 C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D T H E
FESTIVAL
The haftarah portrays the first passover offering in the Land—after which ("on the day after") the people ate of the "unleavened" produce of the land (Josh. 5:10-11). From this perspective, the animal offering marks a recollection and renewal of the Exodus, and the unleavened grain signals the end of the desert trek (and the divine manna). Hence the eating of the new grain on the morrow of the passover offering is something of a rite of passage, the entrance into the Land promised the ancestors. The renewal of this grain ritual annually (through eating the w^tzot, or unleavened wafers) does not simply celebrate new agricultural beginnings. It is also a celebration of the earth as a physical and spiritual homeland—physical, because it marks the natural necessity of eating (and the domestication of the earth through bodily labor); and spiritual, because it stresses the relationship between labor and the re-creation of the earth as a habitat for human freedom and flourishing.
Haftarah for Second Day ofPassover ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
nOD ^
^
•T'
2KINGS23:l-9,21-25 2 KINGS 23:1-9, 21-25
For an introduction to the Book of Kings and a consideration of its contents, historiography, and theology, see "The Book of Kings" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot 303
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
Cycle." For other haftarah selections taken from this book, see the listing in "Index of Biblical Passages." In the year 626 B.C.E., the Chaldean kingdom of Babylon (under King Nabopolassar) rebelled against Assyria. A series of struggles ensued—leading to the fall of Ashur in 614, of Nineveh in 612, and of Haran in 610 B.C.E. All these events had a geopolitical impact on the kingdom ofludah, and some, like the fall ofNineveh, even produced literary results (e. g., the prophetic taunt and exultation that appears at the beginning of the Book of Nahum). In addition, there is an intriguing correlation between the fall of Assyria and the resurgence of religious reform in ludah. The death of King Assurbanipal of Assyria in 627 B.C.E.,1 and the increased weakening of his empire during the struggle for succession, not only induced the Babylonian revolt; it may also explain a significant sequence of events in the life o f K i n g losiah o f l u d a h (639-609 B.C.E.). According to the Book of Chronicles, losiah underwent a religious awakening in the eighth year o f h i s reign (631 B.C.E.); began a process of Temple purification (of pagan features) four years later (627 B.C.E.); and then, in the course of subsequent Temple repairs (six years later, in 6 2 1 B.C.E.), a "scroll of the LORD'S Teaching" was found (arguably the Book ofDeuteronomy, or its core). 2 This event led to a public renewal of the covenant and a great Passover celebration for the entire nation ( 2 Chron. 3 4 : 1 - 3 5 : 1 9 ) . The parallel report in the Book of Kings collapses the second and third events in the sequence—so that now a royal act of Temple repair in the king's eighteenth year ( 6 2 1 B.C.E.) led to the finding of the Torah scroll3 and to the subsequent religious reforms (of purification) and Passover celebration (2 Kings 23). The account in Kings thus puts the work of repair before the acts of purification and presents the finding of the Torah scroll as the reason for the religious reform that ensues. Most modern scholars regard this version of the events as ideologically concerned to privilege the role of "the scroll" in inspiring losiah's pious enactment. By contrast, the account in Chronicles links the purification of worship to the report oflosiah's religious revival and downplays the role of the book. 4 Compared with the historiographies in Kings and Chronicles, our haftarah is even more concise, comprising only an excerpt from the Book of Kings. Thus the Temple repairs and the discovery of the scroll in 2 Kings 22 are not mentioned, and the reading begins with the proclamation of a national convocation and a public reading of the scroll "which had been found" (2 Kings 23:1-3). It then goes on to specify some of the acts of Temple purification that ensued (w. 4-9) and concludes with a royal edict to celebrate the Passover as "prescribed" in the "scroll" (v. 21)—a great event, the likes of which had not been seen during the entire period oflsrael's settlement in the Land (w. 21-25). The haftarah thus moves from the opening events concerning the scroll to the celebration of the Passover as found there. PART 1. THE ASSEMBLY (2 Kings 23:1-9) a. 2 Kings 23:1-3 The king convokes an assembly of the whole nation, and "he read to them the entire text of the covenant scroll which had been found in the House of the LORD" (v. 2). The king then solemnizes the covenant, enjoining all to fulfill its terms "with all their heart and soul," and the nation agrees (v. 3). b. 2 Kings 23:4-9 The king then "ordered" (va-yitmv) the high priest and other functionaries to bring from the Temple many pagan objects used for the worship of Baal and Asherah, or the astral bodies (v. 4). These are destroyed and burned. Also pagan priests are suppressed. Correspondingly, the king has local Israelite shrines destroyed and brings the priests to lerusalem, but they are barred from ascending the altar there and performing the rites of sacrifice (w. 8-9). PART 2. COMMANDMENT AND CEREMONY (2 Kings 23:21-25) Finally, the king "commanded" (va-yitza-v) the people to perform the Passover—the likes of which are unparalleled since before the time of the ludges (w. 21-22). Thus are the acts of purification and Passover accomplished, all according to the Teaching and by royal behest; for no king greater than losiah ever arose, who served God "with all his heart and soul and might" (w. 23-25). HAFTARAH FORSEVENTHDAY OF PASSOVER
304
C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The haftarah develops sequentially. It begins (1) with a national assembly, a public reading of the "covenant scroll" (2 Kings 23:2), and a communal renewal of the covenant; it then turns (2) to the cultic purification program, both of pagan artifacts and priests from lerusalem, and of Israelite shrines in the countryside (with the eviction of their personnel to lerusalem); and it concludes (3) with a national Passover and a summary of all the great events. Each of the parts of the tripartite sequence is initiated by the king, but involves priestly and popular participation; indeed, both the people and king are said to accept God's covenant with all their heart and soul (1 and 3). This language is carefully chosen and is meant to evoke the great proclamation of the Shema' in Deut. 6:4-9—where all Israelites are called upon to love God with all their heart and soul and might (v. 5). The implication is that now, in the days of losiah, the people have fully committed themselves to the covenant—much as Moses had exhorted their ancestors to do before the entrance into the Land. It is notable that the account of the disestablishment and destruction of local altars also follows the language found in the Book ofDeuteronomy (see Deut. 12:1-3). The only discrepancy is that the local Israelite priests are hereby barred from cultic activities in lerusalem (2 Kings 23:9), whereas in Deut. 18:6-8 this is permitted. The difference may be an ad hoc amendment to the Law, meant to deal with the specific circumstances of defilement of this time and place—not more. One can observe that 2 Kings 23: 9 is not only a notice tacked on at the end (with the term }akh, "however"), but (together with v. 8) interrupts the acts of defilement of prohibited worship (w. 4-7, 10-20). Nevertheless, the elements are intertwined: both the purification and centralization of worship are two main parts of the great Deuteronomic reform (see Deut. 12:1-3 + 4-7). The covenant ceremony at the outset of the haftarah and the Passover celebration at the end deserve special comment. Not only is the celebration a public recitation of the divine Teaching—reminiscent of Moses' proclamation of Deuteronomy itself before his death, and of Ezra's reading of "the scroll of the teaching of Moses" upon the return from Babylonian exile (Nehemiah 8:1)—it is also the only event after Sinai in which all the people publicly and collectively undergo a commitment to the divine covenant. There was no other act of covenant ratification with the entire nation since before the settlement into the Land. The great Passover celebration mentioned in 2 Kings 23:21-22 states the same: there had been nothing like it during the whole period of the judges and kings—that is, there was no Passover event like this since most ancient times. The first post-Exodus Passover event of such collective importance occurred in the time ofloshua, immediately upon entrance into the Land (losh. 5:10-11); this event is recited as the haftarah for the first day of Passover. C O M M E N T S
2 Kings 23:2. And he read to them the entire text ofthe covenant scroll This public reading before all the nation echoes the private reading to losiah of the found scroll (2 Kings 22:10-11). In the first case, Shaphan the scribe reads the scroll to the king; in this instance, the monarch himself performs the public recitation. The personal repentance of the king thus results in a national renewal of the covenant. The scroll is called here sefer ha-berit, "the covenant scroll" (cf. Exod. 24:7) —and not only "the scroll of the Teaching" (2 Kings 22:8, l l ) . 5 The precise contents are not specified. On this basis, the allusion to punishment for idolatry (23:11), and the acts of purification and centralization of worship that ensue (23:4-9), many modern commentators assume that the king heard the curses of the Book of Deuteronomy and responded by fulfilling its ritual prescriptions. 3.And all the people entered into the covenant NIPS "entered into" follows the Targum. The Hebrew verbal form va-ya'a-mod is doubly difficult—both because the idiom is otherwise unknown as an expression for entering the covenant and because the verb follows the earlier 305
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
stipulation clause, in which the term used is le-hakim, "to fulfill" (the covenant)—implying that the covenant was already established. The usage makes sense in the light of late biblical Hebrew, where la-dmod regularly replaces le-hakim as the term for fulfilling the terms of an existing covenant. 6 Presumably, the use of k-hakim in the first clause is meant as an archaizing allusion (cf. Deut. 8:18). The Chronicler is more consistent (2 Chron. 34:31-32), deleting the verb le-hakim entirely and replacing it with la-'asot (to observe). In addition, va-yadmod is rendered as va-yadmed—thus giving the verb a causative sense (meaning that the king "confirmed" or "established" the people in the covenant). 7 This verbal form continues the narrator's emphasis on royal action. By contrast, the form in 2 Kings 23:3 shifts attention to the people's commitment. 4.Ashemh For this goddess, compare 1 Kings 18:19; ordinarily dshemh is rendered "sacredpost" (e. g., 2 Kings 17:16) [Transl.]. 6. he beat it to dust The specific verbs used to mark Josiah's destruction of the idols ("burned" and "beat to dust") may intentionally allude to the very same acts performed by Moses when he destroyed the Golden Calf (Exod. 32:20). Josiah would thus function as a new Moses, a role fully consonant with his depiction as one wholeheartedly devoted to the Teaching ofMoses (2 Kings 23:25). The historian clearly had this parallel in mind, as we can see from his praise of Josiah as a king the likes of which had not arisen before—"nor did any like him arise after him" (v. 25). Hearing this, all readers would recall their first great leader, of whom Scripture says, "Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses—whom the L O R D singled out, face toface" (Deut. 34:10). 9.
This verse may be understood in connection with verses 21-23 [Transl.].
21-23. This paragraph resumes the account in the opening verses (w. 1-3), after the depiction of the cultic reforms (w. 4-14, in Judah; w. 15-20, in Samaria). The defilement of local Israelite shrines (v. 8) means that the only legitimate place for the festival sacrifice is Jerusalem. In this way, the instruction in Deut. 16:5-6 is fulfilled. C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D T H E
FESTIVAL
The custom of reciting a haftarah from 2 Kings 23 is stated in the Babylonian Talmud. Supplementing an earlier teaching that "on [the first of] Passover . . . we conclude [the Torah reading] with [the account of] the Passover at Gilgal," the Gemara adds: "but nowadays when there are two days [celebrated at the beginning], [the account of] the Passover at Gilgal [is recited on] the first day, and [the account of] the Passover ofjosiah on the morrow" (B. Megillah 31a). The notice does not specify which verses are recited or that (as is the present custom) "skipping" is done. The structure of the haftarah—covenant renewal, purification from idolatry, and Passover celebration—contemporizes the ongoing meaning of the festival. The first Passover, in Egypt, is but the beginning stage of a national and individual process. At that time, the people left Egypt and its idolatries in order to serve God in the wilderness. The opening lines of the Decalogue also signal this fact. God has delivered the people from Egypt; therefore they should serve Him alone and no idol or divine representation (Exod. 20:1-4). This covenantal commitment is confirmed in the days ofjosiah—and provides an example for future generations. The people read the book of the Teaching and demonstrate their covenantal loyalty by destroying all idolatry from the Temple. Only then do they celebrate the Passsover in full splendor. The process presented is thus one of inner commitment to the truths of the tradition, and a separation from impure and false practices. Through this haftarah, the Rabbis teach that the Passover liberation must be achieved time and again—and that its three central pillars are devotion to the covenant, wholehearted commitment to God, and a purgation from one's religious life of every sign of false or impure service. HAFTARAH FORSEVENTHDAY OF PASSOVER
306
Haftarah for Intermediate Sabbath ofPassover
nOD ^ TOlftn ^in nn^
ASHKENAZIM EZEKIEL37:1-14 SEPHARDIM EZEKIEL 37:1-14
For a discussion of Ezekiel's life and times and a consideration of his message and theology, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the comments to the several haftarah readings taken from his prophecies (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is a special reading designated by ancient rabbinic tradition for the Intermediate Sabbath ofPassover (B. Megillah 31a). Its thematic focus is the regeneration and repopulation of the people's life and spirit from the doom of exile. A vision of dry bones and their resurrection is the central trope of the prophet's depiction of national rebirth. Ezekiel himself went to Babylon with the first contingent o f j u d e a n exiles in 597 B.C.E. (cf. 2 Kings 24:8-16 and Ezek. 1:1-2). The present prophecy is probably after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.E., when there was a large-scale deportation to the east. PART 1. DRY BONES REVIVED (Ezekiel 37:1-10) The prophet receives a divine vision of a valley filled with dry bones and is promised that they shall be revived. Receiving God's command, Ezekiel addresses the bones and commands them in God's name to "live again" (w. 1-6). Thereupon, in the very course of the command, the miracle of resurrection and embodiment takes place. Breath enters the newly formed corpses and "they stood up on their feet, a vast multitude" (v. 10). PART 2. THE H O P E OF REBIRTH (Ezekiel 37:11-14) Following the resurrection scene, God provides an explanation that is intended to counter the hopelessness of the exiles, who have said, "Our bones are dried up, our hope is gone; we are doomed" (v. 11). The new prophecy breathes hope into the nation—announcing their rebirth from the grave of despair and their restoration to the Land of Israel. C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The prophecy of the dry bones in Ezek. 37:1-14 is part of a divine vision (plus execution: w. 1 - 6 + 7-10) followed by its explanation (w. 11-14). In the first case, the opening spectacle of bones strewn across the valley floor is punctuated by God's query of Ezekiel:"0 mortal, can these bones live again?" and the prophet's response that "only You know" (v. 3). Such a query about a phenomenon recalls the prophetic pattern in which God asks the prophet what he sees and, after the latter notes the ostensible feature, the matter is explained by God along with a prophecy bearing on Israel's future (Amos 7:7-8; 8:1-2; Jer. 1:11-15; Zech. 4:2-5:4). 1 In the present case, the question is separated from the explanation by an execution of the divine order to prophesy to the bones about their revival and by a depiction of the event itself. Oddly, the depiction and the interpretation are slightly divergent—since the bones are initially described as being on the ground, whereas the revived bones are subsequently said to arise from newly opened graves (cf. w. 2 and 12). The spectacle and its effect are accentuated by repeated uses of the particle hineh, with the sense of "behold" or"lo"—thus conveying a dramatic sense of immediacy. The term occurs twice in connection with the opening vision of dry bones in the valley ("He led me all around them; and beholdl there were very many of them . . . and lo! they were very dry" [Ezek. 37:2]). It recurs again in connection with the prophet's address to the bones themselves ("Beholdl I will cause breath to enter . . ." [v. 5]), and then twice more in connection with the execution (once in connection with the noise preceding the coming together of the bones [v. 7], and again in connection with the formation of the sinews [v. 8]). The particle also marks God's promise about opening the graves for the resurrection of the people ("Beholdl I am going to open your graves" [v. 12]). 307
HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
NJPS does not translate the particle hineh in any of these instances, thereby leaving unmarked the punctuation of events enunciated by the prophet and recited by every reader since. OJPS preserves this dramatic marker.2 A central use of the particle hineh occurs in Ezek. 37:11, in connection with the explanation of the vision. After remarking that the bones of the vision refer to the "whole House oflsrael," and prior to announcing the national resurrection, God cites a popular saying to the prophet. He says that the people complain: "Beholdl Our bones are dried up, our hope is gone; we are doomed." This phrase sounds like a fragment of a lament or evocation of despair, similar to liturgical expressions found in the Book ofPsalms (cf. Ps.22:15:"My life ebbs away: all my bones are disjointed; my heart is like wax, melting within me"). Given the similarity between its central image ("our bones are dried up") and the motif of Ezekiel's vision, one may wonder whether this very expression of physical and spiritual despondency triggered the content of the prophet's vision as well as the counterimage of resuscitation.3 If so, this would be one of several occasions where a popular saying inspires or generates a teaching of hope for the exilic community. Another instance would be the people's adage about how fathers eat "sour grapes" while their descendants' teeth are "set on edge" (Ezek. 18:2-4)—a saying that led to the prophet's denunciation of the doctrine of vicarious punishment and to his vigorous espousal of personal accountability before God. 4 Whatever the etiology of the bones imagery, it is now the content of the vision initiated by God. Indeed, the opening reference to the "hand of the L O R D " (Ezek. 37:1) should be understood as the sign of a trance-like experience, as elsewhere in the book (see Ezek. l:3ff., 3:14f., 8 : l f f , and 40:lff.). Hence the spectacle reported by Ezekiel is his memory of an ecstatic vision, announced to the people in order to generate hope in God's acts of redemption to come. A similar conclusion about the function of the event was proposed in antiquity by R. ludah. In a tannaitic discussion about resurrection, he asserted that Ezekiel's vision was "really emet] only a parable [mashal]"; his view differs totally from the opinion of R. Eliezer, who regarded the events depicted by Ezekiel to be literally true (B. Sanhedrin 92b). A comparable division of opinion about the nature of the scene runs throughout the Middle Ages. Rashi presents both perspectives—supporting, on the one hand, the literal position of resurrection, but also showing a clear sympathy for a more symbolic interpretation in his statement that the vision is a "hint and example to the entire house of Israel, who have despaired of salvation."5 R. David Kimhi and R. Eliezer of Beaugency also regarded the vision and prophecy as a parable, though Kimhi also emphasizes that the image of disinterred bones is a promise of a physical resurrection to take place in the final salvation. This understanding of the function of Ezekiel's vision is already indicated in the old Targum tradition preserved in the medieval liturgical compendium .Mahzor Vitry.6 A concrete depiction of the resurrection scene is preserved in a fresco in the ancient synagogue of Dura-Europos (dated to 244-245 c . E . ) , but there is no way to determine whether this is to be understood as a literal or figurative event directed to the ancient exiles or to later generations. 7 C O M M E N T S
Ezekiel 37:1. The hand ofthe LORD came upon me A characteristic expression for overwhelming divine inspiration in the Book of Ezekiel (Ezek. 1 : 3 , 3 : 1 4 , 8 : 1 , 4 0 : 1 ) , but also found elsewhere (Isa. 8 : 1 1 ) . Other old traditions refer to the "descent" of the ecstatic spirit upon a person (cf. ludg. 1 4 : 6 , 1 9 ; 1 5 : 1 4 ; 1 Sam. 1 0 : 6 , 1 0 ) . Ezekiel similarly announces that "the spirit of the L O R D fell upon me" (Ezek. 1 1 : 5 ) . The "spirit [mah] o f t h e L O R D " (Ezek. 1 1 : 5 ) or "of God" ( 1 1 : 2 4 ) in the Book ofEzekiel is the "spirit of prophecy" (see the Targum to Ezek. 3 7 : 1 ) , as distinguished from "wind" (ruah) generally. The term ruah is repeated variously in our text with different senses, thus functioning as a constituent feature ofEzekiel's rhetoric. 8 and set me down Hebrew va-yniheni (also in Ezek. 40:2) is a hif'l form of the verb nuah, to be distinguished in form and sense from the variant hif'l form ve-hinnahti (found in 37:14; also 22:20), which means "to set" in the sense of "to leave" or "establish." The repetition of the 308 HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
verb, first with the prophet alighting in the valley and later with the promised resettlement of the nation in the homeland, thus frames the unit and gives it stylistic closure. 3. only Tou know R. Eliezer of Beaugency supplements: "for You created them." 9 He explains: "the artisan is proficient to determine if a broken pot might be repaired or not." 10 4. and say to them The word "them" is a preposition with a third-person masculine plural pronoun, although the reference is to "the bones," a feminine plural. Similar grammatical irregularities pervade this (cf. w. 2, 4-8) and other chapters (especially Ezekiel l). 1 1 5-10. The oracle addressed to the bones follows this sequence: sinews, flesh, and skin. This completed, an oracle is recited for breath "from the four winds" to enter the corpses "that they may live again" (v. 9). The supernatural rejuvenation process reverses the natural process of physical decay, as Rashi and R. David Kimhi have noted. This rebirth imagery is but one of the images the prophet uses to prophesy national renewal. In an earlier oracle, the nation is promised "a new heart and a new spirit" for the time of their resettlement in the Land (Ezek. 36:26-28). 10.1 prophesied Hebrew hinnabbe'ti. Grammatically, the verb is vocalized as a hitpa'el with the elision of the tav (so Kimhi; i. e., from a presumed original hitnabbe'ti);12 it parallels the pi'el form nibbe'ti in verse 7. 13 Both verbs are part of symmetrical compliance formulas. A similar example of such an elision occurs in Ezek. 5:13, ve-hinnehamti (and when I vent My fury) occurring instead of ve-hitnehamti.14 11. we are doomed For this expression and links to liturgies, see above. In particular, nigzarnu (we are doomed) is comparable to the expression nigzarti (I am lost [Lam. 3:54]) and its biform nigrazti (I am thrust out [Ps. 31:23]). Compare also nigmshti (I was driven away [Jon. 2:5]). 14.1 the LORD have spoken and have acted As a result of the national restoration, the nation will "know" that the Lord fulfills prophecies, that is, that He is a trustworthy and efficacious God. The formula "I the L O R D have spoken and have acted," often used with the recognition terminology "that you will know," is a distinctive feature of the prophet Ezekiel (cf. Ezek. 17: 24, 22:13-16, 24:14, 36:36).
C O N N E C T I O N S BETWEEN T H E H A F T A R A H A N D T H E
FESTIVAL
The reason for reading Ezekiel's vision of resurrection on Passover is somewhat obscure. 15 The earliest rabbinic source simply refers to the reading as "the dry bones" (B. Megillah 31a), with no explanation. Rashi's later comment adds the terse remark that "they came out ofEgypt before the [set] time"—an apparent allusion to the identity of the resurrected bones as belonging to Israelites from the Exodus period. His point is fleshed out by an Aramaic Targum preserved in the aforementioned Mahzor Vitry (from the school of Rashi) and elsewhere.16 In these traditions we are told that the bones belonged to those Ephraimites who, according to an old rabbinic observation, miscalculated the time of bondage and left Egypt before the proper time (B. Sanhedrin 92b, cf. Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer 48). These individuals were killed by the Philistines on their way out of Egypt 17 and are now revived as a sign of the future resurrection. The fact that these Ephraimites were in Egypt before the Exodus is presumably the missing link connecting this haftarah with the festival of Passover. But such a marginal tradition hardly accounts for the theme of resurrection, which is the central and powerful theme of the haftarah. Another consideration for the reading of Ezekiel 37:1-14 on the festival may be suggested— one that focuses on the resurrection motif itself, rather than on the identification of the people involved. This consideration starts from the striking Jewish tradition that the patriarch Isaac was bound upon the altar at the Passover season (see Jubilees 18:18-19; Targum Neofiti on Exod. 309
HAFTARAH FOR INTERMEDIATE SABBATH OF PASSOVER
12:42; and Exodus Rabbah 15:11) and that it was divine dewdrops that revived him when he died on the altar "in the grip of fear" (Midrash Lekah Tov, on Gen. 31:42) 18 or after he was sacrificially consumed (Shibbolei ha-Leket 9a-b). This connection between springtime, (sacrificial) offerings, and resurrection is a well-known mythic topos in the history of religions; 19 and the conjunction of this complex of motifs with a classic Jewish theme (the binding of Isaac) may explain the recitation of our haftarah about resurrection at the onset of springtime, when the prayer for dew (associated with fertility and resurrection) 20 is annually inaugurated (beginning with xhe Musa-f service on the first day of Passover). Accordingly, though this thematic complex has been thoroughly Judaized and saturated with monotheistic motifs, one may still sense the residue of older religious sentiments of national and physical renewal. Recitation of Ezekiel's vision of resurrection during Passover thus perpetuates an immemorial association between earthly and human rebirth, inspired by the budding of seeds in the spring. Celebration of the season is also marked in lewish liturgy by reciting Song of Songs in the synagogue on the Intermediate Sabbath ofPassover.
Haftarah for Seventh Day ofPassover
n02
'W IV •V
ASHKENAZIM 2 SAMUEL 22:1-51 SEPHARDIM 2 SAMUEL 22:1-51
For text and commentary, see the haftarah for Ha'azinu. C O N N E C T I O N S
B E T W E E N T H E H A F T A R A H A N D T H E
FESTIVAL
The song ofMoses (Exodus 15:1-18, recited in the Torah service) and David's song of thanksgiving (recited as the haftarah) are both dramatic accounts of God's saving providence in history. The recitation of the Song at the Sea on the seventh day of Passover is based on the tradition that the miracle of the waters occurred on that day. Choice of 2 Sam. 22:1-51 as the prophetic reading is already noted in the Talmud (B. Megillah 31a). Rashi explains this selection as due to the fact that David's song complements that ofMoses. In fact, he proposes specific links between the two passages by suggesting that two of the divine actions in David's song—"Smoke went up from His nostrils" and "He let loose bolts, and scattered them" (2 Sam. 22:9, 15)—actually refer to events at the Reed Sea described by Moses (cf. Exod. 15:8-10). Rashi's opinion is rooted in midrashic tradition, which notes these links among several others (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Be-shallah 2 [on Exod. 14:13]; Yalkut Shimoni, 2 Samuel 22,160). According to R. Yohanan, the phrase "He [God] reached down from on high . . . [and] drew me out of the mighty waters" (2 Sam. 22:17) refers to God's rescue of the weak and weary Israelites from the Sea (Yalkut Shimoni, 161; cf. R. loseph Kara, ad loc.). Moreover, the identification of the "perverse" ones in 2 Sam. 22:27 with Pharaoh and the Egyptians is already made by Targum lonathan, where the paraphrase refers to God's rescue of the Israelites from those who plotted against them. Such identifications show that drawing connections between the haftarah and the Exodus was an established element of old synagogue tradition. It is not necessary to share these historicizing ascriptions in order to appreciate the religious mentality that inspires them. For rabbinic tradition, God's ongoing acts of salvation were embedded in an expanding liturgy of praise. The songs ofMoses and David represent two paradigmatic moments in the sacred history oflsrael. From this perspective, it was only natural to expect that succeeding layers of that history would embed references to earlier acts of divine redemption. This layering of memory is an essential feature of lewish cultural consciousness. Recitation of these events in the synagogue transfers them to new generations, deepening the shared past and its central images. HAFTARAH FOR SEVENTH DAY OF PASSOVER
310
Haftarah for Eighth Day ofPassover n02 bv
DV
ASHKENAZIM ISAIAH 10:32-12:6 SEPHARDIM ISAIAH 10:32-12:6
(Some also recite this passage for Yom ha-'Atzma'ut, Israel Independence Day) For a discussion of the prophecies in Isaiah 1-39 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks introducing the other haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The prophecies in this haftarah compose a series of promises concerning national redemption and conclude the first part of the Book oflsaiah (chapters 1-12). 1 Repeatedly the prophet refers to a "day" to come, a day of victory and fulfillment that will inaugurate a new order of existence (Isa. 10:32; 11:10, 11; 12:1). It will be a time of victory over oppression, of the renewal of Davidic kingship, of an era of peace and harmony that will transfigure the natural enmity, and of the ingathering of the nation from its far-flung dispersion. Beneficiaries of divine grace, the people oflsrael shall "joyfully . . . draw water from the fountains of triumph" (12:3) and praise God, who shall dwell in their midst in Zion. All these hopes are recited on the eighth day of Passover, concluding the festival of freedom with hopes of a great redemption to come. The prophet Isaiah spoke in Jerusalem sometime in the last third of the eighth century B.C.E., with an eye on the oppressive Assyrian power to the northeast. However, his message has not been restricted to that time and place, but has rather been a transcendent teaching of hope ever since. Indeed, the series of prophecies in this haftarah include some of the most powerful and influential Utopian visions in Scripture. PART 1. THE E N D OF OPPRESSION (Isaiah 10:32-34) The prophet envisions the Assyrian king arriving near Jerusalem (at Nob) for his attack but promises that God will "hew off the tree-crowns with an ax" (v. 33). Thus will the "Sovereign LORD of Hosts" defeat the mortal king of Assyria and his army. This defeat provides a prologue to the visions of renewal that follow. PART 2. JUST RULE (Isaiah 11:1-10) a. Isaiah 11:1-5 The prophecy projects the renewal of the dynasty of David ("a shoot" from "the stump of Jesse" [v. 1]) in Utopian terms. The king will rule with the spirit of the Lord, defined in terms of such virtues as "counsel," "wisdom," and "devotion" (v. 2). All shall benefit from his justice and equity. b. Isaiah 11:6-9 The preceding transfiguration of the social world will have its complement in the natural order. The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the cow and the bear together—with a little child to shepherd them. Altogether: "Nothing evil or vile shall be done," for a divine "devotion" shall fill the land (v. 9). c. Isaiah 11:10 The prophecy concludes with another reference to the Davidic leader ("the stock of Jesse"), whose wise "counsel" shall be sought by all nations. This adds a universal aspect to the national promise. PART 3. INGATHERING OF EXILES (Isaiah 11:11-16) A prophecy of restoration of the nation from its exile in Assyria and Egypt, among other places. The ingathering is described as a veritable new Exodus (w. 15-16). PART 4. THANKSGIVING AND JOY (Isaiah 12:1-6) The prophet announces two hymns that the people shall recite to God, in gratitude for His deliverance. The first gives thanks for divine victory after a time of wrath (w. 1-2); the second is a paean of praise that extols God's name before all (w. 4-5) and rejoices in God's presence among the nation (v. 6). 2 311
HAFTARAH FOR EIGHTH DAY OF PASSOVER
C O N T E N T A N D
M E A N I N G
The series of prophecies in this haftarah moves from an end to foreign oppression to Utopian visions of national justice and ingathering. At each point, a dimension of God's universal dominion is depicted or projected. The very first prophecy begins with an oracle of divine victory over an Assyrian monarch; in subsequent ones, the universal acknowledgment of the just rule of the new Davidic king is anticipated, and God's power to redeem Israel from their dispersion is portrayed. All told, the messianic era is marked by justice, kingship, and national restoration—as well as the celebration of God's acts of deliverance. At the center of the haftarah is a vision of social and natural transformation. The new ruler will be inspired by the spirit of the Lord and will reveal this influence in all his ways—through wisdom and counsel, through devotion and reverence, and through justice and equity. The king's transfiguration of the interpersonal sphere by his inspired bearing and actions is complemented by an even more radical transformation of the natural world. An era of Edenic bliss is projected for all creatures, resulting in the virtual end of enmity and rapacity between them. The prophet characterizes this result as a universalization of "devotion" to (or knowledge of, de'ah [Isa. 11: 9]) the Lord. Such a quality will change people and animals alike—such that "nothing evil or vile shall be done" through the land ( 1 1 : 9 ) . The remarkable implication of Isaiah's vision is that there are no essential instincts like anger or aggression; rather, there is only a greater or a lesser devotion to God and its concomitant effects. The interconnectedness of the various oracles is effected by verbal repetitions and wordplays. Sometimes the result is to juxtapose or counterpoint certain themes; on other occasions the effect indicates continuity and development. Such literary features give a rhetorical density to the speeches and highlight their themes in unexpected ways. Particularly instructive for a holistic reading of the haftarah is a comparison of the language in Isa. 1 0 : 3 2 , which opens the cycle with reference to the invader who "shall . . . wave his hand" (yenofef yado) against ludah, and 1 1 : 1 5 , where the prophet subsequently announces that God will "raise His hand" (ve-henifyado) over the Euphrates when He begins to restore Israel from their diaspora. In this sequence of prophecies, a certain counterpoint is evident: the initial figure of waving conveys the power or contempt of the enemy, whereas the second one underscores the sovereignty of God over the nations and the natural world. The transition is thus from oppression to a new Exodus—in both instances by a wave of the hand. An allusion to the redemptive arm of God in Egypt and at the Sea cannot be missed; and indeed, the prophet says as much when he begins the oracle of ingathering with the words "In that day, my Lord will apply His hand \yado\ again to redeeming the other part of His people from Assyria—as also from Egypt, Pathros, Nubia, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and the coastlands" ( 1 1 : 1 1 ) . A juxtaposition of a different sort is effected by the symbolic use of natural images. At the beginning of the haftarah, the destruction of the oppressor is expressed through the figure of God "hew[ing] off the tree-crowns {pu'mh] with an ax" (Isa. 1 0 : 3 3 ) . As if in response to it, the ensuing oracle announces the regeneration of Davidic kingship through the statement that "a shoot shall grow \yiphreh] out of the stump of lesse" ( 1 1 : 1 ) . The counterpoint between the images of hewn branches and a shoot from a tree stump distinguishes the opening oracle from the one that follows. Through these images a contrast of leadership is dramatized: an oppressive leader passes, while an inspired one emerges to transform society. As noted, this difference is marked by two words {pu'rah/yiphreh) that share the consonants p/r/h. The same cluster of sounds recurs in the ensuing vision of creaturely harmony, which speaks of "the cow \paralo\ and the bear" grazing together ( 1 1 : 7 ) . For the attentive reader, such phonemic repetitions provide a rhetorical texture to the opening sequence of oracles—giving a tonal dimension to the thematic content. 3 A more complex phonological cluster integrates elements of the Utopian prophecies, where the patterns of \,alef\/r and'['ayin\/r predominate. Thus the announcement about the new ruler says that he will be inspired by "a spirit o f . . . reverence for [yir'at] the LORD" (Isa. 1 1 : 2 ) and goes on to add that "He shall not judge by what his eyes behold [mar^h]" (v. 3). Because ofhis HAFTARAH FORSEVENTHDAY OF PASSOVER
312
just leadership, there will be a radical transformation oflife on earth. Harmony and peace shall reign and with them the absence of fear and distrust. All creaturely interactions will change—as symbolized by a vision that "the cow and the bear shall graze [tir'enahY together, and "an infant [shall] pass his hand over an adder's den [me'umtY (w. 7-8). Similarly, social life will be radically reformed: "nothing evil [yare'u] or vile shall be done" on God's sacred mount, "for the land [}aretz] shall be filled with devotion to the L O R D " (V. 9). Once again, tonal harmonies give density to the prophetic theme. A concordance of sound also marks the emphasis on the "spirit" (ruah ) that shall alight upon the new Davidic king (Isa. 11:2). After that inspiration is announced (11:2), the theme word ruah is repeated three more times in order to specify the dimensions of that inspired leadership (including "a spirit" of wisdom [ruah hokhmah], valor, and devotion; [v. 2]). And concluding this sequence is the remark that the king "shall sense [va-hariho]n the truth or be inspired "by his reverence for the L O R D " (V. 3 ) , and "slay the wicked by the breath [ruah] ofhis lips" (v. 4 ) . The new ruler will thus receive a divine spirit, but he will not be a seer or warrior; rather he will be an ideal leader, pious and thoughtful in mind and heart. This ideal echoes the quality mentioned in Deuteronomy about Joshua, who replaced Moses as the national leader and was filled with the "spirit of wisdom [ruah hokhmahY (Deut. 3 4 : 9 ) . A recurrence of the theme word mah, now as "wind," links the prophecies on leadership with the vision of a new Exodus from the dispersion (Isa. 11:15-16). Such a hope is a fitting climax for the concluding day of Passover.
COMMENTS Isaiah 10:32. This same day atNob The fall of the Assyrian aggressor precedes the account of the messianic ruler (11:1-10) and national ingathering (11:11-16). The place name Nob is punned on in the reference to the monarches contemptuous and boastful "wave" (yinofef) of "his hand" (Luzzatto). 4 This negative act is reversed by God's hand gesture (ve-henif) over the Euphrates (11:15), in His act of deliverance. In B. Sanhedrin 94b, the place-name Nob is actually called nof. According to some commentators, Isa. 10:32-34 provides the needed syntactic prologue to l l : l f f . ("but a shoot"); compare Ibn Ezra and S. D. Luzzatto. Abravanel, however, suggests that 10:34 is the antecedent to 11:1; but Luzzatto rejects this, since 10:33 is not a conclusion to the previous oracle. 33. tree-crowns Hebrewpu'mh. This is an unusual spelling; many manuscripts readpumh. See Ezek. 17:6 and 31:5-6 for the related formpo^rot. The verbal stemp- } -r may be a biform of p-w-r. In this case, the spelling evokes a punning suggestion of the enemy's pride (pe'er). The high branches here contrast with the humble stump of the scion of Jesse in the next image. Isaiah elsewhere emphasizes the theme of cutting down national (Isa. 2:9-18) and foreign pride (14:5-15). Isaiah 11:1. stump ofjesse This messianic prophecy has been linked "to a descendant of the family of King Hezekiah" (Kimhi); R. Moses ibn Chiquatilla suggests that this prophecy "hints at Hezekiah" himself, "since it is joined to the (prophecy found in the preceding) chapter" (Ibn Ezra) —which announces that the Assyrian monarch attacking Jerusalem would be destroyed. That king was Sennacherib, and his Judean contemporary was Hezekiah (cf. Isaiah 36-38). 2-5. The messianic ruler will be divinely inspired. The general reference to "the spirit [ruah] of the L O R D " in verse 2a is explicated in verse 2b as the spirit of wisdom, insight, counsel, valor, devotion and reverence. Verse 3a ("he shall sense," va-hariho]) has traditionally been interpreted as an inner perception (Kimhi; Ibn Ezra), as against the outer senses of sight and of hearing noted in the sequel. Alternatively, the verb may be construed as a denominative, meaning "(God shall) inspire" him (R. Isaiah di Trani; R. Eliezer ofBeaugency). The royal virtues allude to the epithets of counsel and valor in Isa 9:5 and to the rule of "justice" and "equity" (9:6). Here the rule is by "justice" and "equity" (11:4) and "justice" and "faithfulness" (11:5)—all ancient virtues of the just king. These ideals are repeated in royal hymns 313
HAFTARAH FOR EIGHTH DAY OF PASSOVER
(Ps. 72:1-2, 4, 7, 12-13) and other prophecies of the Davidic shoot (Jer. 23:5). Proverbs 20:8 pithily captures this virtue of justice. 9. My sacred mount [Transl.].
That is, the Holy Land; compare Exod. 15:17 and Ps. 78:54
Nothin^g evM i m a g e °f righteousness that is guided by royal example (w. 2-5). The king will be inspired by knowledge of God (v. 2) and will generate this among the people. An image ofEdenic transformation intervenes (w. 6-8). A parallel image occurs in Isa. 65:22-25. There too there is a reference to an era when "nothing evil" will occur on God's holy mount; but the latter version omits any reference to "knowledge" or "devotion to the L O R D " (cf. 1 1 : 9 ) . In leremiah's expectation of the new age, God will provide knowledge to the people as a whole. A new, spiritual Sinai will occur: the Torah will be written on the tablets of all hearts, and then all will "know" God (ler. 3 1 : 3 3 - 3 4 ) . 11. otherpart
That is, the part outside the Holy Land [Transl.].
12. hold up a signal Hebrew ve-nasa} nes is alliterative. This and other images of this prophecy have been combined by rabbinic tradition in the tenth blessing of the daily Amidah prayer. It calls upon God to gather the exiles from their dispersion; its invocation of a triumphal blast of the shofar to inaugurate this messianic moment draws on Isa. 27:13. 15. The LORD will dry up The prophet uses mythic imagery to convey the new Exodus. The theme of God smiting the waters is a primordial event of origins, found in biblical (cf. Ps. 74:13-15) and ancientNear Eastern sources. The splitting ofwaters into seven streams is known from Canaanite and earlier sources.5 The transfer of this battle to the Exodus event is also found in Isa. 51:9-11. The battle motif forms the basis for the more epic account in Exodus 14-15. Thus the depiction in Exod. 14:21 ofMoses extending his arm over the sea and of God making the sea a dry ground (ha-mvah) by cleaving (va-yibba-ke'u) the waters (yam) is a transformed and historicized version of the god Marduk's battle against the sea dragon Tiamat in the Babylonian myth of creation (Enumah elish ). In that account, the hero defeats the sea by means of a staff and blasts of wind; he also splits the monster asunder, after the battle. The biblical and Near Eastern images give reason to suggest that the words heherim (lit., "doomed") and ba'ya-m in Isa. 11:15 should best be read as heheriv (dry up) and ba-ka'ya-m (split [the] sea), respectively.6 The proposed verb baka' was presumably corrupted orthographically; indeed just this verb occurs in Torah's account of the splitting of the sea (Exod. 14:21). Ibn Ezra assumes the otherwise unattested root ba'a-m, with the contextual sense of "strength"; Luzzatto proposes the same meaning with the reading be-'otzem (this sense also underlies the Syriac version).
16. otherpart
That is, the part outside the Holy Land [Transl.].
Isaiah 12:2-3. Behold the God.. .Joyfully shall you draw water Verses 2 - 3 have entered liturgical practice as an expression of messianic hope in the Havdalah service at the conclusion of the Sabbath. The use of imagery of water and wells to convey spiritual sources is found variously in Scripture (cf. ler. 2:13 and Ps. 36:9-10). The image became a widespread postbiblical motif. 7 The many links between Isa. 12:2-6 and other hymnic celebrations in Scripture (cf. Pss. 36:6; 105:1; Exod. 15:1) suggest that Isaiah draws from established liturgical language.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL This haftarah is first mentioned as the prophetic recitation for the eighth day of Passover in B. Megillah 31a. One obvious reason for this selection is the promise in Isa. 11:11-16 of a new exodus of the nation from its dispersion. lust as the holiday celebrates the original "Egyptian Passover," it also anticipates a future ingathering from the exile. HAFTARAH FORSEVENTHDAY OF PASSOVER
314
But why does the reading begin with Isa. 10:32-34? Rashi's comment on the talmudic source is terse. He simply says that the passage was chosen "because Sennacherib was defeated on the eve ofPassover." This observation is rooted in old tradition. According to the synagogue poem composed by Yannai (fifth to sixth century c . E . ) , entitled "You Then Performed Marvelous Miracles at Night," the doom of Sennacherib's army is mentioned in these words: ya'atz meha-refle-nofefle-'iwuy ve-hovashtapega-mv ba-laylah, "The curser thought to destroy my chosen city [Zion]; [but] You shamed his corpses at night." 8 Evidently the hymnist has blended the reference to the threatening advent of an Assyrian monarch toward Zion in Isa. 10:32 with the account of Sennacherib's siege of Jerusalem reported in 2 Kings 18:13-19:35. Yannai interprets the monarch's wave ofhis arm (Isa. 10:32) as a symbolic act of destruction and calls Sennacherib a curser (meharef) — just the word used by Isaiah to characterize that king's disdain for the God oflsrael (2 Kings 19:22). In addition, the poet mentions that the destruction of the Assyrian army ("corpses") occurred "at night"— drawing on the biblical account, which states that, on the eve of Sennacherib's siege of Jerusalem, "that night [va-yhi ba-laylah ha-hu7] an angel of the L O R D went out and struck down \va-ya-kh; stem n-k-h] . . . the Assyrian camp" (2 Kings 19:35). This formulation is strikingly similar to the statement in the Torah that, on the eve of the Exodus, "in the middle of the night \yn-yhi be-ha-tzi ha-laylah] the L O R D struck down \hikkah\ stem n-k-h] all the first-born in the land ofEgypt" (Exod. 12:29). Such similarities were sufficient to link the two events typologically, and this was precisely what the Sages did in old teachings that listed them among several other miracles reportedly occurring "at night." Notably, the homily in the Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 15:1 9 specifically links "the night of Pharaoh [leylo shelPar'ohY t ° "the night of Sennacherib [leylo shel SanherivY and this or similar formulations influenced Yannai's poem. 10 The typological link provided the basis for the common dating. Yannai's composition is structured on a pattern in which the redemptive events divide into triadic clusters ending with the words "at night," "the night," and "night." The whole series is preceded by the words "And it was in the middle of the night." This phrase now serves as the stanza refrain (after each triadic sequence) for the version of the hymn included in the Passover Haggadah and recited by Ashkenazim as a supplementary song on the first night of Passover. Subsequently the Italian and Balkan rites adopted this hymn, as well. 11 The defeat of Sennacherib purportedly on the night of Passover is thus testimony to the Jewish religious imagination—particularly its tendency to link acts of divine deliverance to earlier paradigms. By such associations, new historical events assume the power and often the characteristics of an ancient and foundational moment. History thus becomes a series of repetitive and confirming truths. For Jewish memory, God's redemptive acts are one such truth and the source of national hope. The festival ofPassover is one ritual occasion when this truth and this hope are publicly celebrated.
Haftarah for First Day of Shavuot n m i W bw "p^Xn DV ASHKENAZIM EZEKIEL 1:1-28; 3:12 SEPHARDIM EZEKIEL 1:1-28; 3:12
For a discussion of the life and times of Ezekiel and a consideration of the content and style ofhis prophecies, see "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks introducing the several haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). This haftarah is Ezekiel's report ofhis vision of the divine Glory (or Presence) along the Chebar Canal in Babylon, in July 593 B.C.E. (Ezek. 1:1). This experience is part ofhis inauguration as a prophet, some five years after being deported from Judah with his fellow exiles. The awesome sense of God's appearance upon a throne, supported by a spectacle of creatures amid fiery forms, 315
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
overwhelms Ezekiel, and he flings himself down on his face. At this point the vision gives way to words (v. 28). Rabbinic tradition provides the content of that audition by concluding the haftarah with the doxology "Blessed is the Presence of the L O R D , in His place," found in Ezek. 3 : 1 2 . Visions and accounts of God upon His chariot or heavenly throne occur throughout the Bible, in diverse genres and settings (cf. Exod. 24:9-11; 1 Kings 22:19-26; Isa. 6:1-3; Ps. 18:11-15; Dan. 7:9-10). They vary in solemnity and detail, as well as the function they serve in a given setting. Ezekiel's vision is by far the most detailed and most numinous. It is at once dazzling and daring in descriptive detail, conveying an awesome sense of God's majesty. Since antiquity, readers have taken the text as esoteric truth and tried to penetrate its uncanny images. Others have sought to replicate its speculations. For such reasons, the use of Ezekiel's vision has been subject to regulation. Opinions varied regarding liturgical use of "The Chariot," as the text was called. In the Mishnah, the Sages forbade reciting the chariot vision as a haftarah, but Rabbi ludah permitted it (M. Megillah 4:10). In the Talmud, some Palestinian Sages were said to have favored this chapter for the festival of Shavuot, and this secondary opinion became predominant among the later Rabbis in Babylon (B. Megillah 31a). Recitation ofEzekiel 1 is now the established custom, along with a concluding verse from Ezek. 3:12. This practice was already established by the eleventh century, according to the testimony of the. Mahzor Pztry.1 PART 1. HISTORICAL PROLOGUE (Ezekiel 1:1-3) Ezekiel son of Buzi, the priest, reports the onset ofhis vision in Babylon, in the fifth year of the exile o f K i n g lehoiachin, 593 B.C.E. PART 2. THE VISION (Ezekiel 1:4-28) a. Ezekiel 1:4 The prophet is transfixed by a fiery cloud surrounded by an effulgent nimbus of light. In its center there pulses a flashing spectre of color, like amber. b. Ezekiel 1:5-13 Penetrating deeper, the prophet sees within this irradiated center four glowing creatures, anthropomorphic in shape but with four faces (human, eagle, lion, and ox) and (apparently) four wings apiece. These creatures are fixed firmly at four corners roundabout, with their upper wing tips touching. Thus their movements proceed in one direction at a time: each face of each creature disposed to one cardinal point only, with all humanoid countenances pointing one way, and so on. As fire within fire, some torch-like spectre appears to dart among the creatures, shooting forth flares and fiery bolts. c. Ezekiel 1:14-21 Following further, the prophet perceives four wheels set alongside each creature. Each of the wheels is a composite of concentric cycles set crosswise for axial motion, and they are colorful like beryl, though fearsome to look upon: tall and studded with eyes. The "spirit of the creatures was in the wheels" (v. 20), and from these pivots lateral and horizontal movement proceeds. d. Ezekiel 1 : 2 2 - 2 8 As the prophet follows the fiery apparition upward, he sees above the creatures (1) a numinous expanse gleaming like crystal; an awesome roar reverberates as the lower wings flap: "a tumult like the din of an army" (v. 24). Further up, there is (2) the appearance of a throne of a hue like sapphire and (3) "upon this semblance . . . the semblance of a human form" (v. 26). Fire encases this form (itself, apparently, half like fire and half like amber) as well as a luminous radiance, colorful like the mystery of a rainbow. "That was the appearance of the semblance of the Presence [kavod] of the L O R D " (v. 2 8 ) . Beholding this, the prophet is overcome and falls down on his face. PART 3. CONCLUSION (Ezekiel 3:12) The haftarah "skips" to a later prophetic moment. A doxology by the heavenly host marks Ezekiel's withdrawal from his vision, providing a coda to the preceding events.
CONTENT AND MEANING The portrait of the chariot follows the prophet's perception as he first notices it and then allows his gaze to rise to its numinous heights. "From below to above he saw it all," says R. Eliezer HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF SHAVUOT
316
of Beaugency. "He saw all these visions one after the other, just as [described by] the order of the text."2 Fire, colors, and sound: the great chariot vision dazzles kaleidoscopically. A fusion of experiences still strikes the reader, even as Ezekiel's own description fuses the visual and audible and superimposes different perspectives and sensations. This is partly what makes the text so difficult to construe. Whether entirely the result of a direct experience or perhaps, in part, also the reflex of subsequent clarifications by the prophet or his disciples, the depiction relapses and repeats itself (cf. Ezek. 1:8-9, 11-12, 23-24). It moves back and forth like the gaze of the prophet—repeatedly interrupted by qualifications and adjustments (w. 13-14), and compounded by confusions of grammatical gender (cf. w. 13-17). The figures of the vision are extraordinary and beyond adequate description: composites of form, lively with color, wraithlike and fiery. And yet description is the purpose of the text. "Out of necessity [for our understanding] the prophet has figured [the vision] by means of things known from our experience: like the matter of the beryl, like the appearance of the torches, like the awesome crystal, like the appearance of the flares, like the luster of burnished bronze, like the appearance of the rainbow—all as they appear in [this] world" (R. Eliezer of Beaugency, on Ezek. 1:4). 3 But similarities are not reality: they are only instructions and hints by means of earthly comparisons. The figurative nature of Ezekiel's perception is all the more indicated as the vision rises to its climax. Again in the words of R. Eliezer of Beaugency, what Ezekiel saw was only as far as the "appearance of the semblance of the Presence" (or Glory, kavod) surrounding the great King: "but [the Lord] Himself he [Ezekiel] did not see—only the semblance of a human form, like the luster of a reflection. Nor did he even see the covering of His light and His garment of exalted splendor; but [he only perceived this] through the crystal. For he saw everything from below to above, and the expanse (ve-ha-mki'a) separated them [viz., the prophet and the object ofhis visionary gaze]." 4 At the conclusion of this description of the revelation of the throne of the Presence of the transcendent God, there is a remarkable change. God's word addresses His prophet (Ezek. 1:28). Indeed, as the sequel shows, this shift from human vision to divine address is a shift from Ezekiel's experience of the advent of God to his prophetic commission (2:1-3:11). Personal ecstasy is thus not the goal here; the visionary experience is neither an end in itself nor one initiated by contemplative techniques. Rather, Ezekiel is confronted with a sudden experience that precedes the announcement of a prophetic task.5 Such is the pattern found with Moses, who envisions the appearance of an angel of the Lord within a fiery bush and then is given his divine task (Exodus 3); and it is also the feature found with Isaiah, who envisions the Lord on His throne surrounded by divine beings and subsequently receives a commission to address the people oflsrael (Isaiah 6). 6 Given this scriptural pattern, there is something "unbiblical" about the rabbinic decision to omit the divine directives found after the vision (Ezek. 2:1-3:11) and to conclude the haftarah with 3: 12:"Then a spirit carried me away [or: lifted me up], and behind me I heard a great roaring sound: "Blessed is the Presence [kavod] of the LORD, in His place!" By so juxtaposing this verse to Ezek. 1: 28, where vision gives way to audition (in both cases va-'eshma' [I heard] and kol [a voice/sound] are used), tradition turned this praise into what Ezekiel heard directly after the vision. As a result, the vision is no longer a prelude to prophecy but the first part of a twofold mystical experience—one that concludes with a hearing of the orisons of the divine host before the throne of God. In sum: there is nothing in the haftarah that hints of the fact that Ezekiel's "visions of God" begin a drama of prophetic commission; rather, the mystical experience is all that we have. Ezekiel is thus a man who perceives supernal realities, and not an inspired messenger. Without God's word, he is the founding figure of ancient Jewish throne mysticism—not a biblical prophet. 7
COMMENTS Ezekiel 1:1. In the thirtieth year This date is obscure and has long puzzled interpreters, even though it is correlated in verse 2 with the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin (593 317
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
B.C.E.). The Targum, presumably based on ancient tradition, suggested that the thirty-year reference counts from the finding of the Torah in the reign of Josiah (621 B.C.E.). Rashi accepted this view and, on the basis of the Seder 'Olam chronicle in his possession, added that the thirty-year reference was to a Jubilee year calculation.8 2-3. the word ofthe LORD came... to Ezekiel Though verse 1 is reported in the first person ("I was"; "I saw"), verses 2 - 3 are third-person reports. Noting this "interruption of divine inspiration" (Rashi) between verses 1 and 4, R. Eliezer of Beaugency suggested that "the scribe who wrote [Ezekiel's] prophecies added [these verses] to explain what [Ezekiel] stated obscurely" inverse 1. Historicalsuperscriptions are alsofoundinlsa. 1:1; Jer. 1:1-3; andAmos 1:1.
3. Chaldeans Hebrew kasdim. The Chaldeans were an Aramean group that penetrated southern Babylonia around the beginning of the first millenium B.C.E. At first subjugated to Assyria, they gained independence and took over the Babylonian kingship with a dynasty founded by Nabopolassar (in 626 B.C.E.), father ofNebuchadnezzar. The group is affiliated with Chesed (kesed), mentioned in Gen. 22:22. The English name "Chaldean" derives from Greek chalda-ioi (Akkadian kaldu )-, it is the result of a slight consonantal change from the original Semitic kashdu. 3. hand of the LORD An idiom referring to an overwhelming prophetic experience. See Isa. 8:11 and Jer. 15:17. In Ezekiel, it is especially used prior to visions; compare Ezek. 8:1 and 40:1. 4-5. The image of a divine advent in a chariot, upon clouds, with flashing fire and a nimbus of light, is most commonly used in the Hebrew Bible in connection with God's appearance as a warrior. Compare Ps. 18:8-15 and Hab. 3:3-15, though it is also used to depict God's advent as a righteous judge (see Ps. 97:1-9). The local source of this imagery is Canaanite portrayals of the storm god Ba'al as a rider of clouds (cf. Ps. 68:5, 34). 4. of amber Hebrew hashmal. A bright substance, possibly related to the Akkadian gem elmeshw,9 alternatively, it is cognate with Akkadian eshmaru, "polished bronze." The Latin Vulgate renders electmm ("amber"; cf. similarly, Greek elektron). Later, a rabbinic tradition regarded the hashmal as a mysterious quality, able to emit fire and kill (B. Hagigah 13a). 6. each hadfourfaces The face of a man in front, a lion at the right side, an ox at the left side, and an eagle behind (v. 10). 7. single rigid Iqg A "straight" or unjointed leg. NIPS has "the legs of each were [fused]"; but it is not clear whether this is the case or whether each creature had but one leg. On the basis of this phrase, talmudic Sages ruled that one should stand with both feet fixed together during theAmidah (B. Berakhot 10b), thus resembling the angels on high (I. Berakhot 1:1).
like the luster Hebrew 'ein:, literally, "color." See Lev. 13:5. The panoply of colors in the vision (also w. 4, 22, 26, 28) dazzled the prophet and inspired the rich color symbolism of lewish mysticism, both in actual meditation techniques and in esoteric speculations. 11. each had two touching Of the four wings, two were raised and touching those of the creatures on each side, and two covered each body (cf. w. 22-23). It is difficult to determine whether Temple iconography inspired Ezekiel. In Solomon's Temple two large cherubs overarched the ark with wing tips touching and fully extended (1 Kings 6:23-27); here, only one pair of wings is described. On the other hand, Isaiah envisaged seraphim with three pairs of wings (Isa. 6:2). The imagery of four wings fits into the symbolism of four that dominates the chapter. In fact, an old expression refers to the four corners of the earth as "the four wings [,kanfot] of the earth" (Isa. 11:12). The four creatures thus symbolize earthly and cosmic wholeness: unity amid multiplicity, like the four countenances themselves. The many faces also indicate divine omnipresence, and the many eyes on the wheeled discs (v. 18) suggest divine omniscience and providence. HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF SHAVUOT
318
An old midrash gives a sense of the attributes conveyed by the four creatures: "Four kinds of proud beings were created in the world: the proudest of all—man; of birds—the eagle; of domesticated animals—the ox; of wild animals—the lion; and all of them are stationed beneath the chariot o f t h e Holy One . . ." (Exodus Rabbah 23:13). 10 16. two wheels cutting through each other Hebrew ha-'ofan be-tokh ha-'ofan. Alternatively,"a wheel within a wheel" (OJPS). It is not clear if the portrayal is of two wheels intersecting crosswise (somehow fixed into each other, at right angles), 11 or of concentric wheels, one inside the other. 12 24. the sound of mighty waters waters; compare Ps. 93:4. 13
Hebrew kol mayim mbim. This may refer to the cosmic
28. the Presence ofthe LORD Literally, "the Glory [kavod] of the LORD." The divine kavod in the Bible is frequently associated with theophanies, particularly in cultic settings (see Exod. 24:17; 40:34-35; 1 Kings 8:11). It was experienced as a substantive presence, even occasionally anthropomorphic in appearance (Exod. 33:18-23). This latter, at any rate, is "the appearance of the semblance of the kavod" that Ezekiel saw. In later Jewish thought, the relationship of the kavod to God was variously discussed. Some speculations, particularly mystical ones, regarded the kavod as an extension of the Godhead itself. For philosophers like Saadiah Gaon, the divine kavod was a "created form" made by God in order "that the light would give his prophet the assurance of the authenticity of what has been revealed to him . . . and is called Shekhinah by the Sages."14 Indeed, according to Yehudah Halevi, it can assume any form God wishes to show the prophet. 15 Maimonides held a similar view, calling the Shekhinah a "created light." 16 As such, the divine "Glory" was deemed essentially distinct from God.
Ezekiel 3:12. Blessed is the Presence ofthe LORD, in His place Hebrew Barukh kevod YHWH mi-mekomo. In context, this phrase refers to something the prophet heard. The Targum already suggested that Ezekiel heard beings "praising and saying" the ensuing doxology. Hymnic recitations by divine beings were a common motif, already in the Hebrew Bible (cf. Isa. 6:3, and the threefold Kedushah).17 It is also a feature found in the Qumran scrolls and in ancient Jewish visionaryliterature (the so-called merkavah [throne] and heikhalot [palace] hymns). As regards the place of "His place," some answers are actually suggested in the midrash-like sequences of the different Kedushah prayers. In Seder Rabbah di-Bere'shit, the creatures beneath the divine throne respond to the angel's doxology of "Holy, holy, holy" with "Blessed is the Glory [NJPS: Presence] of the LORD, from [NJPS: in] His place!" A midrash follows based on the language used. "Why do they [the creatures] not say 'in His place' [bi-mekomo instead of mi-mekomo]? Because the Shekhinah is in every place. In the future, when the Shekhinah returns to its place in the Holy ofHolies, they will say 'Blessed is the Glory of the LORD, from His place!"18 But the whole matter is puzzling and may derive from an earlier and different formulation. It will be noted that Ezekiel "heard" this "great roaring" (Ezek. 3:12) in connection with the wings and the wheels (v. 13). Since such audible sounds are connected in Ezek. 1:24 with the ascension of the divine throne, it may be wondered whether this is also the original meaning of the phrase. On this view, it has been suggested (by F. Hitzig and S . D . Luzzatto) that the word "blessed" (barukh) is the result of a minor scribal error that arose in transcribing the Hebrew text from an earlier archaic orthography to the present square "Assyrian script" (called ketav \ashuri). Thus, the similar letters kh and w were presumably confused, resulting in the transcription barukh instead of berum, "when it [the divine transport] ascended." 19 Notably, this reading is exactly like the idiom used for the ascension of the chariot in Ezek. 10:15-19. Restored to its assumed original, Ezek. 3:12 would thus read: "Then the spirit carried me away, and behind me I heard a roaring sound, when the Presence [kavod] of the LORD ascended from its place." Between the scribal slip and the lip of praise, a great religious motif was formed. The angelic doxology "Blessed is the Presence of the LORD, in His place" has become a fixed element of the Kedushah (Sanctification) prayer, in which the human worshipers sanctify 319
HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER
the divine Name (or exalt God Himself) "just as" the holy angels do in the supernal heights.20 The first words of praise are the threefold recitation of "Holy" (Isa. 6:3); this is followed by the words of Ezek. 3:12. There are three types of Kedushah recitation that are said daily: (1) The Kedushah de-Yotzer, recited between the morning call to prayer (Barekhu) and the Shema' (also on Sabbaths and Holidays); (2) the Kedushah de-Amidah, recited during the public repetition of the Amidah in the morning and afternoon service (also on Sabbaths and Holidays, and whenever the supplementary.Mw.OTf prayer is recited); and (3) the Kedushah de-Sidrarecited in the morning as part of the U-va' le-Tzion Go'el prayer, at the conclusion of the Tahanun (Penitential) service (and also during the Sabbath afternoon service). Regarding the latter, an old responsum from the gaonic period states that it was "a custom of the early [generations]" to recite ten verses from the prophets after the Tahanun [service] in the morning, plus Isa. 6:3 and Ezek. 3:12—"in order to conclude [the litany] with praise of the Holy One, blessed be He." 21 In the present version of the U-va' le-Tzion prayer, Isa. 6:3 and Ezek. 3:12 occur at the beginning of the chain of biblical citations, along with Aramaic translations and explications of the Hebrew wording. In this setting, the "place" of God's Presence is "the place of the Shrine of His Shekhinah"—in the heavenly heights.
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL As noted above, opinions regarding the use of "The Chariot" as a haftarah varied. Alongside the talmudic tradition designating Ezekiel 1 as a prophetic reading for Shavuot (B. Megillah 31a), there are older sources that indicate divided views on the subject (M. Megillah 4:10)—one of which rejects its use. This prohibition undoubtedly derived from the content of the vision, particularly as expanded in mystical circles. In addition to the awesome "Account of the Chariot" itself (called Ma'aseh Merkavah), the bold anthropomorphic references to the divine kavod (Ezek. 1:27-28) were especially troublesome. One Mishnaic ruling even prohibited its private exposition by an individual, "unless he is a scholar with understanding on his own" (M. Hagigah 2:1). Accordingly, untrained exposition of, and theological speculation on, Ezekiel 1 was strongly discouraged. R. Abbahu underscored this point through a pun. Citing Prov. 27:26, "the lambs \kevasim\ will be your clothing," he said: "The things that are the mystery [kivshono] of the world should be under your clothing" (B. Hagigah 13 a)— they must not be divulged. A compromise position permits the public reading of Ezekiel 1 while forbidding its vernacular translation (Tosefta Megillah 3 [4]: 31-38). But this ruling was also not universal (cf. B. Megillah 25a-b). Diverse targumic versions and paraphrases exist, and some even served as prologues to the haftarah. 22 Given the content of the haftarah, it may be wondered why Ezekiel's vision was chosen for recitation on Shavuot—the festival celebrating the Giving of Torah. What is the link between his experience and the public revelation at Sinai? One ancient teaching provides a clue, suggesting that rabbinic tradition found a parallel between the events. Beginning with the verse stating that"God's chariots \rekhev~] are myriads upon myriads, thousands upon thousands; the L O R D is among them as in Sinai in holiness" (Ps. 68:18), it was taught that "there descended with God (on Mount Sinai) twenty-two thousand chariots, each one like the chariot \merkavah'] that Ezekiel saw" (Tanhuma Yitro [Buber] 14). 23 A similar tradition is found in an anthology of teaching for the festival of Shavuot (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, Ba-hodesh, piska 12:22), and elsewhere (Midrash Shoher Tov, on Ps. 68:18). The upshot of this is that Ezekiel's theophany was long preceded by a national precedent (preserved in Ps. 68:18), when God descended upon Sinai to make a covenant with all Israel. Indeed, according to rabbinic midrash, a mystical theophany occurs in the course of the Sinaitic revelation. Ezekiel's experience was thus anything but unique. To the contrary, his throne vision is a personal expression of an ancient pattern. A further connection between Sinai and Ezekiel's vision can be noted. It is based on a spectacular account of Moses' ascension on high to receive the Torah. According to a tradition preserved in Pesikta Rabbati 20 (Piska Matan Torah), we learn how Moses rose through the throne world of God like any mystical voyager depicted in the Merkavah tracts.24 Passing the guarding HAFTARAH FOR FIRST DAY OF SHAVUOT
320
angels of destruction, Moses is told that even the angels that serve the throne do not know God's place—for they say "Blessed is the Presence of the L O R D , from His place" (Ezek. 3:12); and he is also graced with a vision of the crowning of God, while the angels that serve the throne repeat the word "Holy" three times (Isa. 6:3). At the apex ofhis ascent, all the cosmic vaults are opened to Moses, and he sees the majesty of God. But not only Moses! With the opening of the heavens, all Israel sees the Glory face to face. As the words "I am the L O R D " (Exod. 20:1) blast forth, the entire people (all 600, 000) die in ecstasy. Revived by divine mercy, God sends forth 1, 200, 000 angels to enable the nation to receive the revelation and live. Each person is therewith supported by two divine beings—one to hold the head (so that he may withstand the vision); the other, the heart (so that it would not escape in awe). According to R. Abba bar Kahana, however, these angels served a different purpose. One of them turned each Israelite about by the belt, to face God Himself, while the other crowned his ward with a heavenly crown. 25 Thus aided, the nation of Israel received the Torah in ecstasy and vision. Ezekiel 1 thus reveals what even the most common Israelite saw at Sinai on that awesome occasion. Its recitation on the first day of Shavuot calls that wondrous event to mind with numinous detail. Luminous beyond understanding, the vision in Ezekiel 1:4-28 is a sight for the inner eye.
Haftarah for Second Day of Shavuot ASHKENAZIM
HABAKICUK3:1-19
SEPHARDIM
HABAKKUK 2:20-3:19
nwm ^
^
DV
For Habakkuk's prophetic message and a discussion ofhis theology, see "The Book of Habakkuk" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." At the center of the haftarah is the revelation of God's heavenly Glory to the prophet (Hab. 3:3-15). As in Ezekiel 1 (recited on the first day of Shavuot), that Glory appears on a chariot and is of numinous and terrifying aspect. This prophetic vision is encased within an opening petition of divine mercy and a concluding personal response (Hab. 3:1-2, 16-19). This entire unit is recited by Ashkenazim. Sephardim begin with the final verse of chapter 2 (Hab. 2:20), which refers to God in His heavenly Temple. This verse thus serves as a prologue to the divine advent depicted in the vision. The Book of Habakkuk has no superscription or internal dating. The reference to the destructive advance of "the Chaldeans, that fierce, impetuous nation" at the beginning of the collection (Hab. 1:6) gives reason to suppose that the prophet was a contemporary of the emerging neoBabylonian empire (from 626 B.C.E.), if not a witness to its famous victory over the Egyptians at Carchemish (605 B.C.E.). Nebuchadnezzer's subsequent invasions ofludah are not mentioned by Habakkuk, but an ominous event is on the horizon. In the haftarah, the prophet prays for God to respond—and is graced by a vision of the divine advent and victory. PART 1. GOD'S ABODE (Habakkuk2:20) A statement that "the L O R D " is "in His holy Abode" and that "all the earth" should "be silent before Him" provides the prologue to the haftarah for the Sephardim. PART 2. THE PROPHETS PRAYER (Habakkuk 3:1-2) Habakkuk offers a prayer to God, stating that he has "learned [literally: heard] of Your renown" (sha-ma'ti shim'akha) and beseeches divine aid now, "in these years" (v. 2). PART 3. THE VISION (Habakkuk 3:3-15) After the petition, the prophet receives a vision of God's advent. He is portrayed as majestic amidst His heavenly retinue, shining forth and shaking the pavilions of the land (w. 3-7); and filled with an ancient cosmic rage, storming forth "to deliver [His] people" from their enemy (w. 321
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
8-15). The imagery has a mythic concreteness, derived from ancient Near Eastern models, whereby a storm god rides the heavens and flashes bolts from the dark hollow ofhis thunderhead. 1 In the present instance, the battle is against earthly enemies, and those saved are the people of Israel. PART 4. THE PROPHETS RESPONSE (Habakkuk 3:16-19) The focus shifts from the cosmic spectacle to the awestruck speaker. Echoing the opening prayer, Habakkuk he says that he has "heard" (sha-ma'ti) all this and "quaked" within (v. 16). The prophet adds that although the "day of distress" will come (v. 16) and blast the fruit of the vine, he will confidently rejoice "in the God who delivers me" (w. 17-18). Thus Habakkuk's voice mingles with national concerns, and his personal vision "strengthens" his trust in divine deliverance (v. 19).
CONTENT AND MEANING The main unit of the haftarah (Hab. 3:1-19) is structured symmetrically. The outer frame (A/A1) opens with a rubric announcing a "prayer" in "the mode of Shigionoth" (v. 1) and concludes with another rubric stating "for the leader \la-mena-tzeah~]; with instrumental music [fe-w^motez]" (v. 19b). Such terms recur throughout the Book of Psalms. For example, la-mena-tzeah occurs frequently as a heading on its own; but it also occurs with the word bi-nginot in Ps. 4:1. The musical mode of Shiggaion is itself recorded in Ps. 7:1. All this, together with the threefold repetition of the term selah (being some type of musical direction), suggests that Hab. 3:1-19 is modeled on old psalm types. Both structure and content confirm this, as we shall note. The inner frame of the composition (B/B1) contains the opening petition of the prophet (Hab. 3:2) and the final response (w. 16-19a). Verbal repetitions underscore the symmetrical relations between the units. At the outset, the speaker says, " O LORD! I have learned of Your renown [sha-ma'ti shim'akha]"— referring to divine deeds of victory in the past. He then requests a renewal of them in the present, beseeching God to remember compassion "though [He be] angry [be-rogez]" (v. 2). And at the end, after the terrifying vision of God's martial response, Habakkuk says that "I heard [shama'ti] and my bowels quaked [va-tirgaz] . . . I trembled ['ergaz] where I stood" (v. 16). Nevertheless, he waits "calmly for the day of distress" (v. 16) and avers that he will "exult in the God who delivers me" (v. 18). The uses of the verb shama' thus punctuate the past and the present, the record of ancient divine deeds and the immediate experience of God's advent to save. Variations on the verb ragaz counterpoint divine wrath against Israel and the prophet's experience of God's manifestation to aid His people. At the center of the haftarah is the vision itself (C), a terrifying portrayal of God's advent upon His storm chariot (Hab. 3:3-15). This wreaks havoc throughout the natural world, making "the earth burst into streams" and "the mountains rock" (3:9, 10); it also unloosens the human world, smashing homes and cracking skulls of the enemy. Amid the radiance that emanates from God's glory (v. 4), an avenging hoard of furies (pestilence and plague) march forth and add to the mayhem (v. 5). A horrendous divine rage is described—leading the speaker to wonder at the need for such cosmic force against earthly foes (w. 8-9) and to quiver in place: "Rot entered into my bone, I trembled where I stood" (v. 16). The mythic features of the vision are echoed in many biblical psalms. Some sources depict the divine advent to battle in terms of a storm god riding forth with his divine retinue and armaments (meteorological phenomena). Psalm 18 is typical. In this hymn of thanksgiving, the speaker recounts how he called upon the Lord in "distress," who heard him "in His [heavenly] Temple" (Ps. 18:7) and came to save His people. This coming "rocked" the earth (v. 8): "He bent the sky and came down, thick cloud beneath His feet. He mounted a cherub and flew, gliding on the wings of the wind. He made darkness His screen; dark thunderheads . . . were His pavilion round about Him. Out of the brilliance before Him, hail and fiery coals pierced His clouds" and "shafts" of lightning burst forth against the enemy (w. 10-15). 2 The passage has many other inner-biblical parallels,3 but the foregoing segment is sufficient to show the close similarity of such mythic depictions with that found in Habakkuk 3. HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF SHAVUOT
322
Alongside this cosmic imagery, there is the topos of bashing and battering the water. This too is an old mythic motif, found frequently in Scripture as part of dramatic accounts of God's might at the Creation and the Exodus. In the classic depiction found in Isa. 51:9-11, God's primordial victory over the waters of chaos serves as the prototype of redemptive victories to follow—particularly the splitting of the sea when the Israelites were miraculously saved.4 Overall, Psalm 74 provides an instructive parallel to Habakkuk 3—first, because it is also a prayer appealing for God's saving power in the present; and also because it invokes the ancient battle of origins in order to highlight divine omnipotence. Thus the psalmist calls upon "God, my King from of old . . . who drove back Sea with Your might 5 . . . [and] who crushed the heads of Leviathan" (Ps. 74:12-14) to "rise" and "champion" His cause against the evil ones that now oppress him (v. 22). What is more, this psalm refers to the ancient deeds with the verbpo'el (Ps. 74:12), asks God to "look to the covenant" (v. 20) and "remember" (zekhor) His duties to Israel (v. 2), and repeatedly asks God "why" (lamah [w. 1, 11]) and "howlong" ('admatai [NJPS: "till when"; v. 10]) He will suffer such injustices to reign. The first two points recall Hab. 3:2 ("I am awed, O LORD, by Your deeds \pa'olkha\ . . . remember [tizkor] compassion"), while the third evokes Habakkuk's opening complaint about the duration of divine silence ("how long" [1:2]; "why" [v. 3]) in face of the deeds God has wrought {po'alpo'el [v. 5]) through the rapacious Chaldeans. From this perspective, the entire book of Habakkuk conforms to the prayer genre (of complaint and petition) exemplified by Psalm 74.6 But whereas the psalmist evokes his query and advances his mythic prototypes in hope and expectation, Habakkuk's opening petitions are answered—initially in the course of a prophecy of trust (Hab. 2:2-4) and then through the spectacle of oncoming salvation (chapter 3). Habakkuk's vision is notable in another regard. As a manifestation of God out of a whirlwind in response to a human cry of divine injustice, the text invites comparison with the Book of Job. In both cases, the speakers complaints are brought to a halt—but the differences are significant. In the case of Job, God's hammering questions drive him to humble silence and the awareness ofhis profound ignorance of heavenly mysteries. This rhetoric is an appropriate counterpoint to Job's vaunted diatribe, made in overly confident terms. By contrast, God's appearance to Habakkuk comes in response to his prayer for divine compassion (v. 2). The answer has a direct mythic force. Divine presence is all—and sufficient. Despite his fears, the prophet is empowered with confidence and joy No supernatural wisdom is conveyed here, only the certitude of God's providence.
COMMENTS Habakkuk 2:20. The LORD is in His holyAbode The Lord's heavenly dwelling is the place to which prayers ascend (Ps. 18:7; cf 1 Kings 8:30) and from which divine rescue proceeds (Ps. 18:8-10; cf. Ps. 68:34-36). God's majesty induces numinous awe: hasmi-panav, "be silent before Him." A similar expression occurs in Zeph. 1:7, also in anticipation of God's day ofbattle. Habakkuk 3:1. Habakkuk The Hebrew word is unknown; in Akkadian it means "fragrant herb" (habbaququ/hambaququ). According to medieval legend (though possibly earlier), this prophet was the Shunammite woman's son announced by Elisha with the words: "At this season next year, you will be embracing [hoveket:, root h-b-k] a son" (2 Kings 4:16). Presumably the annunciation formula (hoveket) was interpreted as a folk etymology of "Habakkuk" (see Zohar 1:76; 2:44a). 3-15. Beginning with God's advent from Teman, the depiction is replete with wellknown mythic imagery: the divine appearance is one of splendor and light, which strike abject awe in all beholders; the approach is like that of a storm god, enthroned upon a chariot of clouds and encircled by a fearsome horde; and the weapons include a (rain-) bow, bolts of lightning, and mace-heads that shatter the foe. Comparable biblical descriptions include Pss. 18:7-18; 74: 13-15; and 77:12-19. In these cases, the progression is from the heavenly to the earthly realm, and God fights His earthly battles with great mythic intensity.7 A long-standing rabbinic tradition read Habakkuk 3 otherwise, transforming its mythological sequences into specific episodes in the sacred history oflsrael. The reference to Teman and Paran 323
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
(Hab. 3:3) was a keystone in this conversion, since it could easily be inferred that this was the site of Sinai (see Deut. 33:2 and Sifre Deuteronomy 343). This topography established, other historical features were read into the text. Many separate insights were gathered and systematized in the Targum, where Habakkuk 3 is decoded as a systematic presentation of the great events of Israel's history of salvation. For example, the references to iniquity aven; NJPS: "havoc") and "Cushan" in Hab. 3:7 were understood to hint at the sin of idolatry in the era of the chieftains ("judges") and divine punishment through King Cushan-rishathaim (cf. Judg. 3:7-8); the quaking mountains in Hab. 3:10 are linked to the theophany at Sinai; the image of the sun and moon standing still in Hab. 3:11 evoked Joshua's battle cry and the miracle in Gibeon (Josh. 10:12-13); and the statement in Hab. 3:14 that God cracked the "skull" of the enemy "with [His] bludgeon" was an allusion to God's use ofMoses' staff to defeat Pharoah's warriors at the Sea.8 In the Middle Ages, Rashi drew upon this reading and added further allusions. While not all identifications are shared, this interpretation of Habakkuk's vision is echoed in the commentaries of Ibn Ezra, Kimhi, Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, Abravanel, and Sforno. The result is a historicization of mythic tropes—the transformation of a battle scene into a full-scale retrospective on God's glorious deeds for Israel from earliest times. From mythic vision, Habakkuk 3 was converted into a didactic summary of Scripture.9 3. Selah A musical direction [Transl.]. 8.Neharim... Yam Neharim (lit., "Floods") and Yam (lit., "Sea") were marine monsters vanquished by the Lord in hoary antiquity. On Yam, see Ps. 74:13 and Job 7:12. A being called both Yam and Nahar figures in early Canaanite literature [Transl.]. 9. Sworn are the rods ofthe word This phrase is an old riddle and has puzzled commentators and translators since antiquity. In context, each of the words ("oaths," shevu'ot-, "staves" mattot:, and "word," }omer) is puzzling, and their combination in a construct chain triply so. Following a historicizing predilection (see previous comment), the Targum and Midrash (Songs Zuta 6:11; Exodus Rabbah 44:9) construed these words to refer to a covenantal promise "sworn" (shevu'ot) to the "tribes" (mattot). But this solution only defers the problem of meaning, made all the more troublesome by the fact that the phrase (plus the word selah) interrupts the battle scene of verse 9a and c ("All bared and ready is Your bow . . . . You make the earth burst into streams"). Still suggestive is an old conjecture (by H. St. John Thackery) proposing that the words in question preserve old lectionary notes—now inserted into the text.10 The reconstruction begins by noting that according to an old tradition (B. Megillah 31a), Habakkuk 3 was a prophetic reading for the festival of Shavuot, when the passage "You shall count off seven weeks [shavu'ot]" is read from the Torah (Deut. 16:9). This conjunction suggests that the difficult word shevu'ot in Hab. 3:9 was originally vocalized shavu'ot. The case is supported by the fact that ordinary (not festival) scriptural readings for one version of the Triennial Cycle that occurred at this time included Num. 17:17ff, which dealt with the ordeal of the "rods" (mattot), and Genesis 12:lff., which announced God's call (va-yo'mer) to Abram. 11 To be sure, not all reading cycles were the same, but this cluster of passages is a legitimate possibility12—and best explains the words (whose original spelling or pronunciation was forgotten) now found in Hab. 3:9. Later scribes, not realizing that the three words were marginal annotations of a liturgical nature, revocalized them in an attempt to provide some coherent sense and incorporated them into the text. The case is not unique. Other lectionaty markers have been proposed for the Hebrew Bible and Septuagint.13 13. Youranointed
That is, the king o f j u d a h [Transl.].
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FESTIVAL According to an old rabbinic tradition (B. Megillah 31a), two alternative readings are recorded for Shavuot. "Habakkuk" is the haftarah to be read in conjunction with Deut. 16:9ff. ("You shall count off seven weeks"), whereas "The Chariot" (Merkavah) account in Ezekiel 1 is to be recited HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF SHAVUOT
324
with Exod. 19:lfF. ("On the third new moon"). The talmudic passage continues: "But now that there are two days [of the festival], we do both [sets of readings]—but in reverse [sequence]." That is, Ezekiel 1 and its Torah portion are read on the first day of Shavuot, Habakkuk 3 and its portion on the second. Commenting on the talmudic reference to the Habakkuk selection, Rashi says: "For it speaks of the Giving of the Torah; 'God comes from Teman' [Hab. 3:3]—with the Giving of the Torah." In this explanation, Rashi follows the Targum and an old midrashic tradition (Sifre Deuteronomy 343). 14 But in his commentary to the biblical verse itself, Rashi goes further. He alludes to a tradition whereby God went to the other nations to see if they would accept the Torah, but they refused. Significantly, these homilies make their point through exegetical use of Hab. 3:6, "When He stands, He measures [moded] the earth; when He glances, He unlooses [va-yatter] nations." 15 According to Leviticus Rabbah 23:2, God took the measure of the mountains, but found only Sinai "worthy" for the revelation; and He took the measure of the earth, but found only the Land oflsrael "worthy" for His people. He thereupon gave the Israelites a dispensation (better) with respect to the other nations and permitted (hittir) the nations a certain leniency in their ritual life. 16 According to another version, God took the measure of the nations to see if they would accept the teachings of the Torah; but this "unloosed" the nations and caused them to "jump back" [yatter] in rejection (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Ba-Hodesh 5). 17 Habakkuk 3 thus proves central in ancient homilies attempting to explain or justify why Israel alone received God's revelation. On one view, Israel was singled out because of its special worthiness; on the other, the revelation was offered to all nations, but the responsibilities demanded by it caused the other peoples to withdraw. An intermediate position has Israel cower in fear as well, but then God raises Sinai over their heads and threatens them with death if they do not accept the Torah (B. Avodah Zarah 2b). For all its mythic concreteness and irony, this midrash penetrates an aspect of the rabbinical understanding of the mystery of Israel—for it teaches that Torah is Israel's sacred destiny and the source of its national and spiritual life. This truth is reconfirmed on the festival of Shavuot, when the community oflsrael stands before the spiritual reality of Sinai and "renews" it "in these years" (Hab. 3:2).
325
HAFTARAH FOR SECOND DAY OF PASSOVER
HAFTAROT FOR WEEKDAY OCCASIONS
Haftarah for Tisha b'Av Morning ASHKENAZIM SEPHARDIM
ny^n b v m n w
JEREMIAH8:13-9:23 JEREMIAH 8:13-9:23
For Jeremiah's life and times and a discussion of his thought and literary style, see "The Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the introductory comments to the several haftarah readings taken from the prophecies of Jeremiah (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah is saturated with doom and destruction—first announced and then depicted in a series of powerful images (ler. 8:13-17; 9:7-9, 20-21). The impending horror evokes tears and laments from the prophet himself and from women specifically invited to bewail the event (see 8:18, 21; and 9:16-21, respectively). In a climactic image, the prophet tells these women that death itself "has climbed through our windows"—leaving corpses strewn everywhere, "with none to pick them up" (9:20-21). A concluding coda counsels divine knowledge and proper conduct (9:22-23). It is not said that such behavior can diminish or prevent the severity of doom. Rather, with stark simplicity, this teaching provides a counterpoint to the perversion of morality and divine service denounced earlier (9:1-5 and 11-15). leremiah 8:13-9:23 is recited during the morning service on Tisha b'Av.1 The prophet's call to the keeners to recite their laments for the people and the Land evoke the central genre and ritual of this day—the public recitation of elegies over Zion and lerusalem. PART 1. INESCAPABLE D O O M PROCLAIMED (leremiah 8:13-17) a. leremiah 8:13 The haftarah opens with a statement of uncompromising doom: "'I will make an end of them'—declares the L O R D . " b. leremiah 8:14-16 A detailed rendition of the doom follows. Food will wither, and there will be no escape from the disaster: even the fortified cities will provide no relief. c. leremiah 8:17 The inescapability of doom is reemphasized by the figure of poisonous snakes sent by God—"adders that cannot be charmed." PART 2. LAMENT AND SORROW (leremiah 8:18-23) The prophet responds with grief and lamentation. He expresses sorrow for the desolation of the people and desires to weep for their approaching doom. The sequence of statements has been interpreted as alternating voices (leremiah: v. 18; God: v. 19; leremiah: w. 20-23). 2 PART 3. SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS SINS (leremiah 9:1-21) a. leremiah 9:1-5 The prophet opens with a cry of despair and continues with a condemnation of the people for their mendacity and lies. The nation is charged with perverting trust by training "their tongues to speak falsely" (v. 4). b. leremiah 9:6-11 God announces His judgment and retribution for this behavior, and the prophet again reveals his sorrow and suffering at the destruction to come. lerusalem will "turn . . . into rubble" and the towns o f l u d a h shall become "a desolation without inhabitants" (v. 10). c. leremiah 9:12-13 The doom is now blamed on the people's rejection of the Torah and their adherence to the Canaanite Baalim. 327
HAFTARAH FOR TISHA B'AV AFTERNOON
d. Jeremiah 9:14-21 As earlier, divine doom is proclaimed after a statement of the people's sins (w. 14-15). A call to female mourners to begin their lament follows; further references to the impending destruction follow (w. 16-21). PART 4. A W O R D OF COUNSEL (Jeremiah 9:22-23) The haftarah concludes with a divine instruction to the people. They are advised not to trust in human wisdom and might, but rather to know God and imitate His ways of kindness and justice.
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is marked by rapidly alternating voices and perspectives.3 Overall, the divine voice is most easily detected through such references as "declares the L O R D " and "thus said the L O R D . " These phrases enclose the prophet's words in the mantel of divine revelation. But the personal pathos of Jeremiah himself breaks forth as well and is most readily identified by a series of selfreferential bursts of sorrow: "When in grief I would seek comfort, my heart is sick within me" (Jer. 8:18); "Because my people is shattered/ am shattered; I am dejected, seized by desolation" (8:21); and "Oh, that my head were water, my eyes a fount of tears! Then would 7 weep day and night for the slain of my poor people" (8:23). In contrast, the voice of the people is given in the collective plural. They say: "Why are we sitting by? Let us gather into the fortified cities and meet our doom there" (8:14); 4 and "We hoped for good fortune, but no happiness came" (8:15). Nevertheless, a number of passages remain opaque. Among the most perplexing is the identification of the speaker (s) in Jer. 8:19. Some say that the queries "Is not the L O R D in Zion?" and "Is not her King within her?" are spoken by the people, while the phrase "Why then did they anger Me?" is God's response; others contend differently and argue that all the questions are stated by God, with the opening ones providing the ironic setting for the final rhetorical thrust (see Comments). Equally puzzling is whether Jeremiah spoke the lament in Jer. 8:23, "Oh, that [miyitten] my head were water," as well as the one in 9:1, "Oh, to be \miyitteneni\ in the desert," or whether the second lament is actually proclaimed by God Himself. The implications are momentous, but the passage remains ambiguous—due no doubt to the complex state of the prophet's consciousness and his identification with God's will and pathos. 5 The intense symbiosis between Jeremiah and God is also a theme in rabbinic midrash. In one late formulation dealing with the exile and destruction, Rabbi Aha has God usurp Jeremiah's own words (from Jer. 8:23) when He says: "Israel cries during the night and Jeremiah cries during the day, but I shall cry day and night, as is said: 'I would weep day and night for the slain of my people'" (Yalkut Shimoni, Jeremiah, 279). This relationship between the prophet and God is also expressed in an early sermon introducing the Book of Lamentations, where Resh Lakish explains Jer. 9:16-17 as reflecting God's invitation to the dirge-singers to join Him in lamenting His people, because of His own lack of strength to do so alone. "I and you," God says, "shall lament, weep, and cry over the sorrow of Israel." By way of a parable, the Sage goes on to hint that the Book of Lamentations may itself be considered God's lament for His city and people (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, Eikhah 4). 6 In addition to the factor of voice and pathos, verbal repetition adds another dimension to the haftarah. In some cases, recurrences like leshonam (their tongues) link several units and give them coherence (Jer. 9:1-2, 3-5, 6-7), or they serve to establish a rhetorical counterpoint (see yithallel, "glory," in 9:22-23). In a different way, the fourfold repetition of nehi (dirge) and the eightfold use of}ein/'a-yin (nothing; not) add to the overall mood of desolation and despair in the haftarah. Puns also have a strong rhetorical presence in these prophecies, creating striking connections between the units. Particularly notable is the semantic network created by the phrase 'asof'asifem (I will make an end of them), at the beginning of the haftarah (Jer. 8:13), and the verbs he'asfu (let us gather [into the fortified cities] [8:14]) and ve-'ein me'assef (with none to pick them up 328 HAFTARAH FOR TISHA B'AV AFTERNOON
[9:21]) used later on. The fact that the first phrase opens the prophetic discourse and the last one comes near the end encloses the haftarah in a framework of desolation. Mention should also be made of the counterpoint between the people's initial cry that they should gather into the fortified cities "and meet our doom [ve-nidmah] there. For the LORD our God has doomed us [hadimmanuY (8:14) and the concluding curse in which God intones the horrific image that after the carnage human "carcasses . . . shall lie like dung [domen] upon the fields" (9:21). Also effective is the pun linking the words kinah (wailing) and mikneh (cattle) in Jer. 9:9—thus creating a striking relationship between the form oflament and the object ofloss.
COMMENTS Jeremiah 8:13.1 will make an end ofthem Hebrew 'asof'asifem. This vocalization understands the first verb }asof as an infinitive absolute of the verbal stem s-w-f "to end" or "destroy" (see Rashi and Kimhi). The content of what is destroyed is spelled out in Jer. 8:14. 7 Alternatively, one may read: "Their fruit harvest has been gathered in," following the Septuagint, a translation that presupposes the Hebrew vocalization 'osef'asifam and thus construes the word 'osef as a noun based on the verbal stem }-s-f, "to gather." (Compare Ps. 104:29; for 'e'esof, see Mic. 2:12). The verb is echoed in Jer. 8:14 and 9:21 (see Content and Meaning). The verbal pattern 'asof'asef with the sense "I will sweep everything away," also occurs in Zeph. 1:2-3. 8 As in Jer. 8:13, the first verb functions as an intensifier of the second. Whatever I havegiven them isgone Hebrew va-'etten la-hem ya'avrum. This phrase is difficult. Traditional commentators have perceived here a reference to the transgression of the Torah ofMoses. Moderns have emended the phrase, but there is no commendable solution. 9 14. Because we sinned against the LORD This clause evokes the confessional form hata'nu, "We sinned." Citations of similar popular confessions recur in Jer. 3:25; 14:7, 20; 16:10 (cf. Ps. 41:5; Lam. 5:16). The prophet's speech often appears based upon certain rhetorical forms. Compare the themes, language, and style ofjer. 8:14-23 with 14:17-22.
17. Lo, I will send serpents This is God's response to the previous lament. 10 In this prophecy, there will be no counter-charm for the poison. For "expert enchanter" (nevon lahash), see Isa. 3:3. 18. When ingritflwould seek comfort The Hebrew, mavligiti'aleyyagon, is difficult. The Septuagint translates "incurable," thus understanding mavligiti as a conflated misreading of two words: mivligehot (cf. Hos. 5:13; Prov. 17:22). 11 The referent would thus be to the incurable snake bite mentioned in verse 17. 12 Kimhi follows lonah ibn lanah in considering the word to be a conflation of masculine and feminine forms of a verb meaning "to overpower" (cf. Ps. 39: 14). Thus: "I have been overwhelmed with sorrow." Ibn lanah himself adduces the participial form in Ps. 123:1 (masculine) andHos. 10:11 (feminine) for comparison. 13 His translation and paraphrase follow the Targum. The prepositional 'aley is to be understood as 'alay, "upon me." Is not the LORD in Zion ? Many commentators have construed the first two questions to be spoken by Israel, followed by God's response at the end ("Why then did they anger Me?"). 14 Such an approach interprets the opening questions as theologically challenging; hence the divine reaction. But it is a feature of the triple rhetorical question to create a graded intensification, in which the first two queries imply a negative response. For this reason, it all appears that all three questions are spoken by God (Luzzatto). 15 The triple question is a rhetorical conceit often used by leremiah (cf. ler. 2:14; 8:22). 19.
Jeremiah 9:1-5. This passage is a good instance of the reuse of patriarchal themes in prophecy. Here the lacob cycle is deftly alluded to by a play on the name lacob ("every brother ['ah] is a deceitful supplanter ['akovya'kov]" [v. 3]; [NIPS: "takes advantage"]). Other key words in the oracle derive from that biblical narrative. Compare: "Your brother Yah~] came with guile [;mirmah ] .... 329
HAFTARAH FOR TISHA B'AV AFTERNOON
Was he, then, named Jacob \yacakov] that he might supplant me [va-ya'keveni] these two times?" (Gen. 27:35-36). The noun mirmah occurs in Jer. 9:5; the verbyehatellu (cheat) in Jer. 9:4 recalls Gen. 31:7. 16 The confusing phrases "You dwell \shivtekha\ in the midst of deceit. In their deceit, they refuse to heed Me" (v. 5) can best be understood with the Septuagint. In it, the consonants sh-v are construed as the verb shuv (repent) and linked to the verb nil}u in verse 4 (NJPS: "they wear themselves out"). The result is the phrase niPu shuv, "they refuse to repent \shuv\' The remaining consonants t-kh were construed as the word tokh (treachery). The reconstructed Hebrew text would thus be: tokh be-tokh, mirmah be-mirmah, "treachery in the midst of treachery, deceit in the midst of deceit" (cf. Jer. 9:7). 1 7 The words tokh and mirmah constitute a fixed pair in biblical Hebrew (cf. Ps. 10:7; 55:12). The resulting oracle against verbal mendacity is framed by Jer. 9:2 and 6-8. 2. They bend their tongues like bows "Their arrows are the false and bitter words they speak" (Kimhi). See also verse 7. 5. Tou dwell in the midst ofdeceit
See Comment to 9:1-5.
7. Their tongue is a sharpened arrow "Sharpened," Hebrewshahut (keri). See R. Joseph Kara and Kimhi. The ketiv, shohet, yields the sense of a "killing" arrow. 16. dirge-singers Professional female keeners. Compare Ezek. 32:16. These mourners may have keened in counterpoint; see M. Mo'ed Katan 3:9. let them come The expression is given twice: the first time with the verb u-tevo'enah, the second with the variant form ve-tavo'nah. Compare Ezek. 16:55, for the variants tashovena/ teshuvenah, "shall return"—also with a verb whose second radical is a vav (Luzzatto). 18 23. For I theLoRD act -with kindness The haftarah ends with a summary of covenantal virtues that counterpoints the moral and religious sins denounced earlier (9:1-5 and 11-15). See the discussion in the Comment to Jer. 9:23in the haftarah for Tzav.
JEREMIAH AND THE BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS Ancient Jewish tradition attributed the composition of Lamentations (recited on Tisha b'Av) to Jeremiah. In the Septuagint, for example, this work is placed after Jeremiah's prophecies and introduced with the words: "And it came to pass, after Israel was taken captive and Jerusalem made desolate, that Jeremiah sat weeping and lamented this lamentation over Jerusalem . . . " This tradition of authorship is also reflected in its Greek and Latin titles, in the Talmud (B. Baba Batra 15a), and in the Midrash (Lamentations Rabbah,^etz,ta 18). The biblical notice that Jeremiah's dirge for King Josiah was written "in their laments" (2 Chron. 35:25) undoubtedly contributed to this tradition. The Targum understood Lam. 4:20 ("the LORD'S anointed") to refer to Josiah. Another factor linking Jeremiah to Lamentations is the stylistic similarity between the prophet's words and these laments. The lamentational cry "How eikh] we are despoiled" (Jer. 9:18; cf. v. 6) recalls the wail'eikhah ("Alas!") at the beginning of the dirges in Lamentations 1, 2, and 4 (cf. Zeph. 2:15). Jeremiah's repeated reference to tears (Jer. 8:23; 9:9, 17) tallies with Lam. 1:2, 16; 2:11; and 3:48-49. The reference to heartsickness (davai) in Jer. 8:18 recurs in Lam. 1:13,22; and 5:17. The imagery of silent doom (nidmah; hadimmanu) in Jer. 8:14 is also found in Lam. 3:28 and 49 (ve-yidom:, tidmeh). Israel styled as the "daughter of my people" (bat dmi~, NJPS: "my poor people" or "my people"), which occurs in Jer. 8:19, 21-23 and in Lam. 2:11; 3:48; 4:3, 6, is a further tally between the books. The similar confessions in Jer. 8:14 and Lam. 5:16, in response to the desolation (stem: sh-m-m) of Zion (Jer. 9:10; Lam. 5:18), as well as the remarks on divine abandonment (stem: dzav) in the two texts (Jer. 9:1; Lam. 5:20), strengthen the impression that the voice of Jeremiah is heard in both texts. For that matter, the concluding threnody of the scroll (Lam. 5:22), "For truly, You have rejected us [ma'os ^e'as^anu]" also recalls Jeremiah's despairing cry on behalf of his suffering people (Jer. 14:19): "Have You, then, rejected [hama'osma'asta] Judah?" 330 HAFTARAH FOR TISHA B'AV AFTERNOON
Haftarah for Tisha b'Av Afternoon ASHKENAZIM
ISAIAH 55:6-56:8
Haftarah for Fast Day Afternoons ASHKENAZIM
ny^n bv nm»
mx ^ ^
nm»
ISAIAH 55:6-56:8
For a discussion of the prophecies and traditions in Isaiah 40-66 and a consideration of their historical setting and theological concerns, see "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." See also the remarks on the other haftarah readings taken from this collection (listed in "Index ofBiblical Passages"). The haftarah focuses on spiritual renewal and obedience to divine precepts, national restoration in the homeland, and the ingathering of Israelites and foreigners to Zion. Two features are notable. The first is the prophet's call for repentance—urging the people to turn from evil and seek God (Isa. 55:6-7); and second is God's word—announcing the inclusion of foreigners and eunuchs in the worship of the new Temple (Isa. 56:4-7). Both features are unique in this postexilic collection of prophecies, focused on national consolation and restoration to Zion. 1 The universalist inclusion of foreigners in Israelite worship is part of an ongoing cultural controversy about the nature of the restoration community and its religious practices (see below). The setting and date of the prophecies are not given. The initial call to repentance refers to a promise of deliverance not yet realized, in which the people are told that they "shall leave [the Babylonian exile] in joy and be led home secure" (Isa. 55:12). Another indication of the future restoration appears in the ensuing exhortation to the people to "observe what is r i g h t . . . ; for soon My salvation shall come" (Isa. 56:1). These prophetic proclamations may reflect the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus the Mede and his subsequent decree (in 538 B.C.E.) that made possible the return of the ludeans to their homeland and the renewal of the ancestral religious practices.2 PART 1. DIVINE POWERS OF FORGIVENESS AND FULFILLMENT (Isaiah 55:6-13) a. Isaiah 55:6-9 The prophet calls upon the people to seek the Lord, depart from evil, and return to Him—for He will pardon them. To reinforce this point, God stresses providence and "ways." In an analogy, God's ways are declared "high above" human ways.3 b. Isaiah 55:10-11 A second analogy stresses the marvelous powers of the divine word. In this context, it functions to reinforce the previous assertion of God's ways and an introduction to the ensuing oracle of redemption. c. Isaiah 55:12-13 The unit concludes with a prophecy of national restoration in joy, marked by a miraculous transformation of nature. PART 2. LIFE IN T H E N E W O R D E R (Isaiah 56:1-8) a. Isaiah 56:1-2 A divine instruction of right action—which includes ritual action (symbolized by the Sabbath) and ethical rectitude addressed to the covenantal community. b. Isaiah 56:3-8 Another word of God includes the foreigner and eunuch into Israelite worship. If they observe the Sabbath rules and practice rectitude, they shall be included "within My walls" (v. 5) and be allowed to worship in the new Temple. These rules serve as the basic conditions for the full participation of these proselytes ("who attach themselves to the L O R D " [v. 6]) in national worship. The restoration community will thus be supplemented by people gathered by God and added to the "dispersed oflsrael. . . already gathered" in Zion (v. 8).
CONTENT AND MEANING The haftarah is composed of two rhetorical units. The first part (Isa. 55:6-13) opens with a call to the people to "seek" the Lord and repent (va-yashov) of their sinful "plans" and "ways" (w. 331
HAFTARAH FOR TISHA B'AV AFTERNOON
6-7). The prophet encourages the people with two assertions: a theological statement that God "freely forgives" His people; and God's own word that His "plans" and "ways" are different from those ofhuman beings. The latter point is reinforced by a simile about the distance between the heavens and the earth (v. 9). A second simile then follows, again spoken by God. Its subject is the divine "word" spoken by the prophet and that it will not return (yashuv) unfulfilled (w. 10-11). This new topic shifts the focus from divine forgiveness to oracular fulfillment—from God's "ways" of reconciliation to the realization of His "word" of salvation (w. 12-13). His word of pardon and His promise of restoration are the aspects o f H i s transcendent ways. The second part of the haftarah (Isa. 56:1-8) returns to the proclamatory tone of part one. The prophet opens with a call to justice and announces the imminence of salvation (56:1). Special attention is focused on Sabbath observance and refraining from evil (v. 2). Of the two, Sabbath observance is emphasized in the prophet's words to foreigners and eunuchs. If they adhere to this commandment, the eunuchs are promised "a monument and a name" (v. 5) within the rebuilt Temple, and the foreigners will participate in its sacrifices and holy rites (w. 3-7). A celebratory closure marks this section: "Thus declares the Lord GOD, who gathers the dispersed oflsrael: 'I will gather still more to those already gathered'" (v. 8). The prophet's proclamation of inclusion counterpoints the quotations expressing fear of rejection enunciated by the foreigners and eunuchs (v. 3) and concludes the divine speech that rebuts these assertions (w. 4-7). The two rhetorical parts of the haftarah are linked by various words and phrases, forging new theological connections between the units. For example, by means of verbal repetition, a dramatic link is established between the nearness (karov) of God to the penitent (Isa. 55:6) and the nearness (kerovah) of the redemption announced subsequently (56:1). Of a different sort is the coordination of the"joy" (simhah) of the Israelite exodus from exile (55:12) with the "joy" (ve-simahtim) that God shall establish for the foreigners (56:7) when He brings them to His Temple to celebrate together with the native Israelites. And finally, one may observe the striking connection between Isa. 55:13 and 56:5. In 55:13, the miraculous transformation of nature (from nettles to myrtles) at the time of redemption "shall stand as a testimony [shem] to the LORD, as an everlasting [colam] sign that shall not perish [lo'yikkaret]." In 56:5, the re-plantation of the eunuch intheTemple (transformed from "a withered tree" [56:3] into a"monument" [56:5]) shall "give them an everlasting name \shem 'olam\ which shall not perish [lo'yikkaret]." The images of nature thus provide forceful figures for the envisioned redemption, presenting the movement from exile to redemption in terms of a shift from the dry and sterile to the productive and regenerative. In this way, the haftarah gives thematic emphasis to the renewal of life, which is the flowering of the seeds of redemption that God has planted with His prophetic word (55:10-11). The call to repentance at the beginning of the haftarah is unique in this prophetic corpus. Where references are in fact made to past sins, the expression of divine forgiveness is both categorical and unilateral (as in Isa. 43:25:"It is I, I who—for My own sake—wipe your transgressions away and remember your sins no more"). N o prior act of national repentance is mentioned or expected. In the present case, however, a bilateral or reciprocal movement is announced. Penitent action by the people will elicit divine mercy and thus break the cycle of sin and punishment. Just this power of repentance to counteract divine judgment may also explain the reason offered for God's mercy: "My ways [are not] your ways" (55:8). One may suspect that behind this strong justification was the people's sense that repentance could not annul the guilt for past sins (cf. Ihn Ezra on Isa. 55:8). In response, the prophet forcefully asserts that sincere repentance will indeed activate divine mercy. A similar concern regarding the power of repentance to abrogate the "justice" of divine punishment is also reflected in the postexilic discourses of Ezekiel (Ezek. 18:25-29). There, too, the divine answer is clear. God desires repentance; for He is a God of mercy who wants the sinner to live. The haftarah also emphasizes that God loves the stranger and the foreigner. The universal tone of the proclamation in Isa. 56:3-8 is remarkable and forcefully challenges attitudes found in other religious circles. In particular, the incorporation of foreigners into the Temple worship is strongly rejected by the contemporary prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 44:8-16). 4 This priest-prophet 332 HAFTARAH FOR FAST DAY AFTERNOONS
even contended that such inclusion was one of the fundamental sins of the preexilic community, which must be eradicated (w. 7-8). Similarly, the expulsion of foreigners from the restoration community was a key plank in the exclusivist program of the priest Ezra. 5 The polemical tone of Isa. 56:3-8 may be perceived by the vocabulary chosen by the prophet. For example, the foreigners are said to "attach themselves [nilvim] to the LORD" and "to minister [le-sharet] to Him" and "be His servants [cavadim]n (v. 6). These terms allude to the terminology of levitical affiliation and service in Num. 18:3-4. 6 One may even suspect that the emphatic repetition of the verb shamar ("hold fast") in Isa. 56:4 and 6 is also intended to counterpoint the use of this term in Num. 18:3-5. 7 As against the exclusivist rigor whereby only proper Levites may "discharge their duties" connected with the Shrine (Num. 18:3), the prophet proclaims here that all who "hold fast" (or "observe") the Sabbath may affiliate with the Israelite people and be given a place in the future Temple (Isa. 56:4-7)—even, remarkably, those who are physically maimed like the eunuchs (cf. Deut. 23:2-4). The inclusivist program of the prophet is also marked by this emphasis on Sabbath observance. Elsewhere, he also exalts the Sabbath among all other observance incumbent upon the nation (Isa. 58:13-14). In this he was not alone. Late prophecy put special stress on the Sabbath (ler. 17:21-24; Ezek. 20:12, 20) and even highlighted its desecration as one of the reasons for the exile (Ezek. 20: 21-26; cf. ler. 17:27). 8 The priests also gave special emphasis to this day and even placed it at the head of an older list of festivals (Lev. 23:3). 9 It was presumably the exilic situation, when the people were deprived of the Temple and its offerings, that led to the special prominence of the Sabbath in postexilic Israel. Isaiah 56:3-7 indicates that observance of the Sabbath also came to constitute a minimal first step for inclusion in the covenant community of faith and practice. In this respect we can observe a certain progression of instruction. 10 The exhortation in Isa. 56:1 simply tells the Israelites to "observe what is right and do what is just"—for salvation is soon to come. The teaching is general and unspecific. This changes in verse 2, where there is a specification to observe the Sabbath and depart from evil. This adds a ritual and moral component to the general exhortation, but is restricted to the Israelite community. Only with the further address to the eunuchs and foreigners are requirements for communal participation extended to outsiders. Such practices (the Sabbath; covenantal obedience) are presented as the standards for inclusion in sacred practices normally restricted to Israelites. The haftarah presents this instruction as a divine call to those near and far—native and foreigner alike to share in the joy of God's Temple: "A house of prayer for all peoples" (56:7).
COMMENTS Isaiah 55:6. Seek the LORD while He can befound The call is addressed to contemporaries (Ibn Ezra). If the force of the preposition bet (in be-himma-tz'o and bi-hyoto karov) is temporal, then the divine is to be beseeched now, 11 "while" He "can be found" or "is near." This would imply a special opportunity, a favorable presence of the divine for seekers (Ibn Ezra). 12 However, the preposition could also be functional and implore the seekers to turn to God "in order that" He be present to them (Abravanel; and cf. R. loseph Kimhi, cited by R. David Kimhi). Choice between these possibilities involves different theologies. The notion of seeking God and finding Him has other reflexes; compare Deut. 4:29 and 1 Chron. 28:9; negatively, Hos. 5:6. The passage indicates the nearness of God. This theological feature is elsewhere used to stress the immanence of God—especially to sufferers (Ps. 34:19) or true seekers (Ps. 145:18). The notion of a "near" God is presented in Deut. 4:7 as a distinctive feature of Israelite religion: "For what great nation is there that has a god so close at hand [kerovim] as is the LORD our God, whenever we call upon Him?" (cf. ler. 23:23). On this basis, later rabbinic tradition used wicked King Manasseh to assert that Isaiah's comment in Isa. 55:6 was blasphemous, since it presumed that God was not always "near." The apparent contradiction was resolved by asserting that Deut. 4:7 refers to the nation as a whole, while Isa. 55:6 indicates the situation for individuals (B. Yevamot 49b). The issue clearly exercised the rabbinic mind, perhaps because of the suggestion that God was in some way remote or inaccessible. Such notions occurred in contemporary pagan philosophies. 333
HAFTARAH FOR FAST DAY AFTERNOONS
7. For he freely forgives pardon" (OJPS).
Hebrew yarbeh lisloah-, more precisely, "He will abundantly
8. My -ways God's way is a way of compassion and reception of repentance. After Ezekiel addresses the exiles with a teaching of God's readiness to forgive the penitent, the people respond with wonder and doubt at God's incomprehensible "way" (Ezek. 18:25, 29). 13 They assumed iniquity had to be punished. Here, too, the people need divine justification to believe that God will truly forgive those who return from their evil ways. 9. But as Hebrew simply ki, "as." A special usage of the participle (normally meaning "because" or "indeed"); 14 functioning like ka-'asher (so Ibn Bal'am). 15 In verse 10, the formula is ki ka-'asher, "for as." 11. So is the -word The idiom of a prophetic word that "does not come back . . . unfulfilled" is rooted in old prophetic traditions about the effectiveness of divine predictions (cf. 1 Sam. 9:6). In another idiom, it is stated that the oracle will not fall to the ground unfulfilled (2 Kings 10:10). 16 Choice of the verb "come back" (yashuv) here is due to the verbal play on repentance (ve-yashov, "let him turn back") in verse 7. The verb "perform" ('asah) is also part of a technical vocabulary (cf. Num. 23:19). The ideology of fulfilled prophecy is a criterion for true prophecy in Deut. 18:22, though prophetic notions of repentance introduce a conditional aspect (cf. Jer. 18:7-11). 1 7 The Book of Jonah is specifically marked by this tension between unconditional divine proclamations that are rendered conditional by human acts of repentance. 18 The prophecies oflsaiah 40-55 are especially marked by an emphasis on the fulfillment of prophecy. 19 Indeed, an opening prophecy of this unit states categorically that "the word of our God is always fulfilled \yakum\' (Isa. 40:8). 20 Other expressions use some of the same terms as Isa. 55:11; cf. 45:25; 46:10; and 48:14-15. The fulfillment of prophecy is one of the prophet's main arguments against other gods or idols (Isa. 41:23; 44:7); and in one striking formulation, the prophetic word is linked to creation (Isa. 46:11). 12. leave
That is, leave the Babylonian exile [Transl.].
13. a -testimony Hebrew shem, "a name" that is an "everlasting sign that shall not perish [lo'yikkaret]" Compare 56:5, where the eunuchs who observe the covenant will have a "name" (shem) in the Temple, "an everlasting name [shem] which shall not perish [lo'yikkaret]." Isaiah 56:1. -what isjust The Hebrew noun tzedakah has multiple senses in this prophetic collection. As here, it is often used with the sense of legal justice and right (mishpat)-, compare Isa. 50:8; 58:2; 59:4 and 9. 21 It may also indicate divine justification (cf. 50:8; 53:11; 54:17). Elsewhere, tzedakah is used with the sense of "victory" and often occurs with words indicating deliverance or triumph (cf. 45:21; 46:13; 51:5-8; 61:10-11). This usage is also known from the liturgy (e. g., "the tents of the victorious resound with joyous shouts of deliverance" [Ps. 118:15]). The call to just behavior is a hallmark ofbiblical prophecy but is a subtheme in this corpus. 3. theforeigner... -who has attached himself The foreigner is the ben nekhar, a designation also found in Isa. 60:10; 61:5; and 62:8. Ezekiel speaks against the service o f t h e ben nekhar in the Temple (Ezek. 44:7); his rejection has a Pentateuchal precedent (Lev. 22:25). Isaiah 55: 7 projects a more open regulation (see discussion above). The term "who has attached himself \ha-nilvahY is also a late technical designation for foreigners who join the community oflsrael (see Zech. 2:15; Esther 9:27). The phrase ha-nilvah is like 'ashernilvah (cf. Josh. 10:24). 4-7. A divine speech, using the first-person pronoun in verses 4-5, 6b, and 7. This suggests that the use of the Tetragrammaton Y H W H in verse 6a is a modification of an original first-person pronoun read as an abbreviation of the divine Name; that is, Hy ('alay, "to Me") would have been construed as 'al-Y (HWH), "to the LORD" (cf. also "name of the LORD" for "My name"; and "to Him," lo, was changed to li, "to Me," in harmony with these developments). Such a scribal slip is not uncommon. Euphemistic considerations may also have played a part. HAFTARAH FOR FAST DAY AFTERNOONS
334
5. an everlasting name Hebrewyad va-shem. The wordyad refers to a "monument" (1 Sam. 15:12). Thus Absalom set up a pillar for himself, "for he said, 'I have no son to keep my name alive'" (2 Sam. 18:18). The expression here also indicates an "everlasting memorial" for the childless. 7. I will bring them A similar participation in the rebuilt Temple service is found in Isa. 66:20-21. The idea of the Temple as a "house of prayer" for all peoples recalls Solomon's prayer in 1 Kings 8:41 (see Ibn Ezra).
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE HAFTARAH AND THE FAST DAY The Torah reading for the Minhah (afternoon) service on fast days and on Tisha b'Av is Exod. 32:11-14 and 34:1-10. In the first selection Moses appeals to God to relent of His anger against the people, whereas in the second he receives a revelation of God's attributes of mercy. The Lord is called "compassionate \rahum\" and "abounding \rav\ in kindness," forgiving iniquity and sin (Exod. 34:6-7). The haftarah echoes these themes. In it the prophet calls upon the people to repent of their evil plans and ways—emphasizing that God will compassionately "pardon [viyrahamehu]" the sinner, "for He freely [or: fully,yarbeh] forgives" (Isa. 55:7). One reason for selecting this haftarah was its emphasis on divine mercy—so central on a day of penance and fasting. During the Middle Ages, the question of its recitation was taken up in the context of discussing the practice of reading from the prophets during the Minhah service. According to the Tosafists, "the reason one recites [this selection as] a haftarah during thz Minhah service on a public fast day—and not during the [morning] Shaharit service—is because it is written [in the haftarah], 'Observe what is right and do what is just [tzedakah]" (Isa. 56:1), and 'the merit of a fast day is the charity [dispensed]' de-ta'anita' tzedakta') —toward nightfall. For this reason, it is proper to recite [this haftarah that mentions tzedakah] toward nightfall [of the fast day] after doing charity [tzedakah]" (commenting on B. Megillah 21a; s. v. ve-'ein). This explanation involves a reading of a key word in the haftarah, tzedakah (righteousness), in its common rabbinic sense of "charity" 22 —and then linking it to the proverb 'agm' de-ta'anita' tzedakta' (B. Berakhot 6b), 23 in which the religious reward one may receive for fasting derives from the charity given on that occasion. The matter of care for the needy on fast days is a central rabbinic value (see B. Sanhedrin 35a; and Rashi, ad loc.). 24 Such acts of philanthropy may derive from an older notion that works of charity may help annul an evil decree or distressing situation. The biblical epigram tzedakah tatzil me-mavet (NIPS: "righteousness saves from death" [Prov. 10:2]) was understood in classical ludaism to enjoin: "charity saves from death" (cf. B. Shabbat 156b). Indeed, the notion that "charity" (along with repentance and prayer) may "avert the severity of the decree" of divine judgment due to sin is a central theme of the High Holy Day liturgy.
335
HAFTARAH FOR FAST DAY AFTERNOONS
N O T E S T O T H E COMMENTARY salem and Minneapolis: Magnes Press and Fortress Press, 1995), 179-208. < 12. So Menahem Haran, Bein Ri'shonot le-Ha1. See the remarks oflbn Ezra, ad loc. A 2. See the full discussion of Sheldon Blank, "Studies dashot (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1963), 23. For the notion that it refers to the fulfilled oracles of Isaiah, inDeutero-Isaiah,"HUG4 15 (1940): 18-32. < see D. Jones, "The Traditio of the Oracles oflsaiah 3. Ibid., 9-13. < 4. These links were also noted by my student Jon of Jerusalem," Z ^ . ^ 6 7 (1955): 245f. < Schofer. On the relationship between Isa. 42:5, 18 13. For details, see Benjamin Sommer,.4 Prophet and Genesis 1, see Arvid Kapelrud, "The Date of Reads Scripture: .Allusion in Isaiah 40-66 (Stanford, the Priestly Code (P)" Annual ofthe Swedish Theo- Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998), 97; also logical Institute 3 (1964): 58-64. Moshe Weinfeld, idem, "Allusions and Illusions: The Unity of the Book "The Creator God in Genesis and the Prophecies oflsaiah in Light of Deutero-Isaiah's use of Prophetic of Deutero-Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Tarbiz 37 (1968), Tradition" inNew Visions oflsaiah, JSOTSup 214, ed. esp. 120-26, has noted relations between Isa. 45: Roy Melugin and Marvin Sweeny (Sheffield: Sheffield 7, 18 and Gen. 1:2, and Isa. 40:18, 25 and Gen. University Press, 1996), 161. A 1:26, respectively, and suggested that the prophet 14. Ed. Louis Finkelstein (New York: Jewish Theis engaged in a spiritual polemic against the earlier ological Seminary of America, 1969), 403-4. A mythic and anthropomorphic traditions found in the 15. Isa. 42:5 recurs in and structures the homiletic Torah. On this and related matters, see my Biblical proem to Gen. 1:1 in Mid. Hag., Bere'shit (ed. MorInterpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon decai Margulies [Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, Press, 1985), 325-26. < 1967], 2-4). < 5. Kimhi and Luzzatto understand 'etzorkha from the stem natzar, meaning "protect." A Haftamhfor Noah 6. For the suggestion "covenant of people" see 1. Rashi also identifies the barren woman as John L. McKenzie, Secondlsaiah, AB 20 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1968), ad loc.; for "the covenant of Zion-Jerusalem. The call to rejoice because of divine the people," see Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66:A deliverance occurs in Isa. 44:23; 49:13; and 52:9, Commentary, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, as well. Cf. Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL 1969), 97. Cf. also the suggestion of Mark Smith (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 276. < "Berit Am/Berit 'Olam: A New Proposal for the Crux 2. For other traditions and views on the length of of Isa 42:6"JBL 100 (1981): 241-48; and also the the haftarah in different traditions, see Jacob Mann, still intriguing (if only by virtue of a pun) proposal The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue of Harry Torczyner, "Presidential Address," JPOS 16 (reprint, New York: Ktav, 1971), 1:60-61. < (1936): 7. < 3. For this notion of Zion as a mystical "presence," 7. According to R. Isaiah di Trani, God called see Tikva Frymer-Kensky, the 'Wake ofthe Goddesses (NewYork: Free Press, 1992), chap. 15. A Cyrus. Cf. Isa. 42:19. < 4. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation 8. Yair Hoffmann, "Hazon Hakdashah ve-Toda'ah Nevu'it," Tarbiz 54 (1985): 172, also makes this in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), point; but his other suggestions (pp. 172-73) are 307-12. < not convincing (the terms are used too loosely to 5. See Peirush R. Tehudah ihn Bal'am le-Sefer serve as a complex of elements). A Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (Tel Aviv: 9. See Friedrich Stummer, "Einige Keilschriftliche Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 217, with note ad loc. A Parallelen zu Jes. 40-65,"JBZ 44 (1926): 177-78. < 6. See the comment of Tigay, Deuteronomy, 67. 10. See the valuable discussion of Blank, "Studies in Deutero-Isaiah" 14-18, 32-46. See also Norman For a classical overview, see Nelson Glueck, The Word Walker, "Concerning huy and 'ani hu\" ZAW 74 Hesed, trans. A. Gottschalk (Cincinnati: HUC Press, 1967); and also the study of Katherine D. Sakenfeld, (1962): 205-6. < 11. For a comprehensive account, see F. Cruse- TheMeaning ofHesed in the Hebrew Bible (Missoula, mann, "Jahwes Gerechtigkeit (tzedeq/tzedaqah) im Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978). < alten Testament" ET 36 (1976): 427-50; and for 7. On the basis of parallelism and sense, one may a critique and reformulation in the light of ancient also repoint rega'be-'apo ("for He is angry but a moNear Eastern sources, Moshe Weinfeld, Socialjustice ment') to roga' be-'apo in Ps. 30:6. The Greek also in Ancient Israel and in theAncient Near East (Jeru- translates "anger." A
Haftamhfor Bere'shit
NOTES TO PP. 103-116
336
8. S tt Mahberet Menahem, ed. Z. Filopowski (London and Leipzig: Me'orerei Yesheinim [Societatis Antiquitatum Hebraicarum], 1854), 179. R. Menahem gives his opinion "according to context." A 9. In Sepher Ha-Shorashim, ed. J. Biesenthal and F. Lebrecht (Berlin, 1847), 402. See also in his commentary, where he also quotes R. Menahem and the view ofhis father (like the Targ.). A 10. The same orthographic variation can be found in the keri-ketiv form of'etzorkha in Jer. 1:5. Cf. Minhat Shai, ad loc. < 11. Following NJPS note i. < 12. Cf. Bruce K. Waltke and M. O ' C o n n o r , ^ Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbraun's, 1990), 572 (34. 4. c). < 13. Sepher Haschoraschim, ed. Wilhelm Bacher (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1896), 88. < 14. See the discussion of Otto Eissfeldt, "The Promises of Graces to David in Isaiah 55. 1-5," in Israel's Prophetic Heritage, ed. Bernhard W Anderson and Walter Harrelson (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 196-207; and also Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 2:240. < 15. For a full discussion, see the haftarah to Bere'shit. The ideas are found in homiletic association in Mid. Shoher Tov, ed. Solomon Buber (Vilna: Romm, 1891), chap. 51 (end). < 16. See my earlier discussion in Biblicallnterpretation, 374; also pp. 350-52 for a discussion of typologies. For the use of lo' in oaths, cf. also the comment in B. Shevu'ot 36a. A \7.Mishneh Torah, MattanotAniyim 10:1. A
commissions in Deutero-Isaiah, see Yair Hoffmann, "Hazon Hakdashah ve-Toda'ah Nevu'it," Tarbiz 53 (1985): 169-86; and p. 175 for notes on Isa. 41: 8-13. < 8. For a full discussion, see Moshe GoshenGottstein, "Abraham—Lover or Beloved of God," in Love and Death in theAncientNear East, ed. John H. Marks and Robert M. Good (Guilford, Conn.: Four Quarters Publishing, 1987), 101-4. < 9. Tanh. Be-shallah 9. < 10. Kimhi cites the Yelammedenu and gives a slightly different version of the midrash; Rashi alludes to the teaching through the word "her mouth [pihah]". <
Haftamhfor W-yem*
1. Among the other acts recorded are the healing of the ruinous waters (2 Kings 2:19-22) and poisonous stew (4:38-41); the miraculous multiplication of loaves for the hungry crowd (4:42-44); the curing of the leper Naaman, commander of the army of Aram (5:1-19); and the floating ax head (6:1-7). Elisha was thus, demonstrably, the worthy heir of his master, whose spirit he inherited twofold (see 2 Kings 2:6-15). < 2. For these elements in folktales generally and in our texts in particular, see Eli Yasif, The Hebrew Folktale: History, Genre,Meaning (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1994), 25. < 3. For the common type-scenes—miraculous provision followed by restoring a boy to life—see Robert Culley, Studies in the Structure of Hebrew 'Narrative (Philadelphia/Missoula, Mont.: Fortress/Scholars Press, 1976), 63-64. < 4. Alexander Rofe, in his study entitled "Classes HaftamhforLekhLekha in the Prophetical Stories: Didactic Legends and 1. Some modern commentators consider this Parable," Studies on Prophecy, SVT 26 (Leiden: E. phrase a mistaken dittography from the preceding J. Brill, 1974), 151-53, distinguishes the didactic case. R. Isaiah di Trani interprets it as a summons to from the simple legends on the basis of its concern with moral over against magical issues. See also idem, the nations to begin their arguments. A "The Clarification of the Prophetical Stories"JBL 89 2 . E . g., God designates Himself as "I, the L O R D " and "I am He ['ani hu']" (Isa. 4 1 : 4 ) . NJPS renders (1970): 429-33. < the phrase 'ani hu', "as well"; this considerably softens 5. For the "midrashic" reworking of the motifs the denomination. For the expression, see Norman of the Elisha tales in the New Testament, see the Walker, "Concerning hu' and 'ani hu'," ZAW 74 discussion of Thomas L. Brodie, "Luke 7:36-50 as an Internalization of 2 Kings 4:1-37:A Study (1962): 205-6. < 3. Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL (Phila- in Luke's Use of Rhetorical Imitation," Biblica 64 delphia: Westminster, 1969), 59, considers the criti- (1983): 457-85. < 6. See the review of opinions in Reuven Yaron, cism a quote from a "community lament." A 4. For a succinct consideration of "components" "Ka'eth Hayyah and Koh Lehay," VT 12 (1962): in the prophetic speeches, see Menahem Haran, Bein 500-501. < 7. Observed by W von Soden and cited by W Ri'shonot le-Hadashot (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Lambert, BWL, 288, note to line 1. < 1963), 17-22. < 8. See Mid. Sekhel Tov, ed. Solomon Buber (Ber5. Cf. Gen. R. 2:3 and 42:3 (ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Albeck [Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, lin, 1900-1901), 64; Mid. Lekah Tov, ed. Solomon 1965], 1:16 and 418); Tanh. Lelch Lekha 9 (end); Buber (Vilna, 1884), 161; Mid. Hag., Genesis, ed. and alsoPiyyuteiRabbiTannai, ed. ZviM. Rabinovitz Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1967), 355, in the name of R. Eliezer. On (Jerusalem: Bialiklnstitute, 1985), 1:121. < 6. Cf. also Haran, Bein Ri'shonot le-Hadashot, the "ashes" of Isaac, see B. Ta'an. 16 and B. Zev. 62a. Overall, see Shalom Spiegel, The Last Trial (New 40. < 7. For an overall attempt to see the language of York: Pantheon Books, 1967), chaps. 4-5. A 337
NOTES TO PP.103-116337
9. S. Spiegel, ibid., p. 34, n. 19, regards the refer- ten,Archivesfrom Elephantine (Berkeley: University of ence to resurrection in the phrase "Isaac came to know California Press, 1968), 113, 291-94. < Resurrection ofthe dead as taught by the Torah" to be a 9. So Mordecai Zer-Kavod, SeferMal'akhi, Da'at gloss basedonM. Sanh. 10:1 (Perek Helek). A Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 2, 10. See the comment of Gerald Friedlander, in his ad loc. A 10. A characteristic list of these "corrections" apannotated translation of Mid. Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer (1st ed., 1916; reprint, New York: Sepher-Hermon pears in the MdRY at Exod. 15:7. A broad sample of lists, with variants and analysis, can be found in Press, 1981), p. 239, n. 6. < Christian D. Ginsburg,Introduction to theMassoreticoCritical Introduction to the Old Testament (1897; reHaftamhforHayyei Sarah print, New York: Ktav, 1966), 347-63. A thorough 1. For a study of the oath formula in question, reexamination of the phenomenon, with secondary see Moshe Greenberg, "The Hebrew Oath Particle literature, appears in Carmel McCarthy, The Tiqqune Sopherim und Other Theological Corrections in theMashay/hey:'JBL 76 (1957): 34-39. < soretic Text ofthe Old Testament, OBO 36 (Fribourg, 2. See the haftarah for Va-yehi. A 3. See Mid. Tanh. Hayyei Sarah 4 (ed. Solomon Switzerland: Universitatsverlag, 1981). A Buber [Vilna: Romm,1885]), 1:59b (p. 118). < 11. Jeremiah 33:21b may be a late addition to the Davidide oracle in v. 21a; and see similarly at the end of v. 22. A Haftamhfor Toledot 12. See in Daniel Goldschmidt,Mahzor le-Yamim 1. See the comments in "The Book of Malachi" Nora'im, Yom Kippur (Jerusalem: Koren, 1970), in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the 483-84. < Haftarot Cycle"; see also the discussions of the Book 13. See the materials collected in Cecil Roth, of Obadiah in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted "Ecclesiasticus in the Synagogue Servicc" JBL 71 in the Haftarot Cycle" and in connection with the (1952): 172-73. < haftarah for Va-yetze'. According to 1 Esdras 4:45, 14. First noted by R. S. Y. Rappaport, Toledot Edom burned the Temple. A R. 'Eli'ezer ha-Kattir (Tevunah edition; 1923), 252; 2. The idea that Edom was destroyed by Arabs and see the discussion by Roth, "Ecclesiasticus in the after the destruction of the Temple was championed Synagogue Service," 175-76. A by Willi Nowack, DieKleinen Propheten, HKAT 3-4 15. Ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Albeck (Je(Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1922), 427. rusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1965), 2:699-700. < Present evidence, based on the Nabonides Chroni16. For a wide-ranging and penetrating analysis cle, suggests that Nabonides destroyed "[AJdummu" focusing on historical and geographical variations, (viz., Edom) in 552 B.C.E. in conjunction with cam- see Gerson Cohen, "Esau as Symbol in Early Mepaigns in southern Transjordan and northern Arabia. dieval Thought," in Studies in the 'Variety ofRabbinic See J. Lindsay, "The Babylonian Kings and Edom, Cultures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 605-550 B.C." PEQ108 (1977): 33; and J. Bartlett, 1991), 243-69. < "From Edomites to Nabataeans: A Study in Continu17. See Gen. R., 65:21 (ed. Theodor and Albeck, ity," PEQ 111 (1979): 57. The Arabian campaign in 2:740) and the fuller variants in B. Git. 57b, Eikhah the chronicle appears in.ANET, 305. A Rabbah (ed. S. Buber [Vilna: Romm, 1899]) on 3. Already Daniel al-Kumsi, Pitron Shneim Asar, Lam. 2:2, and Mid. Hag. Bere'shit (ed. Mordecai ed. Isaac Markon (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, Margulies [Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1967], 1958), 77, andAbravanel, ad loc. A 427). < 4. Such a division follows NJPS, against the 18. PdRK, Va-yehi, piska 11 (ed. Bernard ManMasoretic division. A delbaum [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 5. The Targum apparently arose from a Hebrew 1962], 1:134). Rabbi Meier also interpreted the text different from our MT, in which the initial let- anti-Edomite "Dumah" passage in Isa. 21:1 to ters of the last two words were presumably lost (by mean Rome (J. Ta'an. 1:1, 64a)—reading rami for haplography?). Thus Aramaic ve-yitmenahulkekhon the orthographically similar domi, as noted already mineih suggests the Hebrew ve-nassa' se'et-khem by Jerome in his Commentary on Isaiah, 5, on Isa. me'alav, "and will remove their honor/prestige from 21:11 (Migne, Patwlogia Latina xxiv, 199); and see them." < also Louis Ginzberg, "Die Haggada bei den Kirchenvatern, VI "Jewish Studies in Honor of George A. 6. See my Biblicallnterpretation inAncientlsmel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 329-34, for a full Kohut, ed. Salo Baron and Alexander Marx (New discussion, as well as for the larger ancient Near York, 1935), 299. < Eastern and biblical context. I now find that Abra19. See Theodor-Albeck edition, 2:685, and the vanel already alluded to the overall link and several textual matters discussed in Minhat Yehuda. A details. A 20. See Nahum N. Glatzer, "The Attitude Toward 7. Ihn Ezra suggests that the subjects of the ac- Rome in Third-Century Judaism," in Essays injewish tivity are Jews in exile, but the irony of the passage Thought (University, Ala.: University of Alabama suggests otherwise. A Press, 1978), 1-15. < 8. See the evidence and discussion of Bezalel Por21. Various terms for Edom are used; for a NOTES TO PP. 103-116
338
sampling, see Leopold Zunz, Die Synagogale Poesie HUCA 17 (1942): 473. See also Ibn Ezra and R. desMittelalters, ed. Aaron Friemann (Frankfurt-am- Eliezer of Beaugency, who see no mercy here. -4 Main: J. Kaufmann, 1920), 453-60 (Rome) and 14. If OJPS is following Rashi and similar opin462-65 (Christianity). < ions, the refusal of human repentance is the result of 22. See B. Sot. 13a, and also R. Rieger, "The the absence of divine compassion. -4 Foundation of Rome in the Talmud,"/jQ^ n 15. Note also the biformyasham (with harav) in 16 (1925-26): 227-28. The historical sources the first part of the sentence. Both stems derive from are ably discussed by Cohen, "Esau as Symbol," a biconsonantal sh-m. See G. R. Driver, Problems of 254-61. < the Hebrew 'Verbal System (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 23. SeeDemshotRabbi Yehoshu'a ibn Shu'eib (Jeru- 1936), 6-7. Moshe Greenberg follows this reading at Ezek. 6:6 (translating "ruined and desolate"), in salem: LevSameah Institute, 1993), 1:47. A his Ezekiel 1-20, AB (Garden City, N. Y.: Double1983), 133. In pHab 4:9 Habakkuk, ve-'ashem Haftarahfor Va-yetze' (Ashkenazim) day, appears as v-y-shm and is interpreted in terms of 1. Midrashic tradition interprets the second refer- destruction. A ence to Elijah; cf. Yal. 2, 1 Kings, 209. < 16. Also noted by Greenberg, ibid. See Ibn 2. Ed. Louis Finkelstein (New York: Jewish Theo- Ezra, on Hos. 5:15, and his Arabic sources, noted logical Seminary of America, 1969), 88 (on Deut. by Simon, Shnei Perushei R. Abraham ibn Ezra, 70 (n., ad loc.). A 11:14) and 376 (onDeut. 32:35). < 17.'Emunot Ve-De'ot,Ma'amar 5:8. A 3. For this theme, see Judah Goldin, "Not By V&.Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Teshuvah 2:2, 4. A Means of an Angel and Not by Means of a Mes19. The phrase is read as tissa'kol'avon or kol'avon senger" in Studies inMidmsh and Related Literature (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1988), tissa'. Cf. Rashi. Ibn Ezra assumes an ellipsis for kol 'asher tissa\ i. e., "To the extent that You forgive our 163-73. < 4. See the remarks of H. Graf Reventlow, "Sein sins, we shall return." By contrast, Meir Ish Shalom, Blut Komme uber sein Haupt," FT 10 (1960): "Meir Ayin 'al Sefer Hoshe'a" in Zikkaron le-Abmham Eliahu (Festschrift for Abraham Harkavy), ed. D. 311-27. < 5. See H. L. Ginsberg, s. v. "Hosea, Book of," Gunzburg and I. Markon (Petersburg, 1909), 34, Enejud 8:1023-24; and also Moshe Weinfeld, interprets kol as le-gamrei, i. e., "completely forgive Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Oxford: sin." < 20. See Simon, Shnei Perushei R. Abraham ibn Clarendon Press, 1972), app. B, 366-70. A 6. Citations from R. Eliezer are from R. Eliezer Ezra, 129 (with notes) for this view; in the shorter Mi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel Ve-Trei Asar (Kom- commentary, on p. 291, Ibn Ezra reads the phrase as mentar zu Ezechiel und den XII kleinen Propheten, an ellipsis—"take [something] good." A 21. The ending m may be an enclitic particle, Lieferung 2) (Warsaw: Mekize Nirdamim, 1910), added to nouns for metrical or other reasons. It occurs ad loc. A 7. See Ihn Janah, Sefer Ha-Shorashim, ed. Wil- in Ugaritic and old Hebrew literature. The Masoretes, helm Bacher (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1896), s. v. rtt not knowing the form, construed it (falsely) as a plural marker (thus yielding parim, "bulls"). A and rtt. A 22. See Yehudah Keil, Sefer Hoshe'a, Trei Asar, 8. Ihn Ezra refers to Ps. 49:15 here and to Hos. Da'at Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 13:2 there. This correlation was already adduced by Ihn Bal'am on Ps. 49:15. See Shnei Perushei R.Abra- 1990), 111 n. 33. He presumably follows Ish Shaham ihn Ezra Le-lrei Asar, ed. Uriel Simon (Ramat lom, "Meir 'Ayin 'al Sefer Hoshe'a," 34. Keil also cites Gan: Bar Han University Press, 1989), 122, and the Tosef. Sot. 9:3 (brought earlier by Ish Shalom) to the effect that some biblical verses contain (implied) dianote ad loc. A 9. See Shnei Perushei R.Abraham ibn Ezra, ibid., logues ("What this one said, that one did not"). A 23. According to Hans W Wolff, Hosea, Herme123 (n. ad loc.). < neia (Philadelphia, Fortress, 1974), 233, God is the 10. For the biblical notion of suspended punishment as a manifestation of divine mercy, see Yochanan speaker throughout. A 24. Cf. also berosh, "cypress" (Hos. 14:9). < Muffs, Love andjoy: Law, Language and'Religionin 25. On this prototype of servitude and release, see Ancientlsrael (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University already David Daube, The Exodus Pattern in the Bible Press, 1992), chap. 1. < (London: Faber &Faber, 1963). A 11. See NJPS on Hos. 13:14, note f-f. < 12. Rashi and Ibn Ezra juxtapose former acts of Haftarahfor Va-yishlah salvation (from Sheol) to the present act of doom. Overall, this conforms to the sense suggested here. (Ashkenazim) It should be noted that if the opening clauses are 1. Also Arnold Ehrlich,Mikra'I
NOTES TO PP.103-116339
3. Quite different is the view of R. Eliezer of adduced by Elliot Wolfson, Through a Speculum that Beaugency, who explains that the people are "depend- Shines: 'Vision and Imagination in Medieval Judaism ent [teluyim] upon My restoration of them." See in (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1994), R. EliezerMe-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel Ve-Trei Asar 73. < (Kommentar zuEzechiel und denXIIkleinen Propheten, 18. NJPS does not bring this out clearly, being Lieferung 2) (Warsaw: Mekize Nirdamim, 1910), descriptive in tone and characterization. A pt. 2, ad loc. Similarly, cf. Gedalia Alon, "waiting" 19. Cf. the similar terms in Hos. 10:4-5; also the for "My return [to them]," in Be'ur La-Nevi'im (Tel more extended puns in v. 5: the people of Samaria, Aviv: Pelover, n. d.), 145. A who once took "joy \yagiluY in the "calf [ceglot]" of 4. As suggested by NJPS; see Comment to v. Beth-aven, shall mourn "for the glory that is departed 3. < [galah] from it". A 5. For the emendation, see NJPS note e, presum20. See Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture: ably following H. L. Ginsberg, s. v. "Hosea, Book Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts (New York: of", Encjud 8:1020. < Schocken, 1979), 55-56. < 6. This view is adduced favorably by Tanhum haYerushalmi, in Peirush Tanhum ben YosefHa-YerushalHaftamhfor Va-yishlah (Sephardim) mi Le-Trei 5Asar, ed. Hadassa Shy (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991), 40-41. < 1. See his discussion in Sefer ha-Ge'ulah, in Kitvei 7. So, Hans W Wolff, Hosea, Hermeneia (Phila- Ramban, ed. Hayim Chavel (Jerusalem: Mosad HaRav Kook, 1963), end of Ha-Sha'ar Ha-Ri'shon, 1: delphia: Fortress Press, 1974), 210. A 8. For Yefet's commentary, see TheAmbic Com- 274. < 2. For a full discussion, see "The Book of Obamentary ofYefet ben 'Ali theKamite on the Book of Hosea, ed. Philip Birnbaum (Philadelphia: Dropsie College, diah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in 1942); and also Shnei Perushei R.Abraham ihn Ezra the Haftarot Cycle." < Le-TreiAsar, ed. Uriel Simon (Ramat Gan: Bar Han 3. The exception isv.6. A University Press, 1989), 116 (n., ad loc.). See also 4. Verse 15isa swing verse, and some commenthe discussion of the angel as a tutelary power of tators have regarded it as the beginning of this new Bethel by H. L. Ginsberg, "Hosea's Ephraim, More part; others reverse v. 15a and b, and see the latter Fool than Knave: A New Interpretation of Hosea as the conclusion to v. 14 (e. g., NJPS; Yehezkel 12:1-4,'7BZ 80 (1961): 339-47. < Kaufmann, Toledot ha-'Emunah ha^Tism'elit [Jerusa9. Yehudah Keil,Hoshe'a, Da'atMikra' (Jerusalem: lem and Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik and Devir, 1960], 8:364, n. 5). < MosadHa-RavKook, 1990), 93. < 5. Critical studies have found as few as two units 10. Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, Peirush, 42-43. A and as many as eight. For the former view, cf. Julius 11. Wolff, Hosea, 213. < 12. A thorough examination of the terms and A. Bewer, Obadiah andjoel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & an examination of their uses can be found in Moshe T. Clark, 1901), which isolatedw. 1-14 + 15b and Weinfeld, Social Justice in Ancient Israel and in the w. 15a + 16-21. For the latter view, see Kurt RuAncient Near East (Jerusalem: Magnes Press; Min- dolph, mZAW49 (1931): 222-31. For a combined neapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), especially chaps. 1-3, minimal and maximal position (two major units; six overall), see Mordechai Cogan, 'Ovadyah, Mikra' 9-10, along with full bibliography. A 13. Cf. Ehrlich,Mikra'I
21. For variations and nuances, see Cohen, ibid., Asar, ed. Isaac Markon (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirda243-69. < mim, 1958), 40. < 22. Cf. Gen. R. 78:14 (ed. Theodor and Albeck, 11. On this subject, and also relations with Joel, see "The Book of Obadiah" in "Overview of Biblical 934f.), in the name of R. Abbahu (and note the variants and different tradents mentioned in Minhat Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." A 12. In Rabbinic Hebrew, the word refers to a stave Yehudah, ad loc.); and in the liturgical poetry of Yanfor beating (laundry); cf. also in Aramaic and Syriac. nai,PiyyuteiRabbiYannai, ed. Rabinovitz, 1:193 (11. See Jacob N. Epstein,Mehkarim Be-Sifrut Ha-Talmud 32f.), where Obadiah was the haftarah for seder 30 U-vi-Lshonot Shemiyot, ed. Ezra Z. Melamed (Jerusa- (Gen. 32:4, Va-yishlah). < lem: Magnes Press, 1984), 15-17. < 23. For a brief description of theMalkhuyot, see 13. See the suggestion of Otto Peiser, "Obadiah 6-7," Ismar Elbogen Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive HisOrientalistische Literaturzeitung 20/9 (1917): 278, and tory, trans. Raymond Scheindlin (Philadelphia: Jewish my comment in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel Publication Society, 1993), 118-19. Not less than ten biblical verses were required according to M. Rosh (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 80 n. 9. < 14. For the concept, see Meir Weiss, "The Origin Hashanah 4:6, and examples are given in B. Rosh of the Concept of the 'Day of the Lord' Reconsid- Hashanah 32b. On early variations in the structure of ered" HUCA 37 (1966): 29-72; also, Yair Hoffmann, theMalkhuyot, see Saul Lieberman, Tosefta Ki-Fshutah "The Day of the Lord as a Concept in the Prophetic (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1955-62), 5:1053-54. For the text in current usage, Literature" 93 (1981): 37-50. < seeMahzorle-TamimNora'im, vol. I,Rosh ha-Shanah, 15. For this case and others, see my discussion ed. Daniel Goldschmidt (Jerusalem: Koren, 1970), in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, 477-78. Among moderns, this phenomenon has also been 150-151, and High Holiday Prayer Book, trans. Philip noted by Aaron Kaminka, "Expressions of Moses Birnbaum (1951; reprint, New York: Hebrew Puband the Psalms in Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Leshonenu lishing Company, 1979), 335-38. < 1 (1928-29): 40-41. This line of interpretation is already attested in MdRY, piska Bo' 12 (ed. H. S. Haftarahfor W-yeshev Horovitz and I. A. Rabin [Jerusalem: Bamberger & Wahrmann, 1960], 40. < 1. See Shalom Spiegel,Aw05 vs.Amaziah, Essays 16. See Kanaanaische und Aramaische Inschrif- in Judaism, 3 (New York: Jewish Theological Semiten, ed. H. Donner and W Rollig (Wiesbaden: O. nary, 1957), 39-47. He proves the pithy contrasts Harassowitz, 1964-66), inscription 260B, 2 (1:50), between devotion and devotions, right and rite (pp. and the comment (2:306) linking this place with 43-44). < Obadiah 20. Also observed by Mordechai Cogan, 2. For this issue and the expression, see Yehezkel 'Ovadiah, Mikra' Le-yisra'el (Tel Aviv: Am Oved; Kaufmann, Toledot ha-'Emunah haYism'elit (JerusaJerusalem: Magnes Press, 1992), 32f., who further lem and Tel Aviv: Devir, 1957), 6, 71-81. See also suggests that Jews came to this city as traders in the idem, The Religion oflsrael, trans. Moshe Greenberg Persian period. A (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), 345 17. Cf. Ya'aqov Liver, "Milhamot Yisra'el Ve- (for the term), 365-68 (for the role of morality in 'Edom," Historiyah Tzeva'it shel 'Eretz Yisra'el Amos). A Bi-ymei Ha-Mikm' (Tel Aviv: Maarachoth, 1964), 3. See Herbert B. Huffmon, "The Treaty Back190-205. < ground of Hebrew Yadac,"BASOR 181 (1966): 3118. In his penetrating and comprehensive essay, 37; and Herbert B. Huffmon and Simon Parker,"A "Esau as Symbol in Early Medieval Thought," in Further Note on the Treaty Background of Hebrew c Studies in the 'Variety of Rabbinic Cultures (Philadel- Yada ,"BASOR 184 (1966): 36-38. The Akkadian phia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 245, Gerson term is idu, on which, see CAD, s. v. idu, 1:23, 32, Cohen determined that Rabbi Akiba was the first to "to select, choose." A make the identification between Edom and Rome 4. For covenantal responsibility in this case, see in a clear way. See the Sage's comment on Gen. 27: John J. Collins, Irish Theological Quarterly 41 (1974): 22 in Gen. R. 65:21 (ed. Theodor and Albeck, 2: 125 f. "Iniquities" (Hebrew 'avonot) only occurs here 740). < in Amos and has the sense of violating a treaty; see 19. For examples ofEdom as the fourth empire, Weinfeld, DDS, l l l n . 3 . < 5. Yehoshua Gitay, "A Study of Amos's Art of after Greece, see MdRY, Ba-hodesh 9 (ed. Horovitz and Rabin, 236); Gen. R. 99:2 (ed. Theodor and Speech: A Rhetorical Analysis of Amos 3:1-15," Albeck, 2:1273); andLev. R. 13:5 (ed. ReuvenMar- CBQ 42 (1980): 293-308, has argued for the rhegulies [Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1962], 1:289). torical unity of the whole chapter. A More generally, seeMidreshei Ge'ulah, 2nd ed., ed. Y. 6. Shalom Paul,Amos. Herrneneia (Minneapolis: ibn Shemuel (Jerusalem: Masada, 1954), 33f. A Fortress Press, 1991), 104-14, has provided a full 20. Cohen, "Esau as Symbol" 248-50 and n. 31. argument for the sequence of elements and the logic Note especially the lists of terms used for medieval of cause and effect this creates. A Rome and thus medieval Christianity in Moritz 7. Note the apparent pun of "nothing" (lo'. . . Steinschneider, Polemische und apologetische Litemtur davar) on the term for prophetic "word" (davar). (Leipzig, 1877), 266-67, 278-79. < For the issue of revealing the divine purpose to the 341
NOTES TO PP.103-116341
prophets and the reference to the prophets as "ser18. Paul, ibid. For sale into slavery, see Exod. 21: vants" see Comments. A 7-11; Deut. 15:12; Neh. 5:8. < 8. See H. L. Ginsberg, "Towards the History of the 19. Ephraim A. Speiser, "Of Shoes and Shekels Graded Number Sequence" (in Hebrew), inMinhah (1 Samuel 12:3; 13:21)," BASOR 77 (1940): 18. Le-David:Jubilee Volume Dedicatedto DavidYellin (Je- Rashi interprets na'alayim as related to ne'ilah, i. e., rusalem: Va'ad Ha-Yovel, 1935), 75-81; Wolfgang the judges try to "lock in" a false sale of the poor M. W Roth, "The Numerical Sequence x/x+1 in the person's property. Paul,Amos, 78-79, has proposed Old Testament" VT12 (1962): 300-311; Meir Weiss, a reconstruction of a technical term for bribery; but "The Pattern of Numerical Sequence in Amos 1-2: A this does not seem necessary in light of the stylistic Re-Examination,"/£L 86 (1967): 416-23. < structure of the charge. A 9. On this section, see G. Sauer, Die Spruche 20. Also Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, Peirush, Agurs, Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und 74-75. < Neuen Testament 84 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 21. For the terminology and a supporting argu1963), 24-91. < ment, see Isaac L. Seeligmann, "Zur Terminologie 10. According to Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, the fuer das Gerichtsfahren in Wortschatz des biblischen crime is the last one; see Peirush Tanhum ben Tosef Hebraische," in Hebraische Wortforschung: Testschrift Ha-Yerushalmi Le-Trei Asar, ed. Hadassa Shy (Jeru- zum 80. Geburtstag von Walter Baumgartner, ed. B. Hartmann et al., SVT 16 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967), salem: Magnes Press, 1991), 70. A 11. For pattern of seven, see Robert Gordis, "The 269 and n. 2. H. L. Ginsberg emends the clause to Heptad as an Element ofBiblical and Rabbinic Style" mean that the needy are pushed off the roads; see JBL 62 (1943): 17-26; also James Limburg, "Seven- "Some Notes on the Minor Prophets" (in Hebrew), in fold Structure in the Book of Amos "JBL 196 (1987): EI 3 (Moshe David Cassuto Memorial Volume), ed. 217-22. Other heptads in Amos include 2:14-16; 4: Benjamin Mazar et al. (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1954.), 83; ¥-m\,Amos, 81, follows this un4-5, 6-11; 5:8-9, 21-23; 6:1-6; 9:1-4. < derstanding. A 12. The tradition is tannaitic and is reported in Tosef. Yoma 4:12, but without citing the second half 22. This phrase has been regarded as a late interof the biblical verse "for four" etc. Among moderns polation by H. W Wolff\Joel andAmos, Hermeneia who hold this view, see Naftali H. Tur-Sinai, Ha- (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 133f.; rebutted Lashonve-ha-Sefer (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1954), by Yml, Amos, 83, following Rudolph,Joel-Amos1:82. A different position is adopted by Tanhum ha- Obadia-Jona, 144. For the notion of sanctification Yerushalmi, who argues that the questions are rhetori- and desecration of God's name in Ezekiel, see Y. cal and that the number refers to a plural number, in Kaufmann, Toledot ha-'Emunah, 7, 560; and also general; see Peirush, 70-74, on 1:3 and 2:6. A Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden 13. See Menahem Haran, "Biblical Studies: The City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 374. < Literary Application of the Numerical Sequence x/ 23. See the homily against falsehood and lies x+i and Their Connection with the Patterns of Paral- based on Prov. 30:7-9 in Lev. R. 33:3 (ed. Mordelelism" (in Hebrew), Tarbiz 39 (1970): 135-36; also cai Margulies [Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1962], Paul,^4wo5. 29. < 2:760-61); and discussed by Ephraim E. Urbach in 14. Overall, with special emphasis on literary fea- The Sages (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University tures, see Yair Zakovitch,"Tor Three... andforTour": Press, 1987), 356. < The Pattern ofthe Numerical Sequence in the Bible (in 24. Ibid., in the name of the Amora R. Eleazar Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mekor, 1979), I-II. < or R. Hanina. A 15. Cf. already Samuel Loewenstamm, The 25. The idea of a pledge as a security deposit is Tradition ofthe Exodus in Its Development (Jerusalem: found in Rashi and Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi; see the Magnes Press, 1965), 33 n. 31; and Paul,Amos, 23, latter's Peirush, 74-75. A who notes examples from ritual patterns. A 26. For recent studies, see Samuel E. Loewen16. Among Ugaritic examples, cf. Corpus des tab- stamm's review of Roland de Vaux, Les institutions de lettes en cuneiformes alphabctiques a Ras Shamra-Ugarit I'Ancien Testament (Paris, 1958), 1, inKityatSefer 34 de 1929a 1939, ed. Andre Herdner (Paris: Guethner, (1958): 48 (in Hebrew); Jacob Milgrom, "The Miss1963), 15:11:23-24; 19:1:42-44; and in Phoenician ing Thief in Leviticus 5:20 ff.," Revue Internationale des inscriptions, Kanaanaische undAramaischelnschriften, Droits del'Antique (3) 33 (1975): 77ff.; and Isaac L. ed. H. Donner and W Rollig (Wiesbaden: O. Hara- Seeligmann, "Lending, Pledge, and Interest in Biblical sowitz, 1966-69), 1. 2:17-18, p. 6. Overall, see the Law and Biblical Thought" (in Hebrew), in Studies materials collected by Yitzhak Avishur, Phoenician in Bible and the Ancient Near East, Presented to S. E. and the Bible: Studies in Stylistic and Literary Devices Loewenstamm, ed. Yitzhak Avishur and Joseph Blau and Selected Inscriptions (Jerusalem: E. Rubinstein, (Jerusalem: E. Rubinstein, 1978), 191-95. This position is advocated for our passage by Paul,.<4w05, 83-86, 1979), 1:54. A with evidence from the ancient Near East. A 17. The terminology "for sale" is unusual; cf. Wilhelm Rudolph,Joel-Amos-Obadia-Jona, Kommentar 27. This is the only reference to the nazirites as exzum Alten Testament 23/2 (Guetersloh: GerdMohn, amples of divine grace. Cf. Ihn Ezra and Kimhi. A 1971), 138; and Paul,Amos, 77. Also, the term for 28. Following Paul,Amos, 95. A bribery is elsewhere different. A 29. Cf. Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, Peirush, 76-77. A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
342
30. Cf. Num. 11:12; Jer. 18:14-15; Job 7:12. Amos uses the device himself in 6:12. A 31. See also TestamentofGad 2:3. A 32. In the narrative exposition, the phrase ba-'avur na'a-layim ("for a pair of sandals") is used, exactly as in Amos 2:6. A 33. See in Bet Ha-Midrasch, ed. Adolf Jellinek (reprint of 3rd ed., Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1967), 2:64. < 34. The reading talui, "pending" is found in MSS. Vatican 44 and Parma 616; for the former, see Midrash Mishlei, ed. Burton Visotzky (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1990), 18; the reading kayyam, "exists," is found in MS. Paris 152; seeMidrashMishlei, ed. Solomon Buber (Vilna: Romm, 1893), 45. < 35. See Mahzor Piyyutei Yannai La-Torah Ve-laMo'adim, ed. Zvi M. Rabinovitz (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1985), 1:222. <
see G. A. Cooke, Ezekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1936), 397. < 6. In Ezek. 24:19, NJPS translates the similar phrase mah 'eleh lanu: "Will you not tell us what these things portend for us?" A 7. On the concern with northern exiles in Ezekiel, see also Gershon Brin, 'IyyunimBe-SeferYehezkel (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University and Ha-Kibbutz haMeuchad Press, 1975), 185. < 8. On the theme of joining the sticks, see W E. Barnes, "Two Trees Become One: Ezek 37:16-17," JTS 39 (1938): 391-93. < 9. For a full analysis of the difficulties, see Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, AB 22A (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 755. < 10. See the compelling analysis in Greenberg, ibid., 756. He also draws support from Ezekiel 36: 29. The translation "defections" is his. A 11. In his second explanation, Kimhi offers that it may be a hint of the Resurrection. A 12. SccR. EliezerMi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel HaftarahforMikketz Ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII 1. Note Solomon's statement about David in kleinen Propheten, Lieferung 1) (Warsaw: Mekize 1 Kings 5:17, a strategic though incorrect asser- Nirdamim, 1903), 60. < tion. A 13. See Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 757-58, 760. < 2. For this type of legal decision making in ancient 14. See Nahmanides at Gen. 12:6, based on Tanh. Israel, see my discussion in Biblical Interpretation in Lekh Lekha 9. Note the typological observation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), Num. R. 89, end, linking God's reconciliation with 238-44, and the wider context of discussion in pp. the nation after the Golden Calf with the reconcilia234-256. < tion and purification prophesied by Ezekiel. A 3. Ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Albeck (Jerusalem: WahrmannBooks, 1965), 2:1046. < Haftarahfor Va-yehi 4. See the discussion on the haftarah for the eighth day of Passover. A 1. See the haftarah for Hayyei Sarah for a discus5. The two types of dreams are what have been sion of the content and issues in 1 Kings 1:1-31. A called "Message" and "Symbolic" dreams. For a 2. This revaluation has affected the reworking of discussion of these types within the larger context that document in Psalm 89; see w. 31-32. A of ancient Near Eastern dream interpretation, see A. 3. See Jacob Milgrom, Studies in Levitical TerLeo Oppenheim, The Interpretation ofDreams in the minology (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Ancient Near East (Philadelphia: American Philo- Califormia Press, 1970), l:8ff. < sophical Society, 1956), 179-217; for the present 4. See Weinfeld, DDS, 75-76. < biblical examples, see pp. 188, 191, 210. A 5. Ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Albeck (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1965), 3:1198. <
Haftarahfor Va-yiggash 1. On the uses and meaning of nasi' (prince) in Ezekiel, see Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2:277-79. For a broader treatment, see Ephraim A. Speiser, "Background and Function of the Biblical nasi", CBQ 25 (1963): 111-17. < 2. Cf. Zimmerli, ibid., 271, 276. A 3. The shorter phrase occurs some ninety-three times; the present phrase occurs twenty-three times. A 4. On the relationship between these passages, see W W Cannon, "Some Notes on Zechariah c. 1 1 , " 4 / 0 4 (1927): 146; and also Fr. Horst and T. H. Robinson, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten, 2nd ed., Handbuch zum Alten Testament 14 (Tubingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1964) on Zechariah, ad loc. A 5. For this formulation of the tripartite structure, 343
NOTES TO PP.103-116343
Haftarahfor Shemot (Ashkenazim) 1. Cf. Bernhard W Anderson, "Isaiah XXIVXXVII Reconsidered" SVT 9 (1963): 118-26; George Fohrer, "Der Aufbau der Apokalypse des Jesajabuchs (Is 24-27)," CBQ 25 (1953): 34-45; Johannes Lindblom, DieJesaja-Apokalypse,Jes 24-27 (Lund: CWKGleerup, 1938); PaulLohmann, "Die selbstandigen lyrischen Abschnitte in Jes 24-27" 37 (1917-18): 1-58; William R. Millar, Isaiah 24-27 and the Origin ofApocalyptic (HSM 11; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976); Wilhelm Rudolph,/g50/« 24-27 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag, 1933). < 2. Ihn Ezra notes ba-yamim ha-ba'im and suggests that the prophet's abbreviated language was like beha-ba'im. See Peirush RabbeinuAvmham ibn Ezra 'al ha-Torah, ed. and trans. Michael Friedlaender (Lon-
don, 1873; reprint, New York: Phillipp Feldheim, n. d.), vol. 1, ad loc. A 3. Abravanel formulates the rhetorical query in the strongest way, construing the question as, "Is the punishment as great as God could have done?!" A 4. The first alternative (reading active makkehu as passive mukkehu) is cited by Ibn Bal'am in the name of Ibn Janah and then reversed (by reading passive harugav in the second stichos as horgav)', see his discussion in Peirush R. Yehudah ihn Bal'am le-Sefer Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (RamatGan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 130. The LXX also suggests a tradition with the active verb horgav, a reading now confirmed by lQIsa a . A 5. In his commentary, ibid. A 6. Cf. in Lev. 13:49 the verbal intensifications yerakrak, "bright green," and'adamdam, "bright red." Note alsoyefeh-fiyah, "beautiful," in Jer. 46:20. A 7. Cf. Ibn Ezra and Kimhi; Abravanel refers to the fullness of the measure. A 8. See already B. Sanh. 90a and B. Sot. 8b; and the Targ. in The Targum oflsaiah, ed. J. F. Stenning (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949), ad loc. Ibn Bal'am, Peirush, construes be-sa'se'ah as like se'ah be-se'ah, "measure for measure." A 9. The post is also near the altar ofBaal in Judg. 6:25. The evidence for worship of Asherah (as a feminine consort) in some ancient Israelite circles is based on the inscription from Kuntillet 'Ajrud in the Sinai desert, which includes blessings in the name of "YHWH of Samaria/of Teman and His Asherah." For a discussion, see Jeffrey Tigay, You Shall Have No Other Gods (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), 26-29. < 10. Speaking of the meaning of the term, Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 132, writes: "A Palmyrene altar inscription tells of the dedication of an altar and a hmn', the latter apparently represented on a relief (on another side of the altar) as an incense stand or brazier (View of the Biblical 'World [Hebrew], ed. Benjamin Mazar et al., Ill [Jerusalem: International Publishing Co., 1960], 164)." See also the discussion in I
another is permitted for the prophetic readings (M. Meg. 4:4, medallegin be-navi')—though not from one prophetic corpus to another (Tosef. Meg. 4 [3]:18, ed. M. S. Zuckermandel [1881; reprint, Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1970], 226f.). For these purposes, The Book of Twelve (Trei 'Asar) is considered one corpus. A 17. Cf. be-vo'o ha-'ish in Ezek. 10:3, "when the man entered" (lit., "when he entered—namely the man"). < 18. See his commentary, Peirush, 144. A 19. SttMahzor PiyyuteiR. Yannaila-Tomhve-laMo'adim, ed. ZviM. Rabbinovitz, (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1985), l:259f., where the various words of Isa. 27:6 are stylistically deployed. A 20. Cf. also Naftali Fried, "Haftarot Alternativiyot be-Fiyyutei Yannai ve-She'ar Payyetanim Kedumim," Sinai 61 (1967): 268 and n. 7. < 21. See his commentaries on Isa. 27:6 (haba'im), 7 (makkehu; harag), 8 (be-shalhah and beyomkadim). A 22. See Mid. Hag., ed. Mordecai Margulies, (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1967), 6, on Exod. 1:1. See also Ginzei Schechter, ed. Louis Ginsberg (original ed., 1928, as Texts and Studies ofthejewish Theological Seminary of America, vol. 7; reprinted, New York: Hermon Press, 1969), l:62f. (a Tanh. fragment); and Song of Songs R. 7:6. A
Haftamhfor Shemot (Sephardim) 1. The base verse is Exod. 4:18, from our parashah. A
Haftamhfor Va-'em' 1. The cycle of Egyptian doom oracles continues throughout Ezekiel 30-32. A 2. The dating of Ezekiel's prophecies from 597 B.C.E. is discussed in "The Book of Ezekiel" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." The issue arises in Ezek. 1:1-2 regarding the thirtieth year of the prophet. According to the dating of R. Parker and W Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A. D. 75, Brown University Studies, 19 (Providence: Brown University, 1956), 28, the twelfth day of the tenth month of Jehoiachin's tenth year was 7 January 587 B.C.E. A 3. For the precise date, see n . l . A 4. According to the dating of Parker and Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology, 28, the first day of that year was 26 April 571 B.C.E. A 5. Regarding the Jeremianic expression, see Robert Bach, "Bauen und Pflanzen" in Studien zur Theologie der altestamentlische Uberlieferung, ed. Rolf Rendtorff and Klaus Koch (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1961), 7-32. A 6. Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 375f., speaks of asserting sanctity and judges this sanctity to be "the equivalent" of majesty and sovereign authority (based on Isa. 5:16 andLev. 10:3, respectively). A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
344
2. For further details regarding the structure of 7. Cf. Greenberg, ibid., 376. A 8. See the discussion in Connections between the Book of Jeremiah and also the mixture of some the Haftarah and Pamshah, and see the references of the types (e. g., chap. 7 is largely a narrative in the Deuteronomic style and similar to chap. 26), see "The cited. A 9. The first ("it") is attested in Pesh.; the second Book of Jeremiah" in "Overview of Biblical Books ("them"; viz., the Nile and its streams) is reflected Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." A in LXX. < 3. The breakdown of this portion of the outline 10. Cf. Gustav Holscher, Hesekiel, der Dichter is different from the structure in NJPS (w. 14-16a; und das Buch, BZAW 39 (Giessen: Topelmann, 16b-17; 18-24). < 4. On the general theme, see Brevard Childs, "The 1924). < 11. See Hermann Gunkel, Schopjung und Chaos Enemy from the North and the Chaos Tradition," in Urzeit und Endzeit (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & JBL7K (1959): 187-98. < Ruprecht, 1895), 71-77. < 5. For creative uses of the attribute formulary in 12. Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Phila- different genres of Scripture, see Michael Fishbane, delphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2:109, speaks of a Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: three-part "proof saying." A Clarendon Press, 1985), 335-47. < 13. See I. Zeligman, The Treasures of Numbers 6. See John Wilson, The Culture of Ancient (New York, 1942), 135ff, for four; and pp. 273ff. Egypt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, for multiples of four. For forty as a unit in Semitic 1958), 126. < and classical antiquity, see W H. Roscher, "Der Zahl 40 in Glauben, Brauch und Schriftum der Semiten" Haftarahfor Be-shallah in Abhandlungen der philalogisch-historische Klasse der Konigich-Sachsischen Gesellsehaft der Wissenschaften, 27 1. This designation follows Yehezkel Kaufmann, (1909): 100-116; especially p. 102 n. 14, for forty Sefer Shofetim (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 3f. and as a cultic symbol of purification and atonement. See 114ff. See the discussion in "The Book of Judges" also the important comments of Gerson Cohen, Stu- in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the dies in the 'Varieties of Rabbinic Cultures (Philadelphia: Haftarot Cycle." < Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 195, n. 117. < 2. The location of Kedesh is difficult, as many 14. For the situation of biblical prophecies gene- commentators have noted; for if the reference is rally, and Ezek. 29:17-20, see my remarks in Biblical to Kedesh in the region of Naphtali, Sisera's run Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon from the Wadi Kishon would have been quite great. Kaufmann, ibid., 117, resolves the difficulty by asPress, 1985), 476f. < suming that the tribe was not then in Kedesh, but 15. See Comment to Ezek. 29:12. A 16. Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII kleinen rather in the Valley of Jezreel. A 3. This is the upshot of Umberto Cassuto's Propheten (Warsaw: Mekize Nirdamim, 1909), 1: research in "Biblical Epic," in Biblical and Oriental 50. < 17. See Tanh. Va-'era' 14; and Tanh. Buber, Studies (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1975), 2:69-109 Va-'era' 16. For other versions, see Jacob Mann, (originally in Hebrew, 1943); and cf. the earlier and "Midrash Hadash 'al ha-Torah," in The Bible as Read influential speculations of Sigmund Mowinckel, "Hat and Preached in the Old Synagogue (1940, reprint, es einIsraelitisches Nationalepos gegeben?"ZA^53 New York: Ktav, 1971), 1:213 (Hebrew pagination); (n. f. 12; 1935): 130-53. The view that Judges 5 is Mid. Hag., Va-'era' (on Exod. 8:16), ed. Mordecai based on an old epic is picked up with enthusiasm Margulies (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1968), by Chaim Rabin, "Judges V 2 and the 'Ideology' of Deborah's War"JJS 6 (1955): 125. < 126; Yal., Shemot, 181. < 4. One may still study with profit the remarks of 18. For the possible direction of the polemics against the Roman rulers, see the comments of Sha- Cyrus H. Gordon, The Common Background of Greek lom Spiegel in Alejandro Diez-Macho and Shalom and Hebrew Civilization (New York: Norton, 1965). Spiegel, "Fragmentos de Piyyutim de Yannay" Sefarad Discussions of the relationship between Hittite mythology and Near Eastern materials have a growing 15 (1955): 321. < 19. Cf. Targ. Yer., on Exod. 7:1; also Hadar literature. For a broad review of various forms of Zekenim, Peirsushim Mi-Rabboteinu Ba'alei Ha-Tosa- the discussion, see Walter Burkert, The Orientalizing fot 'al Ha-Torah, ad loc. The midrash that is quoted Revolution: Near Eastern Influences on Greek Culture in-theEarly.Archaic.Age (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard is from a variant tradition. A UniversityPress, 1992). A 20. Tanh. Va-'era' 9. < 5. For the ivories in general, see C. Decamps 21. Yal., Shemot, 1:180. < de Merzenfeld, Inventaire commente des pheniciens et apparentes decouvertes dans le Proche Orient (Paris: Haftarahfor Bo' deBoccard, 1954). And see also R. D. Barnett,A 1. The conclusion of this entire unit seems once to Catalogue ofthe Nimrud Ivories (London: Trustees have constituted the end of the teachings of Jeremiah, of the British Museum, 1957); and idem, "Hamath for it ends with the notice "Thus far the words of and Nimrud," Iraq 25 (1963): 81-85. Barnett has Jeremiah" (Jer. 51:64). < suggested that the Hamath group is dominated by 345
NOTES TO PP.103-116345
Egyptian influence and, further, that the particular lections but not in the Torah lections." Tosef. Meg. "woman at the window" is the figure of Astarte-Aph- 4 (3) 118 (ed. M. S. Zuckermandel [new ed., Jerurodite and symbolizes the sacrifice of virginity. This salem: Wahrmann Books, 1970], 226f.) adds this ignores the epic motif, mentioned above. A clarification: "One may not skip from one prophet 6. Female prophetesses with political interests ap- to another; but skipping [is permitted] within The pear in the Mari documents, a half-millenium earlier; [collection of] Twelve" (viz., the TreiAsar). Thus in see Herbert Huffmon, "Prophecy in the Mari Let- addition to the skipping in the haftarah for Yitro, the haftarah for Mishpatim skips (backward!) from ters," BA 31 (1968): 101-24. < 7. See MdRY on Exod. 18:1; and also the delib- Jer. 34:8-22 to 33:25-26, for a positive conclusion, erations of Ibn Ezra on Exod. 2:18 and Num. 10: while the haftarah for Tzav skips (forward) from Jer. 7:21-8:3 to 9:22-23. Among examples of skipping 29. < 8. On the predominance of Hazor in the Middle within The Twelve, cf. the haftarah for the Afternoon Bronze period, see Abraham Malamat, "Hazor 'The Service for Yom Kippur, which skips from the end of Head of All Those K i n g d o m s , ' " / ^ 79 (1960): the book of Jonah (read entire) to Micah 7:18-20. Cf. 12-19. The king in the Mari texts appears together Tosef. Mo'ed 3:19 (ed. Saul Lieberman [New York: with his patron God as "Ibni-Adad, king of Hazor." Jewish Theological Seminary, 1962], 358 f.) and the See Robert Boling,Joshua AB 6 (New York: Dou- authors remarks in ToseftaKilshutah (New York: Jewbleday, 1982), 304. Hazor and Laish/Dan in Canaan ish Theological Seminary of America, 1962), 1193f. had close relations with Mari; see Abraham Malamat, Also see the introduction to this volume. A "Northern Canaan and the Mari TextsNear Eastern 4. The reference to "some" medievals is from Archeology in the Twentieth Century, ed. James Sanders Ibn Ezra, The Commentary ofIbn Ezra on Isaiah, ed. (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1970), 20-33. < Michael Friedlaender (London, 1873; reprinted, 9. So Kaufmann, Sefer Shofetim, 116. For a record New York: P. Feldheim, n. d.), ad loc. He apparently of the archeological evidence of the destruction of is referring (among others) to Ibn Bal'am. Cf. Peirush Hazor, see ¥>o\mg,Joshua, 309, citing Yigael Yadin, R. Yehudah ihnBal'amle-SeferTesha'yah (RamatGan: "Hazor," in Encyclopedia ofArcheological Excavations Bar Han University Press, 1992), 65. A in the Holy Land, ed. Michael Avi-Yona (Jerusalem: 5. By the same token, the reference to the "shakIsrael Exploration Society andMasada Press, 1976), ing" (va-yanu'u) of the doorpost of the Temple at the 2:485. < sound of the angelic choir in Isa. 6:4 has its thematic 10. Ed. H. S. Horovitz and I. A. Rabin (Jerusa- contrast in 7:2, where we read that the threatened attack of the Syro-Ephraim alliance produced fear lem: Bamberger &Wahrmann, 1960), 116-18. A 11. For the Arabic, see the discussion of Rabin, and "trembling" (va-yana') in the heart of the king "Judges V 2," 127; LXX B renders dynastoi in v. 7 of Judah and his people. A (and cf. dynaston in Hab. 3:14). A 6. Shmuel D. Luzzatto, SeferYesha'yah:Metwgam 12. Cf. William Moran, "The Ancient Near 'Italqit u-Meforash Tvrit (Padova: A. Bianchi, 1867), Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deutero- ad loc. A nomy," C B £ 2 5 (1963): 77-87. < 7. Ed. H. S. Horovitz and I. A. Rabin (Jerusalem: 13. Cf. also Louis Ginzberg, Legends ofthejews Bamberger&Wahrmann, 1960), 139. A (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1946), 6: 8. As trenchantly argued by Mordecai M. Kaplan, 197, who also speculates that the Targum is an "al- "Isaiah 6:1-11,"JBL 45 (1926): 252-54. < lusion" to this tradition. A 9. The assertion by R. David Kimhi, R. Judah ibn 14. See Sifrei de-Aggadetha 'al Megillat Esther Bal'am. and R. Isaiah di Trani that the verb "to send" (Vilna: Romm, 1886), Version B, 6, 73f. < is decisive merely begs the question. A 15. See in The Old Testament Pseudepigmpha, ed. 10. See Leon Liebreich, "The Position of ChapJames Charlesworth (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, ter Six in the Book of Isaiah," HUCA 25 (1954): 1985), 2:347. The whole chapter is a recitation of 37f. < divine salvation since the time of Abraham. A 11. For other moderns who contend a late dating, see Aaron Yj&mmkz,Mehkarim be-Mikra' (Tel Aviv: Devir, 1938), 1:64-86; and Yehezkel Kaufmann, Haftamhfor Titro Toledot ha-'Emunah ha-Yisra'elit (Tel Aviv: Devir, 1. G. B. Gray, TheBook oflsaiah, ICC (Edinburgh: 1947), 3:1,207. < T. &T. Clark, 1911), 1:109. < 12. On this factor in biblical prophecy, see Michael 2. NJPS translates " . . . it shall repent. It shall Fishbane, "Biblical Prophecy as a Religious Phenomebe ravaged." This goes against the Masoretic cantil- non" in Jewish Spirituality, from the Bible to theMidlation, which does not understand ve-shavah as the dle Ages, ed. Arthur Green (New York: Crossroad, repentance of the remnant before further purgation, 1986), 63-65. < but the regeneration of the fallen tree (nation). Most 13. Cf. also Jer. 23:22. For the use of sod in the medieval Jewish interpreters (and many moderns) sense of divine council, see Job 15:8 ("Have you follow this ancient reading tradition. See further in listened in on the council of God?"); and cf. Ps. 89: the Notes. < 8. < 3. Cf. M. Meg. 4:4: medallegin be-navi"One 14. Cf. John L. McKenzie, Secondlsaiah, AB 20 may skip (from place to place) within prophetic (GardenCity, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1968), 17, following NOTES TO PP. 103-116
346
James Muilenberg, The Interpreter's Bible (New York: 8. The verb is cognate with Akkadian duraru, Abingdon, 1956), X ad loc. < "move about, run away, be at large, be (come) free." 15. Ibn Ezra says that he will discuss this point See Julius Lewy, "The Biblical Institution of Deror further in his commentary to Ezekiel 1, but does in the Light of Akkadian Documents," EI 5 (1958): 21*-31*. < not. < 16. The verb ve-kam' (would call) following the 9. As proposed by Nahum Sarna, "Zedekiah's participle 'omedim (stood; viz., continuous standing) Emancipation of Slaves and the Sabbatical Years" is understood as denoting frequentive action. Cf. Orient and Occident: Essays Presented to Cyrus Gordon Gesenius'Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautsch (Oxford: on the Occasion ofHis Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. Harry ClarendonPress, 1910),para. 112 k. A Hoffner, AOAT 22 (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Ver17. His reference to an old mystical tract called lag, 1973), 149. According to I. Cardellini, Die bib"Ma'aseh Merkavah" can now be corroborated (by lischen "Sklaven"-Gesetze im Lichte des keilschriftlichen MS. JThS 8288a). For the text, see Gershom Scho- Sklavenrecht: Ein Beitrag zur Tradition, Uberlieferung lem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and und Redaktion der altestamentlichen Rechtstexte, BBB Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theological 55 (Bonn: Hanstein, 1981), 322, the date was 588/87 B.C.E. < Seminary of America, 1965), app. C. A 18. On the relationship of thcKedushah to Chris10. For the term and its background, see Lewy, tian liturgy and the preservation there of ancient for- "The Biblical Institution of Deror," n.8. A mulations, see Eric Werner, The Sacred Bridge (New 11. See "The Edict of Ammisaduqa," English York: Ktav, 1984), vol. 2, chap. 5. < translation in TheAncient Near East: Supplementary Texts and Pictures Relating to the Old Testament, ed. 19. For the term, see Soferim 16:12, end. A James Pritchard (Princeton: Princeton University 20. See the introduction to this volume. A 21. A full discussion of this important theme has Press, 1969), 526-28. < been done by Arthur Green, Keter: The Crown of God 12. In J.Ned. 3:14, 38b, we read: "Hillul ha-Shem in EarlyJewishMysticism (Princeton, NJ.: Princeton is the gravest (sin) of them all." A University Press, 1997), chaps. 2-4. A 13. Ed. M. S. Zuckermandel (newed., Jerusalem: 22. See A. L. Oppenheim, "Akkadian pul(u)h Wahrmann Books, 1970), 190; Tosef. Mo'ed, Kip(t)u and melammu,"JkoS 63 (1943): 31-34; and purim, 4:6-8 (ed. Saul Lieberman [New York: Jewish Moshe Weinfeld, "God the Creator in Gen. 1 and in Theological Seminary of America, 1962], 251-52). the Prophecy of Second Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Tarbiz Cf. the other sources adduced by Lieberman in Tosefta 37(1968): 131-32. < Ki-Fshutah, Mo'ed (New York: Jewish Theological 23. Noted by David Flusser, "At the Right Hand Seminary of America, 1962), 824. A of Power," in hisJudaism and the Origins of Christianity (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988), 301-5. A Haftarahfor Temmah 24. See Ephraim E. Urbach, The Sages: Their 1. See the haftarah for Va-yehi. A Concepts and Beliefs (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard 2. Ed. Dov Ber Ratner (Vilna, 1897; reprint, UniversityPress, 1987), chap. 5. A Jerusalem: Tal Orot Institute, 1988), 23a. < 3. See the text in ANET, 378. < HaftarahforMishpatim 4. For an overall discussion of this case of inner1. See Abraham Malamat, "The Twilight of biblical exegesis and other reuses of Deut. 27:5-6, Judah" Congress 'Volume, Edinburgh 1974, SVT 28 see Michael Fishbane, Biblicallnterpretation inAncient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 159-62. < (Leiden: Brill, 1975), 123-45. < 5. According to Tanh. Be-hukkotai 3, Exod. 25: 2. So Arnold Ehrlich,Mikm ki-Pheschuto (1901; reprint, New York: Ktav, 1969), 3:149. For the 8 and 1 Kings 6:13 are homiletically linked by R. possibility that the occasion was a sabbatical year, Ammi to show that God Himself wished to dwell in the lower spheres as well as in the upper ones. A see below. A 3. For this principle and details, see the haftarah for Yitro, n. 3. The rule in the Tosefta, stating that "one Haftarahfor Tetzaweh may not skip from the end of the book to its begin1. See also the haftarot for 'Emor and Shabbat ning" (viz., backward, "toward" the beginning) refers ha-Hodesh. A to the collection of The Twelve (Trei 'Asar). A 2. For these oracles of doom, see Michael Fish4. See Patrick Miller, "Sin and Judgment in Jebane, "Sin and Judgment in the Prophecies of Ezekiremiah 34:17-19,"JBZ 103 (1984): 611-13. < 5. Sefire 1. A. 40; see Joseph Fitzmyer, TheAra- el," Interpretation 38 (1984): 131-50; reprinted in maicDocuments ofSefire, BibOr 19 (Rome: Pontifical Interpreting the Prophets, ed. James L. Mays and Paul J. Achtemeier (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), Biblical Institute, 1967), 14, 15, 56-57. < 6. Also cf. the references to "horror" in Jer. 34: 170-87. < 3. For dating, see the overall discussion in the 17 and Deut. 28:25. < 7. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation introduction to this volume and also the remarks on in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), the haftarah for the first day of Shavuot. A 4. For a succinct and lucid account ofEzekiel 40211 n. 99. < 347
NOTES TO PP.103-116347
48, see Moshe Greenberg, "The Design and Themes of Ezekiel's Program of Restoration," Interpretation 38 (1984): 181-208; reprinted in Interpreting the Prophets, ed. Mays and Achtemeier, 215-235. For an analysis of the setting and function of Ezekiel 40-42, see the proposal of Steven Tuell, "Ezekiel 40-42 as Verbal Icon," CBQ 58 (1996): 649-64, with extensive recent literature and evaluations. A 5. This resume follows the helpful formulation of Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2:427. < 6. Abravanel harmonizes the accounts by counting seven days from the second daily and assuming that on each day a bull, a ram, and a goat were offered. A 7. For an exposition of puzzling and confusing features of this unit, see Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:433. A 8. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 27. < 9. See Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:426f. A 10. This Moabite inscription is found in H. Donner and W Rollig, Kanaanaische undAmmaischelnschriften (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1966), vol. 1, no. 181,1. 13; and see the commentary in vol. 2 (1964), 175, where the rendering "Altarherd" is offered. A 11. The meaning of the 'er'elim in Isa. 33:7 is obscure. The Rabbis understood them as heavenly beings. Cf. Gen. R. 56:5. A 12. See Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:431 and passim. A 13. See the analysis of M. Greenberg, "Design and Themes of Ezekiel's Program of Restoration," 184-89. < 14. See the discussion at the haftarah for 'Emor. A 15. This "translation" is a misleading harmonization. A 16. For this understanding of the syntax and semantics of the passage, see the comments earlier in this discussion and in Comments. Cf. NJPS. A 17. See also B. Hag. 27a and B. Men. 97a. For later halakhic sources and a discussion, see Daniel Sperber,.Minhagei Tisra'el (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1994), 3:161f. < 18. For later halakhic sources and a discussion, see Sperber, ibid., 162-65. A
Kings (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963), 343, for a summary of the views of Alt and Gressmann; a more recent tradition history analysis has been offered by Adolf Jepsen, "Elia und das Gottesurteil," Near Eastern Studies in Honor ofWilliam FoxwellAlbr(tyht, ed. Hans Goedicke (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971), 298-99. Gray follows Eissfeldt and argues for overall unity; see also H. H. Rowley, "Elijah on Mount Carmel," BJRL 43 (1960): 190-219. < 4. See the literature in Rowley, ibid.; also Roland de Vaux, "Les prophetes de Baal sur le Mont Carmel," ButtetinduMuseedeBeyrouth 5 (1941): 8-20. A 5. For Ba'al's voice as a meteorological force, see CTA 4 VII: 29-35, and the discussion of Loren Fisher, Ras ShammParallels (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1972), 1:26-27. See also in the El Amarna Letters, EA 147:14-15. For biblical parallels, cf. Joel 4:16 and Ps. 18:8-14 and 93:4. See also Moshe Weinfeld, "Divine Intervention in War in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East,"EI 14 (1976): 23 (inHebrew). < 6. For these liturgical similarities, see also the discussion of Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11, AB 5 (New York: Double-day, 1991), 229-30, and the widercontextofw. 1-40 (pp. 199-230). < 7. The NJPS rendition, "Only You can, O LORD our God," obscures the point of the phrase. For the same rhetorical form, see also Jer. 7:19. The reference to "hope" in God, u-nekaveh lakh, at the end, recalls v. 8, where God is called mikveihyisra'el, "the hope oflsrael" in the context of a plaint for divine help. The epithet also appears in 17:13, in conjunction with an appeal to God not to dishonor His throne (v 12) —just as in 14:21-22. The epithet surely puns on mikveh, a pool ofwater. A 8. The verb pasah, "hop" clearly plays on the hopping dance of the Baalite priests (va-yiphasehu [1 Kings 18:26]). A third-century-B.c.E. inscription from the general region in question (Deir al Qa'la, near Beirut), refers to a "Ba'al of the Skipping Dance (Ba'al marqod)'"-, see Theodor H. Gaster\Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 506, following Charles Clermont-Gammeau, Receuil d'archcologie orientale (Paris: E. Leroux, 1888), 1:101-2. < 9. See Saul Lieberman, Hellenism injewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1962), 140-43; he adduces the work of HaftamhforKi Tissa' Alexandre Moret, Ze rituel du culte divinjournalier en 1. Verses 29-33 must be regarded as integral to the Egypte (Paris: E. Leroux, 1902), 122ff. See now the narrative. See Alexander Rofe, "Classes in the Propheti- translation of Robert Riter, in The Context ofScripture cal Stories: Didactic Legenda and Parable," Studies in (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997), 1:55-57. The meaning of Prophecy, SVT 26 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974), 148, n. the taunts in v. 27 have yielded a range of possibili4. See also Robert Cohn, "The Literary Logic of 1 ties—none complementary. For recent proposals, see Gary Rendsburg, "The Mock ofBaal in 1 Kings 18: Kings \7-\9,"JBL 101 (1982): 334-35. < 2. The same type of scene occurs in connection 27," CBQ 50 (1988): 414-17. < with Elisha in 2 Kings 4:1-37, where there is a story 10. For variations, see Tanh. Buber, Addendum of miraculous provision (w. 1-7) and a story of re- to ICorah (Vilna: Romm, 1885), 2:96; also Num. storing a boy to life (w. 8-37). See Robert Culley, R., Korah, 18:12. < Structure of Hebrew Narrative (Philadelphia: Fortress 11. See Rashi, ad loc., and also at B. Meg. 21a. Press, 1976), 63-64. < Rashi adds the viewpoint of Resh Lakish as a "Mid3. Different scholars have subdivided the material rash Aggadah," thereby distinguishing it from the in 1 Kings 18:1-46 differently; see John G r a y , I & H first (peshat— plain sense) account. A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
348
12. This approach also violently offends the syntax 7. Ed. Bernard Mandelbaum (New York: Jewof passage, separating the verb from its following ish Theological Seminary of America, 1962), 1: object. A 4, 8. < 13. For a similarly difficult passage, see Isa. 6: 8. See note 3 above. A 10, where God tells the prophet that the divine word 9. NJPS translates "talent" here, but "knowledge" will fall on deaf ears, to the end that they shall be in Exod. 35:31. A punished. On this verse, see the discussion on the 10. A similar formulation is preserved in a haftarah for Yitro (Comments). A Yelammedenu fragment (to Be-ha'alotekha) and 14. This is the concluding suggestion of Moshe attributed to Rabbi Judah be-Rabbi Shalom. See Greenberg in his essay, "Ve-'atah hasibota 'et libam Adolf Jellinek, Bet Ha-Midmsh, 3rd ed. (Jerusalem: 'ahoranit (1 Kings 18:36)," in Studies inAggadah, Wahrmann Books, 1967), 6:88. < Targum andjewish Liturgy inMemory ofjoseph Heine11. Cf. NJPS. I have rendered the verbs here in mann (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1981), 66 (Hebrew the future tense to fit the import of the homiletic pagination). The entire article (pp. 52-56) gives a prophecy, and I have capitalized "house" to mark the masterly review and analysis of ancient and medieval midrashic allusion to the Temple. A opinions, to which I am indebted. A 15. For Weinfeld (Deuteronomy 1-11,230), these Haftarahfor Va-yak-hel (Sephardim) verbal connections further suggest that Deut. 4:1-40 is of exilic origin. A 1. Cf. further with the notice in 2 Kings 25:17, 16. I hesitate to make historical inferences; per- and this with Jer. 52:21-22. A 2. For an example of a bold modern attempt to haps later theological phrases have been woven into reconstruct the original account, see C. F. Burney, an old strand of tradition history. A 17. See Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11, 227 ff. On Notes on the Hebrew Text ofthe Book of Kings (1903; the ongoing use of hu' in that prayer in polemical reprinted, NewYork: Ktav, 1970), 83-90. < ways, see Naftali Wieder, "Tza'akat 'hu" ba-yamim 3. For a full discussion, with ancient Near Eastern nora'im" Sinai 89 (1976): 6-41. < evidence, see the discussion and notes in the haftarah 18. Ed. Jacob Z. Lauterbach (Philadelphia: Jewish for Va-yak-hel for Ashkenazim. A 4. Ed. Meir Ish Shalom (Vienna: Kaiser, 1880), PublicationSocietyofAmerica, 1933), 1:8-10. A 26a. < 19. See also ibid. A 5. See Adolf Jellinek, Bet Ha-Midmsh, 3rd ed. (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1967), 3:165; and Haftarahfor Va-yak-hd Abraham Epstein, in Mikadmoniyot haYehudim (Je(Ashkenazim) rusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1957), 2:145. The homily builds on Ps. 89:38, "it shall be established 1. See the haftarah for Terumah, 1 Kings 5: (yikon) forever as the moon." A 26-6:13. < 6. Ibid. < 2. See the haftarah Va-yak-hel (Sephardim), 1 7. Ibid. < Kings 7:13-26. < 8. Cited in the discussion for the haftarah for 3. Note, too, that the wooden posts on the outer Va-yak-hel for Ashkenazim. A margin of the court were set within bronze sockets, 9. See the discussion of details, ibid. A whereas the posts along the inner area were fitted with 10. See Jellinek, Bet Ha-Midmsh, 3:165; and silver sockets. The gradations can be correlated with Epstein,Mikadmoniyotha-Yehudim, 2:145. A the woods, stones,and ritual acts. On the later point, 11. Ibid. < see Menahem Haran, "The Symbolical Significance of the Complex of Ritual Acts Performed Inside the Shrine", in Yehezkel Kaufmann Jubilee 'Volume, ed. HaftarahforPekudei Ashkenazim) Menahem Haran (Jentsalem: Magnes Press, 1960), 1. Deut. 12:8-11 anticipates the end of the pro*20-42 (Hebrewsection). A cess and the centralization of worship. Building on 4. Ed. Meir Ish Shalom (Vienna: Kaiser, 1880), this notion, the early Sages formulated a full-scale 26a; se also Yal. 2, Kings, 185. A history of ancient cultic practice; see M. Zev. 14: 5. See James Pritchard, TheAncientNearEastin Pictures, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University 4-8. < 2. See the formative observations of Gerhard von Press, 1969), nos. 472, 500, 534, 537, 653, 855. Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy (London: SCM Press, For a full discussion of the iconogaphy in Ezekiel against its ancient Near Eastern background, see 1953), chap. 3; and the more nuanced discussion by Moshe Greenberg, Eastern 1-20, AB 22 (New York: Weinfeld, DDS, 191-209. A more recent discussion is found in Tryggve D. Mettinger, The Dethronement Doubleday, 1983), 54-58, 182. < ofSabaoth: Studies in the Shem and Kabod Theologies, 6. It is possible that "sound [kol]" of "mighty ConBOT 18 (Lund: Gleerup, 1982). < waters" in Ezek. 1:24 is an expression with mythi3. Given the precise bodily details (back, hand, cal overtones (see the dramatic usage in Hab. 3:9). On this point, see Herbert Mays, "Some Cosmic face), the passing of the divine Presence before Moses, Connections of Mayyim Rabbim" JBL 74 (1955): and the reference to Moses' view of a figure, the portrait is uncompromisingly anthropomorphic. A 9-21. < 349
NOTES TO PP.103-116349
4. The prophet is clearly dependent upon the 2. Whether Jer. 9:22-23 was part of the ancient priestly tradition in his formulation; see the analysis tally is not noted. A of B. Stein, Der Begrijfr'KabodJahweh" (Emsdetten 3. Cf. Neh. 9:10, 29-30. For rabbinic literai. Westf.: H . & J . Lechte, 1939), 299. < ture, see B. Sanh. 6b for the principle "there is no 5. See the discussion of'Weinfeld, DDS, andMet- punishment without [prior] warning" ('ein 'onesh tinger, The Dethronement ofSabaoth. A 'ela' 'im ken hizhir)', cf. the related formulation in 6. See the recent consideration of this point, in J. Yoma 1:5. For the later biblical phenomenon, the course of a larger discussion of Solomon's prayer, see the discussion of Sara Jafet, 'Emunot ve-Decot by Marc Brettler, "Interpretation and Prayer: Inter- be-Sefer Divrei ha-Yamim (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, pretation and Composition of 1 Kings 8:15-53," in 1977), 154-66. < Minhah le-Nahum: Biblical and Other Studies Presented 4. For this idea, see already Joachim Begrich, to 'NahumM. Sama in Honour of His 70th Birthday, ed. "Die priesterliche Tora" in Werden und Wesen des Marc Brettler and Michael Fishbane, 154 (Sheffield: Alten Testaments, ed. Paul Volz, Friedrich Stummer, JSOT Press, 1993), 17-35. < and Johannes Hempel, BZAW 66 (Berlin: Toepel7. NJPS reads "hands are stained with crime" but mann, 1936), 77. < the Hebrew damim suggests a stronger, more literal 5. See his comment on Amos 5:5. A rendition. A 6. See Rashi on Amos 5:5. A 8. This language perhaps alludes to the Priestly 7. See his remarks on Jer. 7:22. A Blessing (cf. Num. 6:24-26). < 8. The prophet is thus focused only on voluntary 9. See also Mid. Aggadah, 'Ekev (ed. S. Buber offerings of the individual, not the obligatory Temple [Vienna, 1894], pt. 2, p. 189); and J. Shek. 6:1. < sacrifices of the community. See the comments in 10. S. v. " M " < this regard by Jacob Milgrom, "Concerning Jeremi11. And see Bahya ben Asher's commentary on ah's Repudiation of Sacrifices," 89 (1977): Exod. 16:32. < 273-75. < 12. See Viktor Korosec,Hethitische Staatsvertrage, 9. This is a much analyzed topic; for lists of simiLeipziger rechtswissenschaftliche Studien, Heft 60 larities, see Weinfeld, DDS, app. A, pp. 320-65, and (Leipzig: T. Weicher, 1931), 100. < frequently throughout the book. A 13. For this theme, see the haftarah for Va-yak-hel 10. Peirush Yirmiyahu, ed. Aryeh Loeb Schlossberg (Ashkenazim). A (Paris: Librairie A. Durlacher, 1881), adloc. A 11. See J. Gerald Janzen, Studies in the Text of Jeremiah, HSM 6 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UniHaftamhfor W-yikm' versity Press, 1973), 11 and 193 n. 7. A 1. For Cyrus's celebrated edict and his concern to 12. Cf. Arnold B. Ehrlich, Randglossen zur restore foreign religious rites, see^NET, 315-316. hebraischenBibel (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1912), 4: See also Ezra 1 for a biblical reflex of the edict. A 261, suggests that the letters_yw (now appearing as 2. 1 translattpesha'ekha as "transgressions" here, yom) accidentally repeats the final letters of the previas earlier in 43:24. The NJPS has reversed the visual ous word nivi'iym (prophets). He would delete the translation of the two terms in this case. A presumed dittography. A 3. Rashi locates the issue in the time of King Ahaz 13. See D. J. Wiseman, "The Vassal Treaties of and is followed by Abravanel. A Esarhaddon," Iraq 20 (1958): 476-77, 483-84, 4. Significantly, kaneh is not mentioned among the and the discussion of Morton Cogan,"A Note on spices in M. Keritot 6:1, as elsewhere. A Disinterment in Jeremiah," Gratz College, Anniversary 5. Ed. H. S. Horovitz and I. A. Rabin (Jerusalem: Volume, ed. Isidore Passow and Samuel Lachs (PhilaBamberger &Wahrmann, 1960), 312, end. A delphia: Gratz College, 1971), 29-34. < 6. See Isaac Mendelsohn, Slavery in the Ancient 14. Rassam Cylinder 6.70-76. See MaximiNear East (New York: Oxford University Press, 1949), 46f.; and Bezalel Porton, .ArchivesfromEle- lian Streck, Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen phantine (Berkeley: University of California Press, Konige bis zum Untergange Ninveh, Vorderasiatische Bibliothek 7 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1916), II, p. 56, 1968), 204. < 7. See in general, Jeffrey Tigay, s. v. "Adoption" esp. vi:73-75. Similar posthumous disgraces are mentioned in rabbinic literature; cf. Eccl. Rabbah Encjud 2:298-301. < 1:15. According to J. Ta'an. 4:8, 69a, Hadrian did 8. See in the edition of L. Finkelstein (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1969), not grant permission for the burial of Jews who fell 403f., commenting on Isa. 43:12. The passage at Bethar. A 15. See Streck, Assurbanipal, II, p. 30; 111: mentions other attributes of God also dependent on 98. < human theological formulations. A 16. Ed. Solomon Schechter (3rd, corrected edition; New York: Feldheim, 1967), 21. For a full Haftamhfor Tzav discussion of substitutes for sacrifice in Judaism, 1. John BrightJeremiah, AB 21 (Garden City, N. see Michael Fishbane, The Exegetical Imagination Y.: Doubleday, 1965), 52, also refers to this ensemble (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998), chap. 8. < as "appended sayings." A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
350
1-17)," in .Melanges bibliques en I'honneur deM. Henri Cazelles, ed. Andre Caquot andMathias Delcor, AOAT 1. Cf. Moshe Z. Segal, Sefer Shemuel (Jerusalem: 212 (Ke-valaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Kiryat Sefer, 1971), 268. According to Joseph NeukirchenerVerlag, 1981), 54. < Blenkinsopp, the Ark was moved after the Philis10. Later biblical tradition explains that David tines were driven from the region of the Gibeonites; was denied the right to build the Temple because see his Gibeon and Israel: The Role ofGibeon and the he had "shed much blood" in war; see 1 Chron. Gibeonites in the Political and Religious History of Early 22:8. < Israel, SOTSMS 2 Cambridge: Cambridge University 11. The ancient Near East also had traditions of Press, 1972), 134 n. 4. < this double emphasis; see most recently, Antti Laato, 2. LXX and 4QSama read "alongside." < "Second Samuel 7 and Ancient Near Eastern Royal 3. For the possible connection between this epi- Ideology," CBQ 59 (1997): 244-69. < sode and the episode in Beth-shemesh, see Naftali H. 12. For a discussion of the title and the claim Tur-Sinai, "The Ark of God at Beit Shemesh (1 Sam. that this was the God of Israel at Shilo, see Otto VI) and Peres 'Uzza (2 Sam. VI; 1 Chron. XIII)," Eissfeldt, "Jahwe Zebaoth," in Miscellanea AcaVT1 (1951): 275-80. < demica Berolinensia (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 4. It has been suggested that Psalm 132 reflects a 1950), 128-50, esp. 139-46; for the figure of similar cultural tension; see Antti Laato, "Psalm 132 the cherubim, see R. de Vaux, "Les cherubins et and the Development of the Israelite/Jerusalem Royal l'arche d'allianct," Melanges de I'universite SaintIdeology" CBQ 54 (1992): 49-66. For a considera- Joseph 37 (1960-61): 93-124. < tion of some features of this psalm in relationship to 13. Psalm 132 has been assumed to be part of an 2 Samuel 6-7, see my remarks in Comments, on 2 ancient cultic practice, but this argument has been Sam. 6:2. A refuted by Delbert Killers, "Ritual Procession of the 5. 2 Samuel 7 is a core text in the messianic specu- Ark and Ps 132," CBQ 30 (1968): 48-52; on pp. lation of the Dead Sea sectarians; see John Allegro, 53-55, he offers the alternative of looking to royal "Fragments of a Qumran Scroll of Eschatological dedicatory inscriptions as the stylistic background for Midrashim,"/£L 77 (1958): 350-54. Many ofthe the psalm. See also v. 4, above. A verses are reinterpreted. A 14. See also Yal., Be-shallah, 1:261. These sources 6. See the discussion in Michael Fishbane, Biblical mention four episodes causing difficulty; only two Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon are mentioned in Num. R. 4:20, but the key terms Press, 1985), 392-94. < there are different. A 7. For an analysis of the reuse of 2 Samuel 7 15. See Philo's LegumAllegoria (Allegorical Inin Psalm 89, see Nahum M. Sarna, "Psalm 89: A terpretation) 2:57-58, and De Somnis (On Dreams) Study in Inner-Biblical Exegesis," in Biblical and 2:67; and in the Midrash, Sifra, Shemini 3:32, and Other Studies, ed. Alexander Altmann, Brandeis Lev. R. 12:2. For later discussions, see the comment University Texts and Studies (Cambridge, Mass.: of R. Hayyim ibn 'Attar in his 'Or ha-Hayyim, on Harvard University Press, 1963), 29-46; and Fish- the passage. I have discussed the phenomenon of bane, ibid., 465-67. A such mystical death in my book The Kiss of God: 8. Leonhard Rost, Die Uberlieferung von der Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism (Seattle: Thronnachfolge David (Stuttgart: W Kohlhammer, University of Washington Press, 1994), chap, 1, 1926), argued that 2 Samuel was from the outset and esp. p.21. A a foundation document for dynastic perpetuity. By 16. For a broader discussion of the theme, see contrast, Isaac L. Seeligmann emphasized that a core Michael Fishbane, "Joy in Jewish Spirituality" in The oracle was supplemented at 2 Sam. 7:12b, 13b, and Exegetical Imagination: Jewish Thought and Theology 16 in order to give the promise perpetuity. See his (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998), "From Historical Reality to Historiosophical Concep- chap. 10. < tion in the Bible" (in Hebrew), in P'ra-kim, ed. Erwin Rosenthal (Jerusalem: Yearbook of the Schocken Haftarahfor Tazriac Institute, 1969-71), 2:301; and my discussion in ibid., 394-97. < 1. Thus one haftarah for the seder of Tazria' (begin9. See the discussions of Mattitiahu Tsevat, "The ning at Lev. 12:1) begins at Isa. 9:5, according to AbSteadfast House: What Was David Promised in 2 raham's Cambridge Library List (col. 3), but the extent Samuel 7?" in The Meaning ofthe Book ofJob and is not given. The verse is also given in a kerovah of R. Other Biblical Essays (New York: Ktav, 1980), 115; and Simon Ha-Kohen ibn Megas; see Piyyutei Shimon bar Kyle McCarter,H Samuel, AB 9 (Garden City, N. Y.: Megas, ed. Yosef Yahalom (Jerusalem: Israel Academy Doubleday, 1984), 222. For an overall review of this of Sciences and Humanities, 1985), 211. Ibn Megas issue in the context of the whole document, see Lyle also mentions a haftarah beginning at Isa. 66:7 (ibid.); Eslinger, House ofGod or House ofDavid: The Rhetoric the extent of this reading went to v. 24, as preserved in of2 Samuel 7, JSOTSup 164 (Sheffield: Sheffield Aca- the Romanian Mahzor. For haftarah traditions readdemic Press, 1994). A discussion of the relationship ing Isa. 57:17-18 and 7:20 for sedarim beginning at between w. 5 and 13 can be found in Andre Caquot, Lev. 13:8 and 13:29, respectively, see Jacob Mann and "Breve explication de la prophetie de Natan (2 Sam 7, Isaiah Sonne, The Bible asRead and Preached inthe Old
Haftarahfor Shemini
351
NOTES TO PP.1 0 3 - 1 1 6351
Synagogue (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Jewish Institute of Religion, 1966), 2:68-69. < 2. It is hard to accept the contention of Alexander Rofe, The Prophetical Stories (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1982), 111-12, that this narrative is late eighth century in origin and that its purpose was to legitimate worship of the God of Israel by Israelite exiles. I fully concur with Mordecai Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, H Kings, AB 11 (New York: Doubleday, 1988), 67, who argue that "it is hard to believe that Naaman's individual solution could serve as a sanction for the thouands in Assyrian exile who would worship YHWH on soil transported all the way from the holy land. The story of Naaman's conversion is rather an expression of'ancient Israelite universalism'. . ." This was first remarked by Yehezkel Kaufmann, Toledotha-'Emunah ha^Yism'elit (Tel Aviv: Devir: 1960), 2:277-79. < 3. Cf. the Akkadian incantation, whose similarity to Jer. 22:29 is remarkable: "Earth, earth, earth, Gilgamesh casts a spell upon you!" This occurs in the magical series Maqlu l:37f. A 4. The formulation is more temperate in Yal. 2: 455. < 5. For the idiom "to lift up the face," see the study of Mayer I. Gruber, "The Many Faces of Hebrew ns' pnym 'lift the face,'" Z ^ . ^ 9 5 (1983): 252-60. < 6. For other biblical cases and the ancient Near Eastern backgrounds, see Michael Fishbane, "Form and Reformulation of the Biblical Priestly Blessing," JAOS 103 (1983): 115-21; and in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 329-34. < 7. For a full discussion of the term tzara'at in scholarship, see EM 6:774-78. And see the extensive comments of Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, AB 3 (NewYork: Doubleday, 1991), 816-26. < 8. See Judith Green and Yoram Tsafrir, "Greek Inscriptions from Hammat Gader: A Poem by the Empress Eudoreia and Two Building Inscriptions," IEJ 32 (1982): 84, 88. < 9. See Moses Gaster, The Sword ofMoses (1896); reprinted in his Studies and Texts in Folklore, Magic, Medieval Romance, HebrewApociypha and Samaritan Archeology (NewYork: Ktav, 1971), 1:322 and 3:82 (Aramaic text). A 10. Historia Natumlis 28:45. A 11. See the review of evidence by Jonas C. Greenfield, "The Aramaean God Rammon/Rimmon" IE/ 26 (1976): 195-98; and idem, EM 7:377-78. < 12. Verse 23 is repeated at the end. A 13. According to the Cambridge Library list, col. 3, another reading dealing with birth and messianic hope began at Isa. 9:5; see n. 1, above, andMann and Sonne, TheBibleasReadandPreached, 2:61-62. A 14. This link is developed in Deut. R.2:28. A
HaftamhforMetzom' 1. See the discussion of the haftarah for Tazria'. A 2. There was Ben-hadad, contemporary of Baasha (1 Kings 15:18); Ben-hadad, enemy of Ahab (1 Kings
20:1); and Ben-hadad, sonofHazael (2 Kings 13:3). See the careful evaluation ofMordecai Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, H Kings, AB 11 (New York: Doubleday, 1988), 78-79 (with cross-references to "Comments"). 1 have adopted their cogent analysis. A 3. SccANET, 278-79, which reports that Ahab sent chariots to fight alongside Adad-idri (Ben-hadad) at Qarqar. A 4. Already Abraham Keunen. The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel (London: Longmans and Breen, 1877), 396 n. 2; his view is followed by Cogan and Tadmor, IIKings, 84. A 5. Ibid. < 6. Following Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, AB 3 (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 816-20, and his comprehensive analysis. See the discussion of the haftarah for Tazria'. A 7. Hans Winkler,Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen (Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1892), 168-74. < 8. Cogan and Tadmor, IIKings, 82. A 9. The device was first observed by Moshe Seidel. See his collected studies, Hikrei Mikra' (Jerusalem: MosadHa-RavKook, 1978). < 10. See Jacob Mann and Isaiah Sonne, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue (Cincinnati, Ohio: Hebrew Union College Jewish Institute of Religion, 1966), 2:64-75. < 11. Tanh. Metzora' 1; cf. Tanh. Buber, Metzora' 1. < 12. See also the tradition of slander reported in B. Sot. 47a (according to the reading in Yal. 2, on 2 Kings 5). < 13. For this tradition about Gehazi, among others, see Louis Ginzberg, The Legends ofthejews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1942), 4:244-45. <
HaftamhforAhareiMot 1. Due to the preceding formula (Ezek. 22:12) and the shift to the divine first person, some commentators separate this unit from the original prophetic word. Thus Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 1:459, regards this section as having been added by "Ezekiel himself or his school." These stylistic features deserve mention, but it is hard to imagine that this arraignment was originally without any announcement of doom. Already G. A. Cooke, Book ofEzekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1936), 240, regarded w 1-16 as a prophetic whole; and similarly, Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, AB 22A (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 464. < 2. Ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1972), 2:761. < 3. See the discussions of David P. Wright, "Unclean and Clean" in ABD, 6:729-47, and Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 466. A 4. Cf. Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 452. < 5. For the structure of a divine charge plus sentence, see the survey in Kirsten Nielsen, Yahweh as Prosecutor andjudge (Sheffield, England: Department ofBiblical Studies, University of Sheffield, 1978). < NOTES TO PP. 103-116
352
6. See H. G. L. Peels, "The Vengeance of God: work of a postexilic theologian, see already Bernhard The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of Duhm, "Anmerkungen zu den Zwolf Propheten, I. the NQM Texts in the context of Divine Revelation Buch Amos" 31 (1911): 1-18; and more in the OT" OTS 31 (1995): 123-24; and Greenberg, recently, Ulrich Kellermann, "Der Amosschluss als Ezekiel 21-37, 452. < Stimme deuteronomistischen Heilsoffnung,"£T28 7. See his Peirush Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar (1969): 163-83. < zu Ezeehiel und den XII kleinen Propheten) (Warsaw: 7. For arguments for the authenticity of the Mekize Nirdamim, 1909), 1:36. < conclusion, see the discussions of Gerhard Hasel, 8. Also Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 452. A The Remnant: History and Theology ofthe Remnant 9. See his comment on v. 4. A Ideafrom Genesis to Isaiah, Andrew University Mono10. See n. 3, above, and also Jonathan Klawans, graph Studies in Religion 5 (Berrien Springs, Mich.: "The Impurity of Immorality in Ancient Judaism," Andrew University' Press, 1972), 473; and Klaus JJS 48 (1997): 3-7. < Seybold, Das davidische Konigtum im Zeugnis der 11. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Propheten, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur Ancientlsrael (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 293, des Alten und Neuen Testaments 107 (Gottingen: building upon David Daube, Studies in Biblical Law Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972), 17-19. < (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1947), 80. < 8. On the disputation form here, see Hans W 12. Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 451, and see the Wolff, Joel and Amos, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: analysis on pp. 458-59. A Fortress Press, 1977), 345. The terminology is used 13. Greenberg, ibid., 457, even wonders whether alsobyMayes,Aw05, 156. A this is an explication of the Name given in Exod. 6: 9. Jonas Greenfield, IDB 1:534; and Benjamin 3, in terms of promise and fulfillment. A Mazar, EM 4:236-38 (in Hebrew). For the iden14. For a suggestion, see Samuel Abramsky, "'Slag' tification with Cappodocia, see G. A. Wainwright, and 'Tin' in the First Chapter of Isaiah" EI 5 (1958): "Caphtor-Cappodocia" VT 6 (1956): 199-210; 105-7 [Hebrewsection], A and also idem., "The Septuagint's Kappodokia for 15. Greenberg,Ezekiel 21-37,459, gives a lengthy Caphtor,"jT/~S 57 (1956): 91-92. Regarding the and helpful formulation of the inversion. A suggestion of Cyprus, see James Strange, Caphtor/ 16. There are also common terms linking Ezekiel Kefti: A New Investigation, Acta Theologica Danica with the Torah rules (e. g., zimmah, "depravity"; cf. 14 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1980). < Lev. 18:17 and Ezek. 22:9). < 10. See A. Leo Oppenheim, "The Eyes of the Lord,"jk4 OS 88 (1968): 173-80; reprinted in Essays inMemory ofE.A. Speiser, ed. W W Hallo, AOS Haftarahfor Kedoshim 53 (NewHaven, Conn.: American Oriental Society, (.Ashkenazim) 1968). < 11. See Paul, Amos, 284-85. < 1. Cf. John J. Collins, "History and Tradition in 12. Followed by Paul,Amos, 286. A the Prophet Amos," ITQ 41 (197): 125-26; and J. 13. See Samuel Krauss, TalmudischeArcheologie: Alberto Soggin, The ProphetAmos, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press, 1987), 143. Both speak of Grundriss der Gesamptwissenschaft desjudentums (reprint, Hildesheim: George Olms, 1966), 1:99, the absence of special benefits or privileges. A 288 n. 156. < 2. Also Shalom Paul,.Amos, Hermeneia (Minne14. If the hif'il takdim is an authentic form (cf. apolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 283:"Election is not Job 41:3), it may have influenced the vocalization predicated upon exodus." A 3. Some claim that v. 8b is the gloss of a (Judean) of the form taggish. Alternatively, if taggish is the redactor, insofar as the phrase "contradicts the rest of authentic form, the influence would have gone the the oracle, and makes the foregoing pointless." See other way. The latter alternative is the solution of James L. Mayes,Amos, OTL (London: SCM Press, Hanokh Yalon, "Studies in Biblical Literature: kalhifil" (in Hebrew), Leshonenu 2 (1930): 129, who 1969), 160. < 4. Inexplicably, Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi draws an suggested that the form tqggish represents an archaic opposite inference (i. e., that the scattered ones are future kal. A 15. SccWolftJoelandAmos, 344. < the punished sinners); but this goes against the whole 16. Followed by Paul,Amos, 290. See also Hasel, sense of the judgment of exile as a rescue of Israel from complete destruction. See his Peirush Tanhum The Remnant, 211 and n. 313; and Seybold, Das ben TosefHaYerushalmiLe-TreiAsar, ed. Hadassa Shy davidischeKonigtum, 17-19, 60-67. A 17. This possibility has been noted by Paul,Amos, (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991), 98-99. A similar interpretation of the sieve image is found in Francis 291. < I. Andersen and David N. Freedman,.<4w05, AB 24A 18. For the material in Obadiah, see the ex(NewYork: Doubleday, 1989), 879. < tensive discussion in the haftarah for Va-yishlah 5. See Ibn Ezra's comment in Shnei Peirushei R. (Sephardim). A 19. So already Samuel R. Driver, Deuteronomy, Avraham ibn Ezra le-Trei 5Asar, critical edition with commentary by Uriel Simon (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), 306. For this and related terminology, see Weinfeld, DDS 4: University Press, 1989), 263. < 6. For the argument that Amos 9:11-15 is the 193-94, and 325 (app. A:2). < 353
NOTES TO PP.103-116353
20. For the realia, see Gustav Dalman, Arbeit und Sitte in Palastina (reprint, Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1964), 2:177, 198; and4:368-69. < 21. For an analysis of this and other examples, see Moshe Weinfeld, "Mesopotamian Prophecies of the End of Days," Shnaton 3 (1979): 263-76. See the Mesopotamian texts collected and presented by A. K. Grayson and W Lambert, "Akkadian Prophecies," JCS 18 (1964): 7-30. < 22. "But now, the gods have brought about the return of the hou[se of my father . . .]"; see Joseph Fitzmyer, TheAmmaic Inscriptions ofSefire, BibOr 19 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967), 100. < 23. For the expression sbuv shevut and variants, see Ernest L. Dietrich, Shuv shevut: Die endzeitlich Wiederherstettungbei denPropheten, BZAW 40 (Giessen: A. Topelmann, 1925); Riekele Borger, "TjMshuv shevut/if ZAW66 (1954): 315-16. <
9. For related terms and themes, see the discussion on the haftarah for Shabbat Parah. A 10. See Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, 384. A 11. This topic is developed by Moshe Greenberg, "Parashat ha-Shabbat be-Yirmiyahu" in Tyunnim beSefer Yirmiyahu, ed. Ben-Zion Lurie (The Israel Society for Biblical Research; Givatayim: Peli'y, 1971), 2:27-37. < 12. SccFishbanc,BiblicalInte?pretatim,47&-79. A
Haftamhfor 'Emor
1. For a concise overview of Ezekiel's program, see G. A. Cooke, TheBook of Ezekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1936), 425-29; for a summary and analysis, see Moshe Greenberg, "The Design and Themes of Ezekiel's Program of Restoration," Interpretingthe Prophets, ed. James L. Mayes and Paul J. Achtemeier (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), 215-36. < The date of ro'sh ha-shanah, "the beginning of HaftarahforKedoshim (Sephardim) the 2.year," occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible; it may be cognate with Akkadian resh shatti. LXX reads 1. For a more detailed analysis of the structure ba-rishon, "in the first [month]." A of this entire chapter and its ideology, see Moshe 3. For example, regarding the contradiction Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 376-82. See also, Michael between Ezek. 44:21 and Lev. 21:7, 14, see Rashi's Fishbane, "Sin and Punishment in the Prophecies comment at B. Hag. 13 a; on the conflicts between of Ezekiel," in Interpretingthe Prophets, ed. James L. Ezek. 44:25-27, see R. David Kimhi and R. Eliezer Mays and Paul J. Achetemeier (Philadelphia: Fortress ofBeaugency. On these cases, see below. A 4. For these matters, see Walter Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Press, 1987), 180-81, 184-87. < 2. In an influential essay, Meir Friedmann, Ha- Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2: tziyyun, hu' be'ur li-nvu'at Yehezqel siman 20 (Vienna: 459-60; see there his consideration that v. 18 is an n. p., 1888), suggested that the inquiry in v. 1 might expansion. Ezekiel prohibits any use of woolen garbe inferred from the subsequent condemnation of child ments by the officiants. Remarkably, in later times, sacrifices and the emphasis on the restoration of proper priests wore vestments made of wool andflax,despite worship. He proposed that the elders wished to put the prohibition in Lev. 19:19; cf. M. Kilayim 9:1. a stop to private sacrifices (leading to votary child sac- On the biblical rules of mixtures, see Michael Fishrifices) and thus sought divine warrant to build a shrine bane, Biblical Interpretation inAncient Israel (Oxford: in the exile to control such activity. But the point is that ClarendonPress, 1985), 58-63. < God refuses to answer the inquiry; hence no inferences 5. See the comments ofMenahem Haran, "The should be drawn. See the next note. A Law-Code of Ezekiel XL-XLVIII and Its Relation to 3. Cf. Yair Hoffmann, "Le-She'elat ha-Mivneh ve- the Priestly School,"HUCA 50 (1979): 61. < 6. See the argument ofHaran, ibid., 62. A ha-Mash-ma'ut shel Yehezkel Perek 20," BethMikm 7. For a review of these positions and the problem63 (1975): 473-89, followed by Moshe Greenberg, atic nature of subsequent genealogical lists, see Samuel Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (NewYork: Doubleday, 1983), Loewenstamm, s. v. Tzadok, EM 6:673-77. A 387-88. < 8. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation in 4. For this term, shafat with the meaning "arraign," see the discussion of Ezek. 22:2 in the haftarah Ancientlsmel, 296-98. A 9. See his Peirush Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Warsaw: for 'Aharei Mot, in the Content and Meaning and the Mekize Nirdamim 3, 1909), 1:105. < Comments sections. A 10. Peirush 'Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar, 1:105. A 5. For two other uses of this term in connection 11. This refers particularly to the parashah; with divine power—negative and positive—see w. 26, 42. < admittedly, two of the laws taught by Ezekiel are 6. See my comments in Biblical Interpretation in given by God to Aaron alone in the Torah (see Lev. Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 245, 10:9). < 539. On the way the reality of Torah transforms this 12. PiyyuteiRabbi Yannai la-Tomh ve-la-Mo'adim, and other terms, see Michael Fishbane, The Garments ed. Zvi M. Rabinovitz (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, ofTorah: Essays in Biblical Hermeneutics (Bloomington, 1985), (seder 84): 455. < Ind.: IndianaUniversityPress, 1989), 70-71. A 7. Peirush Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Haftamhfor Be-har Ezechiel und denXIIkleinen Propheten), Lieferung 1 1. Verse 12 is replete with technical terms and pro(Warsaw: Mekize Nirdamim, 1909), ad loc. A cedures; so too is v. 14. The phrase ha-sefarim ha-'eleh, 8. See Greenberg,Ezekiell-20, 364-65. A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
354
"these documents," in v. 14 seems extraneous. It is Haftarahfor Be-hukkotai missing in LXX and has long been considered a second1. R. Joseph Kara even suggested a reference ary feature of the text. Cf. Bernhard Stade, "Miscellen, here to divine punishment before the nations would 8:Jer. 32, 1 1 - 1 4 " Z A W 5 (1885): 175-78. < 2. See Yigal Yadin, "Expedition D—The Cave of recognize God. See his Peirush 'Yirmiyahu, ed. Aryeh the Letters," BIES 12 (1962): 236-38 (plate 48b); Loeb Schlossberg (Paris: Librairie A. Durlacher, 1881), 27. < and Bezalel Porten ^Archives from Elephantine (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1968), 2. Cf. Yehezkel Kaufmann, The Religion oflsrael, trans. Moshe Greenberg (Chicago: University of 197-99. < Chicago Press, 1960), 424. < 3. See his comment on Lev. 25:33. A 4. Luzzatto legitimates the sale, as does Kimhi 3. See Jacob Milgrom, "The.H0£te'f-sacrifice and before him. See Peirushei ShaDaL 'al 'Yirmiyahu, Worship in the Temple in the Time of Jeremiah" (in Yehezkel, Mishlei, ve-'Iyyov (Lemberg: A. Menkes, Hebrew), in Lyyunim be-Sefer Yirmiyahu, ed. Ben 1876), 98-99. < Zion Lurie (Jerusalem: Israel Society for Biblical 5. See Peirush Yirmiyahu me-Rabbi Yoseph ben Research, n. d.), 2:123-30. < Rabbi ShimonKara, ed. Aryeh Lev Schlossberg (Paris: 4. See Wilhelm Rudolf, Jeremia, 3rd ed., HKAT Librairie A. Durlacher, 1881), 41. < 12 (Tubingen: Mohr, 1962), ad loc.; and John 6. See Nahman Avigad, Hebrew Bullae from the Bright,Jeremiah, AB 21 (Garden City, N. Y.: DouTime ofjeremiah. Remnantsfrom a BurntArchive (Je- bleday, 1965), 118; see also William McKane,/errusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1986), 28-29, emiahl-XXV., ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1986), no. 9; see also Yigal Shilo and D. Tarler, "Bullae from 384, 386, where he suggests that our received text is the City ofDavid: A Horde of Seal Impressions from the result of interpretation of Jer. 15:3. But on this the Israelite Period," BA 49 (1986): 204. < argument one could retain our text as the original 7. See n. 2, above. A form, with no need to revert it to an original. See 8. With reference to the Jeremiah text, see already my comment below. A Friedrich Giesebrecht, Das Buch Jeremia, HKAT 3 5. Presumably, the reference is to the historical (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907), 177. Temple "of old." The ancient Midrash understood the See also Mariano San Nicolo, Beitrage zur Rechtsge- reference to be to the primordial or transcendental sehiehte im Bereiehe der keilsschriftliehen Rechtsquellen,throne of the heavenly Temple, and this view has Instituttet for sammenlignende Kulturforskning, Se- recently been propounded on the basis of a Canaanrie A, 13 (Oslo: H. Aschehoug; Cambridge, Mass.: ite mythological parallel. Cf. W McKane, Jeremiah Harvard University Press, 1931), 128; and also I-XXV., 406, where he refers to the "transcendental Leopold Fischer, "Die Urkunden in Jer. 32 11-14 origin" of the Temple. A nach der Ausgrabungen und der Talmud," ZAW 30 6. Cf. Arnold Ehrlich,MikmI
NOTES TO PP.103-116355
12. For a related observation made with regard to the legal dimensions of Hosea's speech and its com1. This knowledge includes a cognitive dimen- plicated sequences, see Francis I. Andersen and David sion and seems to go beyond devotion (NJPS) N. Freedman, Hosea, AB 24 (NewYork: Doubleday, and acknowledgment. The present knowledge thus 1980), 219 ("but the juridical framework is neither counterpoints the non-knowledge mentioned in v. 10. rigid not realistic"). A For the sense of acknowledgment, see Hans Walter 13. See n. 6, above. A Wolff, op. cit., 53, and more extensively in '"Wissen 14. So also Yehudah Keil, SeferHoshea, TreiAsar, um Gotf bei Hosea als Urform der Theologie," ET Da'at Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 12 (1952-53): 548-49. < 1990), 1:14. < 2. The provision by God of oil and clothing (Hos. 15. See Kruger, "Israel, The Harlot," 114. < 2:13) is also a marriage theme, these being provisions 16. For a consideration of the theme of the desert that a husband was required to provide his wife; cf. in biblical thought and literature, see Shemaryahu L. Durr, "Altorientalisches Recht bei den Propheten Talmon, "The 'Desert Motif in Biblical and in QumAmos und Hosea,"BZ 23 (1935): 150-57. < ran Literature" BiblicalMotifi: Origins and Transfor3. For a development of this idea, see Gerson Cohen, mations, ed. Alexander Altmann, Brandeis Texts and "The Song of Songs and the Jewish Religious Mentality," Studies 3 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University in Studies in the Wriety qfRabbinic Cultures (Philadelphia: Press, 1966), 31-63. < Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 3-17. A 17. Cf. Ernst Jenni, "Das Wort 'olam im Alten 4. Cf. from the outset of the Midrash to the Song Testament," ZAW64 (1952-53): 235-39. < of Songs (1:11), commenting on Songs 1:1. A 18. This is the so-called betpretii, the bet of means. 5. R. Eliezer mi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel ve- In 2 Sam. 3:14, this bet is used in the context of an Trei Asar (Warsaw: Mekize Nirdamim, 1910), 2: espousal and the payment of a bride-price. A 119. < 19. See overall, Moshe Weinfeld, SocialJustice in 6. The particular dimension of accusation as a Ancient Israel and in theAncient Near East (Jerusaprimary sense of riv has been emphasized by Ernst lem & Minneapolis: Magnes Press & Fortress Press, Wurthwein, "Die Ursprung der prophetischen 1995). < Gerichtsrede," ZTK49 (1952): 4. For the form, see further in Berend Gemser, "The Rib or Controversy Haftamhfor Naso' Pattern in Hebrew Mentality" SVT 3 (1955): 124-37. < 1. For an overall evaluation of these various 7. That the riv is part of an attempt at divine re- features, see Yehezkel Kaufmann, Sefer Shofetim conciliation, see Hans Walter Wolf, Hosea, Hermeneia (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1962), 235-44. See also (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974), 32, following the considerations of Samuel Loewenstamm, s. v. Gemser, ibid., 129. A Shimshon, EM 8:189-195. < 8. For a discussion, see my Biblical Interpretation 2. Noting the difference, it is remarked in Num. in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), R. 10:17 that the messenger knew that Samson 307-12, with a consideration of the legal issues bear- would defile his nazirite status with Delilah, someing on Hosea 2 as well. A thing the mother did not know. A 9. See Cyrus H. Gordon, "Hos. 2:4-5 in the 3. These are type scenes, following established patLight of New Semitic Inscriptions," ZAW 54 (1936): terns. See Robert Culley, The Structure ofBiblical Nar279-80. See also Curt Kuhl, "Neue Dokumente von rative; and also Robert Alter, TheArt ofBiblical NarHosea 2:4-15" ZAW $2 (1932): 102-9. See also rative (NewYork: Basic Books, 1981), chap. X. The the evidence in Samuel Greengus, "A Textbook Case type scene in Judges 13 was expanded exegetically in of Adultery in Ancient Mesopotamia" HUCA 40 Pseudo-Philo's BiblicalAntiquities 42:1-7; see Daniel J. (1969): 33-44. For symbolic rites in ancient Near Harrington, S. J., "Birth Narratives in pseudo-Philo's Eastern law, see S. Greengus, "The Old Babylonian Biblical Antiquities and the Gospels," in To Touch the Marriage Contract" JAOS 89 (1969): 505-6. For Text: Biblical and Related Studies in Honor ofJosephA. the suggestion that the act of stripping was a kind Fitzmeyer, S.J., ed. Maura Horgan and Paul Kobelski of punishment, see P. A. Kruger, "Israel, The Harlot (NewYork: Crossroad, 1969), esp. 319-21. < (Hos. 2:4-9)"JNSL 11 (1983): 111-12. < 4. According to Num. R. 10:16, the ta'ar was a 10. Cf. "She is my wife and I am her husband more severe blade. A from this day and forever" (K 2:3f). See the discus5. For the biblical rules pertaining to the nazirite, see sions in Reuven Yaron, "Aramaic Marriage Contracts Milgrom, Numbers, 43-47 and Excurses 11-12. A from Elephantine"7SS 3 (1958): 30-31; also Bezalel 6. The original nazirite status has been reconPorten,Archivesfrom Elephantine (Berkeley: Univer- structed as focusing on the absence of intoxicants, on sity of California Press, 1968), 206. See also Marcus the prohibition of shaving, and on one's consecrated J. Geller, "The Elephantine Papyri and Hosea 2:3: status. See E. Zuckerscherbe, "Zur literarischen VorEvidence for the Form of the Early Jewish Divorce geschichte des priestlichen Nazir-Gesetzes," ZAW88 Writ,'7S/8 (1971): 139ff. < (1976): 191-204. For later rabbinic elaborations, 11. For Babylonian examples, see Greengus, "The see Marcus Jastrow, "The 'Nazir' Legislation "JBL Old Babylonian Marriage Contract," 516-17. A 32 (1913): 266-85. <
Haftamhfor Be-midbar
NOTES TO PP. 103-116
356
14. See Gershom Scholem, The Mystical Shape ofthe Godhead (NewYork: Schocken Books, 1991), chap. 4. A 15. Overall, see Gerson Cohen, "Zion in Rabbinic Literature," in Studies in the 'Variety ofRabbinic Cultures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 19-38. < 16. On v. 5, Ibn Ezra quotes Ibn Janah (R. Marinus) as suggesting that Masoretic va-'omar (and I spoke) is instead of va-yo'mar (and he spoke). Ibn Ezra prefers to think that the speaker is Zechariah, as did Rashi before him. A 17. Cf. 1 Sam. 24:10 andjob 7:21. < 18. Also noted by Eric Meyers and Carol Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, AB 25B (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1987), 211. < 19. Overall, see John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star (New York: Doubleday, 1995), esp. chaps. 3-4. < 20. See G. A. Cooke, A Text-Book ofNorth-Semitic Inscriptions (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1903), 83 (Larnaka, 1. 11); H. Donner and W Rollig, Kanaanaische undAmmaischelnschriften (Wiesbaden: O. Harrasowitz, 1966), 1:10, no. 42 (1. 11). < 21. For a detailed discussion, see Ismar Elbogen, Haftamhfor Be-ha'alotekha Geschichte des Achtzehngebets (Breslau: W Koeber, 1903), 24ff. A midrashic indication of the lateness 1. See Comment to 3:2, "a brand plucked from of this benediction is found in Num. R. 18:21. A the fire." < 22. Analysis and reconstruction of the account 2. Cf. Ezek. 43:7. < has varied greatly. See the representative studies of 3. NJPS renders this: "And let them make me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them" (my K. Mohlengrink, "Der Leuchter im funften Nachtgesicht des propheten Sacharja: eine archeologische emphasis). A Untersuchung," ZDMG 52 (1929): 257-86; Ro4. The same holds for Isaiah 6. See my comments bert North,"Zechariah's Seven-Spout Lampstand," on Parashat Yitro. A Biblica 51 (1970): 183-206; andMeyers andMeyers, 5. Ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, 229-38. A Books, 1963), 2:493. < 23. See in the critical edition of Robert Kirschner, 6. SiphreD'BeRab, ed. Hayim S. Horovits (JeruBamitaDe-MelekhetHa-Mishkan, Monographs of the salem: Wahrmann Books, 1966), 143. A 7. See Victor Aptovitzer, "Beit ha-Mikdash Hebrew Union College, 15 (Cincinnati: Hebrew Unishel Ma'alah 'al pi ha-Aggadah," Tarbiz 2 (1931), on College Press, 1992), 197-98. < 24. Adolph Reifenberg,AncientJewishArts (Je137-153, 257-287. < 8. David Flusser, "The Cult of the Judean Desert rusalem: ReuvenMass, 1947), 69; Israel's History in and Its Views" (in Hebrew), Zion 19 (1954): Coinsfrom theMaccabees to the Roman Conquest (London: East and West Library, 1953), 22, fig. 5. A 83-103. < 25. For a discussion of this date and other mat9. Overall, see Flusser, ibid. For the hymns, see ters, see Ernest Nash, Pictorial Dictionary ofAncient John Strugnell, "The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran— 4Q Serekh Olat Hassabat," SVT7 (1960): 318-45; Rome (New York: Praeger, 1961), 1:133-35, figs. and Carol Newsom, Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacrifice 143-45. < 26. For an analysis of sources bearing on "The (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). < History of the Menorah," see Daniel Sperber,j7S 16 10. The case of the pagan emperor Julian, in whom (1965): 135-59. < many Jews put great hopes for the rebuilding of the 27. See the full treatment by Antti Laato, "ZechaTemple, is paradigmatic. See Hans Lewy, "Yulianus Kaisar u-Vinyan ha-Bayit," in 'OlamotNijgashim (Je- riah 4, 6b-10a and the Akkadian Royal Building Inscriptions," 106 (1996): 53-69, with earlier rusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1969), 221-54. < bibliography cited. A 11. Cf. Weinfeld, DDS, 193. < 28. See ibid., 59-60, 62-63; and the survey of 12. For a comprehensive analysis, see Arnold Goldberg, Untersuchungen uber die Vorstellung von earlier interpretations by E. E. Le Bas, Zechariah's der Schekhinah in der fruhen rabbinischen Literatur Enigmatical Contribution to the Corner-Stone" PEQ 82 (1950): 102-22, andMeyers and Meyers, Haggai, (Berlin: Mohr-Siebeck, 1969). < Zechariah 1-8, 246-48. < 13. See, for example, MdRY Bo' 14 (ed. H. 29. See Laato ibid., 60f. < Horovitz and I. Rabin [Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 30. See Mid. Tanh. Be-ha'alotekha 5. < 1960], 51-52). <
7. The spelling here is morah, not mora' (as in Judg. 13:5). Some mss. do have the latter orthography. A 8. NJPS is inconsistent in its translation of the idiom yayin ve-shehar. In Num. 6:3, this is rendered "wine and any other intoxicant"; in Judg. 13:4, the phrase appears as "wine or other intoxicant"; and here in 1 Sam. 1:15, we find "wine or other strong drink." A 9. One may even suppose that the rule that a nazirite may not have contact with the dead (Num. 6:6) is thematically alluded to in Judg. 14:9,19; and 15:8, 15. Cf. also 1 Sam. 15:33. < 10. Regarding the term, cf. Ibn Ezra, who says that the person "does something exceptional (pele') since most people would rather indulge their appetites." < 11. Further on puns in this cycle, see Stanislav Segert, "Paronomasia in the Samson narrative in Judges XIII-XVI," VT 34 (1984): 454-61, and J. J. Glueck, "Paranomasia in Biblical Literature," Semitics 4 (1970): 51-78. < 12. In fact, the phrase is more rhetorical: "Why do [or should] you request my name?" A
357
NOTES TO PP. 103-116 357
31. Lev. R. 32:8, ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: WahrmannBooks, 1962), 755. A 32. See, for example, the midrashic unit found in MdRY, Bo' 14 (ed. Horovitz and Rabin), 51-52. <
Haftarahfor Shelah-Lekha
in classical literature; cf. Hans Windisch, "Zur Rahabgeschichte (Zwei Parallelen aus der klassischen Literatur)," ZAL 37 (1917/18): 188-98. < 11. Regarding her meritorious conversion, see B. Zebahim 116 a/b. On the larger theme of Rahab's rehabilitation in Jewish tradition, see Judith Baskin, "The Rabbinic Transformations of Rahab the Harlot" Notre Dame English Journal 11 (1979): 141-57. Cf. also Leila Leah Bonner, "Aggadic Attitudes toward Prostitution: Rabbinic Rehabilitation of the Marginalized Woman" in Proceedings ofthe Eleventh World Congress ofjewish Studies (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1994), vol. 1, esp. 36-38. For more on Jeremiah's lineage, see PdRK 112b and 115a-b (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum); Sifre Be-midbar, Be-ha'alotekha, piska 78 (ed. Haim Horovitz, p. 74), and Sifre Be-midbar Zuta (ibid., p. 252); and also Piyyutei Yannai (ed. ZviM. Rabinovitz [Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1985], 2:180f, and n. 6), where Jeremiah is referred to as navi' ben zonah. A
1. The tradition-history of the unit is complicated, as evidenced by the fact that in Num. 13:30 only Caleb is quoted as giving an encouraging report. This may reflect a Judahite bias or tradition, subsequently supplemented and balanced by the introduction of the Ephraimite hero Joshua into the scene (14:6). A certain Judahite bias (and emphasis on Caleb [w. 12, 20]) also marks the report in Judges l:w. 1-21 elaborate upon the Judahite venture; w. 22-28 add references to the activities of the House of Joseph (the Ephraimites and Menassites); and w. 30-36 summarize the gains of the other tribes. For a comprehensive review of tradition-history issues and the proposed layers of the text, see Gene M. Tucker, "The Rahab Saga (Joshua 2): Some Form-CritiHaftarahfor Korah cal andTraditio-Historical Observations" in The Use ofthe Old Testament in theNew, ed. J. M. Erfird (Chapel Hill, 1. Many modern scholars concur that the beginN. C.: Duke University Press, 1972), 66-86. < ning of this unit of the narrative is 1 Sam. 11:14. 2. For a different narrative emphasis, see Robert See Mattitiahu Tzevat, "The Biblical Account of the Culley, "Stories of the Conquest: Joshua 2, 6, 7 and Foundation of the Monarchy," in The Book ofjob and S,"HARS (1984): esp. 25-35. < Other Biblical Essays (New York: Ktav, 1980), 83, 3. For a fuller discussion, see Dennis J. McCarthy, 97; and Jan Fokkelmann, Narrative Art and Poetry "Some Holy War Vocabulary in Joshua 2" CBQ 23 in theBooks ofSamuel (Assen, The Netherlands: Van (1971): 230. < Gorcum, 1993), 4:482-484. < 4. For a discussion of this and related formulations 2. The procedure has been characterized as like a in the context of Deuteronomic sermons and rhetoric, court hearing ("Feststellungsverfahren"); see Hans see Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11, AB 5 (New Jochen Boeker, Die Beurteilung der Anfange des York: Doubleday, 1991): 214, 226-30. < Konigtums in den Deuteronomistischen Abschnitten 5. For the redactional position of this verse, see my des 1. Samuelbuches, WMANT 31 (Neukirchen, comments in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel 1964), 74. < (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 200-2. < 3. For the notion of renewal, see also Martin 6. On the textual and exegetical history of this Buber, "Die Erzahlung von Sauls Konigswahl," VT unit, see my discussion in Biblical Interpretation in 6 (1956): 155. < Ancientlsrael, 199-201; further on the herem overall, 4. See the discussion of this passage in the haftarah see pp. 204-8. < for the first day of Passover. A 7. Cf. the recognition of the problem by Robert 5. For this phrase, see Ephraim A. Speiser, "Of Boling,7<M&M0, AB 6 (New York: Doubleday, 1982), Shoes and Shekels" BASOR 77 (1940): 15-20; 150. < reprinted in Oriental and Biblical Studies, ed. J. J. 8. Cf. the discussion of Tikva Frymer-Kensky, Finkelstein and Moshe Greenberg (Philadelphia: "Reading Rahab," in Tehillah le-Moshe: Biblical and University of Pennsylvania Press, 1967), 151-59. Judaic Studies in Honor of Moshe Greenberg, ed. Morde- See the discussion of this matter in the commentary cai Cogan, Barry Eichler, and Jeffrey Tigay (Winona to the haftarah for Va-yeshev. A Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 63-65. A 6. For a full list, see Kyle McCarter, 1 Samuel, AB 8 9. See Frymer-Kensky, ibid., 64, for a different (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1980), 216-17. < formulation of this point: "The herem, this story 7. Among modern scholars, Yair Zakovitch has would seem to imply, is not an absolute and should adduced various sources to suggest that Bedan was be superceded by issues of justice and mercy." A another name for Jephthah, in "bdn = ypth" VT 22 10. For a wider consideration, see Phyllis Bird, (1972): 123-25. H. Jacobson, "The Judge Bedan" "The Harlot as Heroine: Narrative Art and Social (1 Samuel XII 11)," VT 42 (1992): 123-24, has Presuppositions in Three Old Testament Texts," identified the judge with Abdon, the minor judge in Narrative Research in the Hebrew Bible, ed. Miri mentionedinjudg. 12:13-15. A Amihai, George Coats, and Anne Solomon, Semeia 8. Ed. Solomon Buber (Vilna: Romm, 1885), 46 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), esp. 120-21, 2:91. < 126-32. The harlot as a type of heroine also occurs 9. Yal. 2, Jer., 292. < NOTES TO PP. 103-116
358
9. See in the translation of William Hallo (New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1970), 424. Cf. 1. See Julius Wellhausen, Die Composition des the original, Der Stern der Erloesung, 2nd ed. (FrankHexateuchs und der historischer Bucher des Alten furt-am-Main: Kaufmann Verlag, 1930), 210. A Testaments, 4th ed. (1876-1888; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1966), 224; and Hugo Gressmann, DieAnHaftamhforPinhas (before 17th fdnge Israels (Gottingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, ofTammuz) 1914), 230-31. < 2. George FooteMoortjudges, ICC (NewYork: 1. 1 Kings 18:1-39 is the haftarah for Ki Tissa'. Charles Scribner's Sons, 1895), 283. He notes: "The See the discussion there. A occasion of the interpolation may have been the in2. The question of the unity of 1 Kings 19 has trusion of the Ammonites into the old territory of been raised by commentators. For example, GerIsrael at the beginning of the 6th century; cf. Jer. hard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (Edinburgh: 49:1." < Oliver & Boyd, 1965), 2:19, argues "that w. 9-14 3. See Yehezkel Kaufmann, Sefer Shofetim (Jeru- are not a unity" and proposes to delete w. 9b-lla. salem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 220-21. < Ernst Wurthwein, in "Elijah at Horeb: Reflections 4. Ibid. < on 1 Kings 19:9-18 "Proclamation and Presence, 5. Abravanel actually inserts the gloss "cloister" ed. S. I. Durham and J. R. Porter (Richmond: John (!) here. < Knox Press, 1970), 152-54, proposes to delete 6. Cf. also the similar condition set by Idome- w. 11-14. As many difficulties are produced by neus (according to Servius's report to Virgil) in the these solutions as are resolved. See the comments Aeneid (3:121). During his strife, Idomeneus vowed of Frank M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew to sacrifice "that which" came out first to greet him Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), (devovit... se sacrificaturum de re quae eiprimoo oc- 193 and n. 197. An attempt at literary unity has curisset). A been put forward by Robert Cohn, "The Literary 7. Cf. also B. Ta'anit 4a, and Tosafot, s. v. Logic of 1 Kings 17-19," JBL 101 (1982): esp. 343-50. < sheloshah. A 8. See The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. 3. Cf. Joachim Jeremias, Theophanie: Die GesJames Charlesworth (Garden City, N. Y.: Double- chichte einer alttestamentliches Gattung (Neukirrchen: day, 1985), 2:353. The language of divine rejection Vluyn: 1965), 65. < of the false vow follows rabbinic tradition. See the 4. For another view of the anti-mythological citations above. A aspect of the narrative, see Cross, Canaanite Myth, 191-94. < 5. Cf. Zeev Weisman, "Sippur ha-Hitgalut beHaftamhfor Balak Horev"BetMikra 11 (1966): 140-43. And see also 1. See the discussion of the haftarah to Va-yes- Zakovitch, n. 6 below. A hev. A 6. See Johann J. Stamm, "Elia am Horeb," Studia 2. See the haftarah to Be-midbar. A Biblica et Semitica, Theodora Christiana Vriezen. .. 3. For these elements as features of covenant dedicata, ed. W C. Van Unnik and A. S. van der loyalty in ancient Israel and the ancient Near East, Woude (Wageningen: H. Veenman, 1966), 333, see Moshe Weinfeld, Social Justice in Ancient Israel 334. This position is followed and fully developed and in the Ancient 'Near East (Jerusalem and Min- by Yair Zakovitch, "'Kol Dememah Dakkah': Tzuneapolis: Magnes Press and Fortress Press, 1995), rah ve-Tokhen be-1 Melakhim-19," Tarbiz 51 (1984): chaps, 1, 9-10. < 338-46. < 4. The notion of "the primacy of morality" was 7. Cf. Zakovitch, ibid.; he notes that this point coined by Yehezkel Kaufmann and analyzed by him was already made explicitly in the Epistle to the in his writings. See his The Religion oflsrael, trans. Romans 11:2-5. A Moshe Greenberg (Chicago: University of Chicago 8. For comparisons between the "voice" of the Press, 1960), 161, 345, 365, 366-67, 385, and 396 storm-god Baal in Ugaritic myth and Psalm 29, see (forMicah). < Cross, Canaanite Myth, (n. 1), 148-56; for earlier 5. On the riv form, see Hubert Huffmon, "The studies, see the references in Cross, 152 n. 22. A Covenantal Lawsuit in the Prophets,"JBI 78 (1959): 9. See Yochanan Muffs, Love andjoy: Law, Lan285-95; see also James Limburg, "The Root ryb in guage, and Religion in Ancient Israel (New York: the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,"/^! 88 (1969): Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1992), 291-304. < 33-34; and Michael Fishbane, Biblicallnterpretation 6. Among modern commentators, cf. Max Mar- in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), golis, The Holy Scriptures with Commentary: Micah 397-99. < (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1908), 10. See, Muffs, ibid., 34-36. For modern estimations of the typology between Phinehas and Elijah, 56. < see Robert Hayward, "Phineas the Same as Elijah: 7. Cf. NJPS, note h. < The Origins of a Rabbinic Tradition"^ 29 (1978), 8. And see the further explication of Mid. Lekah 22-34; and Meir Faierstein, "Why Do the Scribes Tov, ad loc. A
Haftamhfor Hukkat
359
NOTES TO PP. 103-116 359
Say That Elijah Must Come First ?'JBL 100 (1981): 75-86. < 11. See the discussion of this passage in the haftarah for Shabbat ha-Gadol. A 12. For modern versions of the typology between Moses and Elijah, see Georg Fohrer, Elia. (Zurich: Zwingle-Verlag, 1957); R. A. Carlson, "Elie a l'Horeb," VT 19 (1969): 416-39; and Michael Fishbane, The Garments of Torah: Essays in Biblical Hermeneutics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989), 56-57. <
HaftamhforMattot 1. See the discussion and bibliography under Textual Comments and Notes; see also the discussion and chart in M. Fishbane, Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts (New York: Schocken, 1979), 68f. < 2. For Mesopotamia, see the statement of King Assurbanipal (668-621 B.C.E.)—in the generation before Jeremiah—in his annals: "I am Assurbanipal, offspring (creature) of Assur and Belit. . . whose name Assur and Sin, the Lord of the tiara, have named for the kingship from earliest days, whom they formed in his mother's womb, for the rulership of Assyria" (Rassam Cylinder, col. 1; see D. Luckenbill,Ancient Records ofAssyria, and Babylonia [Chicago: University of Chicago, 1927], sec. 765). For Egypt, see the speech of the god Amun to the pharaoh Pianchi of the twenty-fifth dynasty (751-730 B.C.E.), recorded on a stele: "It was in the belly of your mother that I said concerning you that you were to be ruler of Egypt; it was as seed and while you were in the egg, that I knew you, that (I knew) you were to be Lord" (see M. Gilula, "An Egyptian Parallel to Jeremia I 4-5", VT 17 [1967]: 114). < 3. A construal of ye'eshamu as a past tense requires taking it as a preterite. This is not unknown (in old Hebrew poetry especially) but seems not to make the best sense in this context. The verb 'asham, "be guilty," is sometimes a variant of the verb ya-sham (a biform of the more common shamam), "be desolate, destroyed." Cf. Ezek. 6:6 and the discussion of Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 133. Greenberg cites several other uses of 'asham in this sense (Hos. 5:15; 10:2; 14:1; Isa. 24:6; Joel 1:18). < 4. On the second possibility, see Martin Noth, Die israelitischen Personnennamen im Rahmen der jyemeinsemitischen Namenjyebung, BWANT III 10 (Stuttgart, 1928; reprint, Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1980), 201, n . 2 < 5. Larry Herr, The Scripts of Ancient Northwest Semitic Seals, HSM, 18 (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978), no. 45, p. 103. < 6. Letter 14; see Harry Torczyner et al,,LachishI (TelledDuweir): TheLachishLetters (London: Oxford University, 1938), 20-31. < 7. Kimhi harmonizes the forms; cf. the formulation of Minhat Shai. A 8. See n. 2 above. This motifhas been discussed
in relationship to the prophecies in Deutero-Isaiah by Shalom Paul, "Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions"jk40S 68 (1988): 180-86. < 9. See the strong argument against this identification by F. Wilke, "Das Skythenproblem im Jeremiabuch" Alttestamentliche Studien fur Rudolf Kittel, BWANT 13 (Leipzig, 1913), 222-54; and cf. the recent positive contentions of Henri Gazelles, "Zephaniah, Jeremiah, and the Scythians in Palestine,".^ Prophet to the Nations, Essays injeremiah Studies, ed. Leo Perdue and Brian Kovacs (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1984), 129-49 = "Sophonie, Jeremie, et les Scythes en Palestine," RB 74 (1967): 24-44, with extensive bibliography. A 10. See in the edition of Yitzhak Raphael (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1978), 1:284; this begins the subsection li-fnei tish'ah be-'av, "[The Period] before Tisha b'Av." A 11. See the argument of Mordecai Margulies,.Mzdrash Vh-yikra'Rabbah (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1962), in his introduction to Lev. R.13. For a later dating, see Yom Tov Lipmann Zunz, Ha-Derashot Be-Tisra'el (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1972), 83-86. For a recent discussion with bibliography, see Lewis Barth, "The 'Three of Rebuke and Seven of Consolation' Sermons in the Pesikta de Rav Kahana "JJS 33 (1982): 503-15. A new analysis has now posed an even earlier date, several hundred years earlier than the midrashic record; see Naomi Cohen, "Earliest Evidence of the Haftarah Cycle for the Sabbaths between yod-zayin be-Tammuz and Sukkot in Philo", JJS 48 (1997): 225-49. < 12. However, Maimonides records the practice of reciting Isa. l:14ff. as the second reading and Isa. 1: 21ff. as the third. < 13. This tradition is already indicated at the beginning of the LXX and Targum, and B. BB 15a. The tradition may derive from Jeremiah's prophecies of lamentation for the destruction (Jer. 7:29; 9:19) and his prediction ofhis own future lamentation (9: 9). See also 2 Chron. 35:25, which refers to laments Jeremiah recited over Josiah that were "incorporated into the laments." Tradition takes Lam. 4:20 to refer to that king (see Targum, ad loc). In this regard, see also Lam. R. 1:18, no. 54; and 4:1, no. 1. A 14. As noted earlier, Isa. 1:21 ff. is the third reading mentioned by Maimonides. A
HaftamhforMase'ei 1. According to Jacob Milgrom, "The Date of Jeremiah Chapter 2 " J N E S 14 (1955): 65-69, the situation described in the haftarah did not obtain after 616 B.C.E., when Assyria and Egypt ceased to be rivals and became allies against a common foe. This would date the chapter early in the career of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. However, there is no reason to assume that the references to Assyria and Egypt reflect enmity or alliance; they are just references to the two powers to which the Judeans repeatedly turned. The dating thus remains unauthenticated. A 2. For the term rip and its formal uses, see HuNOTES TO PP. 103-116
360
bert Huffmon, "The Covenantal Lawsuit in the Prophets,"J&L 78 (1959): 285-95; and James Limburg, "The Root ryb in the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches," JBL 88 (1969): 292-304. < 3. See the discussion and details in the haftarah for Shabbat Shuvah. A 4. For the Akkadian evidence, see Shalom Paul, in JBL 88 (1969): 65-69. < 5. See Jonas Greenfield, s. v. "Kittim" IDB 3: 40-41. < 6. See John Thompson, s. v. "Kedar" IDB 3: 3-4. < 7. Regarding the tikkunei soferim, see Saul Lieberman, Hellenism injewish Palestine (New York: Feldheim, 1950), 28-37. A more midrashic approach has been strongly argued by Carmel McCarthy, The Tikunei Sopherim and Other Theological Corrections in theMasoretic Text ofthe Old Testament, OBO 36 (Fribourg: Universitats Verlag; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1981). < 8. See in MdRY, ad loc. In this case, the formulation "I will change their glory into shame" was presumably "they exchanged My Glory for shame"; see Christian D. Ginsburg, Introduction to theMassoretico-Critical Edition ofthe Hebrew Bible (reprint, New York: Ktav, 1966), 345-63 (overall), and on Hos. 4:7, in particular. A 9. See Michael Fishbane, "The Well of Living Water: A Biblical Motif and Its Transformations," in Shaarei Talmon: Studies in the Bible, Qumran, and the AncientNear East Presented to Shemaryahu Talmon, ed. Michael Fishbane and Emanuel Tov (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1992), esp. 4-6. A 10. Overall, see Moshe Held, "Rhetorical Questions in Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew," EI 9, W F. Albright Volume, ed. Abraham Malamat (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1969), 71-79. A 11. For an analysis of the form, see Moshe Greenberg, "The Hebrew Oath Particle Hay/Hey" JBL 76 (1957): 34-37. < 12. See PDRK, piska 16 (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1962], 1:279); Pesikta Rabbati, piska 33 (ed.Meirlsh Shalom [Vienna: Kaiser, 1880], 157b); and in thcpiyyut of Yannai published in Mahzor PiyyuteiRabbi Yannai la-Tomh ve-la-Mo'adim, ed. Tzvi M. Rabinovitz (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik and Tel Aviv University, 1987), 2:319 (recited on the second Sabbath of admonition). A 13. NJPS "Alas, I find you changed" introduces a lament form here; this overinterprets the literal sense but does work midrashically (see my ensuing point). A
HaftarahforDevarim (Shabbat Hazon) 1. Modern scholarship over the past century has debated the redactional makeup of this chapter. The literature is vast. Two recent studies have reviewed the material from different angles and indicated the different layers and periods proposed. See Susan 361
NOTES TO PP.103-116361
Niditch, "The Composition oflsaiah 1 " Biblica 61 (1980): 509-29; and John Willis, "The First Pericope in the Book oflsaiah," VT 34 (1984): 63-77 and the commentaries referred to in the notes. A 2. Among earlier commentators, Otto Procksch (Jesaiahl, HKAT 9/1 [Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1930]) and Otto Kaiser (Isaiah l-12iA Commentary, OTL [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976]) take w. 2-9 as one unit; T. K. Cheyne (Introduction to the Book oflsaiah [London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, and Co., 1895]) breaks this down into w. 2-4 and w. 5-9; and Artur Weiser (The Old Testament: Its Formation andDevelopment [NewYork, 1957]) prefers to divide the units into w. 2-3 and w. 4-9. A 3. Most scholars regard w. 21-26 as one unit and v. 27 as beginning another one. A 4. It is thus the first part of what George A. Smith called (following Ewald) "the Great Arraignment"; see his The Book oflsaiah I-XXXTX, The Expositors Bible (New York: A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1901), ad loc. A 5. The recurrence of theme words may account for the redactional association of the units, but it does not establish a unity overall; cf. Georg Fohrer, "Jesaja 1 als Zusammenfassung der Verkundigung Jesajas," ZAW 74 (1962): 251-68. For an attempt to argue for the unity of Isa. 1:1-20 on the grounds of rhetoric, see Yehoshua Gitay, "Reflections on the Study of the Prophetic Discourse: The Question of Isaiah 12-20," VT 33 (1983): 207-21. Among earlier commentators, Don Isaac Abravanel also saw a unity in the chapter; for him, it was the movement from admonishment to challenge. A 6. This expectation contradicts the opening suggestion that the doom has come and so apparently "reflects a different historical situation from w. 1-19." See George B. Gray, Isaiah I-XXXIX, ICC (NewYork: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912), 3. A 7. Cf. ibid., 1. < 8. In the edition of Jacob Z. Lauterbach (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1933), 1:91; in the edition of H. Horovitz and Israel Rabin (Jerusalem: Bamberger and Wahrmann, 1960), 40. For a modern presentation of the point, see Aaron Kaminka, "Expression ofMoses and Psalms in Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Leshonenu 1 (1928-29): 40-41. For the expression, "for the L O R D has spoken" and references to other prophecies, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 477-79. < 9. The attempt by Niditch, "The Composition of Isaiah 1," to treat Isaiah l a s a riv is not convincing and depends upon a synthetic method that is only suggestive—not proved. For a strong critique of the rip-pattern here and a consideration of topics of justice in the chapter, see Eryl W Davies, Prophecy and Ethics: Isaiah and the Ethical Tradition oflsrael, JSOTSup 16 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1981). < 10. See Samuel D. Luzzatto, Sefer Yesha'yah (II Profita Isaia, volgarizzato e commentate ad uso degl'Israeliti) (Padua: Bianchi, 1867), adloc. A 11. The instructions here are like moral confessions for visitors to shrines; cf. Moshe Weinfeld,
"Instructions for Temple Visitors in the Bible and Ancient Egypt," Egyptological Studies, ed. Sara Groll, ScriptaHierosolymitana 28 (1982): 224-50. A 12. Luzzatto renders ve-shaveha as the "dwellers" of Zion. A 13. For details, see the haftarah for Mattot. A
Haftarahfor Va-'ethannan (Shabbat Nahamu) 1. See inANET (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955), 315-16. < 2. See the discussion of Elias Bickerman, "An Edict ofCyrus,"/RL 65 (1946): 24-25. < 3. See his :Adnei Kesef, ed. Isaac Last (London: J. Narodiczky [printer], 1921), 1 (Former Prophets and Isaiah): 148 (onlsa. 40:1). < 4. For this matter and Ibn Ezra's argument, see the discussion in "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." A 5. See Megillat Ha-Serakhim, ed. Jacob Licht (Jerusalem: MosadBialik, 1965), 181. < 6. Alternatively, Stephen Geller, "Were the Prophets Poets," Prooftexts: AJournal ofjewish Literary History 3 (1983): 217, suggests that the whole unit (beginning "all flesh") is part of the prophet's claim of his inability to prophesy. A 7. See the discussion of Arvid Kapelrud, "The Date of the Priestly Code (P ),"Annual ofthe Swedish Theological Institute 3 (1964): 58-64, and the elaboration made by Moshe Weinfeld, "The Creator God in Genesis 1 and the Prophecies of Deutero-Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Tarbiz 37 (1968): esp. 120-26. See also Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 322-26. A 8. See the haftarah for Titro. A 9. The terms nehamah and nehemata' are often used in ancient rabbinic texts to indicate redemption. See B. Pesahim 54b and B. Makkot 5b. < 10. Cf. R. Moses of Coucy, in Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, 'aseh 19 (p. 113b). For a discussion in relationship to the ancient testimony of the PdRK, see Yom Tov Lipmann Zunz, Ha-Derashot Be-Yisrael Ve-Hishtalshelutan Ha-Historit, ed. Hanokh Albeck (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1974), 347 n. 35. This expanded edition is based on the second edition of Zunz's Diegottesdienstlichen Vortrage derjuden, Historisch Entwickelt (Berlin: A. Asher, 1832; reprinted, Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1966). < 11. See Sefer Ha-Manhig Le-RabbiAwaham BeRabbi Natan Ha-7arhi, ed. Yitzhak Rafael (Jerusalem: MosadHa-RavKook, 1978), 1:284. In a variant tradition that is popular in our own day—and reflected in this book—the typical haftarah for Ha'azinu (when recited after Yom Kippur) accords with that parashah, rather than the liturgical season; according to that custom, the series of haftarot that is dedicated to the season spans eleven Sabbaths, not twelve. A 12. SeeMachsor Vitry, ed. S. Hurwitz (Nurnberg: J. Bulka, 1923), 223-24.^
13. Naftali Wieder, "Hashlamot ve-Tikkunim leSiddur Rav Saadia Gaon," in Sefer Asaf (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1953), 260. < 14. See Adolf Buchler, "The Reading of the Law and Prophets in a Triennial Cycle," JQR, o. s. 5 (1892/3), 421. <
Haftarahfor 'Ekev 1. See the discussion in "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" and in the discussion of the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A 2. See the discussion of this cycle at the end of the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A 3. Cf. Ibn Ezra and Kimhi, who state that though there may be mothers who abandon their children, God will never leave His people. A 4. The Hebrew verb isga'ar but is translated "blast" by NJPS in Ps. 104:7. Cf. alsoPs. 89:10-11. < 5. For a different treatment of feminine imagery, see the comments of Mayer Gruber, "The Motherhood of God in Second Isaiah," RB 90 (1983): 351-59. < 6. For the typological argument, see my comments in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 375- < 7. On this subdivision and a discussion, see Charles C. Torrey, The Second Isaiah: .A New Interpretation (NewYork: Scribner's Sons, 1928), 380. A 8. The term rehem may be a variant of raham, "woman" (Judg. 5:30). The latter term is found frequently in Ugaritic (as rhmt) and even as an epithet for the goddess Anat (called rhm cnt); cf. Corpus des tablettes en cuneiformes alphabetiques, Andre Herdner (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1963), 6:26-27. The term is also found in Moabite, on the Mesha Inscription, line 17; see in H. Donner-W Rollig, Kanaanaische undAmmaischelnschriften (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1966), 1 (181): 33. The variation between the nominal pattern raham and rehem has been explained on the basis of corresponding shifts with mi/e prefix (cf. mimkar-mekher), see Robert Gordis, "Studies in the Book of Amos" American Academy ofjewish ResearchJubilee Volume (Jerusalem: American Academy for Jewish Research, 1980), 1:210. Gordis thus already proposed that mrhrn in our Isaiah passage be related to the issue of woman; he did not notice the absence of the interrogative 'im. For other independent suggestions of an original particle 'im, see Yitzhak Avishur, "Degamei Ha-She'elah haKefulah" in ZerLi'Gevurot: The Zalman ShazarJubilee Volume, ed. Ben Zion Luria (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1973), 439 n. 6; and also Mayer Gruber,"Ha-Tishkah 'Ishah 'Ulah .. ..>" Tarbiz 51 (1983): 491-92. < 9. This is Rashi's formulation in his first opinion. A 10. See the ancient Near Eastern evidence adduced in the haftarah for Va-yikra'. A 11. For the Qumran evidence, see David Flusser, "The Text of Is. 49:17 in the DSS" Textus 2 (1962): 140 ff. < 12. The rabbinic term is not sefer keritut (bill of divorce) butgetpitturim (seeM. Git. 9:3). A NOTES TO PP. 103-116
362
13. See his : AdneiKesef.ed. Isaac Last (London: Sabbat Liedes" in Letzte Gedichte und Gedanken von I. Narodiczky [printer], 1921), 1 (Former Prophets Heinrich Heine, ed. A. Strodtman (New York: S. and Isaiah): 164. A Zickel, 1871). < 11. For the motif of the divine arm in this prophetic collection, see H. L. Ginsberg, "The Arm of Haftamhfor Re^eh YHWH in Is. 51-63," JBL 77 (1958): 152-56. 1. On this matter, see the discussion in "The Book More comprehensively, see my discussion "Arm of oflsaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview ofBiblical the Lord: Biblical Myth, Rabbinic Midrash, and the Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" and also in Mystery of History," in Language, 'Theology, and the the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A Bible: EssaysinHonour ofJamesBan; ed. Samuel Ba2. The same orthographic variation can be found lentine and John Barton (Oxford: Clarendon Press, in the keri-ketiv form oPetzorkha in Jer. 1:5. Cf. Min- 1994), 271-92. < hat Shai, ad loc. A 3. Following NJPS note i. A HaftamhforKi Tetzey 4. Cf. Bruce K. Waltke and M. O ' C o n n o r , ^ Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, 1. See the discussion in "The Book of Isaiah: Ind.: Eisenbraun's, 1990), 572 (34. 4. c). < Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books 5. Sepher Hasehoraschim, ed. Wilhelm Bacher Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" and the comments (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1896), 88. < on earlier haftarot of consolation. A 6. See the discussion of Otto Eissfeldt, "The 2. Rashi also identifies the barren woman as Promises of Graces to David in Isaiah 55. 1-5," in Zion-Jerusalem. The call to rejoice because of divine Israel's Prophetic Heritage, ed. Bernhard W Anderson deliverance occurs in Isa. 44:23; 49:13; and 52:9, and Walter Harrelson (New York: Harper & Row, as well. Cf. Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL 1962), 196-207; and also Gerhard von Rad, Old (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 276. < Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 3. See the discussion in the haftarah for Be1965), 2:240. < midbar. A 7. For a full discussion, see the haftarah for 4. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation Bere'shit. The ideas are found in homiletic associa- in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), tion in Mid. Shoher Tov, ed. Solomon Buber (Vilna: 307-12. < Romm, 1891), chap. 51 (end). < 5. See Peirush R. Tehudah ihn Bal'am le-Sefer Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (Tel Aviv: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 217, with note Haftamhfor Shofetim ad loc. A 1. See further in "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 6. See the comment of Tigay, Deuteronomy, 67. 40-66" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted in For a classical overview, see Nelson Glueck, The Word the Haftarot Cycle." < Hesed, trans. A. Gottschalk (Cincinnati: HUC Press, 2. On this subject, see the concluding section of 1967); and also the study of Katherine D. Sakenfeld, the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A TheMeaning ofHesed in the Hebrew Bible (Missoula, 3. For the new exodus in this prophetic collection, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978). < see Bernhard W Anderson, "Exodus Typology in Se7. On the basis of parallelism and sense, one may cond Isaiah," in Israel's Prophetic Heritage: Festschrift also repoint rega'be-'apo ("for He is angry but a mofor James Muilenberg (New York: Harper & Row, ment") to roga'be-'apo in Ps. 30:6. The Greek also 1962), 177-95. < translates "anger." A 4. See his comment on this verse. A 8. See Mahberet Menahem, ed. Z. Filopowski 5. NJPS renders "It is not so!"—which is correct (London and Leipzig: Me'orerei Yesheinim [Soin the context, where the people deny the coming cietatis Antiquitatum Hebraicarum], 1854), 179. trouble; but the midrash is making a more theologi- R. Menahem gives his opinion "according to cal point. A context." A 6. See his Sefer Haschoraschim, ed. Wilhelm Bacher 9. In Sepher Ha-Shorashim, ed. J. Biesenthal and (Berlin: Itzkowski, 1896), 434. For the sense that the F. Lebrecht (Berlin, 1847), 402. See also in his comverb in this passage means "to be drained," or the like, mentary, where he also quotes R. Menahem and the see Rashi's first explanation and Pesikta Rabbati, ed. view ofhis father (like the Targ.). A Meir Ish Shalom (Vienna, 1880), 151a. < 7. See Samuel David Luzzatto, Sefer 'Yesha'yah HaftamhforKi Tavo* (F Profeta Isaia, volgarizzato e commentate) (Padua: Bianchi, 1867), 538. < 1. See the discussion in "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66" in "Overview of Biblical Books 8. Ibid. < 9. For the counterimage of rejection, see Hos. 1:9 Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." Many modern and its reversal in 2:1 (see discussion in the haftarah scholars regard Isa. 56-66 to be part of a distinct collection of materials and in particular regard the forBe-midbar). A 10. The hymn was rendered into German by exhortations to Zion in Isaiah 60-62 to have been no less than Heinrich Heine, "Ubersetzung eines recited by a prophet in the Land of Israel. See the 363
NOTES TO PP.1 0 3 - 1 1 6363
comments of Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 353. The matter is far from certain. A 2. For a discussion of this cycle, see the first haftarah of this cycle, for Va-'ethannan. A 3. For Isa. 52:2, see the textual observations in the haftarah for Shofetim. A 4. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 498. < 5. For an overview ofBiblical and ancient Jewish perspectives, see Sverre Aalen, Die Begrijfe Licht und Finsterniss im Altentestament im Spatjudentum und im Rabbinismus (Oslo, 1951). From a broader perspective in antiquity, see Rudolf Bultmann, "Zur Geschichte der Lichtsymbolik im Altertum," Philologus 97 (1948): 1-36; and for Philo, see Erwin R. Goodenough, By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of HellenisticJudaism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935). < 6. See above, n. 4. A 7. See his The Star ofRedemption, trans. William W Hallo (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), 417; cf. 253. <
Haftamhfor
~Nitzavim
1. For a discussion of this cycle, see the haftarah for Va-'ethannan (the first reading of the cycle). A 2. The speech beginning in Isa. 62:1 has also been attributed to God by Ibn Ezra and Kimhi; but this seems unlikely, given the reference to God in v. 2. On other suggestions for the speaker of w. 6ff. and the content of their speech, see Comments. A 3. Abravanel notes that some interpreters assume that the watchmen include the "mourners of Zion" presumably those mentioned previously in Isa. 61: 2. < 4. Isa. 60:15 combines 'azuvah andsenu'ah (forsaken and hated); the latter is a technical term for divorce in Deut. 24:3 (see Comments). A 5. See the discussion of the haftarah for 'Ekev (the secondprophecyofconsolation). A 6. Cf. also Claus Westerman, Isaiah 40-66, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969), 373-74. < 7. The term timma'es, "be despised," serves as a synonym for being "rejected" (senu'ah [Deut. 24:3]); i. e., "divorced." A 8. See Peirush R. Tehudah ihn Bal'am le-Sefer Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (RamatGan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 239. A 9. Kimhi identified them with the Israelites in exile. According to midrashic tradition, the "watchmen" were the heavenly angels; cf. Exod. R. 18:5. A 10. For studies of the symbolism, see Gerson Cohen, "Esau as Symbol in Early Medieval Thought," JewishMedieval and Renaissance Studies, ed. Alexander Altmann, Brandeis Texts and Studies 4 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967); reprinted in his Studies in 'the 'Variety of Rabbinic Cultures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 243-69. For
a more recent treatment, see Mireille Hadas-Lebel, "Jacob et Esau ou Israel et Rome dans le Talmud et le Midrash,"RHR 101 (1984): 369-92. < 11. Cf. the comment of Abravanel, ad loc. A 12. This is like the Masoretic ketiv, or version as "written," but not "read." < 13. See Paul Winter, "Is LXIII. 9 and the Passover Haggadah" VT 4 (1954): 439ff; Daniel Goldschmidt, Haggadah shel Pesah (Jerusalem: Koren, 1960), 44 and n. 60; Judah Goldin, "Not By Means of an Angel and Not by Means of a Messenger," Studies in the History of Religion for Morton Smith (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968), esp. 412 (reprinted in Judah Goldin, Studies in Midrash and Related Literature, ed. Barry Eichler and Jeffrey Tigay [Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society: 1988], 163-73); and Ephraim Urbach, Hazal: 'Emunot Ifc-De'ot (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1969), 116. < 14. See, for example, the various expressions of this motif found in Lev. R. 23:8, ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1962), 537f. < 15. For a classical example, see MdRY, piska Bo' 14 (ed. H. S. Horowitz and I. A. Rabin [Jerusalem: Bamberger & Wahrmann, 1960], 51-52); and in general, "Shekhinta Ba-Galuta: A Midrashic Response to Destruction and Persecution "Journalfor 'the Study ofJudaisminLateAntiquity 13 (1982): 147-59. A 16. Among other recurrences is the theme of the "diadem" and of the divine "arm" bared for victory. A
Haftamhfor Ha'azinu 1. A close metric, verbal, and structural analysis is developed by Jan Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry in 'the Books ofSamuel: Part 3. Throne and City (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1990), chap. 8. A 2. See the discussion of the haftarah for the second day of Shavuot. A 3. This content is unusual in a celebratory hymn after battle and has led some commentators to suggest that some of these verses are secondary. Cf. Moshe Z. Segal, Sefer Shemuel (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1971), 373. < 4. Also noted by Paul Dhorme, Les Livres de Samuel (Paris: Gabalda, 1910), 429. < 5. Cf. Segal, Sefer Shemuel, 384. < 6. For this figure in the Apocrypha, see Yehoshua Amir, "The Figure of Death in the 'Book of Wisdom"' JJS 30 (1979): 154-78. < 7. See in the critical edition ofMichael Higger (New York: D'bei RabbananPress, 1897), 188-93. < 8. But see R. David Kimhi and R. Joseph Kara on 2 Sam. 22:36. A 9. The author reinforces the dominant sound pattern evoked by tzur through various puns: he states how God "engirded" him (yitzreni) in the desert (Deut. 32:10), how He will requite His enemies (tzaray [v. 41] and tzamv [v. 43]), and that He will ensure that neither "bond ['atzur] nor free is left" (v. 36). < NOTES TO PP. 103-116
364
Haftarahfor Shabbat Rosh Hodesh
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 299; following T. Muraoka, Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew (Leiden and Jerusalem: E. J. Brill and Magnes Press, 1985), 61. <
1. For Cyrus's decree and its biblical reflexes, see the discussion in the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A 2. See the discussion in the haftarah for Tisha B'Av Afternoon. < 3. See the discussion in the haftarah for VaHaftarahfor Shekalim 'ethannan. A 4. See n. 2 above, and the ensuing discussion in 1. Since the work of Bernhard Stade, "10. Anthis haftarah. See also my discussion in "The Hebrew merkungenzuKo. 10-14,"ZAW5 (1885): 279-88, Bible and Exegetical Tradition," in Intertextuality in most commentators have divided 2 Kings 11 into two Ugarit and Israel, ed. Johannes deMoor (Leiden: E. sources—a secular-political source (w. 1-12,18b-20) J. Brill, 1998), 26-28. < and a narrative fragment emphasizing religious mo5. Cf. Numbers 18 passim for the exclusion of tivations for the revolt (w. 13-18a). Most recently, the stranger and Deut. 23:2 for the rejection of the Mordecai Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, HKings, AB 11 physically maimed. A (New York: Double-day, 1988), 131-32, have taken 6. Also, among moderns, see Amos Hakham, Sefer issue with this approach and stressed the unity of the Yesha'yah, Da'at Mikra (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav whole, as well as the difficulty of separating so-called Kook, 1984), 2:786. < "religious" from "secular" features. A 7. For example, Hugo Gressmann, Uber diejes. 2. See my discussion, "Census and Intercession c. 56-66 vomusgesetzen zeitgeschichtlichen Verhaltnissein a Priestly Text (Exodus 30:11-16) and in Its (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1898), 25; Midrashic Transformation," in Pomegranates and John McKenzie, Second Isaiah, AB 20 (Garden City, Golden Bells: Studies in Biblical, Jewish, and 'Near N. Y.: Doubleday, 1968), adloc. < Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor ofjacob 8. See Moshe Weinfeld, "Ha-Megamah Ha-'Uni- Milgrom, ed. David Wright, David Noel Freedman, versalistit Ve-ha-Megamah Ha-Badlanit Be-Tequfat and Avi Hurvitz (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, ShivatTziyon," Tarbiz 33 (1964): 228-42; Michael 1995), 108. < Fishbane, Biblicallnterpretation inAncientlsmel (Ox3.1 have discussed such exegetical changes in Bibliford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 114-21,138-43; and cal Interpretation inAncientIsrael (Oxford: Clarendon on Isa. 56:1-8 specifically, idem, "The Hebrew Bible Press, 1985), 222-23. < and Exegetical Tradition" 26-28. A 4. So also Cogan and Tadmor, IIKings, 137. A 5. See A. Leo Oppenheim, "A Fiscal Practice of the Ancient Near East,"JNES 6 (194): 116-29. This is HaftarahforMahar Hodesh adduced by Cogan and Tadmor, HKings, 138, whose 1. NJPS breaks up the unit into separate units; formulation I have adopted. A "His reputation soared" is rendered as a separate 6. Following Cogan and Tadmor, II Kings, sentence. A 138. < 2. In our narrative, the plan is fully delineated; 7. Cf. PdRK, Ki Tissa', 2:1-5; see in the edition of in other cases, this is not so. See, overall, Ann Vater, Bernard Mandelbaum (New York: Jewish Theological "Narrative Patterns for the Story of Commissioned Seminary of America, 1962), 1:16-25. See especially, Communication in the Old Testament,"/£Z 99 1:17, 24. Cf. Tanh. Ki Tissa' 11. < (1980): 365-82. < 8. Cf. thepiyyut of Yannai for Shabbat Shekalim, 3. According to Jan P. Fokkelman, NarrativeArt in Zvi M. Rabbinovitz,-M«^zor Piyyutei Rabbi Yanand Poetry in the Books of Samuel (Assen/Masstricht, nai la-Tomh ve-la-Mo'adim (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1986), 2:292, 1987), 2:244 (lines 6-7). < Jonathan's mediation is limited to 1 Sam. 19:1-7. 9. See, for example, R. Yehudah Aryeh Leib of This is a more literal use of the term; I have used Gur, SefasEmes, in his teaching on Shabbat Shekalim, it also to convey structural features of the narra1871. < tive. A 4. For the double reading here, see Shemaryahu Haftarahfor Shabbat Zakhor Talmon, "Double Readings in the Massoretic Text," Textus 1 (1960): 173-74. < 1. This contradiction is dealt with and resolved in 5. For modern arguments supporting this view, PdRK 3:15 (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum [New York: see A. Guillaume, "Mecod in 1 Samuel XX, 1 9 " P E Q Jewish Publication Society of America, 1962], 2:52; 68 (1954): 84; andG. R. Driver, "Old Problems Re- and in Tanh. Ki Tetze' 11. A examined," 80 (1968): 174-77. < 2. For the topos of seizing the hem of a garment 6. See Salman ben Ycmham,Milbamot Ha-Shem, in ancient Near Eastern sources, see Ronald Brauner, ed. Israel Davidson (New York: Jewish Theological "To Grasp the Hem' and 1 Samuel 15:27," JANES Seminary of America, 1934), 78-83. A 6 (1974): 35-38. In his view, the various equivalent 7. Cf. Moshe Zvi Segal, Sifrei Shemuel (Jerusalem: expressions indicate a gesture of "supplication, imKiryat Sefer, 1971), 165, who then, however, goes portuning, submission." Cf. already Rashi. According on to give a speculative emendation. A to R. Joseph ibn Kaspi, the robe is a metonym for 8. See Bruce K. Waltke and M. O'Connor, Samuel. A 365
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
3. For a discussion of the term and its texts, see Moshe Greenberg, s. v. herem, Encjud 8:348-49. The issues are considered from the perspective of inner-biblical exegesis in Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 199-208. < 4. This follows the schematic presentation by Jacob Milgrom, Numbers, 428 (Excursus 44). A 5. See Greenberg, op. cit. A 6. For the connection with Deuteronomy 13, see Moshe Z. Segal, Sifrei Shemuel (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1971), 118. < 7. See my earlier formulation of this issue, in BiblicallnterpretationinAncientlsrael, 208. A 8. See also the formulation of Rabbeinu Hananel on B. Yoma 22b, ad loc. A 9. See Segal, Sifrei Shemuel, 136; and also Shemaryahu Talmon,'T Sam. XV 32b—A Case of Conflated Readings?" FT 11 (1961): 456-57. < 10. Seder Eliyahu Rabbah (ed. Meir Ish Shalom [Vienna, 1873; reprint, Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1969], chap. 20, p. 115); and Targum Sheni to Esther 4:13. < 11. Cf. PdRK 3:7 (ed. Mandelbaum, 1:46). In liturgical poetry, cf. Zvi M. Rabinovitz,.M^z0r PiyyuteiYmnai la-Torah ve-la-Mocadim (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1987), 2:249. The theme of Edom-RomeChristianity has been discussed by Gerson Cohen, "Esau as Symbol in Early Medieval Thought" Studies in the Variety of Rabbinic Cultures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), 243-69. < 12. See the comments on religious failure by the sixteenth-century commentator Samuel de Medinah, in his Ben Shemuel (1622), 22a; and the remarks about Amalek and the evil inclination by Shelomoh Le-Beit Halevi, inDivrei Shelomoh (1596), 53a-55a. See the discussion and texts in Alan Cooper, "Amalek in Sixteenth-Century Jewish Commentary: On the Internalization of the Enemy," in The Bible in the Light ofIts Interpreters: Sarah KaminMemorial 'Volume (in Hebrew), ed. Sara Japhet (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1994), 491-93. For hasidic sources following these lines of interpretation, see, for example, R. Yehudah Aryeh Leib of Gur, Sefas Emes, in his teachings on Parashat Zakhor. A
Haftamhfor ShabbatParah 1. On this theme, see Moshe [Goshen-]Gottstein, "Amending the Failures of History" (in Hebrew), in Sefer Auerbach, ed. Abraham Biram (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1955), 175-78. For the term "reversal," see Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, AB 22A (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 705. < 2. The lakhen clause is not rendered by NJPS in v. 22. NJPS earlier renders "therefore" in v. 21, but this is an interpretation of the narrative vav, which in fact need not be translated. A 3. R. Eliezer mi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII kleinen Propheten), Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim, 3 (Warsaw, 1909), 1:59 and adloc. <
4. For the term "messenger formula" in this context, see Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2:244. < 5. This point and its formulation follows Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 62. < 6. So also Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 727. A 7. See Greenberg, ibid., 728; he refers to the earlier study of Sheldon Blank, "Isaiah 52.5 and the Profanation of the HUCA 25 (1954): 1-8. < 8. See the evaluations in Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2: 242-43, and Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37,738-40 (with full bibliography). A 9. Noted by Greenberg, ibid. A 10. Also G. A. Cooke, The Book of Ezekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1936), 390; and Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 736. < 11. For the construction, cf. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautsch-A. E. Cowley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), sec. 15C, pp. 491-92. < 12. So, Cooke, TheBook ofEzekiel, 392. A 13. Cooke, ibid., 395; and followed by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 730, who translates "and so bring to pass." A 14. For details of the onset, see the discussion for the haftarah for Shekalim. A 15. The entire section must be read, and special halakhic provisions deal with cases where less than the requisite amount is recited. See the discussion in the Entziklopedyah Talmudit (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1949), 2:167a. < 16. For more on this passage and its symbolism in the rabbinic imagination, see the discussion of the haftarah for Hukkat. A 17. The Jerusalem Talmud explores why the special reading for Shabbat Parah was not read after that for Shabbat ha-Hodesh, since on the first of Nisan (Shabbat ha-Hodesh) the Tabernacle was erected, and the ashes of the heifer were burnt on the second of the month. The present sequence is maintained because the concern of purity is with the entire community, not just those in contact with the dead. A 18. NJPS renders the verb hizzah in Num. 19:19 as "sprinkle" and zorak i n w . 13 and 20 as "dashed" but then translates zarakki in Ezek. 36:25 as "sprinkle." Moreover, the Hebrew expression for "waters of lustration" in the red heifer ritual is mey niddah. As noted by Milgrom, Numbers, 316 (n. 26 to chap. 19), the noun niddah is comparable to the Akkadian verb nadu and Ugaritic verb ndy, with the meaning "throw, sprinkle." A 19. See The Piyyutim of.'RabbiEl'azarBi-rabbiKillar (in Hebrew), ed. Shulamit Elizur (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988), 336-37 (for ShabbatParah). <
Haftamhfor Shabbat ha-Hodesh 1. There is also no mention of the nature of the libation (nesekh) that accompanied the meal offering. According to Num. 15:5, it consisted of wine. See also the contradiction between the Torah and Ezek. 45:23 notedbyRashi. < 366 NOTES TO PP. 231-245
2. Rabbi Eliezer mi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel ve13. For attempts to circumscribe this theological Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezeehiel und den XII kleinen theme, see B. Ta'anit 9a. A Propheten) (Warsaw, 1909), 1:109. < 14. Cf. Maimonides' formulationMishneh Torah, 3. Rashi normalized the formulation by regarding HilkhotMa'aserShenive-Neta'Reva'i 11:1-3. A it as referring to the counting of the seven weeks until 15. See his comment on Exod. 31:12. A Shavuot. Kimhi attempts a grammatical explanation, 16. SttMa'or Tinayim, Va-yetze' 23a; cf. Pinhas regarding shevu'ot like shevu'at. A 54b-55a. < 4. See G. A. Cooke, The Book ofEzekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clarke, 1936), 509. < Haftarahfor First Sabbath 5. Peirush 'Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar, op. cit. A ofHanukkah 6. See OrZaru'a 2:389. < 1. See Massekhet Soferim 2:8 (ed. M. Higger [New York: Devei Rabannan, 1937], 349. Significantly, the recitation concludes with the account of 1. Cf. also Hos. 9:4, "And no sacrifice of theirs the elevation of the lights on the menorah, from the will be pleasing [ye'ervu] to Him." Jeremiah's con- beginning of thc parashah of Beha'alotekha. It is a demnation in Jer. 6:20b is apparently derivative or fitting conclusion to a reading on Hanukkah. imitative of Hosea in this instance, as also in many It may also be noted that the juxtaposition of others. Overall, see the still valuable study by K. Num. 8:2-4 to the portion on the chieftains' ofGross, "Hoseas Einfluss auf Jeremias Anschauun- ferings was subject to eschatological interpretation gen," Neue kirehliehe Zeitschrift 42 (1931), 241-56, in the Middle Ages. Nahmanides (on Num. 8:2) 327-43. < suggested, following R. Nissim and the Mejyillat 2. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation Setarim, that since the priests did not offer anything in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), with the chieftains and were despondent, they were 293-95, for this and related instances of the influence promised the kindling of the lights in the Temple. of the law on the prophets. A R. Avraham ben R. Natan of Lunel incorporated 3. For a full modern summary, with literature, this tradition in his Hilkhot Hanukkah, in his Sefer see Moshe Weinfeld, s. v. ma'aser, EM 5:204-12; Ha-Manhijy (ed. Yitzhak Raphael [Jerusalem: Mosad and see the analyses and harmonization of Milgrom, Ha-Rav Kook, 1978], 2:528). The priests are thus Numbers, Excursus 46. A promised "another dedication" (hanukkah). He also 4. See M. Demai and Ma'aser Sheni. A brings a reference from the Jerusalem Talmud, as yet 5. See the evidence of Josephus,Antiquities 4:8, unknown to moderns. For thcMegillat Setarim, see 22; Tobit 1:7-8 (version B); Jubilees 32:11; and pos- Samuel Poznanski, REJ 7:22, par. 27. A sibly Targum Yerushalmi 1 to Deut. 26:12-13. A 2. See overall PdRK 1 (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum 6. B. Rosh Hashanah 12b; J. Shevi'it 2:5. < [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 7. See the discussion of these sources in Saul 1962]). The wedding symbolism suggests a pun, interLieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: preting "the day thatMoses finished [kallotY as "the day Feldheim, 1965). Other rabbinic sources include ofMoses' espousal [kelulot]"; cf. piska 1:3. A Midrash Shoher Tov 29:22 (ed. Buber, p. 195) and 3. Note especially the verbal plays in Yannai's Pesikta Rabbati 180a (ed. Ish Shalom). < piyyut for the Sabbath ofHanukkah, in Mahzor Piyy8. See, for example, Abravanel and his long uteiRabbi Yannai, ed. ZviM. Rabinovitz (Jerusalem: discussions. A 9. See the explanation of R. David Kimhi, ad loc., MosadBialik, 1987), 2:238 (esp. lines 29-31). < 4. For the symbolism of seven days, see the v. 12. According to the Seder 'Olam, this prophetic Targum paraphrase published by Rimon Kasher, intervention took place seven years after Elijah's "Ha-Tosafot ha-Targumiyot le-Haftarat Shabbatascension to heaven. A 10. This text also remarks that the Sabbaths pre- Hanukkah," Tarbiz 45 (1975): 44; and Pesikta Rabceding Shavuot and Sukkot were similarly designated bati 8 (ed. Meir Ish Shalom [Vienna: Kaiser, 1880], Shabbat ha-Gadol. Note also the prayer in the mahzor 29b). The cosmic imagery occurs in Josephus,A»of Rome entitled "yotzer for the Shabbat ha-Gadol tiquities 1:3; in the poetry of'Yznrm,Mahzor Piyyutei of Shavuot." The Keter Shem Tov (1:177) mentions Rabbi Tannai, 241; and frequently in the Midrash (cf. a similar designation in a siddur according to the rite PdRK 1:3 [ed. Mandelbaum, 7f.]). < 5. See Israel Abrahams, "An Aramaic Text of the of Corfu; here the explanation is that on the Sabbath Scroll of Antiochus"JQR, o. s., 11 (1899): 291-99. before Shavuot a miracle also happened—this being the announcement of the Torah, given on Shavuot See also Natan Fried, "Nusah 'Ivri Hadash shel itself. "Therefore it is customary to recitc yotzrot- Megillat 'Antiyokhos (Lefi Ketav Yad ha-Musay'on and reshut-prayers as on the Shabbat ha-Gadol of ha-Beriti be-London)," Sinai 64 (1968-69): esp. 107-24 (for a characterization of the Hebrew text Passover." A 11. See thc piyyutim of Isaac ibn Chiquatilla, and a transcription). A 6. See Shirei ha-Kodesh le-Rabbi Yehudah Halevi, published by Menahem Zulai in Tarbiz 20 (1950/ ed. Dov Yardeni (Jerusalem: Boys Town, 1979), 1: 51): 161-76. < 12. Ed. H. Horovitz and I. Rabin (Jerusalem: 222-23, no. 100. The reference to Zech. 4:7 occurs on p. 223, line 18. A Bamberger &Wahrmann, 1960), 16. A
Haftarahfor Shabbat ha-Gadol
367
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
on already appears in Pesikta Rabbati, piska 43 (ed. Ish Shalom, 182a). < 11. D. Aberbach, "mnh 'ht 'pym (1 Sam. I 5): A 1. See the discussion of sources in the haftarah New Interpretation," VT 24 (1974): 350-53. < 12. See Samuel R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew for Va-yak-hel (Ashkenazim) —Pekudei (Sephardim) Text and the Topography ofthe Books ofSamuel (Oxford: under Connections between the Haftarah and the Clarendon Press, 1913), 8. A Parashah. A 13. See my comments on the haftarah for 2. See B. Shabbat 21a. < Naso'. < 3. See the remarkable Hanukkah homily of R. 14. The Qumran fragment 4QSama reads: hyws' Menahem Nahum of Chernobyl,Me'or 'Eynayim (at mpyk; the Greek has to exelthon ek toustomatos sou. See the end ofMikketz 25b-26d). < McCarter, 1 Samuel, 56. A 15.Cf. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew, 23. A Haftamhfor First Day ofRosh 16. Hannah is also numbered among the prophetesses in B. Megillah 14a. A Hashanah 17. H. St. John Thackery, "The Song of Hannah 1. See Menahem Haran, "Zebah Hayyamim" VT and Other Lessons and Psalms for the Jewish Near 19 (1969): 11-22. < Year's Day,"/TS 16 (1914-15): 184f., noted the pa2. See the haftarah for Naso'. A rallels with 2 Samuel 22 and suggested that the song 3. Cf. R. David Kimhi; see already in Midrash of Hannah is based on an "ancient Psalm of victory" Pesikta Rabbati, piska 43 (ed. Meir Ish Shalom [Vi(especially w. l-8b). Links with 2 Samuel 22 have enna: Kaiser, 1880], 180a). < recently been drawn by Polzin, "1 Samuel" 33f. He 4. One easily observes that the etymology tries to reads the song as an anticipation of David's career. The read a sentence from the personal name; but the verb prayer is also called a "Song of Victory or Triumph" by sha'al is absent, and the mu oishemu (an old form for J. Willis, "The Song of Hannah and Psalm 113," CBQ "name") is hardly partitive me-(" of" or "from"). The 34 (1973): 142. The style conforms to what Claus secondary nature of the "name sentence" ("I asked Westermann called a "descriptive psalm of praise"; see the L O R D for him") is also clear from the fact that the The Praise of God in 'the Psalms, trans. K. Crim (Richsentence uses the divine name YHWH, whereas the mond: John RnoxPress, 1961), 122. A name Samuel is built on the divine name El. Either 18. Willis, "The Song of Hannah and Psalm 113," one may suppose that the name was understood to 149, judges that "the Song of Victory in 1 Sam 2: be an anagram of the derivation (following Kimhi) or 1-10 comes from a pro-monarchic circle of the preit was understood to be a contracted phrase—somemonarchic period." DavidN. Freedman, "Psalm 113 thing like she-me-'el ([one] that is from God). It is a commonplace of modem criticism to suggest that and the Song of Hannah," in his Pottery, Poetry, & the etymology was originally for Saul—(Sha'ul) Prophecy (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1980), —not Samuel. See the studies of Ivar Hylander, 261, also considers the song early, but considers the Der literarische Samuel-Saul-Komplex (1 Sam. 1-15) monarchic references as later. This is an old positmditionsgeschichtlich untersucht (Uppsala: Almquist tion. "It is plain that this verse, at any rate, cannot have been spoken by Hannah, even granting that & Wiskell, 1932). < the allusion is to the ideal king" (Driver, Notes on 'the 5. The verb also anticipates the people's request Hebrew, 27). < for a king and Samuel's involvement in that (1 Sam. 19. For comparisons between Hannah's prayer 8:10 and 12:13). See Robert Polzin, "1 Samuel" pt. and this psalm, see the studies in the preceding 2 of Samuel and the Deuteronomist:A Literary Study of note. A the Deuteronomic History (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana 20. The fact that the reference is to "horn of salvaUniversity Press, 1989), 23. < tion" generally is odd, but the absence of a personal 6. For the theme word 'alah, "ascend," see Jan P. Fokkelman, NarrativeArt and Poetry in 'the Books of pronoun may be deliberate (for "his salvation" would Samuel, Vow and Desire (1 Samuel 1-12) (Assen, The be ambiguous in this context, leaving unclear if the reference were to God or the king). The language of Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1993), 9. < this Fifteenth Benediction has many variations, and 7. Onomasticon 32:21-23; 144:27-29. < 8. Compare W F. Albright,AnnualoftheAmerican it is the latest of the benedictions. In the Palestine Schools of Oriental Research 2 (1922-23): 112f. For a versions, it is not found at all. See the discussion summary, see Kyle McCarter, 1 Samuel, AB 8 (Garden and literature in Ismar Elbogcri, Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History, trans. Raymond Scheindlin City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1980), 58. < 9. Excavations indicate that the site goes back to (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1993), premonarchic times. See M.-L. Bohl and S. Holm- 48-49. < 21. The link between Rachel and Hannah derives Nielsen, Shiloh: The Danish Excavations at Tel Sailun, Palestine, in 1926,1929,1932, and 1963: The Pre-Hel- from their correlation in old Triennial Cycle tradilenistic'Remains(Copenhagen: National Museum of tions. See Aggadat Bere'-shit, where the seder on Denmark, 1969). The precise time of destruction is Leah-Rachel is linked to the prophetic material on Hannah. Cf. also the discussion of St. John Thackery, unknown. A "The Song ofHannah," 180ff. < 10. Orally; R. Menahem was his uncle. The opini-
Haftamhfor Second Sabbath ofHanukkah
368 NOTES TO PP. 231-245
22. See the instructive comment in Pesikta Rabbati, piska 43 (ed. M. Ish Shalom [Vienna, 1880], 179a, n. 1). The whole piska has homilies based on a haftarah including 1 Sam. 2:21. A
Haftarahfor Shabbat Shuvah
1. For details, see the Introduction. A 2. "Backsliding"—or something like it—is indubitably the meaning of meshuvah and is so rendered by OJPS. The NJPS rendering "affliction" is problemaHaftarahfor Second Day ofRosh tic. Adducing Jer. 2:19 (as in NJPS note) is puzzling, Hashanah since the parallel word there is ra'atekh, which in context seems to indicate "your evil" or "rebellion." 1. This formula also precedes other subunits (cf. The same is true of Jer. 3:22, where Hosea's language Jer. 30:12; 31:1,6,14,15, 34, 36) as well as the first is echoed ("Turn back . . . I will heal your meshuvah,y). superscription (30:2). A Note that the preceding line refers to the perversity of 2. Cf. the discussion of K. Gross, "Hoseas Einfluss the people's way. See Comment to Hosea 14:5. A auf Jeremias Anshauungen," Neue kirkliche Zeitschrift 3. The term hesed is frequently found in cove42 (1931): 241-56, 327-43. < nantal contexts. Cf. Deut. 7:9, 12; 1 Kings 8:23; 3. See the discussion of the haftarah for Be- Dan. 9:5. < midbar. A 4. 'EmunotVe-De'otMa'amar 5:8. A 4. Overall, see my Biblical Interpretation inAncient 5.Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Teshuvah 2:2, 4. A Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), pt. 4. A 6. So James Crenshaw,/oe/, AB 24c (New York: 5. NJPS: He shall sense the truth by his reverence Doubleday, 1995), 134. < f o r t h e LORD. A 7. For a full discussion of the biblical term and its 6. Shmuel D. Luzzatto, Peirushei ShaDaL 'al uses, see M. Fishbane, s. v. teshuvah, EM 8:949-62, Yirmeyahu, Yehezqel,Mishlei, ve-'Iyov (Erlauterungen with bibliography. For an English documentation of ubereinen Teil der Propheten undHajyiojymphen) (Lem- the verb's utility, see William Holladay, The Root S4bh berg: Menkes, 1876), 83. < in the Old Testament (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1958). A 7. Ibid. < 8. The phrase is read as: tissa'kol 'avon or kol 'avon 8. Ibid., 84. < tissa'. Cf. Rashi. Ihn Ezra assumes an ellipsis for kol 9. NJPS translates "tends" rather than "plants"— 'asher tissa', i. e., "To the extent that You forgive our but this weakens the proverb. For the use of natzar sins, we shall return." By contrast, Meir Ish Shalom, with the meaning "plant," see Amotz Cohen, "Notzer "Me'ir Ayin 'al Sefer Hoshe'a," in Zikkaron le-AvmTecnah" Leshonenu 24 (1990): 179 f. < ham Eliahu (Festschrift for Abraham Harkavy), ed. 10. Cf. NJPS note c-c. < David Guenzburg and Isaac Markon (Petersburg, 11. Luzzatto, Peirushei, ad loc. A 1909), 34, interprets kol as le-jyamri, i. e., "completely 12. On this syntactic form, see Moshe Held, "The forgive sin." A Action-Result (Factitive-Passive) Sequence of Identi9. For a full discussion of the formulary of divine cal Verbs in Biblical Hebrew and Ugaritic "JBL 84 attributes in the Hebrew Bible, see my remarks in (1965): 272-82. < Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: 13. See the discussion in the haftarah for Shabbat Clarendon Press, 1985), 335-47. < Shuvah. Biblical patterns are noted there. A 10. See Uriel Simon, Shnei Peirushei Rabbi Av14. For a slightly different approach, see Adrian raham ibn Ezra le-Trei 5Asar (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan van Selms, "Motivated Interrupted Sentences in University Press, 1989), 129 (with notes), for this Biblical Hebrew," Semitica 2 (1971/72): 48-49. He view; in the shorter commentary, on p. 291, Ibn would render the first phrase as if it implied a posi- Ezra reads the phrase as an ellipse—"take [sometive response; i. e., "Is Ephraim My son?"—no, but thing] good." A he could be. A 11. The ending m may be an enclitic particle, 15. Joshua Blau, "Reste Des I-Imperfekt von added to nouns for metrical or other reasons. It occurs ZKR, Qal. Eine lexikographische Studie," VT 11 in Ugaritic and old Hebrew literature. The Masoretes, (1961): 81-86, opts for the meaning of "speak" not knowing the form, construed it (falsely) as a pluin Jer. 31:20, but this flattens out the rhetoric and ral marker (thus yielding^mw, "bulls"). A pathos. A 12. See Yehudah Keil, Sefer Hoshe'a, Trei Asar, 16. See Daniel Goldschmidt, Mahzor le-Yamim Da'at Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 111 n. 33. He presumably follows Ish ShaNora'im (Jerusalem: Koren, 1970), 1:152-53. A 17. See the Siddur R. Saadjah Gaon, ed. Israel lom, "Me'ir 'Ayin 'al Sefer Hoshe'a," 34. Keil also Davidson, Simha Assaf, and Issahar Joel, Mekize cites Tosef. Sot. 9:3 (brought earlier by Ish Shalom) Nirdamim Society (Jerusalem: Reuben Mas, 1985), to the effect that some biblical verses contain (implied) dialogues ("What this one said, that one did 223. < 18. Piyyutei lose ben Tose, ed. Aaron Mirsky (Jeru- not"). < 13. According to Hans W Wolff, Hosea, Hermesalem: Mosad Bialik, 1977), 103. < 19. Jer. 31:20 is the last verse but one, according neia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974), 233, God to Abudarham's commentary on the prayer book is the speaker throughout. A 14. Cf. also berosh, "cypress" (Hos. 14:9). < (fourteenth century); see Abudarham Ha-Shalem 15. NJPS has a reflexive rendition: "Bid the con(reprint of the 1st ed., Jerusalem, 1963), s. v. gregation purify themselves"; but this is not justified Zikhronot, p.275. A 369
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
4. It also introduces the divine reward with the and seems motivated by the obscurity concerning adverb 'az, "then." See the earlier discussion of the who does the purification. A 16. The use of the verb kadesh with the proclama- rhetoric of the opening verses. A 5. See Moshe Weinfeld, "King-People Relationtion of an assemblage is unusual but not unknown; cf. 2 Kings 10:20. A sacral sense should not be entirely ship in the Light of 1 Kings. 12:7" (in Hebrew), Leshonenu 36 (1971-72): 9 n. 43; and Jonas Greenfield, excluded. A 17. Ibn Ezra's language suggests that it was per- "Studies in the Legal Terminology of the Nabatean missible, though not proper. See the comment of Funerary Inscriptions" (in Hebrew), in Sefer Zikkaron le-Zekher Hanokh Yalon, ed. Yehezkel Kutscher, Saul Uriel Simon, ShneiPeirushei, 156, ad loc. A 18. Cf. Brevard Childs, "The Enemyfrom the North Lieberman, and Menahem Kaddari (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1974), 67 n. 20. See further in CAD and the Chaos Tradition"JBI 78 (1959): 187-98. < 4, E, p. 218; 6, H, pp. llOf. < 19. For the comment of R. Eliezer of Beaugency, see his Peimsh Yehezkel ve-Trei.'Asar (Kommentar zuEzechiel 6. For a full discussion, see my Biblical Interpreund den XII kleinen Propheten) Schriften des "Vfereins tation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 477-79. This phenomenon was earlier Mekize Nirdamim, 3 (Warsaw, 1909), 2:141. < noted by Aaron Kaminka, "Expression of Moses 20. See Peirush Tanhum ben Tosef ha-Yerushalmi, and the Psalms in Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Leshonenu ed. Hadassa Shy (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991), 1 (1928-29): 40-41. Such a line of interpretation 62-63. < is already attested in MdRY, piska Bo' 12 (ed. H. 21. See Wilhelm Rudolph, Joel-Amos-ObadajaHorovitz and I. Rabin [Jerusalem: Bamberger & Jona, Kommentar zum Alten Testament 12:2 Wahrmann, 1960], 40). < (Gutersloh: G. Mohn, 1971), 66-67; and also the 7. See my analysis, ibid., and the remark in the earlier discussion of Orvid Sellers, "A Possible Old haftarah for Va-yishlah for Sephardim. A Testament Reference to the Teacher of Righteous8. The citation quotes only the opening line of ness" IEJ 5 (1955): 93-95; and Cecil Roth, "The Isa. 57:15. < Teacher of Righteousness and the Prophecy of Joel," 9. Ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Wahrmann VT 13 (1963): 91-95. < Books, 1972), 4:815. < 22. The verb in Ps. 65:10 is teshokekeha, a polel form; 10. For a fuller discussion, see my Biblical Interpossibly a biform ofshuk, the stem of heshiku. A pretation, 304-5. A 23. Noted by Amos Hakham, Trei Asar, Da'at Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1990), 1: HaftarahforFirstDay ofSukkot 15 (separatepaginationforjoel). A 24. The notion of an oracle of assurance here 1. The distinctive themes and language of Zechafollows Hans W Wolff\Joel and Amos, Hermeneia riah 9-14 have long induced scholars to consider (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 58. He refers these chapters a distinct unit of the book, a so-called to Walther Zimmerli's discussion of divine manifes- Second Zechariah. Within that unit, chapters 9-11 tation in "Das Wort des gottlichen Selbsterweisses and 12-14 appear to be clusters of related traditions. (Erweiswort), eine prophetische Gattung," reprinted For the recent study of Zechariah 1-8 and 9-14, in Zimmerli's Gottesoffenbarung: GesammelteAufsiitze see Brevard Childs, Introduction to 'the Old Testament zumAlten Testament, Theologische Bucherei 19 (Mu- as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), nich: Chr. Kaiser, 1963), 120-32. < 474-76. See further Rex E. Mason, "The Relation 25. See also Crenshaw,7oe/, 161. A of Zech. 9-14toProto-Zechariah,"Z4^88 (1976): 26. For a more complete discussion, see the In- 227-39; and the earlier treatment of B. Otten, Stutroduction and comments on the haftarot of Mattot dien uber Deuterosacharaja, Acta Theological Danica and Va-'ethannan. A 4 (Copenhagen: Postant apud Munksgaard, 1964), 27. See Sefer Teshuvot Dunash Halevi ben Labrat 11-34. See the overall consideration in "The Book of 'al Rabbi Sa'adya Ga'on, ed. Robert Schroter (Bre- Zechariah" in "Overview ofBiblical Books Excerpted slau: Schletter, 1866), I, 50 (No. 150a). For many in the Haftarot Cycle." A suggestions of this scribal phenomenon, see Raphael 2. For the term "The Day of the LORD" in proWeiss, Mehkerei Mikra' (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, phetic literature and its eschatological uses, see Moshe 1981), 4-13. < Weinfeld, "The Day of the Lord" Studies in the Bi28. See the teaching of Rabbi Yehudah Aryeh ble, Scripta Hierosolymitana 31 (Jerusalem: Magnes Leib of Gur, Sefas Emes, in his teaching for Shabbat Press, 1986), with previous literature cited. See also the considerations of Konrad Schaeffer, "The EndShuvah, 1880. < ing ofthe Book of Zechariah" RB 100-102 (1993): 169-70. < Haftamhfor Yom KippurMorning 3. For other approaches to the reiteration of 1. For details, see the discussion of the haftarah earlier themes in Zechariah 14, see Konrad Schaeffor Va-'ethannan. A fer, "Zechariah 14 and the Book of Zechariah," RB 2. Literally, "his heart" (libbo). < 100-102 (1993): 374-84, with earlier literature 3. See Peirush Rabbi Yehudah ibn Bal'am le-Sefer extensively cited. A Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (RamatGan: 4. On the theme of the Mount of Olives, see Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 225. A overall J. B. Curtis, "An Investigation of the Mount 370 NOTES TO PP. 231-245
of Olives in the Jewish-Christian Tradition," HUCA 28 (1957): 137-80. For its place in Zechariah 14, see Schaeffer, "The Ending of the Book of Zechariah," 180-85. < 5. The term for "remnant" here is yeter ha-'am. For the various terms for remnant, see F. Dreyfus, "Reste d'Israel," Dictionaire de la Bible, Suppl. 10, pp. 414-37. < 6. Cf. H. G. Mitchell,^ Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1912), 346, who comments "there shall be a continuous [literally, one] day." A 7. See my discussion in Text and Texture: Close Readings ofSelected Biblical Texts (NewYork: Schocken Books, 1979), chap. 9. < 8. Peirush Tanhum ben Yosef ha-Yerushalmi, ed. Hadassa Shy (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991), 318-19. < 9. For an examination of the ancient versions, see Giovanni Garbini, "La luce di Zaccaria 14,6 "Henoch 8(1986): 311-19. < 10. Ibn Ezra consideredyekarot to be the adjective "thick" without its modifier (presumably "cloud"). That is, there will be neither light nor thick clouds and cold. Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi brings this interpretation (unattributed) and the variation that there will be no light, but "but heavy and thick clouds." This is based on B. Pesahim 50a. A 11. So already George A. Smith, The Book ofthe Twelve Prophets, The Expositors Bible (New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1901), 489 n. 1. < 12. See his Peirush 'Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII kleinen Propheten) Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim 3 (Warsaw, 1909), 2:212. < 13. For the claim that Zechariah 14 was influenced by Isaiah 66, see E. Bosshard, "Beobachtungen zum Zwolfprophetenbuch," Biblische Notizen 10 (1987): 30-36, 56-60. < 14. On this matter, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 114-23, 138-43. < 15. Recitation of this chapter in the Triennial Cycle is also attested in Geniza fragment TS B 17/29, noted by Natan Fried in "Haftarot 'Alternativiyot Be-Fiyyutei Yannai Ve-She'ar Paytanim Kadmonim" Sinai 61 (1967): 288 n. 111. The reading began at v. 10 (referring to the geographical place Arabah [Heb. 'aravah ], but presumably understood as an allusion to the 'aravah, or "willow," one of the four species ritually designated for the festival). The manuscript goes to v. 18 and is broken off; it undoubtedly continued throughv. 19, as 'mMahzorRomania. A 16. He cites the Tosefta explicitly ("thus have I learned in Tosefta Sukkot") but integrates the comment of R. Eliezer from the Talmud into it. A 17. 1 Sam. 7:6 and 1 Kings 18:34-35 reflect water libations to stimulate rain, though not on Sukkot. Psalm 118:27 (recited as a Hallel hymn) refers to a ritual of putting leafy bows near the altar on a festival. Leafy bows were part of the four 371
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
biblical species on Sukkot, and the psalm passage may reflect an old custom. Proof for this is found in Jubilees 16:31. A 18. Among the vaunted miracles "wrought in the Temple," tradition states that "no rain ever quenched the fire of the woodpile on the altar; neither did the wind overcome the column of smoke that arose therefrom" (B. Yoma 21a). A
Haftarahforlntermediate Sabbath ofSukkot 1. See Bernhard Heller, "Gog und Magog im judischen Schriften" inJewish Studies in theMemory of GeorgeA. Kohut, ed. Salo Baron and Alexander Marx (NewYork: Alexander Kohut Memorial Foundation, 1935), 350-58. < 2. This has also led to speculations of the original sequence of these prophecies. Characteristic is the reconstruction of Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 2:307-21. Such reconstructions are speculative and unnecessary; it is enough to recognize the various versions of the tradition and their compilation into one series. A 3. For a full analysis of this passage and other opinions as to its meaning, see the discussion on the haftarah for Shabbat Parah. A 4. There is a striking and no doubt deliberate use of the nations recorded in Genesis 10 in the Gog prophecy. Thus Magog is second in the list of the sons of Japheth (Gen. 10:2); the first is Gomer, mentioned in Ezek. 38:6 as an ally of Gog. Gomer is father of Togarmah in Gen. 10:3, who is also an ally of Gog. Other sons of Japheth are Tubal andMeshech, mentioned in Ezek. 38:2 and 39:1. Further on these speculations, see Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:301. A 5. Possibly for the year 676 B.C.E. See D. D. Luckenbill,.4»«mt Records ofAssyria and Babylonia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1926-1927), 2:779-85, 876. Cf. the old identification of the city princtgagu in the annals by Friedrich Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies~i Eine biblisch-assyriologische Studie (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1891), 246-47. For a review of suggestions, and the identification of Gog with Gyges, see Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:301. A 6. See Ismar Elbogen,Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History, trans. Raymond P. Scheindlin (Philadelphia and New York: Jewish Publication Society of America and Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1993), 80-84. < 7. Ed. Mordecai Margulies (Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1972), 3:549. < 8. Cf. Ethiopie sosawa, with the simple sense "enter in." See G. A. Cooke, The Book ofEzekiel ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1936), 423; and cf. the comments of Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 2:289, who gives the Ethiopie verb as meaning "walk along." A 9. Interpreting Gen. 3:13, but citing Ps. 89:23 (yashi'). See Midrash Bere'shit Rabbah, ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Albeck (Jerusalem: WahrmannBooks, 1965), 1:182. < 10. R. Eliezer Mi-Belgantzy, Peirush 'Yehezkel ve-
3. The language is typical ofDeuteronomy. OverTrei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezekiel und den XH kleinen Propheten), Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim all, see Weinfeld, DDS, 45-51. < 4. Josh. 1:13-15 purports to be a citation; it is 3 (Warsaw, 1909), 62. < 11. For this reference as a theme (and less as a very similar to God's instruction in Deut. 3:18-20. precise topological designation), see Brevard Childs, In earlier printings of NJPS, the ending punctuation "The Enemy from the North and the Chaos Tradi- for Josh. 1:13 unduly obscured the close relationship between w. 14-15 and that passage in Deuteronomy. t i o n " / ^ 78 (1957): 187-98. < 12. The Talmud refers to the reading of Ezek. NJPS is therefore incorrect to limit the enclosed quote 38:18ff. (citing the opening words of v. 18) in B. to Josh. 1:13. < Megillah 31a. < 5. The narrative in Gen. 23:17-18 reflects the lapidary formulations of Hittite and other contracts. For various studies, see H. Petschow, "Die NeubaHaftarahfor SheminiAtzeret bylonische Zweigesprasurkunde und Genesis 23," 1. See Zvi M. Rabinovitz,-M«^zor Piyyutei Rabbi JCS 19 (1965): 103-20; Gene Tucker, "The Legal Yannai la-Torah ve-la-Mo'adim (Jerusalem and Tel Background of Genesis 23,"JBL 83 (1966): 7-84; Aviv: Mosad Bialik and University of Tel Aviv, and Raymond Westbrook, "The Purchase of the Cave of Mzchpchh," Israel Law Review 6 (1971): 29-38. 1987), 2:229. < 2. The haftarah extended to 1 Kings 9:1 accord- The Akkadian equivalent of Hebrew kol in these ing to the Italian rite and until 9:5 according to the contracts is mimati. A tradition in Mahzor Romania. A 6. On "walking into" property in ancient Meso3. NJPS does not translate mishpat, which is potamian texts, see Yochanan Muffs, Studies in the unfortunate given the cross-reference implied (see Aramaic Legal Papyri from Elephantine (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969), 24 n. 2. For hazakah by walking, see my discussion). A Tosef. BB 2:11 and the next note. A 4. Cf. John Gray, I &IIKings, OTL (Philadelphia: 7. Tosef. BB 2:11 incorporates the phraseology Westminster Press, 1963), 219. < 5. See I. H. Weiss, Dor Dor we-Doreshaw (Berlin: of this passage in its statement that walking through Piatt and Mitikus, 1923), 1:25; Moshe Z. Segal, the land constitutes a form of possession, or hazakah. Parshanut ha-Mikra', 2nd ed. (Jerusalem: Kiryat See also Targ. Jon. at Gen. 13:17; and the comment Sefer, 1971), 6-7; and my discussion in Biblical ofHizzekuni. The legal point of Gen. 13:17was also Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon appreciated by Sarna, Genesis 100. A 8. Note the use of such terms as "walk," "all," Press, 1985), 151-53. < 6. So also Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11, AB and "land." < 9. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation 5 (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 223-24, 228-30. in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), Given the postexilic reality presumed by Deut. 4: 1-40 and Isaiah 45, Weinfeld considers the whole 384. < 10. See my comments, ibid. A liturgical complex to be exilic or later. A 11. See the discussion of Yehezkel Kaufmann, 7. See the explication of this text, with rabbinic sources, in Saul Lieberman, Tosefta Ki-Fshuta (New Sefer Shofetim (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 89. York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1963), pt. 4, For specific examples, see the cases noted in the secMo'ed, 902-4. This teaching is also incorporated tion "Introduction to the Book of Joshua." A 12. The subject of ve-kol 'asherya'aseh is richly aminto PdRK, Shemini Atzeret 6 (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum [New York: Jewish Publication Society of biguous—and can be construed to mean that either "it" (viz., the tree) or "he" (viz., the righteous person) America, 1962], 2:429-30). < 8. Ed. Mandelbaum, 2:433; p. 419 provides will thrive or prosper. Clearly, the psalmist wishes to homiletic expression for the fact that this "eighth convey both possibilities simultaneously. A 13. Cf. Moshe Weinfeld, "Zion and Jerusalem day" was "for you." A 9. See Rabinovitz, Mahzor Piyyutei Yannai, 2: as Religious and Political Capital, Ideology and Utopia," in The Poet and the Historian: Essays in 229-30. < 10. See Rabmovitz,Mahzor PiyyuteiYannai, 229 Literary and Historical Biblical Criticism, ed. Richard (1. 31); on the next line (1. 32), he cites Ps. 118:24 E. Friedman, HSM 26 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983), 98f. < (p. 230). < 14. For the spiritual ideal of study and the com11. SeeMidrashTanhumaPinhas 16. A mand to study as two tasks, see the discussion in B. 12. Ibid., 15. < 13. See PdRK, Shemini Atzeret 8 (ed. Mandel- Menahot 99b and also the comment of R. David Kimhi on Josh. 1:8. A baum, 2:432; also2:420). < 15. See Halakhot Gedolot, ed. Azriel Hildesheimer (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1888), 620. This practice is Haftarahfor Simhat Torah noted and rejected by the Tosafists; see their com1. A syntactic argument is advanced by R. David ment at B. Megillah 31b, s. v. le-maharkarinan. See also in 'Otzar Ha-Ge'onim, Megillah, p. 63, and 'Or Kimhi (cf. Ibn Kaspi). A c Zaru a 2:383. A 2. NJPS to Deut. 11:25 translates "stand 16. See in SiddurRashi, ed. Solomon Buber and up to"—but the Hebrew word (yityatzev) is the Jacob Freimann (Berlin: Mekize Nirdamim, 1911), same. A 372 NOTES TO PP. 231-245
siman 308, p. 148. Remarkably, this ruling is ad5. See previous note. A duced in the name of "Rav Yehudai . . . in Halakhot 6. For older references to typologies, sttMidmsh Gedolot". < Ha-Gadol: Devarim, ed. R. Shlomo Fisch (Jerusa17. Sefer Ha-Manhig, ed. Yitzhak Raphael (Jeru- lem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1972), 50, on Deut. 3: salem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 197?,), Hilkhot Sukkah, 21. < 7. Reference to the north wind suggests that this siman 56,1: 415f. The author, R. Abraham b. Natan of Lunel, designated 1 Kings 8:22 "ad tet pesukim" would either have cooled off the people or stanched the blood. The talmudic tradition cited indicates that as the first of the two selections. A the north wind could not penetrate because of the 18. Ha-Rokeah, Hilkbot Sukkot, siman 225. A 19. R. David ben Joseph Abudarham, Sefer density of the protective "clouds of [divine] Glory," which did not break up or scatter. A Abudarham, end of Seder Tefillat Sukkot. A 8. He cites from Gen. R., but this is not found 20. For details on the custom, see Suleiman Sassoon, Massa' Bavel (Jerusalem, 1955), 186, in our sources. The closest passage suggesting that 228; Ezra Zion Melamed, Pirkei Minhag Ve-Hala- peri'ah was practiced early is the comment on Gen. khah (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1955), 84f.; Natan 17:13 in Gen. R. (ed. Julius Theodor and Chanokh Fried, "Haftarot 'Alternativiyot Be-Fiyyutei Kallir Albeck [Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1962], 1: ve-She'ar Payyetanim Kedumim" Sinai 62 (1968): 468-69). < 9. According to Num. R. 11, Joshua performed a 127f. n. 216, brings these sources and refers to further manuscript evidence. According to this custom, the mass circumcision at the Exodus, with Aaron practicconclusion of the lectionary cycle with the portion ing the ritual ofperi'ah. A 10. Ed. Theodor and Albeck, 446. This notwithof Ve-zo't Ha-berakhah on Simhat Torah is also the occasion for the completion of the Prophetic corpus standing, there is a remarkable allegorical treatment (with Malachi, whose concluding strophe, "Be mind- of Joshua's deed as a rebuke in the Targums. See Riful of the Teaching of My servant Moses" [Mai. 3: mon Kasher, "Metaphor and Allegory in the Aramaic 23], reinforces this larger liturgical context). For the Translations ofthe Biblc"JAB 1 (1999): 68-77. < 11. For the literary-historical genre, see I. Leo custom of reading Malachi on the festival, see the list referred to by Fried, ibid. The book was read on Seeligman, "Aetiological Elements in Biblical Histodifferent days (during Sukkot or Shemini Atzeret); cf. riography" (in Hebrew), Zion 26 (1961): 141-69, Fried, ibid., 128. The liturgical poet R. Y. ibn Avitur and Burke Long, The Problem ofAetiological Narramentions the reading in a liturgical prayer, cited by tive in the Old Testament, BZAW (Berlin: Siebeck, Fried and published by Ezra Fleisher (in Tarbiz 36 1968). < [1967-68]: 149ff.). < 12. The Egyptians performed a "dorsal incision 21. This custom is not mentioned either in the Tal- which liberated thtglans penis" whereas the Israelites mud or early halakhic sources; see S. Kook, Sinai 36 "amputated the prepuce and exposed the corona." See Jack M. Sasson, "Circumcision in the Ancient Near (1956): 162 (= Tyyunimu-Mehkarim 2:42f.). A EastI'JBL 85 (1966): 473-76. < 22. So, Fried, "Haftarot," 127. < 13. Exod. 12:6 has "slaughter it at twilight" (bein 23. Cf. Ezra Fleisher, "Simhat Torah shel benei ha-'ar-bayim). A 'Eretz Yisra'el" Sinai 59 (1966): 217 and n. 37, 14. The use of the sources, and the reappliquoting a kedushta by Rabbi Pinhas; the text is T-S H 3/79, lines 84-85. This continuity of theme would cation, consititute an example of inner-biblical also explain the evidence for reading Joshua 1 with exegesis; see my Biblical Interpretation in Ancient the last seder (or portion) of the Triennial Cycle. See Israel, 147-51. < 15. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation in Natan Fried, "He'arot le-Mehkarei A. Ya'ari 'al Tefillat 'Mi She-Berakh'," Kiryat Sefer 37 (1961-62): 513f. Ancient Israel, 148 f. For biblical sources that juxtapose hodesh (new moon) and shabbat (full moon), see andn. 18. < 24. Birkhei Tosef (Livorno, 1798), 'Orah Hayyim 2 Kings 4:23; Isa. 1:13; and Amos 8:5. Cf. also the 669. 2; and see the discussion of S. Kook, "Simhat Akkadian terms arhu. . . shapattu and the full discussion by William Hallo, "NewMoons and Sabbaths: Torah," 164 (= Tyyunimu-Mehkarim 2:45f.). A A Case-Study in the Contrastive Approach," HUCA 48 (1977): 1-18. Haftamhfor First Day ofPassover The link between Josh. 5:11 and Lev. 23:10-14 1. For an important contribution to this theme, is also evident in the particular terms chosen by see Jan Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedachtniss. Schrift, the historian to indicate that "on the day after the Erinnerung undpolitische Identitat infruhen Hochkul- passover" the manna "ceased" (va-yishbot). Clearly, the choice of the verb shabat here (5:12) was due to turen (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1992). < 2. For an overall consideration of typology in dependence on the Pentateuchal source, which spoke biblical literature, see my Biblical Interpretation in of the "day after the shabbat." 16. See my discussion, ibid. A Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 17. B. RH 13a; M. Men. 10:3; and also Josephus, 350-79. < Antiquities III. X. 5. Cf. Ibn Ezra at Lev. 23:11. A 3. Cf. ibid., 358-60, 373. < 18. Tosef. RH 1:15; M. Men. 10:3; Tosef. Men. 4. On the matter of the "morrow" see Textual 10:23; B. Men. 65a-66a. < Notes and Comments. A 373
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
Panel ofthe Dura Synagogue"7&L 60 (1941): 43-55. For a recent assessment of the frescoes, focusing on the role of nudity, see Warren G. Moon, "Nudity and Narrative: Observations on the Frescoes from the Dura Synagogue,"jMAR 60 (1992): 587-658, with a full bibliography. A 8. See also Michael Fox, "The Rhetoric of EzekHaftarahfor Second Day ofPassover iel's Vision of the Valley of the Bones" HUCA 51 1. See Wolfram von Soden, "Assuretellilani, (1980), esp. pp. 14-15. < Sinsarriskun, Sinsum(u)iser und die Ereignisse 9. See R. Eliezer Mi-Belgantzy: Peirush Yehezkel in Assyrereich nach 635 v. Chr.," ZA 68 (1967): ve-Trei Asar, Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim 241-55. < 3 (Warsaw, 1909), 1:59. < 2. See the full exposition of this position in Samuel 10. Ibid., 59-60. < R. Driver, Deuteronomy, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. 11. See the haftarah for the first day of Shavuot. A Clark, 1895), xliv-xlv. < 12. This is a controversial form; see Hans 3. The account of the repair is modeled on 2 Bauer and Pontus Leander, Historische Grammatik Kings 12. < der hebraischen Sprache des Alten Testaments (Halle: 4. Cf. Mordecai Cogan, "Tendentious Chrono- Niemyer, 1922) 1:59c; and the brief discussion in logy in the Book of Chronicles" (in Hebrew), Zion Bruce K. Waltke and Michael O'Connor, An In45 (1980): 165-72. < troduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, 5. For the importance of these terms, see Moshe Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990, 360 (21. 2. 3b-c); and cf. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11, &£> 5 (New York: Dou- Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37,744. David Yellin proposed that this form is in fact a hippa'el stem; see his "The bleday, 1991), 17-19. < 6. See Avi Hurvitz, "A Linguistic Study of the Hippa'el-Nif'al Conjugation in Hebrew and Aramaic: Relationship between the Priestly Source and the The Assimilation of tav in the Hitpa'el Conjugation," Book of Ezekiel" Cahiers KB 20 (1982): 94-97; JPOS (1924): 85-106, esp. 89-97. < this point is also emphasized by Mordecai Cogan 13. Greenberg, ibid., 744, regards this as another and Hayim Tadmor, H Kings, AB 11 (New York: example of the type of repetition with variation "typiDoubleday, 1988), 285, ad loc. < cal of Ezekiel's style." A 7. NJPS "obligated" is too strong and deprives the 14. Noted in Waltke and O'connor, Introduction people of their decision to enter the covenant—which to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 360 n. 30, and discussed by is the very point of the passage. A Yellin, "The Hippa'el-Nif'al Conjugation." < 15. Ezek. 36:37-38 is added before 37:1-14 in some Ashkenazic, Sephardic, and Yemenite rites; but Haftarahforlntermediate Sabbath not, for example, in the Italian rite preserved in the ofPassover Trieste Pentateuch (1855, ed. Samuel D. Luzzatto), 1. On this interpretative form, see my comments or in the rite practiced in Posen (Poznan). A 16. For the Mahzor Vitry, see above, n. 6. The in Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: text paraphrased is from Exod. 13:lff, read on the Clarendon Press, 1985), 448-50. < seventh day of Passover. The antiquity of this tradi2. The role of the particle has also been noted tion is now confirmed by the manuscript published by Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, AB 22A (New by Alejandro Diez-Macho, "Un segundo fragmento York: Doubleday, 1997), 747. < del Targum Palestinense a los Profetas," Biblica 39 3. This approach is briefly suggested by Walther (1958): 198-205. < Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: For17. Reference to the passageway from Egypt to tress Press, 1983), 2:258; it is more fully engaged Canaan via the land of the Philistines is found in by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 745-46, and esp. 748 Exod. 13:17, the Torah text read on the seventh day (also cf. 750). < ofPassover (see preceding note). -4 4. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation, 18. Ed. Solomon Buber (Vilna, 1884),161. < 337-39. < 19. The relationship between the themes of Isaac's 5. See his comments on Ezek. 37:12 and 11, death and the springtime has been variously and sugrespectively. A gestively linked to pagan and ancient Near Eastern 6. See Machsor Vitry, ed. S. Hurwitz (Nuernberg: religious elements of sacrifice, fertility, and resurrecJ. Bulka, 1923), 1:305; the resurrection of the bones (of Ephraimites who had left Egypt early and subse- tion by Shalom Spiegel, in his classic The Last Trial quently died) is a "sign" that God "will resurrect the (NewYork: Pantheon Books, 1967), passim. A 20. Dew and fertility are already classically linked dead in the foture." A in Hos. 14:6, where God promises to be Israel's dew. 7. See C. H. Kraeling, The Synagogue. The ExcaDew and resurrection are first linked in Isa. 26:19, vations at Dum-Europos\ Final Report, VIII/1 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1956), 185-94, a con- a verse that is taken up in many classical rabbinic clusion endorsed by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, 750. comments, most famously that found in J. Ta'anit For earlier views, see Rachel Wischnitzer-Bernstein, l:l:"The dead only live by means of dew [telalim], "The Conception of the Resurrection in the Ezekiel as it is said [in Scripture], Oh, let Your dead revive!
19. See my discussion, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, 145-46; and the evaluation of the Qumran calendar by Shemaryahu Talmon, "The Calendar Reckoning of the Sect from the Judean Desert" ScriptaHierosolymitana 4 (1958): 169-76. A
374 NOTES TO PP. 231-245
Let corpses arise! Awake and shout for joy, you who dwell in the dust! —For Your dew [talekha] is like the dew on fresh growth . . . ' (Isa. 26:19)." A
2. Thus his comment on Ezek. 1:27-28; see R. Eliezer mi-Belgantzy, Peirush Yehezkel ve-Trei Asar (Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII Propheten), Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim 3 (Warsaw, HaftarahforEighth Day ofPassover 1909), 6-7. < 3. Ibid., 2. < 1. For the structure and contents of the book, see 4. Ibid., 5. < "The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 1-39" in "Overview of 5. For this aspect of prophecy, see Michael FishBiblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." A bane, "Biblical Prophecy as a Religious Phenomenon" 2. NJPS sees the second hymn as extending from in Jewish Spirituality: From 'the Bible 'through theMidv. 4 through v. 6; but it seems that the end is at v. dleAges, ed. Arthur Green (New York: Crossroad, 5 being a statement about the people's joy, not an 1986), 1:63-6. < expression of it (cf. v. 3). A 6. See further the discussion of the haftarah for 3. The importance of phonological repetitions for Yitro. < literary analysis has been discussed repeatedly. For a 7. The literature is vast. See especially Gershom classical formulation, see Jurij Lotman, The Structure Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, oftheArtistic Text, Michigan Slavic Contributions 7 and Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theo(Ann Arbor, Mich.: Dept. of Slavic Languages and logical Seminary of America, 1960), with important Literatures, 1977), esp. chap. 6. For an application merkavah (throne) hymns included; Ithamar Gruenof this focus to the Bible, see my study of Jer. 20: wald, Apocalytpic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: 7-12, in Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture (New E. J. Brill, 1980); David Halperin, The Faces ofthe York: Schocken Books, 1979), chap. 7. A Chariot: Early Responses to Ezekiel's Vision (Tuebingen: 4. See his Sefer Yesha'yah [H ProfetaIsaia, volgariz- J. C. B. Mohr, 1988), with translations of materials zato e commentato~] (Padua: A. Bianchi, 1867), 156; and a rich bibliography; and Peter Schaefer, The Hidother commentators see this gesture in terms of a den and Manifest God: Some Major Themes in Early Jewish Mysticism (Albany, N. Y.: SUNY Press, 1992), threat. A 5. For texts and discussion, see Cyrus H. Gordon, including many translations. For primary sources, see, "Leviathan: Symbol of Evil"'mBiblicalMotifs:Origins especially, Peter Schaefer, ed., Synapse zur Hekhalotand Transformations, ed. Alexander Altmann, Bran- Literatur (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1981). The pattern of vision, falling down in awe, and deis Texts and Studies (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard hearing orisons in heaven became part of a fixed patUniversity Press, 1966), 1-9. A 6. See my earlier comments in Biblical Interpre- tern—found in various ancient Jewish visionary retation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, ports and sometimes with the sequences varying. See the discussion of Haviva Pedaya, "Re'-iyah, Nefilah, 1985), 355 andn. 100. < 7. See Michael Fishbane, "The Well of Living Shirah: Hishtokekut Re'iyat Ha-'El Ve-ha-Yesod HaWater: A Biblical Motif and Its Ancient Trans- Ruhi Be-Mistorin Yehudi K a d u m A s u f o t 9 (1995): formations," in "Sha'are Talmon": Studies in the 237-77. On the issue of sacred song and the HekBible, Qumran, and theAncient Near East presented halot literature in particular, see Rachel Elior, "From to Shemaryahu Talmon, ed. Michael Fishbane and Earthly to Heavenly Shrines. Prayer and Sacred Song Emanuel Tov (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, in the Hekhalot Literature and Its Relation to Temple Traditions,"7S£4 (1997): 217-67. < 1992), 3-16. < 8. For a summary of possibilities regarding the 8. Thcpiyyut is a kerovah for the seder beginning at date, see Julius Bewer, "The Text of Ezekiel 1:1-3," Exod. 12:29, now part of Parashat Bo'. See Menahem Zulay, Piyyute Yannai (Berlin: Schocken, 1938), 92; AJSL 50 (1933-34): 96-101. < 9. So Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 and Mahzor Piyyutei Rabbi 'Yannai la-Torah ve-laMo'adim, ed. Tzvi M. Rabbinovitz (Jerusalem and (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 43. The Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik and University of Tel Aviv, Akkadian word elmeshu has been rendered "amber" by Benno Landsberger, "Akkadisch-hebraische Wort1985), 1:302 (1. 62). < 9. Ed. Bernard Mandelbaum (New York: Jewish gleichungen," VTS 16 (1967): 190-94. < 10. This rendition follows Greenberg, Ezekiel TheologicalSeminaryofAmerica, 1962), 1:281. A 10. Cf. Genesis Rabbah 70:15 (ed. Julius Theodor 1-20, 56, who cites it in the context of a wide-rangand Chanokh Albeck [Jerusalem: Wahrmannn Books, ing discussion of the creatures in the light of Near Eastern iconography (pp. 55-56). A 1965], 2:815). < 11. Cf. C. H. Toy, The Book ofthe Prophet Ezekiel, 11. See Menahem Kasher, Haggadah Shelemah (JeThe Sacred Books of the Old Testament 12 (New rusalem: MakhonTorah Shelemah, 1967), 188. A York: Dodd, Mead, 1899), 95. < 12. For this latter alternative, see Greenberg, HaftarahforFirstDay ofShavuot Ezekiel 1-20, 4, with Near Eastern parallels. A 13. Overall, see Herbert Mays, "Some Cosmic 1. It occurs at the end of targumic paraphrases for Connections of Mayim Rabbim" JBL 4 (1955): the haftarah on the first day of Shavuot. SttMachsor 9-21. < Vitry, ed. S. Hurwitz (Nuernberg: J. Bulka, 1923), 14. 'Emunot Ve-De'ot, ed. R. Joseph Kafih 1:169-70. < 375
NOTES TO PP. 2 3 1 - 2 4 5
(New York: Sura Publications, n. di),Ma'amar 2: 103-04. < 15. Kuzari,Ma'amar 4:3. See in Sefer ha-Kuzari, trans. Yehuda Even Shmuel (Tel Aviv: Devir, 1972), 164. < 16. Guide ofthe Perplexed, trans. Shlomo Pines (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), 1:64, 76 (pp. 156-57, 227-31). < 17. See the discussion of the haftarah for Yitro. < 18. See the text in Schaefer, Synapse zurHekhalotLitemtur, 714 (p. 262). The NJPS translation obviates the midrash. A 19. See the independent proposals of F. Hitzig, Der Prophet Ezechiel, Kurtzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum alten Testament, 8 (Leipzig: Wiedmann, 1874), ad loc.; and S. D. Luzzatto, Peirushei ShaDaL 'al Yirmiyahu, Yehezqel, Mishlei, Ve-'Iyov [Erlauterungen uber einen Theil der ProphetenundHajyiojymphen] (Lemberg: A. IsaakMenkes, 1876), ad loc. < 20. A complex interrelation between Israel's ritual doxology and that of the angels in heaven developed at an early time, developing such features as the "crowning" of God on His throne. See now Arthur Green, Keter: The Crown of God in EarlyjewishMysticism (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1997). < 21. See TeshuvotHa-Ge'onim, ed. Jacob Mussafia (Lyck, 1864), 28b. The Kedushah de-Sidra' has elements once used to conclude Torah study. For the rabbinic evidence and an evaluation, see Leon Liebreich, "An Analysis of U-Ba le-Ziyyon in the Liturgy," HUCA 21 (1948), esp. pp. 176-81. The origins of the Kedushah de-Sidra' have been the subject of much discussion, particularly because of its recitation on Sabbath afternoon. See the discussion of Jacob Mann, "Changes in the Divine Service of the Synagogue Due to Religious Persecution," HUCA 4 (1927), esp. pp. 26-77. A 22. For these latter, see Rimon Kasher, Targumic Toseftot to the Prophets (in Hebrew), Sources for the Study ofjewish Culture, 2 (Jerusalem: World Union ofjewish Studies, 1996), 180-98. < 23. See Midrash Tanhuma, ed. Solomon Buber (Warsaw: Romm, 1885), 2:38b-39a (pp. 76-77). < 24. Ed. Meir Ish-Shalom (Vienna: Kaiser, 1880), 96b-98b. < 25. Ibid., 103a. <
Haftarahfor Second Day ofShavuot 1. A perceptive and valuable exposition of the Canaanite features was done by Umberto Cassutto in Annuario degliStudiEbraici, 1935-37 (1938): 7-22, soon after the Ugaritic tablets were discovered; the essay was reprinted as "Chapter III of Habakkuk and the Ras Shamra Texts," in his Biblical and Oriental Studies (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1975): 2:3-15. The Near Eastern parallels and difficulties of description have been the subject of many studies;
much recent scholarship has been incorporated in Theodore Hiebert, God of My Victory: The Ancient Hymn in Habakkuk 3, HSM 38 (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1986). < 2. For an overall comparison of the storm imagery in the Hebrew Bible, with Canaanite and other parallels, see Moshe Weinfeld, "'Rider of the Clouds' and 'Gatherer of the Clouds, "' in "Gaster Anniversary Volume" JANES (1973): 421-26; on the motif of thunder and meteorological phenomena, and parallels, see idem., '"Min ha-Shamayim Nilhamu'; Hit'arvut Gufot Sha-maymiyim be-Kerav ha-'Oyev be-Yisra'el u-ve-Mizrah ha-Kadmon," EI 4 (1975): 23-30 [Hebrewsection], A 3. Among other biblical materials dealing with this cosmic display of thunder and lightning, see Ps. 68:34-36; Job 37:2-11. A classic Ugaritic passage is found in CTA 4 VII:29-35 (CTA = Corpus des tablettes en cuneiformes alphabetiques, ed. Andre Herdner [Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1963). The spectacle of light in Hab. 3:4 is also a widespread ancient topos; cf. E. Cassin, La Splendor divine: Introduction a I'etudedelamentalitemesopotamienne (Paris: Mouton, 1968) for many detailed and striking Mesopotamian parallels. A 4. For Ugaritic parallels, see cf. Cassuto, "Chapter III of Habakkuk," p. 12. < 5. NJPS has "the sea" but this demythologizes the text, in which Sea is ancient Yam and is placed alongside Leviathan (cf. Isa. 51:9-10, where the parallels are Yam, Tehom, Rahab, and Tanin—cognomens of the ancient Sea Monster, well-known in Ugaritic mythology). A 6. See also the verb pa'al in Ps. 77:13, in which context other mythic motifs occur. A 7. Hab. 3:13 utilizes the verb mahatz (smash) to render the defeat of the human enemy; in Isa. 51:9 the word is used to depict a divine battle. The imagery in Ps. 89:26 also echoes Isa. 51:9 in its portrayal of the mighty Arm versus Sea; the significant difference is that in Ps. 89:26 the "hero" is David. Finally, the routing of the Lord's enemies in Ps. 92: 10 has a famous parallel in Ugaritic mythology. In it, the enemies of Ba'al are dispersed in similar terms. Cf. UT 68 (III AB, A): 8-9, "Behold your enemies, Ba'al / behold your enemies you smash / you crush your foes." On the poetics and mythic background of this tricolon, see H. L. Ginsberg, "The Victory of the Land God over the Sea-God "JPOS 15 (1935): 328, 330f., and "The Rebellion and Death of Ba'lu,'" Orientalia 5 (1936): 17. < 8. NJPS reads: "You will crack [his] skull with Your bludgeon" but this involves changing the tense of the verb, rejecting the Masoretic syntax, and emending the pronoun. A 9. Similar transformative energies are at work in the Targum to Ezekiel 16 and Song of Songs— two other texts in which the riot of sexual and natural images is subdued. A 10. See his "Primitive Lectionary Notes in the Psalm of H a b a k k u k J T S 12 (1910-11): 191-213. < 376 NOTES TO PP. 2 3 1 - 2 4 5
11. In the third and first years, respectively; see proposal of Wilhelm Rudolf,/igrewz0, Handbuch zum Ibid., 194, 200-202, 207. < Alten Testament I, 12 (Gottingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 12. For the issues involved in the Triennial Cycle, 1968), ad loc. He suggests changing ya'arvum to meva'arim u-vi'arum, "[I have assigned] fire-raisers see the Introduction. A 13. See E. G. King, "The Influence of the Trien- to them who will set them alight." A nial Cycle upon the Psalter,"/TS 5:203ff.; and H. 10. So also H. Graf Reventlow, Liturgie und St. John Thackery, The Septuagint andjewish Worship prophetisches Ich beijeremia (Gutersloh: Gutersloher (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1923), 43-70. < [GerdMohn], 1963), 192. < 14. This version focuses on the multi-directiona11. Various biblical manuscripts, from the Cairo lity from which God comes; in other traditions, the Geniza and elsewhere, actually read mivligiti. A emphasis is on the mysterious omnipresence of the 12. See ~Rndoli,Jeremia, ad loc. A divine voice (cf. Exodus Rabbah 5:9). A 13. See his Sefer Ha-Shorashim, ed. Wilhelm 15.1 follow here the Masoretic text, which the Bacher (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1896), 65. < Rabbis' comments build upon. NJPS translates 14. Cf. Kimhi, among medieval commentators; "shake" for "measure" in light of the targumic andMenahem Bulah, Tirmiyahu, 117. A 'azi'a and the Septuagint, which is like emending 15. See Shemuel David Luzzatto, Peirushei va-ymoded to va-ymotet. The translation "tremble" ShaDaL 'al Tirmiyahu, Yehezqel, Mishlei, ve-'Iyov seems adjusted to the (emended) first colon, though [Erlauterungen uber einen Theil der Propheten Job 37:1 gives some justification for this render- und Hagiographen] (Lemberg: A. Isaac Menkes, ing; the Rabbis interpret it in various ways (see 1876), 34-35. His stylistic argument is full and following). A trenchant. A 16. For the former, cf. J. BK 4:3; B. BK 38a; for 16. See my Biblical Interpretation inAncient Israel the latter, cf. Tanh. Shemini 10 (Buber). A (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 376-79. < 17. Ed. H. Horovitz and I. Rabin (Jerusalem: 17. See already Heinrich Ewald, Die Propheten des Bamberger & Wahrmann, 1960), 221; cf. Ba-Hodesh Alten Bundes erklart, ii.Jeremja und Hezeqiel mit ihren 1. Further, B. Av. Zar. 2b combines the traditions: Zeitgenossen (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, God takes the measure of the nations and permits 1868). The emendation is followed by many modcertain behaviors to the gentiles. A ern commentators. Cf. William McKane, Jeremiah I-XXV, 201. < 18. Luzzatto, Peirushei, 37. A Haftamhfor Tisha bAvMorning 1. The haftarah for the afternoon (Minhah) service is discussed in the next haftarah. It is identical with the haftarah recited on public fast days (afternoon). A 2. Menahem Bulah proposes that the people state v. 19a (the first two questions) and that God responds in v. 19b. See his commentary, Sefer Yirmiyahu, Da'at Mikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-Rav Kook, 1983), 117. See already Kimhi. A 3. Sometimes this has led commentators to hypersubtleties, which are too subjective and speculative. This is the case with William Holladay, Jeremiah (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1986), 1:287-89. < 4. Medieval and modern commentators take 8: 14-16 as Jeremiah's words on behalf of Israel, as their representative; cf. Kimhi and William McKancJeremiahl-XXV, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1986), 190. < 5. The most extensive discussion of prophetic pathos is in Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets (New York: Harper&Row, 1962), passim. A 6. Ed. Bernard Mandelbaum (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1960), 1: 252-53. < 7. The world that is destroyed is the created order itself; cf. Michael De Roche, "Contra Creation, Covenant and Conquest (Jer. VIII13)," FT 30 (1980): 280-90. < 8. On this passage, see Michael De Roche, "Zephaniah i 2-3:The 'Sweeping' of Creation," VT 30 (1980): 104-09. < 9. Typical of modern emendations is the prolix 377
NOTES TO PP. 231-245
Haftamhfor Tisha bAvAfternoon 1. The material beginning in Isaiah 55 has been attributed to Trito-Isaiah since the researches of Bernhard Duhm, Das BuchJesaja ubersetzt und erklart (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1914). However, his speculations were preceded by Abraham Kuenen, who attributed chaps. 50-51 and 54ff. to a later stratum; see his Historisch-kritische Einleitung in die Bucher desAlten Testaments, Her Teil: Dieprophetischen Bucher (Leipzig: Reisland, 1892,128-44. The translation is from the Dutch original that appeared in 1886. A 2. See the discussion and references in the haftarah for Va-'ethannan. A 3. The prophe's voice speaks of God in the third person; the divine voice speaks in the first person. The phrase "declares the L O R D " (ne'um YHWH) marks the new divine speech; cf. SigmundMowinckel, "Die Komposition des deuterojesajanischen Buches" ZAW 49 (1931): 111 n. 2. For the sequence of a prophet's utterance followed by a divine one, see Hugo Gressmann, "Die literarische Analyse Deuterojesajas," ZAW 34 (1914): 269-70. < 4. See discussion of the polemic and the use of Numbers 18 in Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 138-43. < 5. See my discussion, ibid., 114-21. Many of the same technical terms are used in these passages. A 6. See also the discussion in Moshe Weinfeld,
"Ha-Megamah ha-Universalistit ve-ha-Megamah SeferYesha'yah (Lemberg: Menkes, 1876), ad loc.; ha-Badlanit be-Tekufat Shivat Tziyon" Tarbiz 33 N. H. Tur Sinai, Ha-Lashon ve-ha-Sefer, 2nd ed. (1964): 228-42. < (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1954), 392; andMoshe 7. The reference to God bringing foreigners to Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. the Temple (havi'otim) in Isa. 56:7 counterpoints Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 333 ("does not conform to the polemic of Ezekiel, who censures those Israe- rule"), for a discussion of this in the context of indilites who brought (be-havi'akhem) foreigners and vidual responsibility, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical uncircumcised males into the shrine (Ezek. 44: Interpretation, 337-39. A 6-7). These terms also allude to the prohibition 14. See Umberto Cassuto, "Note bibliche" Reof certain individuals with maimed genitalia from vista Israelitica 9 (1912): 30-34; and Alexander Rofe, entering the community (lo'yavo'); see Deut. 23: "The Completion of a Homoeoteleuton in David 2-4. See my comments in Biblical Interpretation, Yellin's Book of Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Kiryat Sefer 51 142 n. 98. < (1976): 714. Cf. also A. Schoors, "The particle ki" 8. See Moshe Greenberg, "Parashat ha-Shabbat OTS 21 (1981): 275-76. < be-Yirmiyahu," in Lyunim Be-Sefer Yirmiyahu, ed. 15. See Peirush R. Yehudah ibn Bal'am le-Sefer Ben-Zion Lurie (Israel Bible Society; World Bible Yesha'yah, ed. Moshe Goshen-Gottstein (Ramat Gan: Society, n. p., n. d.), 2:23-37. A Bar-Ilan University Press, 1992), 219. A 9. See Israel Knohl,"Ha-Shabbat ve-ha-Mo'adot 16. Cf. further Josh. 21:43; 23:14; and 1 Kings be-Torat Kehunah u-ve-Hukkei 'Askolat ha-Kedush- 8:56. < ah," Shenaton la-Mikra' u-le-Heker ha-Mizmh ha-Ka17. On this passage, see G. Wanke, "Jeremias dum 7-8 (1985): 109-46; and independently, my Besuch beim Topfer: Eine motivkritische Untersuccomments in "Law to Canon: Some Ideal-Typical hung zu Jer. 18," Prophecy: Essays Presented to Georg Stages of Development," in Minhah Le-Nahum: Fohrer, BZAW 150 (Berlin: Walther de Gruyter, Biblical and Other Studies Presented to Nahum N. Sama 1980), 151-62. < in Honour ofhis 70th Birthday, ed. Marc Brettler and 18. Cf. Samuel D. Goitein, "Some Observations Michael Fishbane, JSOT-Supl54 (Sheffield: Sheffield on Jonah,"/POS 17 (1937), 63-77; Elias Bickerman. Academic Press, 1993), 70-73. < Four Strange Books ofthe Bible (New York: Schocken 10. For a full literary analysis, see Michael Fish- Books, 1967), 1-49. < bane, "The Hebrew Bible and Exegetical Tradition" 19. See also the perceptive remarks of Walther in Intertextuality in Ujyarit and Israel, ed. Johannes Zimmerli, "Jahwes Wort bei Deuterojesaja," VT 32 deMoor (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1998), 26-28 (= OTS (1982): 104-24. < 40). < 20. For other uses of this verb in prophecies, 11. This issue of immediacy is stressed by Claus cf. 1 Kings 8:20; Isa. 7:7; 8:10; 14:24; Jer. 44: Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL (Philadelphia: West- 28. Late Hebrew substitutes 'amad for kum to minster Press, 1969), 287; the issue is taken up as well indicate the fulfillment of a prophecy. Cf. Ps. 33: by Hendrik C. Spykerboer, The Structure and Compo- 9, 11. See Avi Hurwitz, The Transition Period in sition of Deutero-Isaiah (Rijksuniversiteit te Gronigen; Biblical Hebrew (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mosad Krips Repro B. V: Meppel, 1976), 184. < Bialik, 1972), 173. < 12. See also the comments of Amos Hakham, 21. Overall, see especially Moshe Weinfeld, Social Sefer 7eshacyah, Da'atMikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha- Justice inAncient Israel and in theAncient Near East RavKook, 1984), 2:592. < (Jerusalem and Minneapolis: Magnes Press and For13. The technical sense of the Hebrew lo'yitta- tress Press, 1995). < khen derekh YHWH in Ezek. 18:25,29 is something 22. A classical expression is found in J. Pe'ah 1: like "God's way cannot be fathomed" or "does not 1. < make sense." For various related proposals that 23. A teaching of Mar Zutra, in the context of a talce yittakhen as from the stem tkn, meaning "to cluster of statements about rewards or merits. A measure," see S. D. Luzzatto, Peirushei ShaDaL le24. Also on the Sabbath; cf. B. Shabbat 150a. <
378 NOTES TO PP. 2 3 1 - 2 4 5
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Introduction to the Overview The prophetic literature constitutes the second of the three parts of the Hebrew Bible. The first part is the Pentateuch, or Five Books ofMoses, known as the Torah; the second part is the prophetic literature and is designated by the Hebrew term Nevi'im, or Prophets; and the final part is a block of diverse texts known collectively as the Ketuvim, or Writings. The acronym for these three parts (Torah, Nevi'im, and ketuvim) is the word TaNaKh. In scope, however, Prophets covers more than one-third of the Bible. In fact, this unit includes twenty-one of the total thirty-nine books of the canon, when each of the books are counted (or seventeen of thirty-six, when the writings of 1 - 2 Samuel, 1 - 2 Kings, and 1-2 Chronicles are considered as one book each). This literature thus composes fully one-half of the entire Bible and covers about 750 years of biblical history—from the conquest and settlement in the Land of Israel (beginning ca. 1175B .C.E.) to a century or so after the dedication of the Second Temple, in the Persian period (ca. 425 B.C.E.). The first part of the prophetic corpus is known as the Former Prophets and includes the historical Books ofjoshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, and 1-2 Kings. The second part is known as the Latter Prophets and is subdivided into the so-called Major and Minor Prophets (in terms of the quantity of the material preserved). The former includes Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; the latter includes all the others, in a collection of smaller writings known as "The Twelve (Prophets)," or Trei 'Asar. In a literature that spans such a vast period of time and that does so with such different genres, one would expect that the nature, function, and representation of prophets and prophecy would vary greatly—and this is in fact the case. As we shall see, the terms that designate the prophetic figure are many, and these point to different types of experience and roles; moreover, the modes of expression are also many, and these involve a variety of social spheres and personality types. This said, it should be added that the Hebrew Bible presents all these individuals as the legitimate heirs ofMoses—the first and greatest of prophets. A charter of proper prophecy is presented in Deut. 18:9-22. According to this document, the foundation of the phenomenon of prophecy in Israel thus coincides with the founding of the nation and the revelation of the Torah. However, the Torah reports the existence of other prophetic types as well. We are told of the prophetess Miriam, Moses' sister, who sings and dances after the crossing of the Sea (Exod. 15:20-21), and of the ecstatic seizure of seventy elders in the desert (as well as two outsiders, Eldad and Medad), when the spirit of God rests upon them (Num. 11:25-29). According to yet another tradition, even Abraham is called a prophet in a divine word to Abimelech, the king of Gerar (Gen. 20:7). In the collection of Former Prophets, a number of persons are mentioned who have various oracular or ecstatic experiences and are attached to sacred shrines or to special groups. Such individuals might be called a "seer [ r o ^ ] " (1 Sam. 9:9), a "man of God" (1 Sam. 9:6; 1 Kings 13:1), or a "prophet [navi,]n (2 Sam. 7:2); and they could answer a specific question by an individual or even deliver a message (1 Sam. 9:6-21; 1 Kings 14:5; 2 Kings 22:13)—sometimes at a shrine or during a festival, and sometimes also for hire (1 Sam. 9:7-8, 12-13; 1 Kings 14:3; 2 Kings 8:9). The location of the prophet could also be within the royal palace (2 Samuel 7). In other cases, bands of prophets roam about the countryside. They sometimes fall into ecstatic trances to the accompaniment of music and dance and even influence the state of those who pass nearby (as happens to Saul in 1 Sam. 10:5-6, 10-11) and sometimes do miraculous acts of feeding or healing (as in episodes connected with Elisha and Elijah). Groups of prophets in the employ of kings could also be consulted in times of danger or war, in order to divine God's will, although this did not mean that all members of these groups were "yes-men," and 381
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
this divergence among the prophets could result in interesting dynamics (1 Kings 22). Groups of prophets of Baal are also mentioned in these historical sources, and in a famous incident Elijah stems their influence when he successfully intercedes with God to bring an end to a long and deadly drought (1 Kings 18). Very rarely do the prophets mentioned in this literature exceed such acts of divination (speaking or acting for weal or woe, in response to a specific behest or occasion); and even where prophets mentioned elsewhere appear here, mantic functions predominate (as when Isaiah pronounces the death of the sick King Hezekiah, then heals him and provides divine signs of God's favor [2 Kings 20:1-11]). But this notwithstanding, several examples exist of rebuke against kings for their egregious crimes. Particularly notable are the bold confrontations ofNathan versus David (2 Sam. 11:1-12:15) and Elijah versus Ahab (1 Kings 20). The Latter Prophets presents a completely different phenomenon. There are, to be sure, various continuities with prophetic types found in the Former Prophets: King Zedekiah consults leremiah (ler. 21:1-2), and elders consult Ezekiel to divine God's will in exile (Ezek. 14:1; 20:1). Moreover, Isaiah is presented as a visionary (Isa. 1:1; 2:1-4); and the visions and trances ofEzekiel dominate his prophetic experience (Ezekiel 1; 8-10; 40-48), and he also behaves in bizarre ways (Ezek. 4:4-12). Visions also dominate the prophetic career of Zechariah (Zechariah 1-8), and Isaiah was known to engage in strange behavior (Isa. 20:3). But such occurrences hardly offset the abrupt appearance of a new prophetic type in the mideighth century B.C.E. —perhaps in part a response to the emerging Assyrian empire, poised dangerously on the horizon. From this time on, we find individuals who say that they are compelled by God and "sent" by Him to the people, for any of numerous reasons. It might be to announce His words of doom or warning, to interpret disasters to come as divine punishment for many sins (immorality most especially), or to condemn foreign nations for assorted crimes and interpret their attacks against Israel and ludah as the rod of God's punishment. It could also be to offer the nation hope in the present if they repent of their sins (though this is not always a possibility, or one long extended) and a future consolation after the divine dooms befall the nation, the Land, and the Temple. Amos, the first of these great men of mission, utters words of divine rebuke and dramatically declares his difference from the earlier and other breed of prophet when he vigorously rejects the aspersion that he speaks for hire in a shrine. To the contrary, he says, "I am not a prophet, and I am not a prophet's disciple. I am a cattle breeder and a tender of sycamore trees. But the L O R D took me away from following the flock, and the L O R D said to me, 'Go prophesy to My people Israel. ' And so, hear the word of the L O R D " (Amos 7:14-16). The call to prophesy thus marks an involuntary break in the life of this individual, and he speaks to the nation in words that are not his own. Indeed, the commission to hear and proclaim the word (davar) of God to the people is the singular mark of this person— who is a conduit of divine concern. But not only that. Interspersed among the prophecies of doom that forecast a dark day of the Lord, the prophet Amos also tries to intercede with God on behalf of the people ("Oh, Lord GOD, refrain! How will lacob survive? He is so small" [Amos 7:5]) and sometimes succeeds. A century and a half later, leremiah also appears in this double role: at once a spokesman for God to the people, and a spokesman for the people to their God. Amos's self-presentation aside, the classical prophets were hardly rough or untutored individuals. Even Amos betrays himself through his complex speeches, artful rhetoric, and knowledge of national history. Careful study of the words of the prophets shows that these are much more than brief or blunt cries of woe and warning. Rather, they show all the signs of crafted speech—with rhythmic patterns, nuanced emphases, and fixed patterns of emphasis and argumentation. It may be that in certain instances the cries of the prophets were reworked or reformulated by later disciples, who collected and arranged them in thematic clusters or in sequences based on common words. But this editorial process would hardly account for the whole phenomenon. It would rather seem that these persons had access to (or were variously trained in) traditional rhetoric and stylistic forms and that this content took on new and renewed modes of expression under the influence of divine inspiration in specific circumstances. Indeed, one is as much impressed by the commonalities among the prophets as by the differences between them. 382 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
The content of the prophets' words also opens a window upon features of ancient Israelite religion and culture that would not otherwise be known. Much can be learned from their legal rhetoric. Attention to their words informs us about otherwise unknown or variant traditions about the patriarchs or myths, and through their rhetoric we learn how wisdom sayings and psalmody lived in the daily voice of the people. Certainly, in some cases, training or background was a factor. Ezekiel's use of priestly images, terms, and laws—often at variance with what is known in the Torah—makes us aware how diverse were the traditions of ancient Israel. The struggle with Canaanite idolatry and the practice of illicit acts are regularly condemned in this literature—ranging from the rebuke of sympathies for Baal uttered by such prophets as Hosea (Hosea 2) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 2), to critiques of fertility practices and crude animal offerings even in the late postexilic period (Isa. 5 7 : 3 - 1 4 ; 6 6 : 3 ) . But by far the most characteristic feature of classical Israelite prophecy is the strong emphasis put on moral right (even over sacral rite). From the first, this is the new clarion call. In the eighth century B.C.E., Isaiah lambasts the people for coming to the shrine with the stain of ethical sin on their hands, and he adds a manifesto of proper acts (Isa. 1 : 1 0 - 1 7 ) ; Amos decries the mistreatment of the poor and calls for justice to flow like a mighty stream (Amos 5 : 2 4 ) ; and Micah proclaims "what the L O R D requires of you: Only to do justice and to love goodness, and to walk modestly with your God" (Mic. 6:8). In subsequent centuries, the prophets spoke likewise (cf. Jeremiah 6 and Ezekiel 22). Ritual was misbegotten when it was not founded upon covenantal morality, and this could result in divine wrath and punishment. Some scholars have even noted this emphasis in some psalms and have suggested that these reflect a distinct prophetic temper (Psalms 15; 24; 50). Another dominant and emphatic feature of classical prophecy is that the fate of the nation depends upon the covenant obedience of the people (and not just upon the behavior of the kings, as we often find in 1-2 Kings; by contrast, the apologia for the fall of Samaria in 2 Kings 17: 7-23 reflects the classical prophetic ideology) and that the cycle of sin and punishment may be broken by repentance. Hosea's powerful appeal to the people to return to the Lord marks the beginning of the new prophecy (Hosea 14), and repeated reflections on this dynamic can be found in subsequent prophets—leading to various theological assessments of the effects of sin, the nature of divine mercy, and the power of repentance itself (see especially Jeremiah 18; Ezekiel 18; and the Book of Jonah). Nevertheless, the possibility of repentance was not always available to the people—after repeated warnings, the gates of repentance could be closed. A striking and poignant statement of God's refusal to heed the intercession of prophets is found in Jer. 15:1. As warners and condemiiers, the prophets were hardly popular figures, and they repeatedly clashed with the people and royal or cultic authorities. Little wonder that in some of the commission scenes, divine protection and support are pointedly emphasized (note especially Jeremiah I). For his efforts, Jeremiah was repeatedly put in stocks and ridiculed, and when he went so far as to utter words of doom against the Temple, he was even put on trial for his life (Jeremiah 7 and 26). This prophet articulates the pathos of the prophetic vocation and also the compulsions of true prophecy: it is, he says, like a fire in the belly, bursting him from within; like a hammer on a rock, producing sparks of fire (Jer. 2 0 : 7 - 1 3 ; 2 3 : 9 - 1 1 , 2 9 ) . How different is this revelation of prophetic psychology from those false prophets who are condemned for speaking the delusions of their own mind, or who plagiarize the prophetic words of each other (Jer. 2 3 : 1 6 , 2 5 - 2 6 , 3 1 ) ! And yet the prophets are not just speakers of doom. In brief and extended visions, they proclaim a future restoration and Utopia—a restoration of the Land and the Temple, and a return of the people to their homeland and the reestablishment of the monarchy; and the beginning of an unprecedented era of peace and well-being, which is imagined as a transformation of nature itself. Fertility will increase without end, sowing and reaping will overlap, and the lamb will even lie near the lion—with no fear. But most of all, a new spirit and knowledge of the Lord will manifest itself in this era. Isaiah foresees a time when the entire earth will be filled with the knowledge of or "devotion to the L O R D as water covers the sea" (Isa. 1 1 : 9 ) . And in an arresting image, Jeremiah envisions a time when the "Teaching [torah]" of the Lord will be put into the "inmost being" of the nation and God will "inscribe it upon their hearts." At that time, "No longer will they need 383
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
to teach one another and say to one another, 'Heed the LORD'; for all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed Me—declares the LORD" (Jer. 31:33-34). The broken tablets of Sinai will thus be made whole and be inscribed in the mind and heart of the people. Obedience to God will not be learned but a matter of inner instinct. This is the Utopian hope. Gradually, the prophetic corpus as we have it was composed and edited to preserve the words of the prophets—keeping alive their tirades against injustice and ritual sin; and the visions of hope and restoration. Disciples would particularly want to collect and memorialize the words of their master. In the process of this act of preservation, the words would come alive and be renewed through reinterpretation. This is particularly noticeable in postexilic works. Repeatedly, the words and images of Isaiah 1-12 recur in expanded and revised form in Isaiah 40-66, hundreds of years later. Circles of the pious in Maccabean times looked back to the words oflsaiah, especially the account of the suffering servant of God in Isa. 52:13-53:12, and found solace and help in their time of persecution (see especially Daniel 12). Such study and application of the old prophetic corpus are part of its ongoing reception—and its transformation from documents of ancient Israel into spiritual resources for early and later ludaism. The reinterpretation of the prophecies of Habbakuk found among the Dead Sea Scrolls reflects this process of reception and transformation. And the spirit of prophecy that blew among members of the Qumran community allowed them to perceive prophecies even in texts that would appear to be of quite another type (like Psalm 37). The selection of specific readings from the prophetic corpus for recitation on the Sabbaths and on holidays reflects another pattern of lewish reception of this material (see the introduction to this book for details). Certainly the excerption of prophetic texts from their canonical contexts transforms the old biblical materials into specific rabbinic units (often with beginnings and endings that reflect the interests of the Sages), and the choice of prophetic readings for given Sabbath or festival days is also valuable witness to ancient rabbinic interests and emphases. The Former and Latter Prophets thus become part of the larger rabbinic project of liturgical study and cultural pedagogy. Since at the first level the prophetic texts belong to the world of ancient Israel, the first part of each haftarah commentary in this book indicates something of the historical background or social occasion for the speech or narrative—to the extent that this may be known. Readers who wish to get a larger sense of each of the prophetic books used for the haftarot may turn to the chapters here, in this part. One will find a breakdown of the books into their structural components and theological or ideological features, as well as a review of historical information. Information is also provided about the life of the prophet and his style, and his place among other prophets. All this is intended to help the reader contextualize the haftarot in different ways and to appreciate them within the context of many centuries of ancient Israelite thought, history, and literature.
THE BOOK OF JOSHUA Structure und Contents The Book of loshua is the first book of the Former Prophets, which also includes the Books of ludges, Samuel, and Kings. Immediately following the Torah and the death ofMoses, the Book of loshua narrates the conquest of Canaan and the early settlement period. It concludes with the death and burial of loshua. The subsequent historical narrative in the Book of ludges thus covers the wars and battles within the Land after the primary settlement. Parallel with this difference in focus and emphasis, the Book of loshua is dominated by one leader, loshua, and by battles fought by the entire nation. By contrast, the ensuing period is characterized by many temporary leaders, the chieftains ("judges"), and by wars fought by various tribes. What is more, while there are instances of theological discontent and even factionalism during the conquest stage, there is no major outbreak of national apostasy such as occurred at Sinai with the worship of 384 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the Golden Calf. But just this turn toward other gods is the ongoing spiritual flaw presented in Judges. Joshua is thus a book of transition: between the desert wanderings and the settlement in the Land. The generation of the desert forgot the wonders of the Exodus and did not believe in God's power to realize the conquest (Num. 14:11, 22); in turn, their descendants forgot the historical wonders of the conquest and wandered after the gods of nature. According to rabbinic tradition, "Joshua wrote his own book" (B. Baba Batra 14b) — though the notice of his death was recorded by the high priest, Eleazar son of Aaron (B. Baba Batra 15a). In the main, Jewish medieval commentators agreed that most of the book derives from the time of Joshua, with some details (like the wandering of the Danites northward) deriving from later times (see Rashi and Rabbi David Kimhi at Josh. 19:47). 1 Don Isaac Abravanel was of another mind. Focusing particularly on the idiom "to this day," used to date the continuity of certain practices and events (cf. Josh. 4:9; 5:9; 7:26; 8:28), he suggested "that Jeremiah . . . or Samuel collected these sayings, arranged them in a book, and added to them with God's gracious help."2 His two temporal poles (the period of Samuel and the time of Jeremiah and King Josiah) remarkably anticipate the speculations of many modern scholars, based on entirely different criteria and concerns. For example, comparative studies of the territorial boundaries of the tribes (detailed in chapters 13-21) have convinced some scholars that these reflect premonarchic realities,3 while the examination of town lists suggests to others that some literary units are subsequent to the time of Jehoshaphat in the eighth century B.C.E.4 In addition, the notion of a succession of redactions of the varied materials by generations of Deuteronomic editors, first in the time of King Josiah and again in the postexilic period, has gained recent advocates.5 From this perspective, the accumulated accounts of ancient battles and diverse archival records reflect an ongoing process of editorial growth and consolidation—along with the interfusion of late literary sources and ideologies.6 To impart a better sense of this complexity, a brief synopsis of the book follows. The Book of Joshua is divided into two major parts, as well as a set of codas and conclusions. Of the two parts, the first deals with the conquest (Josh. 1:1-12:24). It is organized geographically: (a) 1:1-5:12, an account of the transition of leadership to Joshua and the east-west crossing of the Jordan, near the region of Gilgal; (b) 5:13-8:35, campaigns against Jericho and Ai are launched and the first successes achieved; (c) 9:1-10:27, a series of successful battles in southcentral Canaan; (d) 10:28-43, the campaigns in the south; and (e) 11:1-15, wars in the north. The narrative ofbattles is concluded in 11:16-12:24, with a summary of the conquest. Fully half of the first part is taken up with the transition to Joshua's rule and reports of the crossing of the Jordan (and the subsequent rites of circumcision and Passover offering). Add to this the elaborated report of the miraculous events surrounding the conquest of Jericho, when its walls came tumbling down according to divine plan, and the defeat of Ai (whose name means "ruin" and for which no contemporary archeological evidence can be adduced), and we see that fully three-fourths of the narrative is completed before the account of the overall conquest begins. These subsequent battles are briefly portrayed and presented as a series of successful lightning strikes. The united national army under one leader thus accomplishes its purposes with no apparent hitch whatsoever (the bits of unconquered territory reported in Josh. 13:1-6 are too inconsequential to be mentioned here). 7 Indeed, the final summary of the conquest is conveyed in dry, tabular form. (Discrepancies between the two show that the table and the battle accounts come from different sources.8) The second part of the book, Josh. 13:1-21:43, sets forth the distribution of the land in its ideal form—a just arrangement of tribal holdings that would (ideally) revert to their owners each Jubilee period, thus correcting the economic imbalances that foreclosures and debtor sales would produce. The account of the landholdings may be divided into five sections: (a) 13:1-6, a report stating that there were various pockets of land left unconquered; (b ) 13:7-33, an account of the inheritance of the Transjordanian tribes (Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh); (c) 14:1-19:51, the allotment of land to all other tribes, with preeminence given to the tribes o f j u d a h and Joseph;9 (d) 20:1-9, a record of the cities of refuge (and a brief notice of the law 385
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
itself); and (e) 21:1-43, an account of the cities given to the Levites, who had no independent inheritance among the tribes. Overall, this fulfills the land distribution plan based on a national census, found in Num. 26:2-65 (for the nine and one-half Cisjordanian tribes) and in Num. 32: 33-42 (for the two and one-halfTransjordanian tribes). After the account of land distribution, a series of codas follow. The first of these, in Josh. 22: 1-34, deals with the departure of the Transjordanian tribes to their allotments in the east—now that the conquest and settlement is largely complete. This was the agreement worked out between Moses and the tribal leaders in Num. 32, and now fulfilled. But the separation of the tribes also raises issues of religious unity, since the tribes of the Transjordan wish to erect an altar, which appears to the others to be an act of secession and apostasy. This contentious matter was ultimately brought to a successful conclusion, and Joshua's final address (Joshua 23) and concluding covenant (24:1-28) serve to reinforce the state of national religious unity and faithfulness. The book concludes with notices of the death of Joshua and Eleazar the priest, and the transfer of Joseph's bones to their final interment in Shechem (24:29-33). These matters are significant, for they signal the end of the generations of the Exodus and wandering. The deaths of Joshua and Eleazar conclude the period of the successors of Moses and Aaron; and the deposition of the remains of Joseph finally fulfills the oath imposed upon the people (in Egypt) in Gen. 50: 25 and acted upon by Moses in Exod. 13:19 (citing the earlier source). Midrash makes much of the initial deposit of Joseph's bones in the depths of the Nile or the crypts of the Egyptian pyramids—embalmed and entombed in a special casket.10 The careful biblical emphasis on the transfer of Joseph's remains to Shechem suggests that the bones of this patriarch were a relic at this most sacred site in the north—and that the legends of his afterlife were told along with the history of the nation, from Egypt to the Promised Land.
Historiography and Theology While there is no clear and consistent editorial hand shaping the Book of Joshua, one can easily isolate several Deuteronomic and proto-Deuteronomic (or Elohistic) ideological strains in the collection, along with various priestly materials.11 And while there is also no pattern of ritual practice that can be isolated, the book reflects a period before the Deuteronomic reforms of centralized worship—when there were many shrines and holy sites where the tribes gathered and entered into covenantal alliance (possibly even into so-called "tribal leagues").12 Particularly notable in this regard is the framework of the book. As Joshua takes command, he is exhorted by God to go forth in battle with the confidence that the ancient promises of land inheritance (to the patriarchs and Moses) will be fulfilled (Josh. 1:2-9). But this military charge is singularly transformed by the insertion (in w. 7-8) of a call for Joshua to obey the Torah and never let it depart from his mind or mouth. And as if to prove the point, we repeatedly see Joshua fulfilling the details of the law—be it the priestly rule of not eating of the new produce of the land until the morrow of the Passover feast (cf. Josh. 5:11 and Lev. 23:9-14); the Deuteronomic rule of burying a corpse hung on a tree by evening (cf. Josh. 8:29; 10:26-27; and Deut. 21:22-23); or the Deuteronomic rule of utter extermination (herem) of the native Canaanites (cf. Josh. 11: 10-15 and its reference to the laws in Deut. 7:1-2 and 20:10-18). At the conclusion of the book there is another reference to loyalty to "the Book of the Teaching of Moses" (sefer tomt moshe) (Josh. 23:6). It comes in the context of a final peroration by Joshua, delivered before his death. In it he exhorts the people to see how faithful the Lord has been to His promises: nothing has failed, and nothing will fail if the people remain loyal to the covenant. Indeed, loshua states in no uncertain terms that good will turn to evil through sin and that God will utterly destroy His people from the Land for acts of apostasy. This sermon serves as an introduction to a more formal call to covenantal probity—in fact, to a legal call to loyalty and devotion to God, for the sake of ongoing life and benefits in the Land (losh. 24:1-28). Following the established covenantal convention, loshua convenes the nation (in Shechem) and recites at length the whole history of divine acts-beginning with Abraham (v. 3), 386 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the first to cross over to Canaan, and concluding with the nation's crossing of the Jordan and the recent defeat of the Canaanite population (w. 11-13). In this context, the people are admonished to serve God alone; they agree and swear fealty oaths to that effect. The whole matter is then duly transcribed as a covenant and written into a "book of divine instruction" (sefer tomtJelohim) (v. 26). 13 A sacred pillar is then erected as a divine witness to the event—it having "heard" the reciprocal divine words and human oaths (v. 27). (The cairn of stones erected at Mount Ebal serves a similar function in 8:30-34, as part of the covenantal ceremony celebrating the initial victories in the Land. This event fulfills the commandment in Deut. 27:1-8.) As a result of this overall Torahistic and covenantal framework and the many cases of ritual and legal observance, the reader is left with the sense of a perfected past: a brief era of faithfulness, when a determined and obedient leader conquered the land and distributed it according to God's oracular word. For good reason did the Samaritans include the Book of Joshua with the Torah as a comprehensive religious-literary unit (in a six-book "Hexateuch"). For indeed the successful completion of the settlement closes the cycle of wanderings from Canaan to Egypt by the patriarchs. God's promise to Abraham and his seed is now fulfilled—the nation has "returned here" at last (Gen. 15:16). Subsequent generations will lapse into acts of apostasy; and in the far future, new wanderings and exile will again displace the people from their homeland. But for now all is well: "Israel served the L O R D during the lifetime of Joshua and the lifetime of the elders who lived on after Joshua, and who had experienced all the deeds that the L O R D had wroughtfor Israel" (Josh. 24:31). For concrete and detailed expositions on the transforming power of Torah (in Joshua 1), the style of historical narrative and the ruses of war (even the sanctioned breach of the Deuteronomic law ofherem, in Joshua 2), and the exposition of the ritual circumcision and Passover celebration near Gilgal (in Joshua 5), see the discussions on the haftarah selections for Simhat Torah (Ve-zo't Ha-berakhah), Shelah-Lekha, and the First Day ofPassover, respectively.
THE BOOK OF JUDGES Structure and Content The Book ofjudges is the second book of the Former Prophets, which also includes the Books of Joshua, Samuel, and Kings. Following a fixed editorial convention, the book begins, "After the death of Joshua" (Judg. 1:1; cf. his death and burial notice in Josh. 24:29-30), just as the Book of Joshua begins, "After the death ofMoses (Josh. 1:1; cf. his death notice in Deut. 34: 5-6). But in actual fact, the period of the chieftains ("judges") begins slightly later; for the report of Joshua's death and burial is repeated in Judg. 2:6-10, after an intervening account of various battles in the Land, which repeats information already provided in Joshua 13-19. The editorial repetition serves to mark off a second document of conquest—after which the tribes disperse to their territories and the period of the chieftains begins.1 This era spans the period from the early settlement up to the crises that led to the foundation of a monarchy. The Book ofjudges thus falls between two great poles: the period of the conquest, wherein all the Israelite tribes fight together under one leader and virtually wipe out the native Canaanite population; and the period of the early monarchy, wherein once again the tribes unite under one leader, now to wipe out the Philistine menace. Between these two historical moments is the period of settlement—characterized throughout the Book ofjudges as a time of ongoing strife between the Israelites and still powerful kings (Canaanite and otherwise), of tensions and contentions among the tribes, and of assorted heroes who arise to save their region from military or economic oppression. If unity of national purpose and the dominance of one leader mark the period of Joshua (Joshua was ordained by Moses himself and had "spirit" within him [Num. 27:18]), 2 disunity characterizes the ensuing period and regional interests mark the concerns of its heroes 387
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
(many of whom were filled with the "spirit of the L O R D " (cf. Judg. 3 : 1 0 ; 1 1 : 2 9 ; 1 3 : 2 5 ) . And further: if the first wars (of conquest) were over, the final wars (of liberation) were not; and if the initial battles were assertive strikes against Canaanite cities and areas, those of subsequent times were in response to local coalitions.3 The biblical record of ongoing warfare is largely confirmed by archeological evidence.4 The time in question is approximately 1 2 0 0 - 1 0 2 0 B.C.E. Commentators generally agree that the Book ofjudges has three major parts. Part 1 recapitulates issues of the conquest (Judges I) and concludes with a sermon (Judg. 2:1-5). Part 2 opens with the repeated notice of Joshua's death (2:6-10), 5 continues with a sermon (2:11-23), and then provides extensive examples of thirteen chieftains who saved their people from oppression (Judges 3-16). 6 Part 3 narrates the migration of the Danite tribes to the north (Judges 17-18) and the internecine war against the tribe ofBenjamin (Judges 19-21). The materials in the book are thus quite diverse and filled with the passions and bravado of war. This is particularly clear with regard to the reports of the chieftains' exploits. Some accounts include the briefest of statements that a hero was imbued with "the spirit of the L O R D " (Othniel [Judg. 3:10]) or fought with rude implements (Shamgar fought with an oxgoad [3:31]). These reports have a telescoped folktale aspect and are complemented by more wide-ranging folk narratives that elaborately portray the derring-do of a hero who had the divine "spirit" and used animal bones or brute strength to defeat the enemy (Samson [Judges 13-16]). Secondary motifs may emphasize the heroics of deception and single-handed victory (e. g., Jael's bludgeoning of the Canaanite general Sisera [4:21 and 5:26]) or more elaborate cases of the same type (cf. Ehud versus King Eglon [3:15-30]). In addition, some of the texts report diplomacy and deals at a regional level, while others describe international delegations with complex legal issues at stake (cf. Jephthah [11:4—11 and 12-28]). In brief, there is no one literary form that dominates the many episodes of the Book ofjudges. The editor has clearly utilized numerous traditions and styles to convey the tenor of the times. Inevitably, one is left to ponder the principles that structure the anthology. At the simplest narrative level, there is an apparent chronological continuity among the episodes. The notice of Joshua's dispersal of the tribes to their territories and the hero's death appear at the outset (Judg. 2 : 6 - 8 ) ; this information is followed by a string of chieftains who arise in apparent succession, since the editor repeatedly utilizes the phrases "after him came," "after him arose" or "after him led" to begin new heroic sequences (cf. 3 : 3 1 ; 1 0 : 1 , 3 ; 1 2 : 1 1 , 13); and the final episodes of the book anticipate the monarchic period to follow, through the formula "in those days there was no king in Israel" ( 1 7 : 6 ; 1 8 : 1 ; 1 9 : 1 ; 2 1 : 2 5 ) . Thus we move sequentially from the time of Joshua, a "servant of the L O R D " ( 2 : 8 ) , to a series of chieftains and from there to the anticipation of a king. The foregoing sequence of leaders correlates with a progressive degeneration of religious obedience. The ideal state under Joshua, when "the people served [va-ya'avdu] the L O R D " (Judg. 2:7), worsens as the people repeatedly "worshipped [va-ya'avdu] the Baalim" (2:11; cf. 3:7; 10:6) and eventually degenerates into acts of barbarism and civil war (Judges 19-20). This movement is underscored by the initial emphasis that "the Israelites did \_'nsu\ what was offensive \rac\ to [be-'eynei; lit., 'in the eyes of'] the L O R D " (2:11; and repeatedly) and the final summation that "in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did \ya'aselo\ as he pleased [lit., 'what was right be-'eynav, in his eyes']" (21:25). Once again the editorial emphasis is on the shift from monotheism and national unity to social anarchy and polytheism. In this movement from the heavenly "eyes" of God to the self-centered "eyes" of rebellion, the blinding of Samson (in 16:21) has figurative force. His loss of eyesight serves as a metaphor for the darkening vision of the people. The overall chronological framework is contradictory in some details and suggests a schematic presentation not always to be taken at face value. Primary among these considerations is the use of typological numbers—specifically, 20 and its multiples. Thus the Canaanite king Jabin oppressed Israel for 20 years (before the deeds of Deborah and Barak), and the Philistines oppressed them for 40 years (before the heroics of Samson); there were reputedly 40 years of peace after the deeds of Othniel, Deborah, and Gideon, and 80 after the deeds of Ehud; and Samson is said to 388 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
have "judged" Israel for 20 years. These round figures (like the 40 years of desert wandering; the 400 years of Egyptian servitude, forecast in Gen. 15:13; or Solomon's decision to build the Temple in the 480th year from the Exodus, according to 1 Kings 6:1) undoubtedly represent the passage of time through generations of 20 years. One should be wary of taking such figures too literally. The same goes for the sum total overall. For though a number of other figures in the Book ofludges have an odd ring (3, 8, or 23) and seem to reflect more precise details, it is impossible that the total period in question lasted 410 years. This would put the Exodus in the sixteenth century B.C.E. —which is wildly discordant with all known historical and archeological information. We may accordingly assume that there was substantial overlap among the different chieftains in the different regions. Hence the editorial term "after" most likely signals historical continuity, not precise dating. If we shift our angle of vision, it is also possible to view the structural unity of the Book of ludges from the perspective of geography. Indeed, the list in ludges I and the exploits presented in ludges 3-16 give the same overall account. The narrative begins in the south with the territories of ludah and then Benjamin; it then shifts northward, beginning with the area of Ephraim; it continues with other more northerly regions like those of Zebulun and Gilead; and it concludes with the territory of Dan. The development is thus clearly along a south-north axis.7 This reflects the later geographical reality—even though the opening list still shows Dan encamped along the maritime plain and pressed into the hills by the Amorite presence (1:34-35); and the narrative in ludges 18 has the tribe of Dan still in the plain before finding its eventual home in the north. But this story is something of a puzzle—as are the account of the transfer of cultic objects to Dan (ludges 17) and the story of the Benjaminite abomination and the ensuing war (ludges 19-20). The puzzle is due to the fact that in none of these materials is there any outside threat or any need for a chieftain to save his people. What then explains such a conclusion to the book—devoted as it is to the acts of heroes and organized by an overall south-north trajectory? The answer is national ideology. But to appreciate just what this means as an overall structural component in the Book ofludges, it is necessary to return to part 1 and the abbreviated account of the conquest given there. It has long been noted there are many episodes in ludges 1 that parallel notices already given in loshua 13-19. 8 For example, the land grant of Hebron to Caleb in ludg. 1:20 is like losh. 14:13-15; the account of the conquest ofKiryath Sepher-Devir in ludg. 1:11-15 is essentially parallel to losh. 15:15-19; and the travails of the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, in ludg. 1: 27-28 and 29, are very much like losh. 17:11-13 and 16:10, respectively. These similarities suggest that ludges 1 is merely another account of the conquest of Canaan—albeit a truncated one. But much more can be learned from differences between the two sources. In particular, there are variations that indicate a subtle ludahite bias: in ludg. 1:10, it is ludah who slays the three giants, not Caleb, as in losh. 15:14; and in ludg. 1:21, it is the Benjaminites who fail to dispossess the native lebusite population oflerusalem, and not the ludahites, as in losh. 15:63. These revisions may appear relatively minor, but their significance increases when we look at other editorial features of the Book ofludges. Specifically, in both the first episode of the first part (national war against the Canaanites) and the last episode of the final part (tribal war against the Benjaminites), the Israelites ask the Lord through an oracle, "Which of us [tribes] shall be the first to go up?" and are twice answered, "ludah" (ludg. 1:1-2 and 20:18). 9 Clearly, ludah is the preeminent tribe in the episodes that frame the book. 10 This emphasis is reinforced by the extensive account of ludahite events in ludges 1 as a whole. The treatment of that tribe spans verses 1-20, and all the others are quite tersely dealt with in verses 21-36—mostly in terms of what they did not conquer. It is also supported by the placement of the exploits of Othniel of ludah in the primary position of part 2 and his presentation as an ideal chieftain (3:7-11; his defeat of Cushan-rishathaim, "the doubly-wicked one," even has a figurative aspect).11 The opening condemnation of the tribe of Benjamin is also reinforced in a later part of the book. Thus at the outset this tribe is blamed for not conquering lerusalem (ludg. 1:21), whereas in the appendix the Benjaminites are thoroughly defeated by all the other tribes following the 389
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
abominable crime committed by the Benjaminites of Gibeah against the concubine of a Levite traveler (Judges 1 9 - 2 0 ) . Accordingly, it may be proposed that the final redaction of the Book of Judges reflects ongoing tensions between the Davidic kings of Judah and descendants of the first Israelite king, Saul of Gibeah. 12 What is more, by inserting these negative matters before the rise of the monarchy (in 1 Samuel 9 ff.), Saul's origins are morally tainted in the same measure as the ancient Judahites are proclaimed to be the divinely chosen leaders of the nation. In a similar way, the book's concluding account of the founding by the Danites of a northern sanctuary at Laish (later called Dan) with stolen (and objectionable) cultic objects (ludges 1 7 - 1 8 ) may also allude to the royal and religious succession of King leroboam, who established in Dan a rival and (from the perspective of the ludean editors of the Book of Kings) idolatrous cult (1 Kings 12). This implies a strong ideological component in the final shaping of the Book ofludges. 1 3
Historiography and Theology It was noted earlier that two sermons occur at the beginning of the book: one concludes the first part (ludg. 2 : 1 - 5 ) , the other inaugurates the second ( 2 : 1 1 - 2 2 ) . Both provide religious structure to the work. In the first case, an angel declares that because the people have broken faith with God,"I [God] have resolved not to drive them [the Canaanites] out before you; they shall become your oppressors" ( 2 : 3 ) . This is based on the statements that the Israelites did not drive out certain residents ( 1 : 7 - 3 3 ) , 1 4 considering such failure a deliberate rebellion against God's word (the divine commandment in v. 2 alludes to Exod. 2 3 : 3 2 - 3 3 ; 3 4 : 1 2 - 1 3 ; Num. 3 3 : 5 2 ; and Deut. 7 : 2 - 5 ) . The punishment is thus a fulfillment of the divine warnings and a prologue to the episodes to come (the reference to the enemy as a "snare" in ludg. 2:3 is a frequent feature of the Pentateuchal pronouncements). For its part, the sermon in ludg. 2 : 1 1 - 2 3 speaks of a cycle of religious rebellions that would anger God, lead to divine punishments through various oppressors, and eventually result in God's raising up chieftains to save the people. Peace would last throughout the lifetime of the chieftain, but the slide toward apostasy and its consequences would return after the leader's death. In this way, a religious perspective on the course of history precedes the specific events; and what is more, the all-national dimension of this portrayal (speaking of "the Israelites," not specific tribes) is carried over to the regional details. Indeed, one can easily see how the language and sequence of the prologue (sin, oppression, savior, rest) frame many of the subsequent narratives; 15 it is only absent in the cases of the so-called minor chieftains, for whom we merely have names, time and place of activity, and burial information (see 1 0 : 1 - 2 , 3 - 5 ; 1 2 : 8 - 1 0 , 1 1 - 1 2 , 1 3 - 1 5 ) . 1 6 In this way, diverse traditions are turned into a chain of rebellions that extends throughout the book. The one major discrepancy between the prologue and the narrative frames is that while the former does not state why God raised up a savior-chieftain, the latter regularly say that the people "cried out to the L O R D " (ludg. 3 : 9 , 1 5 ; 4 : 3 ; 6 : 7 ; 1 0 : 1 0 ; the motifis absent onlyin the case of Samson). Thus it would seem that the cause of divine mercy was the Israelites appeal to God in their trouble. This in itself is a significant feature of the historiography of the Book ofludges. But one should not hastily conclude that this "crying out" necessarily involved confession of sin. 17 Indeed this dimension is conspicuously absent except for 1 0 : 1 5 , where, after the crying out, the people say, "We stand guilty" (ha-ta'nu; lit., "we have sinned"). Moreover, there is a total absence of formulas of repentance. 18 This lack is notable, as is the virtual absence of any case of idol-smashing of the type positively mentioned in the opening sermon. Gideon's action in 6: 2 5 - 3 2 is the exception that proves the point. One may therefore observe that the editor of the Book of ludges has taken a variety of local traditions that had little to do with worship and piety and put them into a new national-religious framework—one emphasizing apostasy, divine mercy, and heroic deliverance through divine inspiration. God is sovereign over Israel and its history, and the shifts between oppression and peace are totally dependent upon Israelite acknowledgment of Him. Further, not only is there 390 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
little positive religious activity in the book, there is also remarkably little moral edification to be gained from the episodes. Except for Deborah, most of the chieftains act with deceit or self-interest—and with hardly a trace of religious piety. God's choice of heroes, upon whom the divine "spirit" descends, is thus startling from a modern perspective. As an extreme type, Samson is maniacally self-absorbed. He helps his people in spite of himself. All this is part of the "strange" ways in which God acts in history in the Book ofjudges. Acts of violence and terror recur in every episode—with little respite. 19 Even the concluding chapter, in which men of Israel repopulate the decimated tribe of Benjamin by seizing the girls of that tribe who came to "the annual \mi-yamimyamimO'h~\ feast of the L O R D . . . at Shiloh" (Judg. 2 1 : 1 9 - 2 2 ) , is hardly immune from sanctioned violence. But hope is to come; for this final chapter is in stark contrast with the first chapter of the ensuing Book of Samuel. In that text, we learn that Hannah would accompany her husband "every year" (;mi-yamimyamimah') to the shrine of Shiloh (1 Sam. 1:3, 7)—grieving for her barren state. On one fateful day her prayers are answered, and the son of her sorrow is named Samuel. 20 In due time, the lad "acted as a judge over Israel" (1 Sam. 7 : 1 6 ) . Born from a pure womb, he is God's choice to anoint the first king over Israel.
THE BOOK OF SAMUEL Structure und Contents The Book of Samuel is an integral part of a vast historiographical achievement that begins with the conquest and settlement in the Promised Land (the Books of Joshua and Judges) and concludes with the Judean exile and collapse of the monarchy (the Books of Kings). This time span covers the history oflsrael in its homeland and runs from the mid-thirteenth century B.C.E. to the first quarter of the sixth century B.C.E. Within this framework, the Book of Samuel covers the period from the chaotic turbulence that marks the end of the rule of the chieftains ("judges") and the beginning of the monarchy under Saul, to the transfer of kingship to David and the consolidation ofhis rule. This period ends with the struggles over succession after David. The Book of Kings begins with a final plot by one of David's sons, the designation of Solomon as the heir apparent, and the deathbed testimony ofDavid, in which he instructs his heir to eradicate his foes. Despite its transitional station, the Book of Samuel lingers over this period out of all proportion to the number of years involved. Thus, whereas Judges (twenty-one chapters) covers roughly 1 8 0 years (ca. 1 2 0 0 - 1 0 2 1 B.C.E.) and Kings (forty-six chapters) covers nearly 4 0 0 years of major events in the Israelite and Judean kingdoms (ca. 9 6 2 - 5 8 6 B.C.E.), Samuel covers only the 8 0 or so years of Samuel, Saul, and David (ca. 1 0 2 1 - 9 6 2 B.C.E.), yet does so in fifty-five long chapters. The narrative pace is slow, the development of character is patient, and the perspective moves from angle to angle to produce intersecting plot-lines. Ostensibly, the overall framework is from the birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1) to just prior to the death ofDavid (1 Kings 1-2). But since Samuel's mother Hannah anticipates the rise of an anointed king, in her thanksgiving prayer to God ( 1 Sam. 2 : 1 0 ) , and since David is the main character from the time ofhis anointment by Samuel (1 Samuel 16), it is fair to say that the book is the product of court circles that chronicled the ascension of their royal patron with pathos and perspicuity.1 The result is a stunning royal biography, unique among ancient Near Eastern histories and royal testimonies. The historiographical Books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are known in rabbinic tradition as the Former Prophets. This designation points to the inclusion in these sources of prophets who reveal God's direction for history. Leaders are made and inspired by God; they are not simply self-made achievers of historical or political power. The Book of Samuel certainly fits into this overall category. It is also striking that while Judges and Kings designate the type of leader in a given period, Joshua and Samuel focus on the personalities of specific people of God. Samuel's life in this respect 391
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
is exemplary. His birth is predicted by Eli the priest in response to Hannah's prayer for a child,2 and Hannah devotes him to the Lord as a lifelong nazirite, in fulfillment of her vow. As a result, Samuel grows up in the shrine of Shiloh and serves God and the people as a seer and judge in the shrines of Ramah, Bethel, Gilgal, andMizpah as well (1 Sam. 7:16-17). His role in defense of divine honor when the people request a king "like all the other nations" and his anointment of Saul and David mark his singular place in biblical history. Nevertheless, it is puzzling that his name is attached to the book. One might have expected something like the "Books of Saul and David" or simply the "Book ofDavid." A talmudic citation (B. Baba Batra 14b) attributes the name to Samuel's authorship of the book. While early biblical tradition gives no hint that Samuel had literary pretensions or was even involved in the royal court, later tradition concludes an account of the deeds of David with these words: "The acts ofKing David, early and late, are recorded in the history of Samuel the seer, the history of Nathan the prophet, and the history of Gad the seer, together with all the mighty deeds of his kingship and the events that befell him and Israel and all the kingdoms of the earth" (1 Chron. 29:29-30). Clearly then, for some late biblical historians, Samuel was one of the prophet-types whose notes made up the full history of David. And yet at some point the book was attributed to Samuel alone. The church father Origen, from about the time of the talmudic citation, also calls the book "Samuel." We now refer to two books, 1 and 2 Samuel. But the summary notations of the Masoretes show that they still regarded the whole as one book in the early Middle Ages. The subdivision of the work is thus a subsequent development. There are other more substantive issues involved when we speak of the Book of Samuel. Which one? At first, this query seems to be unnecessary, since we have the Masoretic text before us and it is the basis of all subsequent Jewish study and synagogue recitation. But the question is a real one, since quite different versions of the text of Samuel circulated in antiquity—and are even represented in our own Hebrew Bibles. In those passages where Samuel and Chronicles cover the same material, there are many substantive differences in the latter that cannot simply be accounted for as scribal errors. In fact, different original texts seem to be involved. Fragments of the different Samuel text used by the Chronicler, identified on the basis of similarities between them and the Hebrew underlying Josephus's (Greek) discussion of this period in bisAntiquities,3 as well as the so-called proto-Lucianic recension of the Septuagint,4 have now been discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Accordingly, though we speak of the Book of Samuel, there were important differences in the various editions of it. It was clearly a work written and revised in different biblical circles over much time. Scholars must therefore work very carefully with the manuscripts and variants involved and be careful not to reconstruct a composite text from "best readings" found in a variety of different but unrelated versions. The Book of Samuel can be divided into five major parts and a concluding cluster of appendixes. Part 1. The History of Samuel (1 Samuel 1:1-8:3) This unit covers the period from the events preceding the birth of Samuel to his old age, when he appoints his two sons as judges in Beersheba. This time span thus continues the period of the Judges and ends just prior to the people's request for a king (1 Sam. 8:4). Dominating this period are battles against the Philistines and the capture of the Ark of God (1 Samuel 4). Strange events break out in the Philistine cities of Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron as the Ark is moved from city to city (1 Samuel 5). Eventually, it is returned to Israelite territory, but only after an indemnity is paid. In the course of the Ark's transfer, some citizens of Beth-shemesh look into the Ark, and they too are struck down. In the end the Ark is brought to Kiriath-jearim for safekeeping (1 Sam. 6:1-7:1). There it remains until David brings it up to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6). Further battles result in the eventual Israelite reconquest of towns that the Philistines have taken from them. The report closes with a summary of Samuel's career as a circuit judge (1 Sam. 7:15-17) and the appointment ofhis sons as judges, who, however, subvert their office (1 Sam. 8:1-3). This brief statement precedes the request of"all the elders" for a king. 392 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Part 2. Samuel and Saul (1 Samuel 8:4-15:35) This unit begins with an assembly of "all the elders of Israel" before Samuel in Ramah, where they request a king to govern them. Samuel interprets all this as a rejection of divine kingship and warns them of the price they will pay for this new form of governance. The people persist, and God tells Samuel to accede to their request (1 Sam. 8:4-22). After this comes the identification and anointment of Saul as king (1 Sam. 9:1-10:16). Saul's selection is ratified at Mizpah (1 Sam. 10:17-24), and his kingship is inaugurated at Gilgal (1 Sam. 11:14-15). Various battles are undertaken by Saul—most notably against the Ammonites, Philistines, and Amalekites. However, after Saul fails to comply completely with God's command to destroy the Amalekites, his reign is rejected by the Lord, though he is not formally deposed (1 Samuel 15). The moving scene of divine rejection and Saul's request for some honor before his people conclude the relationship between Samuel and the king. "Samuel never saw Saul again to the day of his death. But Samuel grieved over Saul, because the L O R D regretted that he had made Saul king over Israel" (1 Sam. 15:35). There now ensues a great new turn of events: the identification and anointment of David as king. Part 3. Saul and David (1 Samuel 16:1-2 Samuel 1:27) This unit traces the rise of David through the ranks and the court to become the acknowledged king of all Israel. In the process, David endures the jealousy of Saul and various threats to his life. These difficulties and his unstable situation do not end until Saul dies in battle against the Philistines. The ascension ofDavid begins with his anointment by Samuel "in the presence ofhis brothers" (1 Sam. 16:12-13). The narrator then reports that "the spirit of the L O R D gripped David from that day on" and that "the spirit of the L O R D had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the L O R D began to terrify him" (1 Sam. 16:13-14). This contrast presages the conflicts to come: the heroism ofDavid in battle and the dark anger of Saul toward him. In a touch of irony, the young David is brought to the court of Saul because of his skill on the lyre—for the courtiers seek one who might make music and thus banish Saul's "evil spirit" (1 Sam. 16:16). David passes the audition, and Saul makes him one ofhis arms-bearers. And "[wjhenever the [evil] spirit of God came upon Saul, David would take the lyre and play it; Saul would find relief and feel better, and the evil spirit would leave him" (1 Sam. 16:23). David's first taste of glory comes during a battle with the Philistines, when he defeats the giant Goliath with a few smooth stones from his sling (1 Samuel 17). The event has all the markings of ritual combat: the giant curses David by his gods, while David proclaims that he will "come against you in the name of the L O R D of Hosts, the God of the ranks of Israel, whom you have defied" (1 Sam. 17:45) and that, by his victory, "[a]ll the earth shall know that there is a God in Israel. And this whole assembly shall know that the LORD can give victory without sword or spear. For the battle is the LORD'S, and He will deliver you into our hands" (1 Sam. 17:46-47). The victory leads to an intimate bond between David and Saul's son lonathan, one that is to last a lifetime. And it also leads Saul to impress the youth into his service; but with each victory, David's fame grows, until the people praise him above their king: "Saul has slain his thousands; David his tens of thousands" (1 Sam. 18:7). This attitude vexes King Saul, who in a rush of the evil spirit tries to kill David with his spear. Saul also seeks other ways to kill David—through appointing him head of the troops (1 Sam. 18:17-30) and through plots laid with lonathan and his courtiers (1 Sam. 19:1). But Saul is betrayed by his son and by his daughter Michal on various occasions, and David flees for his life (1 Samuel 19-21). There follows an extensive series of episodes depicting David's flight from Saul. David becomes a freebooter and a mercenary among the Philistines (1 Samuel 22-29). This alliance never brings David face-to-face with Saul in combat, since the soldiers of the Philistine king of Gath reject David's presence, and he returns to his own lands and wins a great victory against the Amalekites (1 Samuel 30). In subsequent battles against the Philistines, lonathan is slain, and Saul prefers death at the hand ofhis retainer (1 Samuel 31). Upon learning of the death of the king and his beloved companion, David chants a dirge of surpassing beauty: "Your glory, O Israel, / Lies slain on your heights; / How have the mighty fallen!" (2 Sam. 1:19) . . . . 393
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
H o w have the mighty fallen In the thick of battle— Jonathan, slain on your heights! I grieve for you, My brother Jonathan, You were most dear to me. Your love was wonderful to me More than the love of women. H o w have the mighty fallen, The weapons of war perished! (2 Sam. 1:25-27) The lament is recorded in the Book of Jashar—a lost work of the battles oflsrael, also mentioned injosh. 10:13. Part 4. The Rise ofDavid (2 Samuel 2:1-10:19) This unit begins with the anointment of David as king by the men o f j u d a h (2 Sam. 2:4). It goes on to detail David's consolidation of power against forces still loyal to the House of Saul. After Saul's general Abner and Saul's son Ish-bosheth are slain (2 Samuel 3-4), "All the tribes oflsrael came to David at Hebron . . . and King David made a pact with them in Hebron before the LORD. And they anointed David king over Israel" (2 Sam. 5:1-3). With this pact in hand, David sets out to conquer Jerusalem from the Jebusites and build a palace. This conquest and building are reported with hardly any details (2 Sam. 5:5-9, 11). David then wins new victories against the Philistines (2 Sam. 5:17-25) and determines to bring the Ark up from Kiriath-jearim, where it has been stored since the debacle at Beth-shemesh years before (2 Sam. 6:1-11). A further debacle ensues en route, and only after another delay is the Ark finally brought into Jerusalem with sacrifices and much rejoicing (2 Sam. 6:12-19). All this sets the stage for the centerpiece of Davidic court propaganda. After building his cedar-walled palace, the king wishes to build a permanent shrine for the Ark. The court prophet Nathan initially approves but, in a night vision from God, is told to inform David that he himself will not build the Temple—but only his son after him. The oracle also gives a divine guarantee for the perpetuity of the Davidic dynasty (2 Samuel 7). Further battles against the Philistines and Arameans are reported, and acts of loyalty to the surviving members of the House of Saul are documented (2 Samuel 8-10). All these details are intended as proof of the power and magnanimity of King David. Indeed, from a narrative point of view, these achievements constitute a crescendo of successes. There follows a cascade of errors, deceits, and revolts. Part 5. The Sin ofDavid and Dynastic Strife (2 Samuel 11:1-20:22) The turning point in David's rise to glory is the episode with Bathsheba. It occurs in the course of Israelite wars against Ammon. David, remaining at home in the palace, casts his eyes on this woman. He conspires to have her husband slain on the front, but the act meets with divine disfavor and the child born of the liaison dies (2 Samuel 11-12). The whole situation is presented in masterly detail, filled with suggestive gaps and alternating perspectives. It is a masterpiece of narrative art. The birth of a new son, named Solomon, consoles the grieving parents. But this good news is offset by a series of disasters in the royal household. A deep corruption begins to undermine the family. The first disaster is David's son Amnon's rape ofhis half sister Tamar (2 Sam. 13:1-22). This disturbs her full brother Absalom, and after much brooding and plotting, he conspires to kill Amnon at a sheepshearing festival (2 Sam. 13:23-29). Absalom flees for his life; but despite the murder, David grieves his son Absalom's absence greatly (2 Sam. 13:37-39). After three years, David's courtiers persuade him to permit Absalom to return to Jerusalem. But it is another two years before he is brought before the king and granted amnesty (2 Samuel 14). Still, all is not over and done with. Soon Absalom proclaims himself king and foments a rebellion (2 Sam. 15: 1-12). Many ofhis supporters are former loyalists of Saul. So great is the mounting loyalty to Absalom that David is constrained to flee Jerusalem (2 Sam. 15:13-17). In an ironic replay of 394 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the old scenario, David flees the court and hides in the countryside. The episode is told with stark pathos: "The whole countryside wept aloud as the troops marched by" (2 Sam. 15:23). David "went up the slope of the [Mount of] Olives, weeping as he went; his head was covered and he walked barefoot. And all the people who were with him covered their heads and wept as t h e y w e n t u p " (2 Sam. 15:30). In stark contrast to these meager remains of respect and loyalty to David, the narrator juxtaposes the curses of Shimei son of Gera, a Saulide loyalist (2 Sam. 16:5-14). This scene epitomizes the public disgrace to which David has fallen and his own psychological inability to strike decisively against the supporters ofhis son. David's only act of self-preservation at this point is to induce his trusted counselor, Hushai the Archite, to go to lerusalem and join Absalom's court as a spy (2 Sam. 15:32-37). Hushai does so and eventually is able to subvert Ahithophel's advice to Absalom (2 Sam. 16:15-17:23). A complex series of intrigues follows, and eventually David's troops are mustered to reassert his authority. Even so, David is obsessed with the safety ofhis rebellious son, giving orders to his commanders to "[d]eal gently with my boy Absalom, for my sake" (2 Sam. 18:5). Consequently, during the bloody battle, when Absalom gets his hair entangled in the branches of a terebinth, none of the soldiers dare strike the dangling rebel. Eventually loab pierces him with three darts. Only then do the arms-bearers move in for the final kill (2 Sam. 18:9-15). The body of Absalom is buried in a pit, and runners inform the king, who responds with a devastating sorrow, wailing, "My son Absalom! O my son, my son Absalom! If only I had died instead of you! O Absalom, my son, my son!" (2 Sam. 19:1). David goes on in this way until loab persuades him that he is in danger of losing the support ofhis troops. The king then moves decisively to regain power. He nobly vows not to slay Shimei, who grovels before him on David's return across the lordan. The king also responds with royal favor to Mephibosheth, grandson of Saul, who fawningly says that David is "like an angel of the L O R D " (2 Sam. 19:28). But one cannot help suspect that David is also beset by deep and lingering loyalties to old King Saul and to his personal covenant with his beloved companion lonathan. lonathan adjured his friend to show "the LORD'S faithfulness" to him and "faithfulness to my house"—"even after the L O R D has wiped out every one of David's enemies from the face of the earth" (1 Sam. 20:15). As 2 Sam. 21:7points out, David remained loyal to his word. The king's troubles are still not over. Immediately after the revolt of Absalom, there are still enough supporters of Saul to induce a "scoundrel named Sheba son of Bichri, a Benjaminite" to sound the horn and proclaim: "We have no portion in David, / N o share in lesse's son! / Every man to his tent, O Israel!" (2 Sam. 20:1). This call to arms leads to another revolt, which is eventually put down. Some final features remain. A last contention over the succession, by Adonijah, takes place during David's final days. David finally confirms Solomon as his successor, charging him to obey the commandments of God and get rid of his enemies (1 Kings 1-2). Thus does the king give final advice based on bitter personal experience. Though these chapters occur after the end of the Book of Samuel, some modern scholars regard this final scene as the real conclusion to the Davidic history. Appendixes A series of appendixes concludes the account of David's life in 2 Samuel. Included are (A) a narrative about the expiation of Saul's murder of the Gibeonites (2 Sam. 21:1-14); (B) further battles against the Philistines (2 Sam. 15-22); (C) David's great song of thanksgiving, for victories achieved through divine aid (2 Samuel 22); (C') the last words ofDavid (2 Sam. 23:1-7); (B') annals of heroes during the wars against the Philistines (2 Sam. 23:8-38); and (A') a narrative of the expiation of the plague brought on by God in punishment for the census taken by David (2 Sam. 24:1-17). Note that the overall sequence of appendixes has been ordered by the final editor in a chiastic manner, with the themes of the final three appendixes balancing those of the first three in reverse order.5 The final appendix includes the advice of Gad the seer to David to purchase the threshing floor of Araunah the lebusite and there build an altar to the Lord. This act "checks" the pestilence and serves as the dramatic conclusion to the Book of Samuel. 395
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Historiography The Book of Samuel, with its court and cult narratives, royal documents and archives, military exploits and adventures, consists of multiple components. This has led some researchers to attempt to identify the component texts.6 Some of these efforts build on the established "documentary sources"; others distinguish larger complexes of material, like the traditions of Samuel, of Saul, and ofDavid. These complexes focus on the biographies of the three protagonists or, more precisely, those parts of the biographies most pertinent for the historian. Thus the biography of Samuel includes the background of his birth and his status as an acolyte at Shiloh and as a nazirite, but it skips many details of his life that do not directly deal with his involvement in the rise of the monarchy or the well-being of the Ark. The narrative goes into considerable detail about the loss and retrieval of the Ark from the Philistines, since the transfer of the Ark is a crucial feature ofDavid's centralization of power. It also emphasizes Samuel's position as judge insofar as this bears on the people's desire for a king, his role in the identification and selection of Saul, and his involvement in the dismissal of Saul and anointment of David. Similarly, the biography of Saul depicts his successes in overcoming military threats and dramatizes his fall from divine favor and his struggles with and jealousy of David. And finally, the story of David is shaped to give dramatic force to his charismatic rise to power and to the equally dramatic disasters that affected the stability ofhis rule and succession. At the center is the divine certification ofhis dynastic line and the anticipation of a Temple to be built by his heir (2 Samuel 7). The overall development of the narrative thus serves the purposes of royal propaganda: detailing the divine acceptance of the monarchy in Samuel's time, the divine involvement in the selection of kings and the gradual shift of power to Judah, and the divine guarantee of the permanence of the Davidic line—a guarantee that withstands all human foibles and intrigues. Certainly such an account would have the backing of the court and would most likely be the product of royal scribes. Nevertheless, one must be equally struck by the authorial freedom found in the narrative. It is not the work of court sycophants. The sins ofDavid against Uriah and Bathsheba are told with little restraint, and Nathan boldly criticizes the king for his greed and folly. Similarly, not only is the seamier side of the royal family portrayed in stark detail, but also David's reluctance to face reality with respect to his feelings for Absalom is presented with considerable psychological insight. Thus, despite the book's commitment to the Davidic line, there is also a striking criticism of power and its debilitating effects. Such a position is not antiroyalist by any means, but it also seems to have a strong dose of prophetic judgment. Accordingly, one may say that the key tension of 1 Samuel 8—in which the kingship is at once validated by divine decision but harshly critiqued in Samuel's speech—is also the tension of the succeeding narrative. On the one hand, the monarchy is never in doubt after the divine decision to yield to the human request, but its positive and negative sides both occupy the stage. The Book of Samuel thus has a singular position in the national history oflsrael. It continues and completes the period of the Judges and anticipates and establishes the period of the kings. Nevertheless, its narrative style and theological orientation are different from those that mark the Books ofjudges and Kings. Both of these collections demonstrate Deuteronomistic style and values: their view of sin and punishment, their vocabulary and the speeches of the protagonists, and the types of religious judgments made about events and people. Virtually none of these features are present in the Book of Samuel. 7 Accordingly, while one may be sympathetic with the theory that Deuteronomy through Kings is one grand historiographical work and even acknowledge this overall structure, the particular traces of this ideology are not much evident in Samuel.8 This material was incorporated into the whole history, but it retained its own stylistic stamp. There are three spheres in which the historiography of the Book of Samuel is distinguished: the psychological components of the narratives; the three central loci of home, shrine, and court; and the preservation of features of popular religion. The Book of Samuel is unique in biblical literature in terms of the range, detail, and subtlety of its psychological portraits. In most other cases, the reader is left to infer the internal life of 396 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the protagonists from narrative gaps, stark dialogue, or the outline of actions. By contrast, the text of Samuel is replete with developed dialogues, often of much pathos; shifting points of view that build up character from various angles; and nuanced actions that bring the reader into the immediacy of the action. Indeed, the Book of Samuel does much to give the modern reader a feeling for the lived life of Israelite antiquity—and it does so in many different social settings. Thus we get an inner look at the torment of the barren wife through the portrait of Hannah, and the importance of a child for her status. We get a glimpse of the nobility of friendship through the relationship of David and lonathan, and the extent to which friendship may transcend selfinterest and family loyalties. The destructive powers of jealousy are finely etched in the emotional decay of Saul, and a sense of resentment and anger in the person of Absalom. The deceptions of lust are remarkably dramatized in the persons ofDavid (in his quest for Bathsheba) and Amnon (in his rape of Tamar). The enmeshments of parental love give David's feelings for Absalom, despite the latter's destructive nature, a pathetic tone. And finally, the subtlety of psychological strategies marks the parables of Nathan and the woman of Tekoa to David, and the advice of Abigail, Hushai, and Ahithophel. In all these and other scenes, the narrative deftly balances characters through dialogue and shifting appearances. Usually the narrative rule of two-to-a-scene is followed, so that the tensions of voice and reaction may be measured; so that the perspective can change, but not in a confusing manner; and so third parties may interface with one or the other of the central characters and thus create new dynamics through new duos and dialogues. The encounters between Samuel and Saul in the context of the battle against the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15) or the plot involving David, loab, and Uriah concerning Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11) are rich in perspective, irony, and pathos. The reader is treated to remarkably subtle dialogues, crafted portraits, and dramatic encounters. The text retains its pace and presence, never rushed and never unduly complicated. One looks in vain to ancient Near Eastern literature for models of such style and presentation. These historical-biographical vignettes are among the wonders of ancient or any literature. Even the finely honed biographies of Philo or Plutarch have a certain stylized, even idealized, character. The old narratives of Saul and David stand alone in the complexity and humanity of their presentations. The unevenness of character, with touches of nobility and debasement, comes through. For all its narrativization of life, the Book of Samuel pulses with human energies and desires. Indeed, its sense of the way personal and national history is generated from psychological impulses is one of the great achievements of the Book of Samuel. A second notable component of the Book of Samuel is the way it balances and integrates the social spheres of home, shrine, and court. 9 Witness the movement back and forth between the emotional reality of home and the cultic ambiance of the shrine in the narrative about Hannah; of the movement among the various shrines in the course of identifying and crowning Saul; or of the intrigues of the court as royal domain and as home in the narratives of David and Saul, David and Bathsheba, or Amnon and Tamar. The reader is brought dramatically into the living situation of a shrine, in the course of Hannah's petition and vow, in the course of Samuel's night vision, or in the course of Saul going to Ramah to inquire after his lost animals from the local seer. Similarly, there are brief but spectacular moments that suggest the climate of the court, as David plays his lyre to relieve Saul's disgruntled spirit, as Saul gathers with his retainers for the New Moon feast and awaits the appearance of David, or as courtiers variously try to confront or console David during his many emotional trials. These social settings are presented with just enough detail to stage the scene, but never so much as to dominate the dialogues or encounters that take place in their context. The alternating scenes are modulated with consummate effect. Throughout, the reader is kept just enough off-balance so as to be surprised and carried along by unresolved issues. Indeed, the splicing of these snippets of social space very much affects the visual and scenic pace of the work. 10 The final aspect to be mentioned here is that of popular religion. Repeatedly, one finds valuable details of religious life portrayed in our source, giving us a glimpse into otherwise unknown features of everyday practice. Let us again mention in this regard the vow of Hannah and the 397
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
devotion of her son Samuel to the shrine of Shiloh as a nazirite for life. Beyond allusions to personal vows in the psalms, or nazirite vows in the Law, we can see how such events were lived. Similarly, the bonds of friendship between David and Jonathan give way to a personal covenant between the two that affected their own relationship but also bound them in loyalty to each other's descendants. And then there are the more menacing aspects of popular religion: the awesome power of the Ark as a source of illness, blessing, and even death (1 Samuel 4-6); the belief in the effects of an improper census of citizens (2 Samuel 24); or even the barbaric mode of ritual expiation for the deaths of the Gibeonites, through impalement of the sinners on stakes (2 Sam. 21:1-14). Even the use of domestic idols stuffed in a bed to decoy the fleeing David exposes popular religion in a most humorous way (1 Sam. 19:11-17). With its psychological features, its focus on living settings, and the added touch of popular religion and sensibilities, the whole work is marked by a very human atmosphere. The focus is less on national idolatry and charismatic derring-do by military heroes, as in the Book ofjudges; or on monumental building projects and corruptions of false worship by assorted kings, as in the Book of Kings. In both these works, the movements of history are shaped by cycles and patterns, and there is a recurrent religious component of apostasy and restoration. By contrast, the Book of Samuel gives prime attention to the personal lives of its protagonists and very little direct attention to the proper worship of the nation. Even the transfer of the Ark to Jerusalem, for all its national implications, remains centered on the person of David. Thus, overall, the concern in the Books of Samuel is less with the maintenance of national religion than with the securing of personal fortunes. In this atmosphere, the corruptive elements are not false gods or improper worship, but raw power and desire. Behind the veneer of royal and cultic grandeur, the atmosphere is polluted by graft in the shrines and petty and vulgar emotions in the court. Curses, deceit, grief, and resentment are the salient components. Only rarely are there hints of nobility. It is for this reason we are so taken by the commitments of Jonathan to David, or David's loyalty to Mephibosheth and grant of amnesty to Shimei. Though the whole abusive system of royal power outlined by Samuel in 1 Sam. 8:10-18 would only take full effect in the reign of Solomon (1 Kings 5), the Book of Samuel anticipates this situation through its unsparing portrayal of the corrosive dimensions of power. David is exalted as the founder of a kingly line. But in its vision of this king of flesh and blood, and the degeneration ofhis family, the narrative speaks with the voice of prophetic protest. Indeed, beneath the surface of the story, a powerful critique of the monarchy may be heard. The anarchic brutality that pervaded the final days of the Judges has not been eradicated. It has only been domesticated and brought within the space of the royal house.
THE BOOK OF KINGS Structure and Contents The Book of Kings is a massive composition that compiles and integrates a vast amount of historical information—from the impending death ofDavid (1 Kings 1:1) to the fall of the Judean monarchy, the destruction of the Temple, and the exile of the nation to Babylon. It concludes with the eventual elevation of the exiled monarch Jehoiachin from the disgrace of prison to the royal table of the Babylonian king Evil-merodach (2 Kings 25:27-30). 1 The time frame of this historical work is 400 years: from 961 B.C.E., just prior to Solomon's assumption of the royal office, to 561 B.C.E., just after Evil-merodach's coronation. The composition thus spans the period of the triumphant united monarchy of David and Solomon, the breakup of that empire and the eventual destruction of the northern and southern kingdoms, and the disgrace and exile of the last kings of Judah. The amnesty granted to Jehoiachin does not, therefore, offset the disaster or portend true hope; 2 it is merely a hint of hope, offered to an exiled nation still counting its 398 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
years from the exile of its kings (2 Kings 25:27). 3 By contrast, the work of the Chronicler (from a slightly later period) ignores this event, concluding with the decree of Cyrus announcing the right of the Jews to return to Zion and rebuild their Temple (2 Chron. 36:22-23). 4 This great proclamation of 539 B.C.E. thus gives a messianic cast to the conclusion of that book. Indeed, such was the mood that a prophet of the time even exultantly proclaimed Cyrus to be God's "anointed one" (Isa. 45:1). But such events were still beyond the horizon of hope for the historians who produced 1 - 2 Kings. In its wider literary setting, the Book of Kings is the last of the so-called Former Prophets. By contrast with the earlier historical books, in which the fate of the people is tied to its own behavior, the historians of 1 - 2 Kings focus on the religious behavior of the kings and view national destiny from this perspective. David and Solomon thus appear as founding fathers of true worship, but even their positive influence decays with the corruptions of their heirs. The apostasy of leroboam sets the stage for the total derailment of northern worship, while Rehoboam in the south inaugurates a more mixed future. Too late does King losiah purge the cultic perversities and have the people renew their national covenant with God (2 Kings 23). Even his own perfect repentance and reformers zeal cannot assuage the divine wrath kindled by the sins of King Manasseh (2 Kings 23:25-27). The sinful kings not only sully the shrine, but also drag the people with them into doom and disarray. Part 1. The UnitedMonarchy (1 Kings 1:1-11:43) Three main units can be discerned in 1 - 2 Kings, plus an appendix of sorts. Part 1 comprises the united monarchy and extends from 1 Kings 1:1 through 1 Kings 11:43. Following an account of the last days ofDavid and his appointment of Solomon as his successor (1 Kings 1:1-2:46), the focus shifts to Solomon and the "wisdom" of his rule as expressed in royal judgments, national projects (particularly the construction of the Temple and royal palace), and international relations (1 Kings 3:1-10:29). Despite this period of glory, Solomon ends on the skids, with trouble on the northern and southern borders (1 Kings 11:21, 23). The historian judges this decline to be due to Solomon's extravagances and to the apostasy that transpires after he builds pagan chapels for his foreign wives—these latter being the domestic entailments and necessities of trade and other treaties (1 Kings 11:14-40). N o less than twelve chapters treat this period of forty years (thus, one-fourth of the chapters in the Book of Kings cover roughly one-tenth of its historical scope). This clearly emphasizes the historian's concern to mark this period of opulence and religious grandeur. Solomon's wisdom is legendary at home and abroad: even the lowliest maiden can hope for personal redress in his court, while multitudes of all nations flock to learn ofhis parables and wit. Such indeed is his practical wisdom that he can engage foreign kings (like Hiram of Tyre) to help build the Temple (contributing both to its architectural design and the artwork that adorned it), and foreign queens (like one from Sheba) gladly exchange all the spices of the East for a touch ofhis charisma (see 1 Kings 3:28; 5:9-14, 21-26; 10:1-8). Surely the exhaustive details we are provided of the labor gangs, work schedules, artisan-ship in tapestries and metals, and building blueprints owe a bit to the ready availability of royal archives to court historians. 5 The reader is impressed as well by Solomon's piety and the central place he envisions for the Temple in his grand dedicatory prayer (1 Kings 8). Close examination shows that this oration is not of one piece or from one time (parts of the prayer are ancient, others reflect late themes), 6 but the effect of the redacted whole is enormous. This was Israel's time of glory: peace at home and abroad, a holy Temple in lerusalem for blessing and atonement, and a wise king to lead them. All this surely contributes to the historian's own sense that Solomon has a (nearly) perfect reign. At all events, it is short-lived. After but forty years, the grand plan of one Israel with one Temple and one king collapses for the whole preexilic period. (Even after the return from exile, this "messianic ideal" will remain imperfectly fulfilled. Restoration of the lineage of David and the Temple of Solomon in the homeland thus will become a "utopian" vision. 7 ) Part 2. The Divided Monarchy (1 Kings 12:1-2 Kings 17:41) Part 2 of the Book of Kings deals with the divided monarchy and extends from 1 Kings 12:1 through 2 Kings 17:41. This period 399
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
covers the main bulk of Israelite-Judean history—from the time that Jeroboam secedes to form his own monarchy, with a royal seat in Samaria, to that fateful moment in 722 B.C.E. when the northern kingdom is destroyed and its ten tribes are exiled to Assyria (2 Kings 17). This period is chronicled in accord with the design of the historian (s)—who have little sympathy for the apostasies of Jeroboam and his successors to the northern throne. Thus after an elaborate portrayal of Jeroboam's sins (which include a counter-cult in Bethel and Dan [1 Kings 12:1-32], adorned with calves and following a distinct calendar) and forecasts of doom by various prophets (1 Kings 13:1-3; 14:7-16), Kings provides a history of the northern and southern kingdoms for the next fifty years (1 Kings 14:19-16:23). While the amount of space allocated for the two kingdoms is similar, the accounts are vastly different in content and style. Most noticeable is the concern to highlight the religious apostasy of the north, beginning with its founding monarch. Thus, while northerners must have regarded the temples at Bethel and Dan as the revival of ancient and legitimate shrines,8 southerners deemed their construction an utter offense and portrayed the action in terms of the arch-apostasy of the Golden Calf centuries before (cf. 1 Kings 12:28 andExod. 32:4). 9 In comparison with the evaluation of religious behavior, reports of the administrative and diplomatic accomplishments of the kings pale in significance. Accordingly, the historiographical style shifts from the judgmental tone of condemnation to a series of bland reports. This continues until the historian is again able to vent his anger—this time against the idolatrous behavior of the House of Omriin the north. From 1 Kings 16:23 to 2 Kings 10:33 (a period of sixty years, taking up seventeen chapters), several lengthy accounts present the deep penetration ofBaal worship into the northern kingdom, as well as the emergence of spiritual protagonists like Elijah who attempt to stem the tide of apostasy. These narratives project something of the religious atmosphere of the times (at least as the historian wishes to present it) and never waver in their condemnation. The return of the binational chronicle at 2 Kings 10:34 documents the final years of the divided monarchy and does not fail to inject positive narratives about Judean kings like Joash. This unit concludes with a report of the Assyrian invasion that brought about the demise of the northern kingdom (2 Kings 17:1-6). It is immediately followed by a long peroration on the sins of the north that led to its doom (w. 7-23) and its subsequent history, in particular the transportation there of pagans from the Assyrian provinces, along with their idolatrous practices (w. 24-41). This chapter forecasts Judah's fate as well,10 based on a theology considerably at odds with the preceding royal history. Now it is the people who are singled out as the culprits of the destruction, with scant reference to the sins of the apostate kings. In this connection, we are told that God sent prophets to induce the people to return to the covenant (w. 13-15)—although no trace of this is found in 1 Kings 12 through 2 Kings 16. Neither the oracles of doom that Elijah decrees against Ahab (1 Kings 17:1; 21:19) nor the prophet's derision of the Baal cult (1 Kings 18) qualifies as an appeal for repentance—and certainly not in the terms found in 2 Kings 17:13 (where these prophets are said to have exhorted: "Turn back from your wicked ways and observe My commandments"). 11 Presumably, this concern with the people's repentance reflects later attitudes about the ways of God in history (see below). Whatever the case, it bears mention that prophets like Jeremiah are conspicuously absent from the events reported in 2 Kings 15-16. And if we do hear Isaiah speak in 2 Kings 19:20-34, his words have nothing to do with repentance and only faintly echo the theological thunder that reverberates in Isaiah 1-5 or 28-33. Part 3. The Kingdom ofJudahAlone (2 Kings 18:1-25:21) Part3 o f t h e Book of Kings focuses on the kingdom o f j u d a h alone and extends from 2 Kings 18:1 through 25:21. The historian first gives an extensive treatment of King Hezekiah's piety and the salvation of Jerusalem from foreign invasion (2 Kings 18:1-20:21). Unstated but always implied is the fact that Hezekiah's purge of paganism contribute to the miraculous intervention of God on behalf of His people, city, and shrine. A synopsis of the apostasy of King Manasseh is then provided (2 Kings 21:1-9), together with an oracle that predicts the end of the southern kingdom because of his sins (w. 10-16). Again royal responsibility is underscored as the cause of the destruction. The subsequent 400 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
reforms of King Josiah cannot forestall the disaster to come (2 Kings 22:1-23:27). Repentance is of no avail: Manasseh weighs in the same balance as Ahab, and his royal city will be wiped like a bowl and cast away—as was the fate of Samaria years earlier (2 Kings 21:13). 12 Having made his point with chilling reserve (2 Kings 23:26-27), the historian then recounts the final kings of Judah, the exiles of Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, and the final disgrace done to the Temple and the people (23:31-25:21). Appendix (2 Kings 25:22-30) A concluding appendix mentions the disastrous prefecture of Gedaliah and the inglorious amnesty accorded Jehoiachin (2 Kings 25:22-30). The Book of Kings thus ends with little comfort. Jehoiachin is able to eat at the table of the Babylonian king—but the Kingdom of Judah is no more, and its people are scattered east and west. The royal dynasty ofDavid has broken faith with their divine overLord, and the result is the destruction of Zion and its Temple. Sin has run its course. If it is any consolation, the reader can draw solace from the theological implications of the course of events as presented here: namely, that God alone rules history and that religious apostasy will be punished.
Historiography and Theology Despite much factual detail, the historical narrative in the Book of Kings is rarely concerned simply with preserving a record of the past. This holds as much for the history of Solomon's diplomatic exchange with Hiram of Tyre as for the blueprints of his magnificent Temple, as much for the details of the tax system as for those of royal apostasy, and as much for the stratagems of Assyrian invasions as for the prayers of Solomon and Hezekiah. The historian is rather concerned to give the people an evaluative account of its past: 13 a past that peaked in Solomon's day, with his united monarchy, glorious Temple, and centralized worship—but that now knows the fragmentation, subservience, and dispersion of exile. H o w could this happen? Was God's covenant with David a broken reed? For the authors of the Book of Kings, the task of historiography is thus to winnow the chaff of political circumstance and to provide the nation with a perspective on its past. The principles of the Book of Deuteronomy set the standard for the historians, who are influenced by its language and its ideology. lust as Moses repeatedly counsels his people "to love" the Lord and "walk only in His paths" and to "follow" His path with all one's "heart" and "soul" (see Deut. 4:4; 5:30; 6:5; 10:12, among others), so do these phrases characterize the piety of righteous kings (cf. 1 Kings 14:8; 2 Kings 18:6; 23:3, 25). Similarly, the Deuteronomic exhortations that warn the people not to cause "the LORD your God displeasure" (lit., "to do that which is evil in the eyes of the L O R D " or "to turn away" either "to the right or to the left," through deeds of apostasy that "follow" one's "willful heart") are variously echoed in the Book of Kings (cf. Deut. 4:25; 11:16; 17:11; 29:18; 1 Kings 14:22; 22:43; 2 Kings 18:6; 22:2). What is more, the terms with which the Book of Kings condemns idolatry, promotes monotheism, advocates centralized worship, and describes divine wrath are also drawn from the argot ofDeuteronomy. 1 4 In this way, a covenant is outlined—one that requires outer obedience and inner resolve. The criteria of fidelity are clear to all. The historical writers thus evaluate the generations of the northern and southern kings according to the standard of Deuteronomy. They do "right" or "evil" in the eyes of the Lord in proportion to their zeal for worship in God's chosen place (lerusalem) and their degree of tolerance for idolatry of any sort. Both values are presented in Deuteronomy 12, where the time set for implementing a centralized shrine is also given. Only when Israel will cross into the Land and find "safety" (lit., "rest") from its surrounding enemies will that commandment come into effect (Deut. 12:10). Historians eager to elevate David and Solomon to the ranks of pious servants of God make sure to adduce this old phrase in their reports of David's inspiration to build the Temple (2 Sam. 7:1) and later in connection with Solomon's decision to fulfill his father's dream of a Temple for the Lord (1 Kings 5:18). Accordingly, only those kings who truly enforce the Solomonic standard—notably, Hezekiah and losiah—come in for exemplary praise, while the 401
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
other kings who win kudos—like Asa and Jehoshaphat—are variously applauded for their zeal against idolatry, even though the regional high places are left untouched. N o other criteria have such crucial bearing, for on no others does the fate of the nation depend. Thus, the political and industrial projects of these monarchs are of little concern to the biblical historians. In remarkable contrast to the Assyrian and Babylonian chronicles, which regularly exaggerate the military and political exploits of the sovereigns, the Book of Kings keeps close to its religious purpose: to explain God's ways to future generations through an explanation of His response to Israel's obedience to the covenant. Criticism of royal behavior and justification of divine judgment are thus the warp and woof of the historiography of the Book of Kings. In particular, the rival successors of Solomon stand at the head of two chains of criticism—whose final links are divine wrath and the punishments of exile. King Jeroboam is the paradigmatic apostate of the north. After the division of the monarchy, he abandons the Temple in Jerusalem and builds rival shrines in Bethel and Dan. He there sets up images of calves ("your gods, O Israel, who brought you up from the land ofEgypt") 1 5 and institutes a festival cycle that is different from the southern calendar (1 Kings 12:28-33). Northern nationalists were undoubtedly delighted by this bold display of cultic chauvinism (which is even supported by local prophets), 16 but our historian immediately adds a devastating prophecy against Bethel (1 Kings 13:1-3) and another against Jeroboam's successors (1 Kings 14:13b-16). 17 Until these forecasts are fulfilled, hundreds of years of cultic blasphemies will follow. Intoning the language in which the doom of the north is sealed (1 Kings 14:16), the historian invokes the expression "the sins that Jeroboam committed and led Israel to commit" (or its minor variation) over all the kings of Samaria (cf. 1 Kings 14:16; 15:26, 30, 34; 16:3, 19, 26, 31; 22:53; 2 Kings 3:2-3; 10:29; 13:2, 6, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18,24, 28; 17:2). The final crescendo of this criticism comes in 2 Kings 17:7-23, which repeats the charge against Jeroboam (w. 21-22) and remarkably adds a strong criticism of the people, who are said to have ignored the repeated protestations of prophets to repent of their "delusion" and return to the "covenant" and "commandments of the L O R D " (W. 13-15). There is nothing like this elsewhere in Kings, though just this language is used in the prophecies ofjeremiah (Jer. 7:23-28). Quite evidently, then, 2 Kings 17:7-23 is influenced by a theology of prophetic warning reminiscent of the near-contemporary oracles ofjeremiah and Ezekiel. Presumably the standard of individual responsibility (Deut. 24:16) could only affirm the justice of divine wrath if all the nation was guilty—and if all were duly forewarned of the consequences. 18 The string of censures of southern kings has another style. Rather than uncompromising denunciation, it offers a mixed assessment. Thus, beginning with Rehoboam, we hear of the sins of the Judeans whose actions reinstated the worship of the dispossessed pagans (1 Kings 14: 22-24). Nothing is said here of Rehoboam's own sins, but these are mentioned in the evaluation ofhis son Abijam (15:3), which ignores the people's apostasy. In the subsequent reigns of those monarchs who "did what was pleasing to the L O R D " (kings like Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoash, Amaziah, Azariah, and Jotham), the positive report is compromised by the ensuing statement that the "shrines" (or "high places") remained standing (1 Kings 15:11-14; 22:43-44; 2 Kings 12: 3-4; 15:3-4, 34-35). Thus, as with Asa, the good news is the destruction of idolatrous objects and pagan perversions; the bad report stresses the continuation of sites of sacrifice and incense that rival Jerusalem. This double evaluation suggests that these righteous kings are limited by the people—keen on preserving their pagan piety (or was it a more syncretistic belief? —cf. 1 Kings 18:21). 19 Indeed, the impression one has from reading that "the shrines were not removed; the people continued to sacrifice and make offerings at the shrines" immediately after the assertion that a given king did "what was pleasing to the L O R D " is that the monarch tried his best to promote reforms but was limited in results. In this regard, the foregoing kings differ utterly from the evil kings who actively introduce pagan practices into Judah—kings like Joram or Ahaziah, whose ways are said to be influenced by marriage to northern princesses (2 Kings 8:18, 27); like Manasseh, whose apostasies reverse 402 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the reforms of Hezekiah (cf. 21:2-8); or like such lesser lights as Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin (23:32, 37; 24:9), who continue the downward spiral. At the same time, the merely "good" kings stand visibly apart from Hezekiah and Josiah as well— the two great reformers whose piety leads to a radical reversal of worship that recalls the greatness ofDavid (2 Kings 18: 5; 23:25). For these kings did not let one pagan sign stand—but utterly extirpated the objects of idolatrous worship and actively "abolished the shrines and smashed the pillars and cut down the sacred post" throughout the Land (2 Kings 18:4; 23:7-8). In the extension ofhis reform, King Josiah even destroyed the shrines built by Solomon for his wives and "tore down," "burned," and "beat . . . t o dust" the shrine in Bethel that leroboam had built (2 Kings 23:13-15). losiah's actions demonstrate exemplary piety, but even this cannot save the day. Years before, during the excesses of Manasseh, the Lord uttered a prophecy through his prophets that he would completely destroy ludah because of the abominations that had caused the people to sin (2 Kings 21:10-16). Indeed, this king's sins were worse than the ancient Amorite perversions (v. 11), which had been invoked earlier in connection with the abominations of King Ahab (1 Kings 21:26) and which had long since served to explain the extirpation of this native population from the land of Canaan (Gen. 15:16) and to mark the sins for which Israel would itself be dispersed into exile (Lev. 18:24-28). Thus despite losiah's unrivaled piety, God's anger cannot be assuaged (2 Kings 23:25-26). "The LORD said: 'I will also banish ludah from My presence as I banished Israel; and I will reject the city of lerusalem which I chose and the House where I said My name would abide'" (2 Kings 23:27). Thus is the sentence sealed and the ways of the Lord made known. It should be noted that there is no hint here of any mitigating condition that might change God's plan. Similarly, in an earlier decree, the Lord intones, "Because King Manasseh of ludah has done these abhorrent things . . . and because he led ludah to sin with his fetishes, assuredly . . . I am going to bring such a disaster on lerusalem and ludah that both ears of everyone who hears about it will tingle . . . I will wipe lerusalem clean as one wipes a dish and turns it upside down. And I will cast off the remnant of My own people and deliver them into the hands of their enemies . . ." (2 Kings 21:11-14). Repentance is also not a factor in the oracle that the prophetess Huldah utters to losiah's embassy after the king has heard the words of theTorah found in the Temple during his acts of purification. Speaking the oracle of the Lord, she says, "I am going to bring disaster upon this place and its inhabitants . . . [bjecause they have forsaken Me and have made offerings to other gods and vexed Me with all their deeds . . ." (2 Kings 22:16-17). It should also be noted that the crimes that elicit these categorical pronouncements are cultic only. There is no hint of the moral censure that contemporary prophets fling at the feet of the ludean kings and the nation. God's word, once uttered, brings about the fate it forecasts—and this for ritual misbehaviors. History is determined by divine decrees and their fulfillment.20 A similar situation obtains for the northern prophecies (if we disregard the atypical report of divine warnings found in 2 Kings 17:7-23). Repeatedly, dynastic oracles—both limited and long-term—are pronounced. Thus, despite an initial oracle of promise by Ahijah (1 Kings 11: 31b-39), the death of leroboam's son invokes a doom oracle against leroboam and the northern kingdom (1 Kings 14:13-15). Following Baasha's coup, this prediction comes true—"in accordance with the word that the LORD had spoken through His servant, Ahijah the Shilonite" (1 Kings 15:29). But no prophetic warning precedes this oracle. leroboam's dynasty is simply doomed without qualification. Nor is there any call for repentance before the judgment against Ahab (1 Kings 21:19, 20b-26). Surely the most dramatic expression of the historian's ideology of divine words that determine future events occurs just after leroboam sets up his shrine in Bethel. At that time, an event-begetting oracle is announced by a "man of God" from ludah, who approaches leroboam while he is preparing to present his offering and, "at the command of the LORD, cried out against the altar: O altar, altar! Thus said the LORD: A son shall be born to the House ofDavid, losiah by name; and he shall slaughter upon you the priests of the shrines who bring offerings upon you. And hu403
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
man bones shall be burned upon you.' He gave a portent on that day, saying: 'Here is the portent that the LORD has decreed: This altar shall break apart, and the ashes on it shall be spilled'" (1 Kings 13:1-3). About 300 years later this forecast comes true during the purges ofjosiah, "in fulfillment of the word of the LORD foretold by the man of God who foretold these happenings" (2 Kings 23:16). The historian wants all to know that punishment is a fact of providence—no matter how long it may take for the prophesied event to be realized. The absence of hope—be it through calls for repentance or oracles of restoration—is thus a striking feature of the Book of Kings. Undoubtedly, the close connection between oracle and punishment helps explain it. But this absence of hope only highlights the contrast between the writers of Kings and the classical prophets, who repeatedly offer words of promise and possibility, rather than oracles of fateful finality. Equally striking is the virtual absence in the Book of Kings of any moml evaluation of the monarchs or the people. Exceptional in this regard is Elijah's critique of King Ahab (1 Kings 21). One looks in vain for the position of the classical prophets, who believe that the Temple stands on a moral foundation and dare say that God desires justice more than sacrifice (Amos 5:21-24). To get a larger view of Israelite attempts to understand the tragedy of the Temple and the sufferings of exile, then, it is vital to keep one eye on the cultic explanation provided by the Book of Kings and the other on the moral explanation offered by the prophets. Only both together make up the full biblical teaching. In conclusion, it may be observed that the absence of consolation in the Book of Kings makes the haftarot taken from this source somewhat odd counterpoints to the Torah readings. Considered overall, it would appear that they were chosen primarily for the thematic parallelisms they present. Thus Torah texts dealing with the death and final testament of Abraham, or leprosy, or the festival celebrations of Passover and the Eighth Day of Assembly are coordinated with historical episodes or records that exemplify such topics. In many cases, recalling God's ongoing providence or the piety of the ancients was a clear motivation in the selection process. Other cases depend on less obvious connections. We have explored these matters in discussions of the individual haftarot taken from the Book ofKings.
THE BOOK OF ISAIAH: CHAPTERS 1-39 The Prophet and His Times Isaiah son of Amoz towers among the giants of classical biblical prophecy—repeatedly challenging the nation and its leaders with the ethical and religious will of God, and providing instructions and visions of moral renewal and universal peace. In such ways, he both dramatizes the engagement of a prophet with the social and political events of his times and expresses an impassioned concern for a life governed by covenantal values. For Isaiah, deceit and dissembling, like moral blindness and greed, corrupt the religious spirit and are anathema to God. The ancient covenant is thus no abstract teaching, but a concrete challenge for rectitude andjustice in daily life. Intensely alive in the troubled times o f j u d a h in the late eighth century B.C.E., Isaiah's words and deeds have became a model for a life of prophetic witness to divine demands. Isaiah's prophetic career was enmeshed in the political and cultural turmoil of the times. According to the superscription to the book, this career spanned the last half-century of the eighth century B.C.E. —including all or part of the reigns of the Judean kings Uzziah (769-733), Jotham (758-743, regent), Ahaz (743-733 B.C.E., regent; 733-727B.C.E.), and Hezekiah (727698 B.C.E.). According to the date provided in Isa. 6:1, Isaiah experienced an awesome vision of the Lord in the year that King Uzziah died (733 B.C.E.). If this experience was his commission to divine service, then his prophetic career began with the death of the monarch. 1 Alternatively, the vision marks a renewal or redirection of his prophetic career begun sometime earlier (and not otherwise indicated). 404 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
We first find Isaiah involved in historical events during the reign of Ahaz, shortly after 735 B.C.E. At that time, according to the Book ofKings, "King Rezin of Aram and King Pekah son of Remaliah of Israel advanced on Jerusalem for battle. They besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome [him]" (2 Kings 16:5). 2 The account of this alliance against Judah and Jerusalem is expanded upon in Isa. 7:1-16. Here we learn that the two kings conspire to dethrone Ahaz and replace him with someone called "son ofTabeel" (7:6). 3 The reasons for this attack are not stated, though it is generally assumed that Aram and Israel joined as allies against Assyria and moved against Jerusalem in the hopes of overcoming Ahaz's resistance and dethroning him. 4 Undoubtedly, this was part of a larger anti-Assyrian alliance, in which lyre and perhaps even Philistia joined in; 5 but one should not dismiss long-time rivalries between Israel, Aram, and Judah, in particular in light of Judah's expansion into Israel's trans-Jordanian territory of Gilead during the reigns of Uzziah and Jotham. This event may have encouraged Israel to join with Aram in the hopes of weakening Judah. 6 During the period prior to the invasion, Isaiah approaches Ahaz, who apparently intends to join forces with Assyria (2 Kings 16:7-9; cf. Isa. 7:13, 20), and delivers several oracles. The prophet regards Ahaz's action as indicating a lack of faith in divine support, and he also believes that such an attack will not materialize. In Isa. 7:3, Isaiah goes out to the Fuller's Field with his son Shear-jashub (meaning "[only] a remnant will turn back") and confronts the king with the words: "Be firm and be calm. Do not be afraid and do not lose heart on account of those two smoking stubs of firebrands, on account of the raging of Rezin and his Arameans and the son of Remaliah . . . . I t shall not succeed, it shall not come to pass . . . . I f you [Ahaz] will not believe, you shall not be established" (7:4-9). Shortly, thereafter, the prophet refers to the fact that "the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son," who should be named Immanuel ("with us is God") (7:14). It is not clear whether this is to be the prophet's own son or a royal scion; in any case, he predicts that before the lad can "reject the bad and choose the good" (7: 16), the danger will pass. Another prophecy, probably also from this period of imminent siege, involves the birth of another son to the prophet (whose wife is here designated "the prophetess"). This child will be named Maher-shalal-hash-baz ("pillage hastens, looting speeds")—a reference to the despoliation of Aram and Israel at the hands of Assyria (Isa. 8:1-3). In 732 B.C.E., in fact, Assyria invaded and sacked Damascus, the capital of Aram. Thus was Jerusalem saved. Whatever prompted Isaiah to refer to Assyria as the agent of divine wrath against his people is not certain (cf. 10:5-6); equally uncertain is the report of a military advance against Jerusalem in 10:27-34. 7 The hegemony of Assyria over the western Asiatic kingdoms refueled the fires of revolt. In the year 724 B.C.E., King Hoshea oflsrael decided to discontinue his tribute payments to King Shalmeneser V of Assyria and establish diplomatic ties with Egypt (2 Kings 17:4). This proved disastrous. Shalmeneser V reacted with force and besieged Samaria. Sometime in late summer or early autumn of 722 B.C.E., Samaria buckled under the siege and fell. Shalmeneser's successor Sargon II repeatedly boasted of destroying Samaria,8 but it would appear that the city had already fallen. The surviving region was made into an Assyrian province (Samerina). The upper class was deported to Babylonian and Media (2 Kings 17:6), and a new upper class was imported from Babylonia and possibly Syria as well (2 Kings 17:24). It was this great northern destruction that caused Isaiah's contemporary Micah to wail: "Because of this I will lament and wail; I will go stripped and naked! I will lament as sadly as the jackals, as mournfully as the ostriches. For her [the nation's] wound is incurable, it has reached Judah, it has spread to the gate of my people, to Jerusalem" (Mic. 1:8-9). Several years later, in 714 B.C.E., a different revolt broke out in southern Palestine—led by the city of Ashdod. This event is recorded in Isaiah 20. 9 Once again the prophet took an active part, dramatizing the dangerous consequences of impetuous revolt against Assyria. His symbolic and excessive performance (he went "naked and barefoot for three years" [v. 3]) probably had a greater popular impact than his ongoing oracles to the people of Judah to trust the Lord for victory and not to rely upon the words and weapons ofEgypt (Isaiah 30-32). Isaiah's warnings 405
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
proved true. Sargon II smashed the coalition in 712 B.C.E.,10 and while ludah participated in the event, there was no Assyrian action against her. This was not the case, however, during the stormy political events of 701 B.C.E. In response to a widespread revolt in Palestine, Philistia, and Egypt that followed the death of Sargon II (705 B.C.E.), King Sennacherib of Assyria (701-681 B.C.E.) invaded ludah and besieged lerusalem. Subject to taunts and destruction, King Hezekiah ofludah sought the word of God from Isaiah and received a prophecy of the salvation and deliverance of Zion. This miraculous episode is recorded in Isaiah 36-38, but the reprieve did not save ludah from subjugation, tribute, and loss of territory (2 Kings 18:13-16). The price of political activism was vassalage, for Isaiah's great appeal for trust in God's plan was ignored. Following these critical events, Isaiah's voice fell silent. His direct access to King Ahaz (Isa. 7:3-24), his familiarity with Shebna, the royal chamberlain (22:15), and his prominent position during the reign of King Hezekiah, when he was summoned to provide oracles for the city and prayers for the king (Isaiah 37-38), suggest that Isaiah had some court position—possibly of a scribal nature. 11 It is of interest, in this regard, that the Chronicler refers to him as a royal historian: "The other events ofUzziah's reign, early and late, were recorded by the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz" (2 Chron. 26:22). From this vantage point, he responded to the turns of political power with God's word to him. Looking back from the Hellenistic period, Ben Sira sang a song in praise of famous men and praised Isaiah as "the great prophet whose vision could be trusted" (Ecclus. 48:22). In due course, this revered prophet became the model of a saintly life. According to rabbinic and pseudepigraphical traditions, Isaiah died the death of a monotheist martyr, hacked to death during the reign of the ruthless paganizing King Manasseh (see B. Yevamot 49b and TheAscension oflsaiah 5:11-14).
The Collection andltsMessqge The Collection Isaiah 1-39 composes the first half of the Book of Isaiah 1-66, which is the first prophetic collection in our received tradition of Hebrew Scriptures. The collection of oracles in Isaiah 1-39 mostly pronounces doom against Israel and envisions her destruction at the hands of Assyria. The coordination of this material with chapters 40-66, whose primary focus is the people's salvation from the Babylonian exile and return to the homeland, thus structures the overall anthology into a sequence of doom and exile/restoration and return. The coordination of all sixty-six chapters in one scroll is already suggested by Ben Sira's song of praise, where Isaiah is lauded as a prophet of trustworthy vision—who "foresaw the last things," "comforted those who mourned in Zion," and "revealed the future to the end of time" (Ecclus. 48:24-25). The oldest full scroll we possess comes from shortly thereafter, one of the so-called Dead Sea Scrolls. The first thirty-nine chapters of Isaiah divide into four parts. Part 1 comprises Isaiah 1-12, and has a threefold structure: (a) Isaiah 1-5 contains a series of stern rebukes directed against the people for cultic and ethical sins, as well as the attitude of pride. There is no narrative framework here, and the oracles are brief and pungent in tone (note, for example, the frequent doomsayings beginning with hoy, "Woe" [NIPS: "Ah"] in chapter 5). Only 2:1-4 provides a sense of hope, in this case of a period when Zion shall be restored as a place of universal justice; its position here is probably to complement the dooms recited at the end of chapter 1 against Zion—bemoaned as a city where justice once reigned, but where now there are only felonies and crimes (1:23-31). (b) Isaiah 6-8 contains several political prophecies mostly directed to King Ahaz, dealing with the impending crisis brought on by the coalition oflsrael and Aram and the rising power of Assyria. In this section there is a narrative framework that helps contextualize the prophecies. Most of these oracles encourage trust in divine aid against the enemy, (c) Isaiah 9-12 contains mostly prophecies of consolation and hope, including the restoration of the Davidic monarchy and the onset of peace and harmony (9:1-6; 11:1-10), the ingathering of the scattered nation from its dispersion (11:11-16), and a concluding hymn celebrating the salvation of the Lord (Isaiah 12). Within this context there are included some doomsday threats (9:7-10:19), but these are 406 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
softened by the immediate promise of divine aid against the Assyrian aggressor (10:20-34). 12 Part 1 thus has a clear structure of doom and diatribe/comfort and consolation. Part 2 (Isaiah 13-27) is a composite collection of doom oracles against foreign nations (e. g., Babylon: 13:1-14:27; Philistia: 14:28-32; Moab: 15:1-16:14; Damascus: 17:1-14; Egypt: 19:1-24; and Tyre: 23:1-18); and ominous pronouncements against the likes of the "Desert of the Sea," "Dumah," and the "Valley of Vision" (Isaiah 21-22). The principle of organization here is loose and associative, and diverse historical events are collected. This material closes with a vision of near-apocalyptic quality—anticipating the doom of Israel's enemies and a new era of hope (Isaiah 24-27). Part 3 (Isaiah 28-35) returns to oracles directed against faithless and foolish Israel (Ephraim) and Judah—and is particularly marked by critiques of the Judean people's disregard of God's will and their attempted alliances with Egypt (Isaiah 30:1-5; 31:1-4). The language and content of the prophecies in chapters 34-35 bear a close similarity with materials found in Isaiah 40-66, which has led to an old opinion that these chapters have been mistakenly appended to Isaiah 1-33. 1 3 Likewise, the historical information that constitutes part 4 (Isaiah 36-39) has also been considered a secondary supplement or appendix. The reports about Sennacherib's attack against Jerusalem, Hezekiah's illness, and other matters found here clearly repeat (albeit with some variation) the historiographical narratives reported in 2 Kings 18:13-20:19. 14 It is thus evident that, despite the presence of broad thematic groups, Isaiah 1-39 is a collection of collections—gathered over the course of a full half-century and more by Isaiah and his disciples. As distinct from the pattern in other prophetic works, the visionary oracles of redemption do not constitute a separate unit here (alongside doom oracles and oracles against foreign nations). By contrast, the ongoing transmitters of Isaiah's words undoubtedly did regard the entire collection (chapters 1-66) as conforming to this overall pattern, so that the first chapters of part 1 and the bulk of part 3 constitute words of critique and censure against Israel; part 2 contains oracles of doom against foreign nations; and Isaiah 40-66 is replete with oracles of national salvation and restoration. The Message Isaiah of Jerusalem is the great teacher of classical ethical monotheism in the Hebrew Bible. With vigor and courage, he speaks out against the sinners in his nation— "People laden with iniquity! Brood of evildoers! Depraved children!" who "have forsaken the LORD" (Isa. 1:4). These disloyal ones have broken the covenant, turning justice (mishpat) into injustice (mispah) and equity (tzeda-kah) into iniquity (tze'akah), as he says at the conclusion to his powerful parable of the vineyard (5:7). 15 Speaking for the voiceless and downtrodden, Isaiah rails against real-estate magnates and land speculators "who add house to house and join field to field" (5: 8); against clever dissemblers and manipulators "who call evil good and good evil; who present darkness as light and light as darkness" (5:20); and against distorters of justice and due process, "who vindicate him who is in the wrong in return for a bribe, and withhold vindication from him who is in the right" (5:23). Over against this, the prophet tries to give the people positive instructions in order to redress their crimes. "Devote yourselves to justice" he teaches, "aid the wronged; uphold the rights of the orphan; defend the cause of the widow" (1:17). Otherwise, God Himself will arise to plead the cause of the needy (3:13), and a terrible divine doom will befall the nation. Zion shall then be left like a lone booth in a vineyard (1:8). "Great houses shall lie forlorn," and the "people will suffer exile for not giving heed" to its "multitude victims ofhunger" and "masses parched with thirst" (5:9, 13). Isaiah's tendency to hyperbole and generalization should not obscure his dominating theological insight: that ethical action is the primary feature of God's covenant with Israel and that the people's disregard of their needy neighbors will result in divine punishment and national doom. No amount of manipulation of the sacred Temple service can replace good deeds, he proclaims. Those sinners who come to the courts of the Temple with animals for sacrifice and pious prayers on their lips fill God with "loathing." The rites of holy assemblies performed along with the disregard of the distressed are unforgivable iniquities, says the prophet; the Lord has no need of sacrifices, but requires devotion to justice and equity (Isa. 1:10-17). There is therefore 407
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
no denunciation here of the Temple ritual per se, but only of the desire to have it both ways: to raise hands filled with iniquity in prayer to God, and yet hope for forgiveness; to withhold food from the poor, and yet offer sacrifices in hopes of divine atonement; to speak lies in the street, and still proclaim pious solemnities in God's courts. First things first, says the prophet: injustice is atoned for by justice; only then may the holy shrine be a place of consecration. Rituals cannot manipulate God or undo injustice. This teaching constitutes a remarkable theological challenge and arises out of Isaiah's deep sense of the transcendent holiness of God. At a crucial moment in his life, standing in the Temple of lerusalem, Isaiah experienced an awesome vision of the divine Glory seated on His heavenly throne and surrounded by angels proclaiming, "Holy, holy, holy! The L O R D of Hosts! His presence fills all the earth!" (Isa. 6:1-3). Overcome, the prophet felt himself unclean among an unclean people and accepted divine purification and a mission to the people oflsrael. 16 He saw as his task to bring the teachings of the "Holy One oflsrael" (1:4; 5:19, 24) to the nation and to teach them that the One whose presence fills the earth requires justice. Even as the Lord is Himself made holy through righteousness (5:16), so will Zion be redeemed through righteousness (1: 27). 17 "None but the L O R D of Hosts shall you account holy" (8:13), the prophet tells the people; but they follow idols and iniquities and the pride of their own pompous presumptions (2:8; 31: 7). Paradoxically, the prophetic proclamations will only blind the people's eyes and block their ears the more (6:9-10), 18 so that, in their haughty pride, the unjust people challenge the Holy One to hasten His punishment "if we are to give heed" (5:19). Yet soon, the prophet says, these haughty ones will "behold what My hands have wrought. . . [and] will hallow My name. Men will hallow the Holy One of lacob and stand in awe of the God oflsrael" (29:23). Then "the confused shall acquire insight" (29:24), "and the wisdom of its wise shall fail" (29:14). Pride is thus a spiritual condition repeatedly condemned by Isaiah. He sees it as a moral cancer, producing flagrant disregard for divine justice, and a corruption of perspective, producing unjustified reliance on human wisdom and power, along with all the follies of idol worship. Whether speaking to kings or commoners, the prophet stresses the importance of trust and confidence in God's covenant and dominion over the illusions of political alliance and power politics. "Oh, disloyal sons," the prophet rails, "making plans ['etzah] against [God's] wishes . . . —who set out to go down to E g y p t . . . to seek shelter under the protection of Egypt" (Isa. 30: l-2)."Ha! Those who would hide their plans ['etzah] deep from the L O R D " (29:15). All these political machinations will come to naught, even as plots to destroy ludah cannot succeed by human design or power. "Hatch a plot ['etzah]" the prophet challenges, "it shall be foiled; agree on action—it shall not succeed. For with us is God!" (8:10). Those who "put. . . trust and reliance in that which is fraudulent and tortuous" (30:12) will be "ruthlessly shattered" (30:14). True hope lies in trust in God's plan. "You shall triumph by stillness and quiet; your victory shall come about through calm and confidence" (30:15). "The L O R D of Hosts has sworn this oath: ' . . . What I have planned [ya'atzti], that shall come to pass: To break Assyria in My land . . . . That is the plan that is planned [ha-'etzah ha-ye'utzah] for all the earth; that is why an arm is poised over all the nations. For the L O R D of Hosts has planned [yaeatz], who then can foil it? It is His arm that is poised, and who can stay it? '" (14:24-27). Isaiah believed that the little faith of Israel and the greatness of her sins would result in her ruin. God would unloose His anger against His people, sending Assyria as the "rod of My anger" against Israel, the "ungodly nation"—charged to punish"a people that provokes Me . . . to make it a thing trampled like the mire of the streets" (Isa. 10:5-6). For Isaiah, then, God not only disregards iniquitous praise and condemns injustice, but also, as Lord of all nations, uses the forces of history to realize His purpose against Israel. Injustice and idolatry will thus not be disregarded in the divine economy of things: perversion and pride will be punished in due course, for the Lord is both mighty and holy, at once attentive to human deeds and zealous for acts of righteousness. But all is not utter doom. Soon the prideful punisher will also be doomed (Isa. 10:12), and the Lord will come in blazing wrath to reinstall Israel to glory. In the end, a remnant will be 408 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
saved
and the exiled people shall be restored to their homeland in a new Exodus ( 1 1 : 1 1 - 1 6 ) . At this time of national renewal, the Lord will bind up "His people's wounds" and heal "the injuries it has suffered." ( 3 0 : 2 6 ) . The prophet gives divine assurance that a glorious light will shine over Zion and Judah—as bright as "the light of the seven days" ( 3 0 : 2 6 ) . Now "the people that walked in darkness" shall see "a brilliant light"; and on "those who dwelt in a land of gloom" the "light" of redemption "has dawned" ( 9 : 1 ) . Now, with vengeance exacted upon the destroyer, the Lord will remove the slag of His people and restore "magistrates . . . and . . . counselors as of yore" ( 1 : 2 6 ) . Under the guidance of a new king of righteousness, "equity" and "justice" will arise—a descendant of David, filled with"a spirit of wisdom and insight." Justice will be restored to the social world, along with peace and harmony in nature. "The wolf shall dwell with the lamb" and "nothing evil or vile shall be done" on earth, "for the land shall be filled with devotion to the L O R D as water covers the sea" ( 1 1 : 1 - 9 ) . Visions of social justice and national restoration are thus the exalted climax of Isaiah's prophecies condemning injustice and forecasting exile. And just as Israel was the center of God's universal rule in the time of judgment, so shall Zion be the matrix of the universal peace to come. On that day, "the Mount of the LORD'S House shall stand firm above the mountains"—a harbinger of joy. A pilgrimage of all peoples will then come to the Temple, from which a teaching of righteousness and peace will be proclaimed. All nations will be instructed by God's word. So transformed, the nations "shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not take up sword against nation; they shall never again know war" (Isa. 2 : 2 - 4 ) . Hopes of national restoration and Utopian visions of international peace thus counterpoint the injustices within the nation and the military terrors from without. For Isaiah, justice is the ultimate demand of God. The image of a renewed Zion and a proclamation there, as if from Sinai, of God's teaching of justice is thus an ideal of spiritual and social reorientation. Nothing is said here of religious conversion among the nations or of a loss of their distinctive cultural or religious forms. Rather, the universality of the vision is that all nations will be instructed by God's demand for equity and peace—each in their own distinctive way. This implication of Isaiah's teaching is made explicit by his Judean contemporary, Micah, who recited the same bold vision as did Isaiah (Mic. 4 : 1 - 3 ) but adds: "Though all the peoples walk each in the names of its gods, we will walk in the name of the LORD our God forever and ever" (v. 5 ) . (6:13),
THE BOOK OF ISAIAH: CHAPTERS 40-66 The Prophecies and Their Times The Book oflsaiah as a whole (chapters 1-66) constitutes the first of the three large collections of prophetic books in the received Hebrew Scriptures: Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. The opening superscription to the book dates the prophetic mission of Isaiah ben Amoz from the reigns ofKings Uzziah and Ahaz, in the mid-eighth century B.C.E. (Isa. 1 : 1 ) . Since Isaiah 4 0 - 6 6 does not begin with any new chronological reference, the prophecies in the last half of the book were presumably understood by the ancients as part of the predictions oflsaiah ben Amoz. The abrupt shift in the Isaianic corpus from oracles of doom to themes of consolation (beginning with Isaiah 40) has long drawn the attention of commentators—particularly since the prophecies of exile announced to King Hezekiah (in the first part) refer to the eighth century B.C.E., while the prophecies of return from exile (in the second part) refer to a historical reality two centuries later. Beginning with Johann Gottfried Eichhorn, in 1783, modern critics have reinforced this observation with various arguments: ( 1 ) Isaiah 7 and 3 6 - 3 9 refer to Kings Ahaz ( 7 4 3 - 7 2 7 B.C.E.) and Hezekiah ( 7 2 7 - 6 9 8 B.C.E.), respectively, whereas 4 5 : 1 refers to Cyrus the Mede, who, in 5 3 9 B.C.E., conquered Babylon and subsequently decreed the release of the Judean exiles (cf. Ezra L ) . 1 ( 2 ) Isaiah 1 0 : 5 - 1 9 and 2 4 refer to mighty Assyria as the rod of God's wrath 409
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
against Zion, whereas in subsequent chapters this empire is no longer reckoned; indeed, in 45: 1 it is Cyrus whom God has "anointed" to free His people,2 and in Isaiah 46-47 the prophet mocks the fading glory of Babylon, the erstwhile "Mistress of Kingdoms" (47:5). (3) Several passages in the opening chapters not only refer to Assyrian monarchs (e. g., Sargon [20:1]) but also are clarified by Assyrian historical documents. 3 By contrast, a strong link exists between the imagery in Isaiah 40-66 and later Babylonian and Persian literary inscriptions.4 And finally, (4) whereas Isaiah 6 presupposes the existence of lerusalem and the Temple, 60:13 and 66:1 anticipate the reconstruction of the shrine, and 60:10 and 61:4 forecast the rebuilding of Zion and her walls. The dramatic differences between the first section of the Book of Isaiah (chapters 1-39) and the second (chapters 40-66) were already observed by classical lewish commentators in the Middle Ages. For example R. Abraham ibn Ezra (1089-1164) deduced that the concluding portion of the prophecies was not the work of Isaiah ben Amoz, but of an anonymous prophet during the Babylonian exile. The reference to Cyrus the Mede in Isa. 45:1 was not a decisive factor in Ibn Ezra's judgment, since he granted Isaiah of lerusalem a prophecy of this late monarch (in 13:4). Ibn Ezra was much more impressed by the style of direct address found in Isaiah 40-66. In his view, God's direct speech to His prophet in connection with a post-restoration period would have made no sense to Isaiah in the eighth century B.C.E. Thus, he reasoned, the reference in 49:7 "to the despised one" before whom "nobles . . . shall prostrate themselves" only made sense if the addressee was a postexilic prophet. In Ibn Ezra's mind, the use of the personal address ("you") in the sequel further clinches his case that the prophecies in Isaiah 40 ff. have their historical locus in Babylon in the sixth century B.C.E. (see especially his comments to 40:1 and 49:7). 5 At the same time, Ibn Ezra stressed that though some oracles "state that Cyrus released the exiles," these prophecies were mentioned as a matter of historical record. The true reference of "everything" (viz., the prophecies) in chapters 40ff, he claimed, is "the coming redemption/row ourpresent exile" By this contemporization of the prophecies, Ibn Ezra differed decisively from R. Moses ibn Chiquatilla (mid-eleventh century). The latter interpreted the prophecies with reference "to the rebuilding of the Second Temple" after the Babylonian exile (see Ibn Ezra's comment on Isa. 40:1). Many modern interpreters share this view. On closer inspection, the precise setting of the prophecies in Isaiah 40-66 is somewhat more complicated. On the one hand, the initial series of oracles in chapters 40-51 suggest a Babylonian setting. The people are comforted for their exilic servitude and told to expect the advent of God's redemptive Glory. "Go forth from Babylon," they are told, "flee from Chaldea!"—for "the L O R D has redeemed His servant lacob" (48:20-21). Several mocking tirades against Babylonian pride and practice further underscore this foreign setting (chapters 46-47). By contrast, some passages in the ensuing chapters deal with the desolation of Zion and imply a standpoint in the homeland (cf. 60:10-11). Similarly, a number of prophecies that include "foreigners" in the pilgrimages to and privileges of the Temple also imply a postexilic reality (chapters 56 and 66). One may therefore conclude that the received corpus of Isaiah 40-66 is itself not a unified collection of prophecies, but rather a collection of collections, beginning sometime after Cyrus the Mede's decree of liberation to the exiles in 538 B.C.E. and continuing several decades thereafter. The different theologies and emphases within chapters 40-66 reinforce this point, as we shall see.
The Collection andltsMessqge The Collection Isaiah 40-66 is an ensemble of several units that have been variously subdivided over the centuries.6 A broad consensus of scholarly opinion distinguishes three parts. Part 1, chapters 40-48, is a collection of prophecies of comfort emphasizing an imminent redemption; these oracles are addressed to the Babylonian exiles (called lacob or Israel) and highlight the power of God as the creator of the universe and the fulfiller of prophecies. Part 2, chapters 49-55, is a group of prophecies directed toward Zion (called a bride or woman); these materials emphasize her reconciliation with God and physical restoration. Part 3, chapters 56-66, is a diverse group 410 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
of prophecies of social and religious rebuke and of hope; these are apparently directed to the Judean community restored to its homeland. 7 This tripartite division is both thematic and stylistic, but inevitably overschematizes. Thus prophecies to Zion and of Zion restored are not limited to part 2, but occur in parts 1 (Isa. 40: 9-11) and 3 (Isaiah 60) as well; and critique of ritual behavior is not restricted to part 3 (65: 3-5; 66:3), but is also found in part 1 (44:9-20). In addition, a series of so-called Servant Songs overlaps the several parts (42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12) 8 and suggests diverse referents and purposes (see below). 9 Finally, the three units are also intersected by other prophecies that contradict the main themes of the part (e. g., Isaiah 47 contains a rebuke of Babylon, and 63: 1 - 6 is a vision of violent retribution against the enslavers of the exiles).10 The inner complexity of the parts notwithstanding, one may discern an overall division of the materials along spatial and temporal axes. Part 1 (Isaiah 40-48) is addressed to the exiles, still in Babylon; part 2 (chapters 49-55) is directed to Zion, as yet unrestored; and part 3 (chapters 56-66) appeals to the returnees, who are in the process of rebuilding their homeland. From this overall perspective, there is a double movement: from the exile of Babylon to the sacred center of Zion, and from promises of imminent fulfillment to their realization. The songs to Zion serve as a hinge in both cases—providing a vision of home to the dispersed, and a transition between the zones of exilic darkness (42:7) and the new light of Zion (60:1-2). Attentive to this division, many moderns have further argued that the larger complex oflsaiah 40-55 (Deutero-Isaiah) is the product of a different prophet (or prophetic tradition) than Isaiah 56-66 (Trito-Isaiah). This contention is reinforced by notable differences of style and ideology in the two sections. In particular, parts 1 and 2 (Isaiah 40-55) are distinguished by fairly integrated rhetorical units focused on God as creator, redeemer, and fulfiller of prophecies, 11 whereas part 3 (Isaiah 56-66) is marked by many different genres (rebukes, prayers, and prophecies) and by a recurrent attention to the involvement of foreigners in the rebuilding of Zion and the Temple (cf. 56:1-7). On the other hand, one can clearly observe recurrent themes and language in the separate parts (e. g., the motifs of a highway in the desert and a messenger to Zion appear in 40:3-5 and 9 - 1 1 and in 52:7-10 and 62:10-12). These continuities of ideology and expression have fostered the opinion that Isaiah 56-66 extends the prophetic tradition found in Isaiah 40-55 through reinterpretation and reapplication. The notion of a prophetic school tradition helps to explain the integration of diverse materials in Isaiah 40-66 and the undeniable recurrences in vocabulary, style, and ideology. It also helps explain the striking relationship between these chapters and Isaiah 1-39. For while there are strong historical and theological distinctions between the sections—principally the difference between prophecies of doom set in eighth-century-B.c.E. Judah and prophecies of consolation set in sixth-century-B.c.E. Babylon (and Judah)—there are also notable links between them. Repeatedly, imagery and language presented in the early chapters as prophecies recur in Isaiah 40-66 as about to be fulfilled. For example, the theme of light and hope in 9:1 is taken up in 60:1-3, and the relationship between doom and promise in 1:7 lies behind the formulation in 62:4. In a similar vein, the impact of the earlier Isaianic prophecies on postexilic tradition is discernible in the reuse of the famous prophecy of Utopian bliss in Isa. 11:6-9, the lion lying with the lamb, in 65:25. 12 In sum, the traditions oflsaiah 1-39 helped shape the expectations found in Isaiah 40-66. 1 3 In addition, these chapters make sophisticated and often innovative use of a wide-ranging array of earlier biblical themes, styles, and sources. Particularly notable is the use made of mythological traditions (51:9-11), the Abraham and Sarah traditions (51:2), the Exodus traditions, 14 the language of prophetic commissions ("Do not fear"), 15 a variety of earlier prophetic collections and many psalms, 16 and idioms found in contemporary cuneiform literature. The prophets and disciples involved in this reworking made full use of earlier material for their own rhetorical and theological ends. The Message Isaiah 40-66 constitutes one of the richest theological collections in the Hebrew Bible. These chapters compose a virtual handbook of theological arguments and doctrines. As 411
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
a collection of revelations on such themes as God's uniqueness, Israel's unique status, and the suffering of exile, chapters 40-55 are beyond compare in postexilic literature. And as a series of universalist teachings on the participation of foreigners in the new Zion, the prophetic teachings in this collection stand in stark contrast to more exclusivist outlooks. It was presumably the exilic condition of the nation that elicited the polemical tone of the discourses—a tone that variously proclaims the good tidings of God's advent and exhorts the people from their exilic ennui and despair. The dominant concern of the collection is clear from the start. Isaiah 40 begins with a proclamation of hope and reconciliation. "Comfort, oh comfort My people, says your God. Speak tenderly to lerusalem, and declare to her that her term of service is over, that her iniquity is expiated . . ." (Isa. 40:1-2). In this call of comfort (nahamu), the despair of destruction and emptiness of exile is reversed. Earlier, the ancient lament over Zion had proclaimed, "Alas! Lonely sits the city, once great with people! . . . Zion spreads out her hands, she has no one to comfort \menahem\ her" (Lam. 1:1, 17); while now the prophet proclaims, "Truly the LORD has comforted [niham] Zion, comforted all her ruins" (Isa. 51:3) and "Raise a shout together, O ruins oflerusalem! For the LORD will comfort [niham] His people" (52:9). The news of God's advent is announced, then, as a time when sorrows will be assuaged and divine forgiveness freely given. The very God who punished Israel in the past (42:24-25) now proclaims His redemptive deeds on behalf of the exiles and Zion. But the call falls on deaf and despairing ears. "Why do you say, O lacob, . . . 'My way is hid from the LORD, my cause is ignored by my God'?" (40: 27). The exile had clearly induced a sense of divine distance and spiritual weariness (40:31). In order to counter this mood, the power of God (as creator and redeemer) is repeatedly stressed. "The LORD is God from of old, Creator of the earth from end to end, He never grows faint or weary, His wisdom cannot be fathomed" (40:28). The many references to God as the transcendent creator and as wise beyond measure are thus teachings designed to support the prophet's claim that the prophecies of divine restoration will be fulfilled. In this regard, we may observe that the most repeated epithets of God are those that proclaim His majesty as the one and only creator, the one and only God. He says, "I am the LORD and there is none else; beside Me, there is no god . . . . I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe—I the LORD do all these things" (Isa. 45:5-7). As "the LORD, who made everything," He "annul[s] the omens of diviners . . . and fulfill[s] the prediction of [His] messengers" (44:24-26). This emphasis recurs in the contentions addressed to the nations and their prophetic predictions (41:22-23; 47:10-15), and it is repeatedly found in polemics addressed to the people of Israel. Significantly, the power of God as Lord of all is juxtaposed to polemics against the people's idolatry. He alone is the redeemer, and not the idols (42:15-17; 45:18-25); and He is the one who "foretold things that happened" (the present redemption) long beforehand (before the exile), so "that you might not say, 'My idol caused them, my carved and molten images ordained them'" (48:3, 5). "For thus said the LORD, the Creator of heaven who alone is God . . . Who announced this aforetime? . . . Was it not I the LORD? . . . By Myself have I sworn . . . a word that shall not turn back: To Me every knee shall bend, every tongue swear loyalty" (45:18, 21, 23). The proclamation of redemption may be trusted because the exile has come to pass. The only and unique Creator guides Israel's national destiny—this is the prophet's challenge to all disbelievers. A decisive theological shift may be discerned here. In the earlier Torah literature, the existence of idolatry among the nations is taken for granted, and only Israelite idolatry is challenged (cf. Deut. 4:9-20). Similarly, in early prophecy, only Israel is condemned for or warned against pagan practices—not the foreign practitioners, even when these practitioners are roundly mocked (cf. ler. 10:1-10). By contrast, in Isaiah 40-66 both Israel (44:9-20; 57:1-13) and the nations (46:1-2; 47:8-13) are repeatedly ridiculed for their false trust in idols and diviners. Indeed, in a collection of oracles where God repeatedly says, "There is no God beside Me," "no God exists beside Me," and'T am God, and there is none else," there is little room for alternate worship or partial acknowledgment of God. This expression of theological totalization is all the more 412 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
striking when set against the great proclamations of the Book of Psalms, which often aver God's supremacy while nevertheless acknowledging the obeisance (and thus the existence) of "all divine beings" to Him (cf. Ps. 97:7, 9). In Isaiah 40-66, then, monotheism is portrayed as a total and absolute phenomenon. But this does not lead to exclusiveness or intolerance. The foreigners are repeatedly promised access to the Temple and the divine service performed there—both as pilgrims and as practitioners (56:1-8; 66:18-21). The strident nature of these passages, with their bold assertion of priestly service by non-Israelites, strikes one as a polemical stance in the post-exilic community. "As for the foreigners . . . who hold fast to My covenant—I will bring them to My sacred mount and let them rejoice in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices shall be welcome on My altar; for My House shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples" (56:6-7). 17 Admittedly, the theology of monotheistic exclusivity is a feature of part 1, and the ideology of universalistic inclusivity is a feature of part 3. One might therefore be tempted to see here separate and distinct traditions. But inasmuch as the prophetic tradition has joined these two parts together, one may rather prefer to see the entirety oflsaiah 40-66 as expressing a new vision of monotheism—one where the consequences of there being one God are maturely faced. In the new community, the poor and the brokenhearted will together find a home (66:1-2). The nations will be gathered to Zion with the returnees o f j u d a h (56:7-8), much like the mixed multitude that once followed the Israelites out of Egypt, and they will respond to the new light shining over Zion and come from all the earth with gifts and gladness (60:1-14). A universalist tone thus triumphs in Isaiah 40-66 over all theological and national divisions.18 In this drama, the people oflsrael have a unique role to play. According to the prophet, God (as creator and redeemer) is known through the historical existence of the nation oflsrael—through its fate and fortune. Thus, throughout parts 1 and 2, the people serve as "witnesses" to the truth of God's predictive and redemptive activity before "all the nations"; they are "My servant whom I have chosen" (43:10, 12). 19 The redemption oflsrael thus betokens the reactivation of divine power and will spark a flow of nations to Jerusalem. In this respect, the people of Israel are a beacon of "light" to all nations. "I raise up the tribes of Jacob and restore the survivors oflsrael: I will also make you a light of nations, that My salvation may reach the ends of the earth" (49: 6). The "light" of Israel's restoration will thus inspire the "peoples" and "coastlands" to trust in God (51:4-5), much as the new "light" of God's glory shining over Zion will have a similar effect (60:1-2). But Israel, God's own "servant" is also in need of a prophetic "servant" who will bring God's "light" of hope to those dwelling in the dark dungeons of exile (42:1-2, 6-7). A powerful oscillation in the use of the term "servant" thus pervades this corpus, varying from the individual prophet to the collective people—and sometimes combining features of both (Isaiah 53). 20 This oscillation corresponds to the various agents of "light" in the oracles and to the several circles to whom God's mission is addressed. With the shift from the "light" of the "servant" in parts 1 and 2 to the "light" of Zion in part 3, there is a notable shift in the presentation oflsrael—from the nation as a whole in exile to the isolation of a righteous remnant. Two features characterize this special group. The first of these is moral: they "pursue justice" and "seek the LORD" (Isa. 51:1). Such "righteous" and "pious" people (57:1) are juxtaposed to idolaters and sinners (57:3-11) and even to those who perform the externals of ritual without regard for the radical demands of moral piety (Isaiah 58). Such special characteristics are limited to part 3 of the collection. The second feature of the remnant suggests a spiritual-psychological dimension. The truly faithful oflsrael are not only "concerned about [God's] word" (66:5) but also constitute "the mourners in Zion" (61:3). These persons are the truly "poor and brokenhearted" ones (66:2), who remember the past glories of Zion. Like the weeping mourners on foreign soil who never forget Jerusalem (Psalm 137), "the mourners" await the glorious restoration of the city. They are comforted together with Zion by God Himself, who reminds them that "Abraham your father . . . was only one when I called him, but I blessed him and made him many" (Isa. 51:2). The remnant can thus look forward to a grand ingathering; and Zion herself, like a "barren" and "forlorn" wife, may expect "children" that will 413
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
"outnumber those of the espoused" ( 5 4 : 1 ) . The time of wrath and rejection has passed; the time yet coming will bring the love of God and His "kindness everlasting" ( 5 4 : 8 ) . The transformation still to come is signaled by divine blessing and the giving of new names. The faithful remnant will be exalted above the sinners. "My servants shall shout in gladness, and you shall cry out in anguish. . . . You [sinners] shall leave behind a name by which My chosen ones shall curse. . . . But His servants shall be given a different name," by which all shall be blessed (Isa. 6 5 : 1 4 - 1 5 ) . Similarly, Zion is called upon to "shout aloud for joy" ( 5 4 : 1 ) , for soon she shall be called by a new name. "Nevermore shall you be called 'Forsaken,' nor shall your land be called 'Desolate'; but you shall be called 'I delight in her,' and your land 'Espoused. ' For the LORD takes delight in you, and your land shall be espoused" ( 6 2 : 4 ) . The dual hope of a people renewed in its restored homeland is thus celebrated by a double name ceremony. "See, the L O R D has proclaimed to the end of the earth: Announce to Fair Zion, your Deliverer is coming! . . . And they [the nation] shall be called, 'The Holy People, the Redeemed of the L O R D ' and you [Zion] shall be called 'Sought Out, A CityNot Forsaken'" ( 6 2 : 1 1 - 1 2 ) . With this rebirth and revival, the travails of exile are over, and the people may anticipate a complete renewal of their former status. Now called "The Holy People ['am ha-kodeshY the covenant nation is promised by God a restoration of a title first granted at Sinai (Exod. 19:6, "holy nation \goy kadosh]"). Isaiah follows the formulation found in Deut. 7:6 ['am kadosh]). And by proclaiming Zion a "City Not Forsaken," God precisely counters the people's cry of despair—enunciated in Isa. 4 9 : 1 4 , and earlier in the lament raised over Zion (Lam. 5 : 2 0 , "Why have You forgotten us utterly, forsaken us for all time?"). The Book oflsaiah thus closes as it began: with prophecies to Zion and her lovers, and with promises announced, but not yet completely fulfilled.
THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH The Prophet and His Times The Times According to the editorial superscription at the beginning of the book (Jer. 1 : 1 - 3 ) , Jeremiah was the son of Hilkiah, "one of the priests" in the old levitical city of "Anathoth in the territory of Benjamin," and prophesied in Judah from the thirteenth year of King Josiah (627 B.C.E.) to the eleventh year of King Zedekiah ( 5 8 6 B.C.E.). His prophetic career thus spanned the reigns of Kings Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah and coincided with many of the tumultuous events of the last generations before the destruction of Judean statehood and the exile of the people to Babylon. More precisely, Jeremiah's call to prophetic activity in 627 B .c.E. coincided with the simultaneous decline of Ashurbanipal's Assyrian empire ( 6 2 8 - 6 2 7 B.C.E.) and the rise to power of the neoBabylonians, led by Nabuzaradan and his son and successor Nebuchadnezzar ( 6 0 4 - 5 6 2 B.C.E.). This period was also the time of a national-religious revival in Judah instigated and directed by King Josiah—most likely in response to the geopolitical events that temporarily released Judah from vassalage (Josiah's own religious revival in 6 2 8 B.C.E. climaxed in the great Temple and national reforms of 6 2 2 ; see 2 Kings 2 2 - 2 3 ) . 1 Over the course of the next four decades, in the context of the growing hegemony of the neo-Babylonian dynasty, Jeremiah was an acute observer and critic of the religious life ofhis people. Judah's brief respite from foreign domination ( 6 2 8 - 6 0 9 B.C.E.) gave way first to a short period of Egyptian control ( 6 0 9 - 6 0 5 B.C.E.)—after the death of Josiah (in 6 0 9 B.C.E.) and the appointment of King Jehoiakim by the Egyptians.2 But after the decisive Babylonian victory over the Egyptians at Carchemish (in 605 B.C.E.), matters changed: Judah now became a vassal of the Babylonians. The domination of this eastern power in the region and the rebellion of King Jehoiakim against its hegemony climaxed in a series of invasions and deportations. The first of these oc414
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
curred in 597 B.C.E., ending the brief reign ofjehoiakim's successor, King Jehoiachin, who was exiled to Babylon along with the upper class. The second and fatal invasion came a decade later, in 586 B.C.E. during the reign of King Zedekiah. Jerusalem and Judah were destroyed, along with the great Temple of Solomon, and many Judeans were deported to Babylon. 3 Other people fled southward to the land of Egypt—the prophet Jeremiah included, where he continued to rebuke his people (in Daphne and elsewhere) at least to the year 583 B.C.E. (Jer. 44:30). Overall, Jeremiah's prophetic career spanned the last quarter of the seventh century B.C.E. and the opening decades of the sixth. This was a period that began with Josiah's glorious Temple reforms of 622 B.C.E. (including the renewed centralization of worship in Jerusalem and de-paganization of religious practices nationwide) and ended with the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the people. 4 Not all the prophecies of denunciation or hope preserved in the Book of Jeremiah can be precisely dated. But from what can be ascertained, Jeremiah was actively engaged in the events of his day. He firmly believed that God had called him to exhort Israel to observe the covenant and to warn the people of the consequences of their disobedience. His spiritual life was thus responsive to this-worldly responsibilities and tasks. He engaged his fellow citizens where he found them: in the streets of lerusalem (ler. 5:1-9), on their way to pray and sacrifice in the Temple (7:1-15), or near a local potter's shop (18:1-12). There he confronted them with their sins, crimes, and political ploys—activities that brought him into personal danger (11: 19-23; 20:10-11; 26:2-5). leremiah also reproached the kings ofludah—sometimes directly (leremiah 22), on other occasions through his disciple Baruch ben Neriah (36:1-18). When King Zedekiah requested that he proclaim a divine word of hope or intercede for divine salvation during the siege, leremiah continued to stand his ground with words of doom and destruction (21:1-10; 32:2-5; 37:1-17). Frequent reprisals and punishments did not restrain him from his divinely appointed task (32:1-5; 37:14-16; 39:15). Nevertheless, leremiah's private laments reveal his tormented soul, in despair that God had abandoned him to suffering and disdain (cf. 11:18-20; 12:1-3; 15:10-18). Throughout the stormy reign of King Zedekiah (597-586 B.C.E.), leremiah maintained the certitude of his moral and religious rebuke and his conviction that the Babylonians were the agents of divine destruction. He therefore refused to support a rebellion in 594 B.C.E. by several of the local West Asiatic states against Babylonian hegemony (leremiah 27-29) and he refused to encourage any national hopes of imminent restoration among the deportees (of 597 B.C.E.) from lerusalem (29:1-9). Though regarded as a traitor whose action undermined national resistance during ludah's final days, leremiah maintained his integrity and sense of mission to the end (37:1-16, 21). He refused blandishments and false promises from the king, and he spoke God's word as it came to him (38:3-18). After the destruction in 586 B.C.E., leremiah continued his prophecies in Egypt (leremiah 44). A legend preserved in a later work attributed to leremiah's faithful disciple and scribe Baruch (36:4, 18, 27-28, 32) records that the prophet's final suffering was death by stoning in this land of exile.5 This tradition was also known to the church fathers Tertullian and lerome. 6 The Prophet leremiah's age when he was called to prophesy is uncertain, since his own selfreference as "a na'ar" unable "to speak" (ler. 1:6) may indicate that he considered himself either an undeveloped novice or an inexperienced youth (cf. Exod. 33:11). Either way, the compulsion of divine destiny that he experienced from this time accompanied him his whole life. As he says, his prophetic calling was like an invasive and inescapable force (ler. 20:7-9; 23:29), one that marked his life with social isolation (15:17; 23:9). It was thus not only God's prophecies of doom that evoked the rage ofleremiah's peers (20:6-7) and contemporary courtiers and kings (20:1-3; 26:7-24). He frequently expressed antisocial tendencies, like not marrying and having children (16:1-2) or not sharing in mourning or joy with his neighbors (w. 5, 8), claiming that this was God's sign to all that national doom and destruction were at hand (16:3-4, 6-7, 9). The prophet's refusal to support national uprisings and his condemnation of hope even in trying historical circumstances (21:1-10; 37:3-10) reinforced the reality ofhis isolation. In addition, 415
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Jeremiah's symbolic displays of imminent divine action (e. g., his dramatic displays of how God would soon strip Israel like a garment or smash her like a jar and a jug [13:1-11, 12-14; 19: 1-13]) marked his public behavior as histrionic and excessive. Few knew his torments of love for his people (4:19-22; 6:11), and few saw his tears of identification with their doom (8:23; 13:17; 14:17) or heard his prayers for them (7:16; 11:14; 14:11-12; 15:1)7 But just this deep and abiding love for Israel marks the passionate core of this mighty man of God. An ancient rabbinic tradition correctly penetrated the unique double commitment of Jeremiah: at once a zealous prophet of God's word of warning and doom and a faithful defender who pleaded the cause ofhis people. In this respect, even Elijah (the zealous doomsayer) and Jonah (the loyalist who tried to escape his mission) fell short (see Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Bo', l). 8 If a complex, multileveled passion marks the man, an equally complex sophistication marks the nature ofhis prophecies. Born to a priestly family (Jer. 1:1), Jeremiah's oracles are replete with legal, cultic, and historical knowledge. Indeed, his skillful reference to such legal topics as the rules for divorce and remarriage (3:1), sacrifice (7:21-22), and Sabbath observance (17: 21-22), as well as his knowledge of the Jacob stories (9:3-4) and the Exodus epic (16:14-15), shows Jeremiah to have been an adept reinterpreter of traditional material as well.9 It is significant to note that the sources of these various teachings span all the books of the Torah. Jeremiah's teachings therefore provide precious evidence for the availability of certain traditions at this time and for their accessibility to learned circles. Moreover, to the extent that Jeremiah's rhetoric presupposes some degree of audience response, his words are also a witness to a certain level of public knowledge and information. Jeremiah's prophecies are characterized by sophistication and style. For one thing, the poetic diction ofhis brief oracles and prayers employs a rich vocabulary, repeatedly charged with evocative natural images and similes (Jer. 2:21-22; 4:13; 5:26-27; 8:6-7; 12:9) and filled with language culled from the Books of Psalms (cf. Jer. 20:10 andPs. 31:14) and Lamentations (cf. Jer. 14:19 and Lam. 5:22). 10 In addition, though many of the dramatic speeches attributed to Jeremiah were probably revised by later tradition (see below), they nevertheless preserve original traces of the prophet's educated and evocative oratory. Some of these longer speeches are punctuated with deft references to legal or historical information (like the Decalogue or the fall of Shiloh, in Jer. 7:9, 14), are constructed around literary puns and theological inversions (as in the coordination of the themes of remarriage and repentance in 3:1-2), or are formulated as legal diatribes with repeated rhetorical questions (cf. 2:11, 14, 32). Still other speeches display the prophet as a dramatic teacher through his use of symbolic actions—be this to evoke doom (13:12-14), to encourage repentance (18:1-11), or to generate hope (32:6-15). The many rhetorical voices of Jeremiah thus reveal a complex man of wide-ranging interests; and they presuppose, in turn, a sharp and often reactive audience over many years. The literary reworkings and expansions of this oratory by later tradition show an ongoing attempt to keep Jeremiah's teachings and prophecies alive for future generations.
The Book and ItsMessage The Book The Book of Jeremiah constitutes the second collection of prophetic teachings in the received section of the Latter Prophets. The tradition of B. Baba Batra 14a that "the Book of Jeremiah is all doom" is at best a half-truth. While the majority of the oracles and sermons found in chapters 2-24, like the prophecies preserved in the narrative history of chapters 26-44, do focus on national doom, the book is replete with prophecies of hope—both for the northern tribes, deported a century earlier (see Jer. 3:12-13; 3:14-4:2; 16:14-15, 16-18), and for the Judeans sent into exile in 597 B.C.E. (24:1-2, 7). In addition, a collection of oracles of consolation (to the northern exiles and to the Judeans) is incorporated within chapters 30-31. This latter unit has all the markings of a scroll of consolation. An overall outline of the Book of Jeremiah reveals a broad range of themes, periods, and focus. Part 1 (Jeremiah 1-25) opens with a prologue of sorts (chapter 1) that describes Jeremiah's 416 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
divine destiny and his mission as a prophet of doom and consolation ("to uproot and to pull down . . . to build and to plant" [1:10]). It is followed by an anthology of oracles, speeches, and laments of different types. There is little here that can be easily dated, and one may assume that it covers much of the period of leremiah's activity as a prophet. Thus a vague notice in 3:6 simply states that the ensuing divine oracle was received "in the days of King losiah," but this can mean anytime from 627-609 B.C.E.11 For its part, the Temple sermon delivered by leremiah in chapter 7 is without a date—although it is apparently from the beginning of the reign of lehoiakim (609 B.C.E.; i. e., just after the death of losiah), according to the resume of it preserved in 26:1-6. Similarly, there is also no date for the delegation sent by King Zedekiah or the prophet's response (leremiah 21), and we can only assume that this occurred during the difficult days of the final Babylonian siege of lerusalem. The visions in chapter 24 bring us back to the exile of lehoiachin in 597 B.C.E. and thus to the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah (24:1). This collection of prophecies is set off by an editorial summary in ler. 25:1-3, which dates the materials from the first year (627 B.C.E.) to the twenty-third year of leremiah's prophetic career (i. e., 604 B.C.E., this being the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign). Beginning in 25: 8-14, leremiah no longer refers to the perpetrators of ludah's doom as some vague enemy from the north (cf. 6:22; 10:22; 13:20) but explicitly identifies them as the Babylonians.12 Remarkably, in 25:9, the leader of this horde is even called God's "servant." leremiah 25:13a (which closes this summary) indicates that all these oracles from before 604 B.C.E. were written down in a scroll. As noted, only the material in chapter 24 (dated to 597 B.C.E.) contradicts this point. We may thus suppose that the content of this collection constitutes, in some form or other, the scroll of doom read before King lehoiakim in 605 B.C.E. by Baruch ben Neriah at the request of leremiah (36:1-31). After the king destroyed the document in a fit of rage, leremiah dictated a new version to his disciple and even added "more of the like" (36:32). Presumably leremiah 2-23 contains the reworking of these materials. (The reference in 25:130-38 to oracles against the nations now anticipates leremiah 45-51 but may actually reflect a different edition of the book; see below.) Following this collection of oracles, laments, and sermonic oratory—spoken by the prophet in the first person—is part 2 of the Book of leremiah (leremiah 26-45), a series of third-person narratives of leremiah's activities and prophecies. They come from several periods, including the time prior to 604 B.C.E. Thus leremiah 26 summarizes the Temple sermon found in chapter 7 (from 609 B.C.E.) and even gives an account of the prophefs trial; leremiah 27-29 reports leremiah's reaction to the anti-Babylonian activity undertaken by the exiles and their allies; and leremiah 34 and 37-44 describe the events of Zedekiah's reign and the prophet's oracles down to the debacle of 586 B.C.E. and slightly beyond. Incorporated into this historical unit is a collection of materials of consolation (chapters 30-33), only partially written in prose (cf. chapter 32). This part closes with chapter 45, which contains another reference to the scroll dictated by leremiah to Baruch (in 605 B.C.E.), along with a prophecy for the disciple himself. Thus both the personal oracles (leremiah 2-24) and the historical narratives (leremiah 26-44) conclude with references to the act of proclaiming and revising prophecies before lehoiakim in 605 B.C.E. This was presumably a significant turning point in the collation of the words of leremiah—at least in the eyes oflater tradition. The narrative histories are followed by part 3 (leremiah 46-51), a variety of oracles against foreign nations. These climax with an anti-Babylonian anthology (chapters 50-51). The Book of leremiah closes with another historical account of the fall of lerusalem and ludah in 586 B.C.E. (chapter 52). This version of the events differs somewhat from the material reported in leremiah 37-43 but largely parallels the account preserved in 2 Kings. 24-25. The historical account may have been placed at the end of the Book of leremiah to show the fulfillment ofhis prophecies of doom against ludah and lerusalem. 13 Traces of the growth of the Book of leremiah may be recognized in the repeated references to a "written" collection of pre-604 B.C.E. oracles. As noted above, such editorial activity is first referred to in ler. 25:13a, at the conclusion of the initial oracle collection (chapters 2-24). A 417
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
second, more expanded reference to these events occurs in Jeremiah 36. We are told there that when the original scroll of doom oracles was ripped and burned before the irate King Jehoiakim (36:19-26), the scribe Baruch recopied the collection and even added new oracles to it (w. 28, 32). This second reference to editing the oracles of Jeremiah occurs after the congeries of materials found in chapters 26-35. The third reference to the collection of prophecies comes after the account of the last days ofjudah (chapters 37-43) and before the oracles against the nations (chapters 46-51). 14 Since all this latter material was not included in the scroll of prophecies recited before Jehoiakim, we may best account for the repeated reference as a means whereby later tradition marked off the literary and thematic units related to Jeremiah's words and activities. It thus gives the impression of an expanding canon of sources included in the final scroll.15 The ancient editorial arrangement thus distinguishes between first-person oracles and prayers from before 604 B.C.E. and third-person historical prose (with some reported oracles) from that time until 583 B.C.E., as well as a series of oracles against the nations. Modern scholarship has long noted these different literary styles and has attributed them to different periods and school traditions. Precise agreement on details varies, but since Sigmund Mowinckel's influential researches,16 most modern scholars distinguish between several units: (A) the short oracles of the prophet (and his various personal prayers), (B) the historical narratives about the prophet, (C) the sermons of the prophet, and (D) the oracles against the nations. In the scholarly search for the authentic or original words of the prophet, the materials in A are given priority; by contrast, the sermons in C are considered more authentic with respect to the core oracles contained therein, but less so with regard to their more verbose rhetorical framework. 17 In some cases, like the so-called Temple sermon in Jer. 7:1-15, the oracular core (the determination of which is a matter of debate) is filled in with stylistic features and ideas that suggest the influence of disciples in the Deuteronomic tradition. 18 The historical materials in C are generally regarded as shaped by the Deuteronomic tradition as well—particularly on the basis of similarities with the prose of the historical books. The overall implication of these hypotheses is that there was repeated shaping and expansion of the original prophecies of Jeremiah—from the earliest times down to the Babylonian exile—even if all the details cannot be agreed upon. The degree to which our Book of Jeremiah is a complex blend of original, divinely inspired prophecies and later expansions is confirmed from another direction—the evidence provided by the versions of the book preserved in the Septuagint and among the Dead Sea Scrolls.19 The Greek translation is about one-seventh shorter than the Masoretic text (and this shorter version is now confirmed by Hebrew texts ofjeremiah found in the Qumran caves). This proves without any doubt that different ancient circles had different formulations of the words of the prophet, as well as different attitudes toward expanding or editing the ancient oracles. It may be added that the different versions have different arrangements of the prophecies, as well. As noted earlier, our Masoretic text presents the doom oracles against Israel first, the doom oracles against the nations last, and some prophecies of consolation (mixed among diverse historical narrative) in between. By contrast, the Septuagint tradition puts the oracles against the nations after the oracles against Israel (beginning at Jer. 25:13b, not 46:1). The syntax of the Hebrew text of 25:13b-14 (after the reference to a scroll of earlier oracles at 25:13a and before the truncated series of oracles against foreigners at 25:15-26) suggests that the Septuagint preserves the original sequence: first, oracles against Israel; then oracles against foreigners; and finally, oracles of consolation. Such a pattern would conform to the editorial sequence still found in the Books of Isaiah and Ezekiel and comparable editorial arrangements that move from prophecies of doom to prophecies of hope (e.g., Amos and Micah). It was presumably the inclusion of the historical narratives into the book, as well as a bleak editorial theology that perceived Jeremiah's prophecies as "all doom," that contributed to the rearrangement of the materials. The Message. The gist of Jeremiah's prophecies is summed up in the prologue to his prophetic vocation. He was appointed by the Lord "to uproot and to pull down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant" (Jer. 1:10). Repeatedly, over a long lifetime devoted to God, 418 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
he prophesied doom and new hope. His doom prophecies against the Judeans are elicited by breaches of the covenant—both cultic and moral. 20 In the realm of false worship, the people are charged with various paganizing practices, including fertility rites ( 2 : 2 0 , 2 3 ; 3 : 2 ; 7 : 8 ) , idolatry ( 2 : 2 7 ; 7 : 1 8 ) , childsacrifice ( 7 : 3 1 - 3 2 ; 1 9 : 5 ) , andpractices thatdefiledthe shrine ( 7 : 3 0 ) . With hyperbolic intensity, the prophet rails: "For your gods have become as many as your towns, O ludah, and you have set up as many altars to Shame as there are streets in lerusalem—altars for sacrifice to Baal" ( 1 1 : 1 3 ) . Whatever the form of deviance, the prophet's bottom line was that such practices constitute a rejection of God (ler. 2 : 1 1 , 1 7 ) and a disregard of His Lordship ( 2 : 1 9 ) . Similarly, leremiah considers a rejection of the covenant ( 1 1 : 6 - 1 0 ) and of Torah instruction ( 6 : 1 9 ; 9 : 1 2 ) as the basis for the immorality ( 5 : 1 - 5 ; 7 : 9 ) and mendacity ( 9 : 3 - 5 ) of the people. The nation has thus "betrayed" the Lord ( 5 : 1 1 ) and has denied Him and His prophecies outright ( 5 : 1 2 ) : with a "wayward and defiant heart" the people "have turned aside" ( 5 : 2 3 - 2 8 ) . For all this, the prophet says, dooms will come against the people. "Shall I not punish such deeds—says the LORD—shall I not bring retribution on a nation such as this?" ( 5 : 2 9 ) . Disregarding the repeated prophetic warnings, the people refuse to repent. And so, in the end, God refuses all intercession on their behalf ( 7 : 1 6 ; 1 5 : 1 ) . "Do not pray for the benefit of this people," says the Lord, "I will exterminate them by war, famine, and disease" ( 1 4 : 1 1 f.). Doom became inevitable. leremiah, however, was called not only "to uproot and to pull down" but "to build and to plant" as well (ler. 1 : 1 0 ) . In fact, many ofhis prophecies of comfort occur along with proclamations of doom. For example, the prophet links his announcement of impending destruction and exile with a prophecy limiting this disaster. After seventy years, he says, the destroyer will be destroyed and the exiled nation restored ( 2 5 : 8 - 1 2 ) . leremiah repeats this prophecy with some variation years later, when he sees the need to tell the exiles of 5 9 7 B.C.E. to resist precipitous messianic hopes and "to build homes" in Babylon ( 2 9 : 4 - 1 0 ) . On another occasion, immediately before the great exile of 5 8 6 B.C.E., leremiah performs an outrageous act of hope. He purchases the field of a relative, over which he had the legal right of redemption and thereby dramatizes his confidence in God's saving word—that "[hjouses, fields, and vineyards shall again be purchased in this land" ( 3 2 : 1 5 ) . The people must therefore take the threat of divine doom seriously ( 3 2 : 36), but they must also know that God will be gracious to His people and will again "plant them in this land faithfully" ( 3 2 : 4 1 ) . leremiah's prophecies of building and planting are a leitmotif of hope. Speaking to the northern tribes, he presents God's promise as a time when "I will build you firmly again [cod] . . . and again [cod] you shall plant vineyards on the hills of Samaria" (ler. 3 1 : 4 - 5 ) . This will be a time of recompense and renewal ( 3 1 : 1 3 , 1 6 - 1 7 ) , a time when "the L O R D has created something new on earth" ( 3 1 : 2 2 ) . To the ludeans, God also promises a renewal when "I will be watchful over them to build and to plant" ( 3 1 : 2 8 ) . This national restoration will result in the renewal of the ancient covenant ( 3 1 : 1 , 3 3 ) . Significantly, this renewed covenant is contrasted with the older one at Sinai. As part of the new dispensation, God says, "I will put My Teaching [torah] into their inmost being and inscribe it upon their hearts" ( 3 1 : 3 3 ) . In this way, the external tablets of Moses—smashed through sin and rebellion—will be restored. The prophecy thus attests to a profound new consciousness of religious inwardness and renewal. With this teaching, leremiah forecasts a transformation that is divinely initiated and unilaterally effected. N o prior act of repentance is mentioned here. Indeed, as an expression of God's grace for the sinning exiles, this prophecy of a new covenant parallels the divine promise of a new heart formulated in the contemporary prophecies ofEzekiel (Ezek. 1 1 : 1 9 ; 3 6 : 2 6 ) . Moreover, this stress on a transformation of the established symbols of religiosity continues earlier prophecies of a spiritual metamorphosis. 21 For example, leremiah had earlier announced that in future days "men shall no longer [cod] speak of the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD, nor . . . make another." Rather, "they shall call lerusalem 'Throne of the LORD, ' and all nations shall assemble there" (ler. 3 : 1 6 - 1 7 ) . The power of these promises—as statements of hope in the new and renewed, and as rejections of the old and passe—is never more profoundly indicated than by the little particle 'od, "again." 419
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
"No longer" (lo} 'od) will people rely on the Ark or follow their stubborn hearts to evil (Jer. 3: 16-17). And "no longer" will people speak of vicarious punishment or yearn to know the Lord (31:29, 34). Now all the people shall be transformed: divine knowledge will be immediate and personal, and once again ('od) the desolate land will be rebuilt (31:4, 23; 32:15; 33:10, 12). The deep hope was thus that God would "still" ('od) remember the northern kingdom of Ephraim (31:20) and, as part of His new covenant with Judah and Israel, would forgive the iniquities of His people "and remember their sins no more [lo} 'od]n (31:34). The transformation and renewal would then be complete.
THE BOOK OF EZEKIEL The Prophet and His Times Ezekiel son of Buzi was a Zadokite priest who was deported to Babylon along with eight thousand other exiles in the year 597 B.C.E., after the siege and destruction ofjerusalem by the neoBabylonian monarch Nebuchadnezzar II (Ezek. 1:1-3; 2 Kings 24:8-17). This occurred during the brief reign of King Jehoiachin, who was also deported. Ezekiel settled with his fellow exiles in Tel Abib ("Mound of the Flood"), a city located on the river Chebar (Ezek. 1:1, 3; 3:15) —a tributary canal of the Euphrates, southeast of Babylon (near Nippur). 1 It was here that he received his call to prophecy o n 3 1 July 593 B.C.E. (1:1-3), in the course of an awesome vision of the divine Glory enthroned in the heavens. Thereupon, Ezekiel pronounced condemnations and dooms against the Judeans who remained in the homeland (particularly Jerusalem) until January 588 B.C.E., shortly before the destruction ofjerusalem and the Temple (see 24:1.) These prophecies are collected in Ezekiel 3-24. During this period of Ezekiel's career (593-588 B.C.E.), there was considerable anti-Babylonian agitation in Judah. This was concretely expressed by various attempts to form alliances in order to break up the Babylonian hegemony in the region. Something of the tensions, factionalism, and plots of revolt of this period are reflected in the Book ofjeremiah, where an alliance of states early in the reign of King Zedekiah (in 592 B .c.E.; probably encouraged by Pharaoh Psamettichus II of Egypt) tried to involve Judah in a general rebellion (Jeremiah 27-28). 2 The revolt was not successful, and Zedekiah was forced to reaffirm his allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 29: 3; 51:59). The winds of rebellion were still in the air, however, despite the apparent misgivings of the king (Jer. 21:1-7; 37:3-10, 17; 38:14-23). In the end, Pharaoh Hophra prevailed upon Zedekiah to revolt, though the support of Egypt for the besieged Jerusalem turned out to be weak, brief, and unsuccessful. Nebuchadnezzar acted decisively. After a protracted siege and a raging famine, the defenses of Jerusalem collapsed and the majority of its population was either destroyed outright or sent into exile (586 B.C.E.).3 Ezekiel received word of the fall of the city in 585 B.C.E. (Ezek. 33:21), and from this time on Ezekiel ceased to prophesy doom. His oracles of spiritual consolation, national reunification, and cultic restoration are collected in Ezekiel 33-34, 36-39, and 40-48. His vision of the restored Temple (Ezekiel 40-48) is dated to 573 B.C.E. (40: 1). The latest dated oracle is from 26 April 571 B.C.E. (29:17). Of Ezekiel's personal life, only a meager amount is known. The superscription to the book accords him a priestly lineage (Ezek. 1:3). This background undoubtedly formed his extensive knowledge of priestly traditions, language, and ideology, not to mention his obsession with the Temple ofjerusalem (its ritual pollution, chapters 8-11; and its purification and restoration, chapters 40-48). Ezekiel's overall restoration program also draws from ancient cultic traditions and practices, and his inaugural vision was richly inspired by ancient temple symbolism.4 In addition to a variety of visionary experiences (see also Ezekiel 10 and 40-42), Ezekiel is frequently portrayed in the throes of clairvoyant experiences of events in Jerusalem—even while he was physically present in Babylon (see 8:3; 11:24-25). These textual reports have produced 420 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
many conflicting theories about the traditions preserved in Ezekiel's name. Some scholars have asserted their veracity for the period in question; some have regarded them as hyperbolic denunciations drawn from abuses prevalent during the reign of King Manasseh, a half-century earlier; while another group of interpreters presumes that these visions reflect events from subsequent centuries. In addition, the often bizarre behavior ofEzekiel has also generated a library of psychological evaluations of varying suggestiveness. He exhibited extreme emotional and physical reactions in connection with his dramatization of the fate of Israel and ludah: keeping dumb for long periods at a stretch (Ezek. 3:26; 33:21-22); 5 lying immobile on his left and right sides, for 390 and 40 days, respectively, and also eating bread baked over dung (4:4-15); and remaining in an immobile stupor for a certain time after his wife's death (24:15-17). But all these actions and characteristics notwithstanding, Ezekiel clearly remained a significant personality within the community of exiles. He received visitations on various matters by the elders of the people (8: 1; 14:1;20:1), among others (cf. 33:30-33), over the course of manyyears.
The Book and ItsMessage The Book The Book of Ezekiel is the third of the three large collections of prophetic books in the received Hebrew Scriptures: Isaiah, leremiah, and Ezekiel. The talmudic assertion (B. Baba Batra I4b) that "the Book of Ezekiel begins with doom and ends with consolation" accurately reflects the arrangement of prophecies and (by and large) their historical sequence as well. Thus, after the opening call and commission ofEzekiel to prophecy in 593 B.C.E. (Ezekiel 1-3), there follows an unabated series of oracles of doom and denunciation (in various styles) from before the destruction of 586 B.C.E. (Ezekiel 4-24). This section is followed by a block of oracles against foreign nations (Ezekiel 25-32), with chapters 26-32 containing prophecies specifically related to the siege period and a year thereafter (from winter 588 to spring 585 B.C.E.). Chapter 33 marks a transition; for after news of the fall of lerusalem reached the prophet in Babylon in 585 B.C.E., he underwent a renewal ofhis commission and began to utter only oracles of hope and restoration. This material is found in various combinations in Ezekiel 34-37, 38-39, and 40-48. The later vision ofTemple renewal takes us down to the year 573 B.C.E. This bipartite structure of dooms and promises reflects a deliberate literary arrangement. The ancient lewish historian losephus even observed that Ezekiel wrote "two books" (Antiquities 10:79). But this comment is excessive; the structure is clearly integrated, with the first part the thematic prelude to the second. We have already noted that Ezekiel's initial call to prophecy and the divine adjuration to silence are picked up again in chapter 33, thus marking a transition from the first to the second phase ofhis prophecy. (One may also note that the two units are not simply black and white; much depends on oracular circumstance. Accordingly, some promises occur in the first part [Ezek. 11:14-21; 16:60-62; 17:22-24], even as some judgments are found in the second [34:1-10; 36:16-32].) Also indicative of the highly organized nature of the book is the fact that the foregoing units contain stylistic or thematic clusters of material. Thus in part 1 (Ezekiel 1-24), after the opening vision, commission scene, and concluding vision (Ezekiel 1-3), the following groups of prophecies can be isolated: (1) symbolic acts and oracles (three each; Ezekiel 4-7); (2) visions of the abominations performed in the Temple of lerusalem and the climactic event of God's abandonment of the city (Ezekiel 8-11); (3) assorted condemnations (Ezekiel 12-14); (4) allegories and teachings of judgment (allegory of the vine, chapter 15; of faithless Israel, chapter 16; of the two eagles, chapter 17; a teaching concerning individual responsibility, chapter 18; allegorical laments regarding the king, chapter 19); and (5) final teachings and oracles (Ezekiel 20-24). 6 Part 2 (Ezekiel 25-32) contains a cluster of oracles against foreign nations (neighbors, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt: 25:1-17; 26:1-28:19; 28:20-26; 29:1-32:32, respectively). Part 3 (Ezekiel 33-48), after the renewal of Ezekiel's mission (Ezekiel 33), contains assorted oracles of hope and consolation—particularly for the land and nation (Ezekiel 34-36), visions of national revivification 421
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
and reunification (37:1-14; 37:15-28), and a near-apocalyptic war of purgation and purification of the land (Ezekiel 38-39); and a vision of the New Temple and its sacrifices, as well as the new land settlements for the restored nation (Ezekiel 40-48). 7 This final vision is marked by the return of God to the holy shrine of the Temple (43:1-12), thus providing a closure to the departure of Godjust prior to the devastation (10:1-11:25). Despite these manifest features of structure and thematic coherence, the Book of Ezekiel presents the reader with numerous difficulties. In particular, numerous repetitions (seemingly verbose and sometimes contradictory) and assorted verbal comments (often disruptive in context) make the book notoriously difficult to construe in many places. As a result, an early trend of modern critical scholarship was to deny the authenticity of all, or virtually all, of the book and to seek to isolate the so-called ipsissima verba (authentic words) of the prophet from additions designed to explain or apply his words to later postexilic situations.8 Such methods were hardly salutary for an understanding of the composition and content of the book, and the best that could be said of these and similar approaches is that they motivated renewed attention to analysis of the difficulties.9 In due course, efforts were made to understand the nature of the compilation and the long process of redaction of the book from the exilic period on, 10 taking into particular account the serious discrepancies between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint. 11 Gradually attention has turned to a more respectful approach to the origin and development of the text. One major breakthrough has been to attempt to determine the core of the prophet's words and then to follow as carefully as possible the ongoing reinterpretations and developments of the materials by circles of disciples and latter-day heirs.12 This exegetical and analytical quest has been aided, but also considerably frustrated, by the often contradictory literary traditions found in the ancient Greek translations. Hence, there is no simple or foolproof method for determining the original components of the prophecies. As a result, some scholars have chosen not to engage in hypothetical reconstructions or blendings of various textual traditions and have rather chosen to discuss only one tradition or the other.13 The result has been a new emphasis on stylistic and structural features of the various units and even the assertion that Ezekiel himself was his own first editor and that the composition gives many indications of serious editorial care—the wellknown difficulties notwithstanding. 14 A second group of difficulties facing the reader of Ezekiel's prophecies pertains to the very nature ofhis language. Some ofhis grammatical forms and terms already puzzled the oldest Jewish Bible translators and account for their often forced and speculative renditions. His language was also a great stumbling block for medieval and Renaissance Jewish commentators. The comment of Don Isaac Abravanel in the sixteenth century is an accurate, if ungenerous, assessment of the case. "Ezekiel," he said, "was not versed in the Hebrew language or its spelling. . . . Hence strange words occur, as well as missing or superfluous letters."15 Today, increased knowledge of Aramaic grammar and syntax, especially their impact upon the Hebrew of Ezekiel's time, and increased knowledge of the Akkadian language, especially the neo-Babylonian dialect of Ezekiel's exilic milieu, have helped to solve many puzzles. Indeed, new respect for the accuracy of Ezekiel's language has promoted a more respectful and cautious regard for the difficulties that remain. Nevertheless, by any comparative standard, Ezekiel's prose style remains highly idiosyncratic—with often jarring shifts of grammatical person and point of view. The inaugural vision in chapter 1 and the account of the new sacrificial and cultic service in chapters 43-48 provide many examples of this phenomenon. A final feature of Ezekiel's prophecies has long caused consternation. This concerns the many priestly and legal traditions in the Book of Ezekiel that manifestly contradict those known from the Torah. For the ancient Rabbis in particular, the priestly rules found in Ezekiel 43-48 caused considerable vexation when compared to the content of the Sinaitic revelation. According to a talmudic tradition, this matter nearly led to the withdrawal of the Book of Ezekiel from public use—were it not for a heroic feat of exegetical harmonization by one Hananiah ben Hezekiah 422 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
(B. Shabbat I3b); unaccountably, barely a trace ofhis reconciliations have been transmitted (see Sifre on Deuteronomy, piska 294, end). 16 The Rabbis were also concerned about the vision reported in chapter 1, whose content was considered a profound esoteric matter reserved for the select few (see M. Hagigah 2:1; B. Hagigah 13a). An anonymous opinion in the Mishnah (M. Megillah 4:10) argued against reciting this chapter as a haftarah. But this view did not become normative halakhah, and Ezekiel 1 is recited on the first day of Shavuot (cf. B. Megillah 31b). Strictures were also leveled against Ezekiel 16, because of its often bawdy tone and its insult to Jerusalem. But there were other opinions to the contrary (see B. Megillah 25a-b). For moderns, however, all these matters have been a boon. For one thing, these textual elements preserve valuable witnesses to the variety of legal-cultic traditions that existed in Ezekiel's day and that contributed to the literary and theological vitality of early postexilic Judaism. In addition, the visionary depiction of the throne of Glory provides precious testimony of traditions of iconography, while the ribald tone of some of Ezekiel's discourses expands our appreciation of the pungency and earthiness of prophetic diatribes. Collectively, these passages permit a richer sense of the habits of literary expression and normative action in ancient Israel than would otherwise be known. A representative sample of the rich and brash prophetic oratory of the prophet Ezekiel, together with the striking range of legal and historical traditions that he articulates, is preserved in the haftarot taken from his prophecies. The Message The hallmark of the oracles in the first part of the Book of Ezekiel, chapters 4-24, is the prophet's repeated insistence upon the inevitability of the doom and exile to befall the citizens ofjerusalem because of their sins.17 Indeed, the contrast between the divine visions of chapters 1 and 10 and the divinely guided visions of the sins performed in Jerusalem (chapter 8) is noteworthy in this regard. It highlights Ezekiel's experience of the transcendent majesty and holiness of God, over against his vision of Israel's debased practices—these being a betrayal of the covenant in its moral and ritual aspects (the two are frequently linked; cf. Ezekiel 6 - 7 and 22). The inevitability of doom is, in fact, a recurrent theme in the prophecies of Ezekiel (Ezek. 12:21-28; 14:12-20; 21:1-7); intercessions of mercy are utterly rejected (9:10). It is furthermore striking that, in contrast with his contemporary fellow prophet Jeremiah, Ezekiel offers no direct call for repentance throughout chapters 4-24. One is therefore left with the sense that the time for hope is past and that the prophecies of doom are geared to impress upon the people of Jerusalem the realization that their punishment is directly due to their rejection of the covenant (cf. 6:1-14; 16:36). Not only the shorter oracles, but also the larger allegorical retrospectives oflsrael's faithless past as a covenantal bride of God (chapters 16 and 23) confirm this sense of an imminent fate. The nation, having rejected God in the past, must therefore bear the consequences of their behavior; indeed, having disregarded God's covenant, the people will come to acknowledge their God in and through the dooms that will befall them. Just this conclusion, one may suggest, is the key reason why many of Ezekiel's oracles of doom conclude with the phrase "that you [Israel] shall know that I am the Lord." 18 The educational function of the punishments is thus designed to confront the people in Judah and Babylon with the inexorable consequences of their covenantal disobedience and thereby promote repentance after the exile (cf. Ezek. 6:9-10, 13; 12:6; 14:11, 22-23). By the same token, the survivors of the destruction of Jerusalem will also serve an educational function for the exiles, since through their profane behavior they will publicly vindicate the justice of God's punishment (cf. 14:22-23). Ezekiel's earliest oracles are thus utterly bleak and hopeless, the dark and fateful content of the scroll of "lamentations, dirges, and woes" that he internalized in the course of his prophetic inauguration (Ezek. 2:8-10). Even the apparent contradiction to this feature, in which Ezekiel is instructed to act as a "warner" to the people in Jerusalem (3:17-21)—to tell them that each person's return-to-righteousness or backsliding-to-evil fixes that individual's fate for "life" or "death"—does not obliterate the pall of the opening collection of doom oracles. For one thing, Ezekiel never acts on this task in chapters 4-24. This suggests that this dimension ofhis prophetic 423
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
vocation is a later prophetic teaching—a response to the implication that the fate of the people to whom Ezekiel addressed himself in the opening years ofhis ministry was utterly without hope. And even granting that the doom oracles are the warnings referred to, the hope in chapters 4-24 is at best a matter addressed to each individual (see 14:12-23). Moreover, the oracles in chapters 4-24 that are specifically addressed to the exiles also convey the same bleak (or only partially hopeful) sense. The report of the abominations performed in Jerusalem, which Ezekiel brought to the exiles, together with the announcement of that city's fate (see chapters 8-11), presumably serves to justify to the exiles the inevitability of the doom to come—and therewith dashes any lingering hopes of an end to the exile before the destruction of Jerusalem.19 Similarly, 12:1-16 plausibly condemns those exiles who ignore the doom pronouncements against Jerusalem and hope against hope that this disaster will wot occur.20 To underscore this point, 12:17-20 rean-nounces the doom ofjerusalem, and 12:21-28 rebuts popular claims that Ezekiel's doom oracles would not come to pass. This complex relationship between individual hopes and national doom recurs elsewhere in Ezekiel's oracles and sets two of his most stunning discourses in apparent contradiction. Thus, on the one hand, Ezekiel 20 reviews Israelite history as a story of continual apostasy: in Egypt (w. 5-10), in the wilderness (w. 11-26), in the homeland, and in exile (w. 30-44). In the first and second cases (after the worship of the Golden Calf), God forgave the people for His Name's sake. Similarly, the second generation of the wilderness was reprieved after apostasy—although, nevertheless, they were now given "bad" laws, so that they and their descendants would sin and be ultimately doomed to exile. The exile is thus presented here as an inevitable corporate punishment—one whose fulfillment is predetermined, despite instances of individual righteousness. Indeed, on the basis of this theology, sons would indeed inherit the sins of their fathers—as the people quite explicitly say in Ezek. 18:2, though the entire rhetoric and purpose of chapter 18 are to rebut this idea and to emphasize the individual's power to repent of sin: not just sins between generations, but even sins committed within the course of any individual lifetime.21 Conceivably, in an effort to reconcile the foregoing contradiction, one may propose that the corporate or collective doom depicted in Ezekiel 20 was believed by the prophet to be punishment for cultic sins—and also a thing of the past. If so, the purpose ofEzekiel 18 would then be to emphasize the point that individual responsibility and repentance are the people's best hope for a national renewal after the destruction. However, the fact is that the discourse in Ezekiel 20 disregards this theology of exilic hope. Indeed, at the end of His harangue about continual national apostasy (that continued into the exile itself), God announces a unilateral redemption of all the exilic sinners. This act of divine grace is described as a totally undeserved redemption—a new Exodus, so to speak, performed (like the first one, says the prophet) by God in a blaze of divine "fury." From these two texts (Ezekiel 18 and 20), one senses the powerful mood swings and theological variations in Ezekiel's prophecies. The oracles of hope in chapters 33-37 reflect still other abrupt transformations, this time around the themes of national reunification and restoration under a scion of David. In connection with these oracles, it is likely that the prophet's despair over the very possibility oflsrael's repentance from sin elicits prophecies of other unilateral divine acts—undeserved acts of grace that transform the wayward heart of the people (36:24-28), that revive the anguished nation and restore her to Zion (37:9-14), and that transform the rubble of lerusalem into a Garden of Eden (36:35-36). To cap these miraculous developments, the blueprint of a new Temple is also revealed, and a new order of cultic holiness is anticipated. At this time, the divine Glory will return to the Temple and dwell amidst the cherubim (43:1-4). The desperate anticipation of a permanent transformation of the national and spiritual situation is poignantly underscored by the repetition of the phrase lo' cod, "never again." It is at once a concise and vigorous expression of divine assurance—invoked by Ezekiel as God's word to the nation in exile (34:28, 29; 36:30; 43:7) and offering hope against despair that the terror of the past shall cease forever. 424 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
THE BOOK OF HOSEA The Prophet und His Times According to the superscription at the beginning of the book (Hosea 1:1), Hosea ben Beeri prophesied during the reigns of Kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah o f j u d a h (769-698 B.C.E.) and during the reign of Jeroboam II, King oflsrael (784-748 B.C.E.). This synchronic designation helps to fix the beginning of the prophet's career early in the eighth century B.C.E. But we are left to speculate on the extent ofhis activity, since there is a considerable gap between the two lists. This is particularly nettlesome, since most modern scholars assume that Hosea continued to prophesy in the north after the death of Jeroboam II and that his prophecies allude to the political turbulence during the reigns of Jeroboam's successors Pekahiah, Pekah, and Hoshea ben Elah (spanning 737-724 B.C.E.). Moreover, the very reference to King Hezekiah is puzzling, since he ascended the throne o f j u d a h only in 715 B.C.E., a half-dozen years after the fall of Samaria (the capital oflsrael) in 722 B.C.E. This event is not even hinted at by Hosea. One must therefore assume that the reference to Hezekiah is erroneous and that Hosea ceased his activity sometime in the late 730s or early 720s B.C.E. Together with his contemporaries Amos and Isaiah, Hosea is thus one of the earliest of the classical prophets of ancient Israel whose prophecies are known and have been written down and collected. Much attention has gone into identifying contemporary events in Hosea's words. But it must be admitted that explicit textual references are generally lacking, leading historians to correlate details known from the biblical and Assyrian historical sources with presumed hints in Hosea's oracles.1 Thus, for example, it is known that the successor of Jeroboam II, King Menahem of Israel (747-737 B.C.E.), paid a heavy tribute to the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kings 15:19-20) and therewith subjugated the northern kingdom to this foreign overLord. 2 According to many moderns, these events are reflected in Hos. 5:8-11 and 14 and in 7:8-9. But Hosea's language is so vague as to be of dubious value. A bit more suggestive is the claim that King Hoshea ben Elah's solicitation of Egypt for an anti-Assyrian coalition in 727 B.C.E. (cf. 2 Kings 17:4) may be reflected in Hos. 7:11, "Ephraim has acted like a silly dove with no mind: they have appealed to Egypt" (cf. 9:3; 12:2). Similarly, the subsequent punitive measures imposed by Assyria have been associated with 13:10 and 15, and references to renewed Israelite submission to Assyria, and the new tribute imposed upon them, have been detected in 5:13 ("Ephraim repaired to Assyria—he sent envoys to a patron king"; cf. 8:9-10). While in themselves these various (fragmentary) oracles are imprecise and often ambiguous, one may at least minimally concede that they correlate broadly with the overall atmosphere of political instability and foreign domination attested in the historical annals. Hosea's prophecies thus provide at least a sense of the times. The prophecies of Hosea have a more direct value with respect to their depiction and critique of religious-cultic behavior in the north. From the extensive references in the Book of Hosea to Ephraimite (Israelite) Baal worship and other Canaanite practices, it is clear that the older crises of religious purity attested by the royally supported Baalite practices in the time of King Ahab (1 Kings 16:32-33; 18:19, 21), by Elijah's victorious ordeal against the prophets ofBaal on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:19-39), and by the bloody purges ofBaalism conducted by Elijah and King Jehu (1 Kings 18:40; 2 Kings 10:18-29) continued to pervade popular religious practice in the north. Thus, in chapter 2, Hosea boldly rebukes Israel's belief in the local Canaanite Baalim as a source of natural sustenance—and their rejection of their own historical Lord (w. 7, 9, 15). Presumably some form of syncretism developed whereby Israel's national-historical God was worshiped under the aspect ofBaal in matters concerning nature and fertility (see Hos. 2:18-20). On this point the nation had to be dissuaded and reeducated (2:10-11, 23-24). Diverse apostate practices are mentioned by Hosea. These include divination by a staff (Hos. 4:12), involvements with cult prostitutes (4:14) and other rejected practices in or near the shrines 425
O V E R V I E W O F BIBLICAL B O O K S E X C E R P T E D I N T H E H A F T A R O T CYCLE
([4:13, 19; 6:8-9), kissing molten images of calves (13:2), and engaging in sexual rites at peak natural seasons (4:14; 9:1). Repeatedly and without qualification the prophet reproached the people for their rebellious sins and "spirit of harlotry" (cf. 2:4-5; 4-6, 11-12; 5:4; 7:2, 10; 8:1, 11; 9:15, 17; 10:2-5; 12:2, 8-9). In all this, examples of moral deceit are less frequently mentioned, or they are included in conjunction with a critique of cultic behavior (e. g., 4:8-19; 12:8-12). Paralleling this major thematic concern with the sources of life and sustenance, Hosea's dominant images (for weal or woe) are derived from the natural world and deal with such events as birth, growth, planting, and sterility (1:4; 2:7-11, 14, 17, 20-21, 23-24; 4:3; 5:6-7; 6:11; 7:14; 8:7; 9:16; 10:1, 8; 13:13-15; 14:6-9). It is within this overall historical and religious milieu that the little we know of the individual Hosea takes shape. According to the text, the prophet was divinely commanded to marry a woman of harlotry (named Gomer) and to beget upon her children of harlotry. This act was intended to dramatize the harlotrous apostasy performed by the people throughout the land (Hos. 1:2-8). The marriage also dramatizes Israel's apostate relationship to YHWH and her punitive "divorce" and eventual restoration through "remarriage" to Him (2:4-22). A subsequent paragraph (3: 1-4) unexpectedly reports another command to the prophet to commit adultery (though nothing of Hosea's own marriage is indicated here). The two perpetrators are then commanded to remain apart for "many days," thereby enacting Israel's punishment for apostasy over the course of"many days." Modern readers often find the symbolism and textual sequences of this material not only complex but also redundant and contradictory. A formal distinction is thus often made between the first-person account in Hosea 3 and the third-person narrative in Hosea 1-2, and opinions vary as to whether different episodes are involved or only different traditions of one episode. Certainly, however the issue is resolved bears decisively upon one's perception of the prophet's life, for apart from these matters, no other biographical details are specified in the text. According to rabbinic tradition, Hosea's father Beeri was also a prophet, and fragments of his prophecies are preserved in Isa. 8:19-20 (Leviticus Rabbah 6:6), but this assertion is based on references outside the Book ofHosea. 3
The Book and ItsMessage The Book of Hosea is the first prophetic collection in the anthology of twelve prophetic units known as the Trei 'Asar, or "The Twelve." These books are roughly arranged in historical order, dating from the mid-eighth century B.C.E. (with Hosea) to the mid-fifth century B.C.E. (with Malachi). The separate collections are all relatively short, with Hosea and Zechariah the longest (fourteen chapters each) and Obadiah the shortest (one chapter) of the anthology. Because of the relative brevity of the prophetic units, the works of this corpus are commonly known as the Minor Prophets (minor in length, not importance). The materials were "collected together so that no book might be lost because of its size" (Kimhi on Hos. 1:1, following B. Baba Batra 14b). 4 The collection is thus to be contrasted with the larger collections of prophecies gathered around the personalities of Isaiah, leremiah, and Ezekiel—known correspondingly as the Major Prophets. The content of the Book ofHosea is complexly organized, and even the basic subdivisions do not yield coherent or uncomplicated material. This may easily be seen from a close look at Hosea 1-3, the first of the two major parts of the book. From one perspective, this division is unified by its focus on the biography of the prophet, by his divinely commanded marriage to a harlot, and by the symbolic names he is bidden to give his children. The names lezreel, Lo-ruhamah, and Lo-ammi are initially designed to convey God's threat against or rejection oflsrael for their apostasy. In the end the names are reversed with positive implications, and this gives chapters 1-2 an overall coherence (cf. 1:3-9 with 2:23-25). Nevertheless, a number of complications obstruct a simple and unified picture. For one thing, Hos. 1:2-9 presents the marriage ofHosea to the harlot in the third person, whereas 3: 426 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
1-5 presents the episode between the prophet and the adulterous woman in the first person. Significantly, these two pericopes are parallel neither in theme nor in focus. The second is also disruptive—following the imagery of remarriage in chapter 2 with the statement that the prophet should subsequently befriend a woman who consorts with others (note: "The L O R D said to me forther" [3:1]). The question has thus been debated whether these are two episodes or two versions of a single episode.5 Many readers try to harmonize the traditions.6 Besides these concrete textual difficulties, an appreciation of Hosea 1-3 has also been challenged by the divine command to love a harlot-adultress. Indeed, traditional Jewish exegesis has reacted quite negatively to the apparent scandal of God's giving the prophet such a command. Solutions have varied. Ibn Ezra and Maimonides focused on the scenario as a divinely inspired vision, while the Targum and Rashi deemed the content to be allegorical. Some moderns have provided a variation of this last position by emphasizing that Israel often appears as an abstraction in Hosea 2 and that the human marriage is not restored. On this reading, the concern of the chapter is not on the concrete reality of Hosea and his marital situation, but on the symbolism of a broken but restored divine-human relationship. By contrast, the ancient rabbinic tradition in B. Pesahim 87 emphasizes the living concreteness of the event and considers it to be a spiritual preparation for prophecy (see also Seder Eliyahu Zuta 9). Others emphasize that if Hosea's consort with a harlot is only a literary fiction or a "belated" attempt of the prophet to understand his life experiences, the "mortally factual" character of the divine word to the prophet is fatefully ignored. 7 On this view, the power of prophecy here lies in the crushing concreteness of the divine demand, even as it exemplifies God's suffering and sustaining love for Israel. Through the divine word, the prophet too is drawn into a situation of suffering, and "[i]n his own feeling the divine feeling is figured so strongly that in every stage he can read from his own lot the course of the relations between YHWH and Israel."8 Thus, in his mortal concreteness, the prophet is mysteriously "bound up with the secrets of God." For Martin Buber, this is at once the hard reality of biblical faith and a central core ofbiblical prophecy.9 The second major division of the Book of Hosea is chapters 4-14, which are less a clearly organized unit than a loosely integrated anthology of prophetic oracles and speeches.10 Indeed, despite repeated attempts, it is exceedingly difficult to establish the boundaries of the separate speech units and tradition units that compose the collection.11 The internal principles of arrangement and the relationships between the smaller speech units are often hard to discern. At most, one can occasionally detect the technique of arrangement by theme word (a principle of arrangement common to biblical prophetic collections, most notably in Isaiah 40-66). Considered altogether, the most positive results lie in attempts to isolate thematic clusters within the book. Among these are the repetition of such topics as knowledge and harlotry (Hos. 4:4-5:7), the recurrence of agricultural and land metaphors (Hosea 9-10), and the importance ofEgypt (11: 1-14:1). But even the isolation of these thematic units is highly subjective, and related thematic content is dispersed throughout the book. There was thus no attempt by the final redactors to collect thematic clusters in only one place. The search for unified historical and thematic developments in the book will thus yield only partial and limited benefits. If there is any central motif in the book as a whole, it would have to be the recurrent focus on religious apostasy and the concomitant expressions of divine wrath or love toward Israel. Sometimes, in fact, these themes are combined—as, for example, in Hos. 2:4-22, where they underpin the motif of marriage-divorce-restoration. In this section, divine love is humanly spurned, resulting in divine anger and punishment prior to a divinely initiated reconciliation and restoration of this love. While the theme of God's abiding love for Israel (despite her infidelities) is repeated elsewhere in the book (see 11:1-11; 14:5-9), the theme of spurned love also finds expression in many oracles of wrath. Particularly powerful is the account of God's rejection of anger and turn toward Israel in Hosea 11. After a reaction of wrath, where God says, "Because they refuse to repent, a sword shall descend upon their towns and consume their limbs and devour [them] because of their designs" (w. 5-6), a new tone of compassion and mercy unexpectedly occurs (w. 8-9): 427
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
How can I give you up, O Ephraim? How surrender you, O Israel? . . . I have had a change of heart, All my tenderness is stirred. I will not act on My wrath, Will not turn to destroy Ephraim. For I am God, not man, The Holy One in your midst: I will not come in fury. As part of the diverse articulation of the themes of apostasy and of divine love given and rejected, other divine images occur in Hosea 4-14. Hosea's God is portrayed as a father (11: 1-3), a healer (7:1; 14:5), a fowler (7:12), and a shepherd (13:6). But among these images none is as characteristic of the prophet Hosea as the figure of God as a husband, and thus of the divine-human relationship as that of a husband and wife (Hosea 1-2). In fact, this figure gave powerful expression to the covenantal bond between God and the nation. Through Hosea, the image influenced the prophet leremiah (ler. 2:2; 3:1). The topic of covenantal love between God and Israel came to celebrated expression in the classical rabbinic interpretations of the Song of Songs. In addition to his bold and daring use of human images and metaphors, Hosea was also cognizant of the early historical traditions of the nation—of the Exodus (Hos. 2:17; 12:10; 13:4), the desert wandering (9:10; 13:5), the conquest (2:17; 12:14; 13:4), the apostasies at Baal-peor (9:10; cf. Num. 25:1-9) and Gibeah (Hos. 9:9; cf. ludg. 19), and the deceit and adventures of the patriarch lacob (Hos. 12:3-5). These historical references pervade Hosea's oracles and show how major historical motifs were conveyed to the people at large, although it is often uncertain whether the prophet's version of such episodes is derived from the traditions as we know them from Genesis through ludges or whether they reflect popular variations or adaptations. The striking use of historical motifs to dramatize past and future behavior is a recurrent feature ofHosea's prophecies. Viewed overall, the Book ofHosea reflects a spiritually weak and inconstant Israel, seduced by the local Canaanite deities and diverse historical-political currents. Perversions of the national cult are threatened with divine punishment (Hos. 9:1-5). The doomsday is forewarned, when the spurned words of the prophet will be vindicated. In all this, the hope for Israel's repentance is never foreclosed as a religious option—though it is realistically tempered by the awareness oflsrael's spiritual deceit and inconstancy (6:1-4; 11:5). Nevertheless, this hope is valiantly extended to Israel in the final chapter, in a remarkable closing appeal for a return to God (14: 2-9). The book thus begins with doom oracles and is dominated by them up to the final chapter. This arrangement recalls the prophecies of Amos, Hosea's contemporary, where also a succession of doom prophecies are concluded with a vision of hope (Amos 9:11-15). The two works do much to describe and dramatize a bleak religious and spiritual reality for Israel in the mid-eighth century B.C.E.
THE BOOK OF JOEL The Book of loel is the second work in the collection of the Minor Prophets known as Trei 'Asar, or "The Twelve," and is ascribed in the superscription to loel son of Pethuel. There is no further information either in the superscription or from indications in the text regarding the time or place of the prophet. Overall, the sequence of books in "The Twelve" conforms to the historical periods of the prophets, beginning with Hosea and Amos from the mid-eighth century B.C.E. (as the first and third in the list) and concluding with Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi from the late sixth to early fifth centuries B.C.E. 1 The occurrence of loel between Hosea and Amos puts 428 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
this prophet earlier than any scholarly reckoning (see below), and many have suggested that his place in the sequence may be due to verbal and thematic considerations. First, some of the final words of Joel (Joel 4:16) tally with the opening words of Amos (Amos 1:1), and an arranger might have brought them into conjunction. Second, the Book of Joel refers repeatedly to the "day of the L O R D " as a time of doom and terror (Joel 1 : 1 5 ; 2 : 1 1 ) , as does Amos (Amos 5 : 1 8 , 2 0 ) . And finally, one may observe that the central horror of the Book of Joel is a plague of locusts, one type of which is called thegamm (cutter [Joel 1 : 4 ] ) , whereas the prophet Amos reports how God brought about a plague ofgazam (Amos 4:9), among other disasters, in order to bring the people to repentance—all to no avail. The Book of Joel is composed of four chapters, and these fall into two parts (Joel 1 - 2 and Part 1 (Joel 1-2) presents a detailed and graphic depiction of an unprecedented locust plague, which attacks like a raving enemy that wipes out the food supply of the people (1:2-7, 10-12, 16-19). The prophet exhorts the people, the elders, and the priests to don sackcloth and beseech God's mercy through repentance, fasting, and prayer. He tells the people to rend their hearts and "turn back" to their gracious Lord—for out of compassion He may "turn and relent" (2: 12-14). For their part, the priests are urged to weep and cry out a liturgy of anguish, that the Lord may "spare" His people (2:17). The turning point comes in response: "Then the L O R D was roused on behalf of His land and had compassion upon His people," and in a great word of promise, He tells them that He will provide new grain, wine, and oil in abundance (2:18-19). The liturgies of penitence are now replaced by divine assurances and joyful proclamations by the ravished soil. Rains will come; the threshing floors will fill to overflowing (2:23-24). Thus will God manifest His presence "in the midst oflsrael" (2:27). Part 2 (Joel 3-4) goes on to speak of the end of days: there will be a renewal of prophecy (3:1-2), but soon a "great and terrible day of the L O R D comes" (v. 3), when "the sun shall turn into darkness and the moon into blood" (v. 4). Only those who invoke the name of the Lord shall escape (v. 5). And then there is a report of the restored fortunes of Israel and a judgment of the nations for all that they have done to the people (Joel 4:1-8). In a rousing call, the nations are told to "prepare for battle" (v. 9)—and, in an eerie reversal of Isaiah's ancient oracle of peace, told to beat their plowshares into swords (v. 10)! The multitudes will be judged on a day when the "sun and moon are darkened" (v. 15). The nations ofEgypt and Edom will become a desolate waste; but as for Israel, the Lord Himself will be their shelter. He will dwell in Zion, and the earth will flow with wine and milk (w. 17-18, 21). Clearly a different scene and language move in the two parts. Nevertheless, there is much verbal and thematic continuity—for example, the dark and devastating day of the Lord (Joel 2: 2 and 3:4) and the eventual divine gifts to Israel of natural bounty (2:24 and 4:13). 2 What the first part portrays in terms of a natural disaster, caused by withdrawal of the divine presence, the second part presents as God's supernatural presence in terms of active judgment against Israel's enemies and active grace for His people. And what the first part presents as an event affecting Israel alone becomes in the second part a decision of judgment against the nations. The leitmotif of disaster in both parts is a day when the land's bounty is laid waste and the lights of heaven go out. By contrast, God's grace is a time of flowing water and healthy fields. The poles of death and life are starkly registered: the dependence ofhuman life upon divine care for existence is manifest. Finally, one is left to ponder the two parts of the composition: whether the book divides into preexilic and postexilic strands,3 whether the work is a unity and the locusts are a symbol of the judgment of the Lord, 4 or even whether some natural event stimulated visions of an apocalyptic moment. 5 As to its date, in addition to liturgical practices and language,6 the whole tone of the book suggests that we are dealing with a period sometime after the restoration of the Second Temple. Note in particular that the imagery of God dwelling in Zion and the Temple as a fount 429
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
of blessing recalls the exilic and postexilic ideology of the prophets Ezekiel (47:1-12) and Zechariah (chapter 14). Moreover, the latter prophet even presents us with a similar apocalyptic battle against the nations, portrayed through images of deadly terror and dark horror. 7 The result is an apocalyptic fantasy with more than a trace of the smoldering hopes for national revival and the imagined collapse of the foreign rulers.
THE BOOK OF AMOS The ProphetAmos and His Times According to the superscription of the book that bears his name, Amos is reported to have prophesied in the reign of King Jeroboam II oflsrael (784-748 B.C.E.) and King Uzziah ofludah (769-733 B.C.E.): "two years before the earthquake" (Amos 1:1). 1 This reference has been linked to a quake from around 760 B.C.E., attested in stratum VI of the excavation at Hazor. 2 The same event was recalled over two hundred years later by the prophet Zechariah (Zech. 14:5). 3 On the basis of this brief historical notice, the beginning of Amos's prophecies has been dated to the mid-eighth century B.C.E.4 The timing would tally with the prophet's words of doom against King leroboam II in Amos 7:9-11. This northern king (like King Uzziah in the south) came to power during a period of decline in Assyria's control over west Asia. Some of the other kingdoms in the region (Aram, Philistia, and Phoenicia) promoted anti-Assyrian sentiment at this time; leroboam used the power vacuum to expand his territories considerably (2 Kings 14:25, 28). These military expansions may have stimulated the economy in general and the construction trade in particular, for Amos makes explicit reference to unfair and aggressive business practices, to luxuriously constructed and appointed homes, and to opulent excesses among the wealthy (Amos 2:7; 3:9, 15; 4:1; 6:1-6; 8:4-6). Archeological excavations from Samaria confirm the impression that this was a period of wealth with an economic gap between the rich and the poor. 5 Another point bearing on the dating of the Book of Amos has to do with the solar eclipse recorded in ancient sources for 15 lune 763 B.C.E.6 This date correlates remarkably with the onset of Amos's prophesies ("two years after the earthquake"). Such an event (or an earlier one in 784 B.C.E.) may explain the prophet's recurrent imagery of a doomsday of total darkness: "And in that day—declares my Lord GOD—I will make the sun set at noon, I will darken the earth on a sunny day. I will turn your festivals into mourning and all your songs into dirges; I will put sackcloth on all loins and tonsures on every head. I will make it [the earth] mourn as for an only child, all of it as on a bitter day" (Amos 8:9-10; cf. 5:20). 7 In addition to general historical circumstances, the opening verse also notes that Amos was a "sheepbreeder from Tekoa."8 He later designates himself a "cattle breeder," a "tender of sycamore figs," and one who followed "the flock" (Amos 7:14-15). Amos's purpose in stressing these rustic occupations was to counter the charge of being a professional prophet, one who prophesied for hire. He thus stressed his unprofessional and humble status and the fact that he was driven unexpectedly to deliver God's word. The priest of Bethel (Amaziah) admonished him to flee to ludah and earn his living there; this banishment suggests that Amos's hometown ofTekoa was located in the wilderness ofludah (cf. 2 Chron. 20:20), and not somewhere in the north. 9 According to the Greek apocryphal work "The Lives of the Prophets" Amos was often beaten by Amaziah and died from a blow to his head by Amaziah's son. 10
The Book and ItsMessage The book bearing the title "Amos" is the third collection of prophecies in the anthology known as Trei 'Asar, or "The Twelve." This anthology, arranged in what was presumably intended to 430
O V E R V I E W O F BIBLICAL B O O K S EXCERPTED I N T H E H A F T A R O T CYCLE
be chronological order, begins with the prophets Hosea, Joel, and Amos. Hosea and Amos are both dated (in the superscriptions to their works) to the reigns of King Uzziah in Judah and King Jeroboam II from the mid-eighth century B.C.E. and are considered to be the first of the classical prophets whose works are written down. The intervening prophetic unit attributed to Joel is undated but is presumed by most modern scholars to be of a relatively late date. It was apparently placed in its present setting because of a verbal tally with the Book of Amos (cf. Joel 4:16 and Amos 1:2). The Book of Amos is also verbally linked to the prophecy of Obadiah, which follows it (cf. Amos 9:12 and Obad. 1:9). The structure of the Book of Amos is threefold: (I) oracles of doom against foreign nations (Amos 1:3-2:3); (2) oracles of doom againstjudah andlsrael (2:4-5; 2:6-9:6); and (3) oracles of hope referring to Israel and the Davidic monarchy o f j u d a h (9:7-15). This tripartite structure is commonly found in other prophetic collections, but as a rule the national prophecies of doom precede the doom oracles against foreign nations. Also unusual is the overwhelming preponderance of oracles of doom in the Book of Amos, the majority of them directed against Israel. The coda of eschatological promise is meager—and of this, 9:7-10 deals with doom to the sinners of Jacob and salvation for the righteous remnant; only in verses 11-15 are there unqualified prophecies of hope. The promise regarding the restoration of the "fallen booth of David" (w. 11-12) is altogether unexpected in a work so focused upon the northern kingdom of Israel. Some modern scholars have therefore suggested that it reflects an addition by Judean theologians after the Babylonian exile. The collection of oracles against the foreign nations, Judah, and Israel (Amos 1:3-2:16) constitutes a structural whole: each of the units is preceded by the formula "For three transgressions of (x), for four, I [God] will not revoke it [the doom]"; each then details typical crimes in encapsulated form; and each (except the oracle against Israel) speaks of a devouring divine fire that will consume the fortresses and cities of that realm. In addition, chains of internal verbal associations create a highly stylized collection.11 Only the oracles against Israel break this pattern. The gathering of materials into units with afixedstylistic pattern or collections of thematically related similar materials is common elsewhere in the book. Thus there is a series of rhetorical questions in Amos 3:3-6; of prophetic units beginning with the exhortations "Hear" (shim'u) (3:1; 3:13; 4:1; 5:1) or the lament "Ah" (hoy) (5:18; 6:1); 12 and of prophetic visions beginning "This is what my Lord GOD showed me" (koh hir'tmi) (7:1, 4, 7; 8:1). The first two of the visions show a scene of disaster (beginning hinneh, "lo"), which the prophet understands, and he begs God for mercy toward his people; the final two present a puzzling scene followed by a divine query, "What do you see, Amos?" and these are followed by a proclamation of divine doom without any prophetic intercession. It may also be noted that these stylistic units and collections show a penchant for patterns of four (3 + 1), seven (broken up as 3 + 4, 5 + 2, or 6 + 1), and eight (7 + 1). Thus there are four visions (of which three precede Amos's encounter with Amaziah, and the fourth is the decisive climax of doom); seven sins addressed to the nations (3 + 4 ) ; seven rhetorical questions posed; and eight clusters of doom oracles (6 against foreigners + 2 against Israel). All of these patterns have resonances elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible and reflect a highly sophisticated rhetorical tradition. 13 Amos's claim to be a rude herdsman, diverted from his labors by the task of prophecy, thus seems somewhat disingenuous: his style and technique reflect a quite artful and developed preaching tradition. This is significant, since Amos and Hosea are the first two of the classical prophets whose work is preserved in writing. They are both clearly heirs to a rich tradition. 14 The prophet Amos also shows awareness oflegal traditions found in the Torah (Amos 2:6),15 as well as historical information about the people and institutions (2:10-12; 3:12) and cultic matters (3:14; 4:4; 5:25). Some of these observations show variations of known legal terms and concepts (e. g., perverting or turning aside the way of the needy [2:7]), as well as altogether striking historical traditions (e. g., that the sacrifices were not offered in the wilderness [5:25]). Amos also knew liturgical traditions, and one of the recurrent features in his prophecies is the doxologies praising God as creator (4:13; 5:8-9; 9:5-6). 431
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Perhaps the dominant element of Amos's preaching is his stress on the primacy of morality and divine justice.16 In this he provides a striking balance to his contemporary, Hosea, who emphasizes knowledge of God and divine love. Repeatedly Amos vents his ire and indignation against the practices of injustice he saw around him and the mistreatment of the needy or indigent by moneylenders and wealthy merchants. To be sure, Amos is also well aware of the cultic abuses occurring in the shrines of Dan and Bethel, but immorality and ethical insensitivity are his main concerns. With singular obsession, Amos deeply identifies with his sense of divine outrage at social injustice and proclaims God's imminent punishment for this (Amos 4:1-13; 5:4-17). 17 This sense of approaching doom is epitomized in the vision of"a basket of figs [kayitz]" whose nature and name symbolize that "the hour of doom [ketz] has come for My people Israel; I will not pardon them again" (8:2). Consistent with this overall doomsday character of the book, the hope for repentance is referred to as something long since past. God warned the people of disaster through famine, and drought, and blight, and pestilence, and death and destruction—but though they suffered, they "did not turn back to Me" (Amos 4:6-11); therefore, they can now expect to meet their God (v. 12). Similarly, prophetic exhortations to "seek" the Lord and "live" are rare (5:4, 6, 14-15), and divine stays of execution are temporary (7:1-6). The northern kingdom oflsrael, in particular, stands under the sign of unconditional judgment because of injustice. The inescapability of divine judgment soars to a climax in Amos 8:4-9:6. The people will experience the day of the Lord, a day of darkness and no light (5:18). 18 Nothing will save them—not even their vaunted sense of specialness because of the covenant (3:1-2); not even their belief in God's special favor toward them at the Exodus (9:7). Indeed, the covenant imposes upon the people great responsibilities before God ("You alone have I singled out [or: known] of all the families of the earth—that is why I will call you to account for all your iniquities" [3:2]), and God's liberation oflsrael was only one such act that God performed for the nations; therefore they should not assume that God only cares for Israel and will not destroy them. According to Amos, the God of justice will punish Israel's wrongs, and then He will restore the dynasty of David and His people Israel. Ruins will be built up, and a future of national renewal will come about. With supernatural beneficence, God will provide for His people. Bounty will be such that the plowman of one season will meet the reaper of another, "and the treader of grapes him who holds the [bag of] seed" (Amos 9:13). This the Lord promises, but only for the righteous remnant. As for the sinful kingdom: "I will wipe it off the face of the earth! . . . All the sinners of My people shall perish by the sword" (9:8, 10). The prophet of justice is not known for his mercy.
THE BOOK OF OBADIAH The Prophet and His Times The entire brief Book of Obadiah (twenty-one verses) is the haftarah for Va-yishlah (Sephardim). It is the fourth prophetic collection in the anthology known as Trei 'Asar, or "The Twelve." The main theme of Obadiah, the divine judgment of Edom, is anticipated in the conclusions to the prophetic collections of loel (loel 4:19) and Amos (Amos 9:12), which immediately precede it, while the sub-theme dealing with Israel's dispossession of Edom is also specified in Amos. In addition, Obadiah (Obad. 1:17) concludes with the promise that "Zion's mount. . . shall [again] be holy," echoing loel's promise (loel 4:17) that God will again dwell in "Zion," His "holy mount," and that "lerusalem shall be holy." The inclusion of Obadiah among the earliest oflsrael's prophets may reflect an old rabbinic tradition. For although it is uncertain just who Obadiah was, an observation preserved in the Talmud (B. Sanhedrin 39b) suggests that he was the royal official who saved the prophets of 432 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the Lord in a cave during the persecutions of the Israelite King Ahab, in the mid-ninth century B.C.E. (1 Kings 18:4). The early rabbinic chronology entitled Seder 'Olam (20) gives an even earlier date for the prophet Obadiah, for it backdates the envisioned battle against Edom to the preceding generation of King Jehoshaphat of Judah, based on the biblical report that in his day "there was no king in Edom" (1 Kings 22:48). 1 In medieval times, Abraham ibn Ezra remarked forthrightly that "we do not know his generation and we cannot say that he is mentioned in the Book of Kings." He goes on to say that the references in the Book of Obadiah (l:10ff.) concerning Edom's guile against Jacob suggest that the prophecy against this nation comes after the exile of the Judeans to Babylon and is motivated by memories of Edom's participation in the fall ofjerusalem in 586 B.C.E. (cf. Ps. 137: 7). 2 Nahmanides was also of the same opinion. 3 Alternatively, the prophecy is said to allude to the strife between the Jews and the Idumeans in the Second Temple period (David Kimhi). 4 By contrast, Don Isaac Abravanel tried to honor the old rabbinic tradition regarding the identity of the prophet Obadiah while avoiding any precise dating of the prophecies of Edomite destruction. In his view, therefore, Obadiah was in fact Ahab's majordomo, but he regarded the prophecies as a forecast of the final and complete destruction of Edom. On this view, Edom (long extinct) was hardly the ancient nation of biblical or early rabbinic times, but rather an epithet for a kingdom of evil and power that would keep the Jews in exile and impoverishment during the dark night of history.5 Most moderns concur with the opinion that the prophecy of Obadiah is late and refers to events during the fall of the Temple and Jerusalem in 586 B.C.E.6 Like Ibn Ezra, they do so on the basis of the references to Edom's betrayal ofher former ally against the Babylonian empire. The Book of Lamentations anticipates a time when Edom will be punished for its participation in Israel's downfall and drink from a cup of sorrows (Lam. 4:21), 7 an image found also toward the end of the prophecy of Obadiah (Obad. 1:16). Several examples of late language reinforce these thematic considerations regarding the date of the book. 8
Structure and Themes The theme of Edom's downfall gives the Book of Obadiah an overall thematic coherence. Nevertheless, its structure has been subject to much speculation. Numerous proposals have been advanced. For a breakdown of the book and an analysis of its content, see the haftarah for Vayishlah (Sephardim).
THE BOOK OF MICAH The Prophet and His Times According to the superscription at the beginning of the book (Mic. 1:1), Micah the Morashtite prophesied during the reigns of the Judean monarchs Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. Since Jotham rose to power in 758 B.C.E. and Hezekiah reigned until 698 B.C.E., we may fit the prophet Micah into the broad parameters of two full generations during the late eighth and early seventh centuries B.C.E. The superscription targets the time more precisely when it says that Micah spoke concerning the fate of Samaria and Jerusalem. We may assume that this statement refers to the general period of Assyrian power and hegemony and specifically to the occasions surrounding the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C.E. (under Sargon II) and the siege ofjerusalem in 701 B.C.E. (by Sennacherib). No precise reference to these events occurs in the prophecies themselves, though the prophet apparently refers to them in 5:4 and poignantly envisages the waste and woe of the two cities in 1:6-9 and 3:12. The shocking nature of Micah's prophecy against Jerusalem and the Temple had aftereffects over a century later, when it was cited in his name during the trial of 433
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Jeremiah at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign ( 6 0 8 B.C.E.). That source states that Micah spoke his words of doom "in the days ofHezekiah" (Jer. 2 6 : 1 8 ) . The prophetic career of Micah is thus contemporaneous with that of Isaiah of Jerusalem, though the latter offers more information about political and military events, including the fall of Damascus (in 7 3 2 B.C.E.) and that of Samaria ( 7 2 2 B.C.E.). From the social critiques of Micah, on the other hand, we learn a great deal about the power structures of the time and the perversions of justice by the wealthy. All the same, much of this social reality, riddled with greedy landowners and callous acts of extortion (Mic. 2 : 1 - 2 ; 3 : 2 - 3 ) , is precisely echoed in the diatribes oflsaiah (Isa. 5 : 8 - 1 2 , 1 8 - 2 0 ; 1 0 : 1 - 2 ) , who also employs similar images and styles (for example, the condemnation of the land grabbers in Isa. 5 : 8 and Mic. 2 : 1 - 2 ) . Other stylistic and thematic features connect these two prophetic contemporaries (see below). Coming from the rural region of Moreshet, located in the plain between the highlands of ludah and the maritime coast of Philistia, Micah nevertheless seems to be fully aware of the machinations of the power brokers as well as the activities of other prophets. 1 He speaks boldly and directly against the "rulers" and "chiefs of the House oflsrael" (Mic. 3 : 1 , 9 ) and repeatedly resists the remonstrations of the wealthy (2:6) and mocks their preferred prophecies (2:11; cf. 3:5). Yet Micah has none of the privileged access to power characteristic oflsaiah, nor is he ever found in the courts of the kings. For that matter, we know nothing of the exact setting in which Micah recited his words. Thus his prophecies seem to blow unanchored throughout the land—from Shaphir and Maroth to Migdal-eder and Mare-shah. On the other hand, despite his rural background, Micah's rhetoric is sophisticated: at once rich in nuance and allusion, and informed of national and religious traditions. Throughout his prophecies, Micah is God's spokesman, using such formulas as "thus said the L O R D " (Mic. 2 : 3 ; 3 : 5 ) and "declares the L O R D " ( 4 : 6 ; 5 : 9 ) . Nevertheless, it is remarkable how infrequently such terms occur and how extensively the prophet seems to speak in his own voice. The reader is often faced with circumscribed divine words embedded within Micah's personal rhetoric and is thereby drawn directly into the speeches of a man delivering his own social condemnations in the context of divine judgments. The fact that Micah also incorporates the words ofhis enemies (2:6; 3:11) or their future laments (2:4) into his diatribes further enlivens the rhetoric of the book and gives it a tone bristling with partisanship. The inner world of the prophet is known mostly through his external concerns. Only once does Micah give personal testimony—and this in contrast to the false prophets. "But I," he says, "I am filled with strength by the spirit of the L O R D , and with judgment and courage, to declare to lacob his transgressions and to Israel his sin" ( 3 : 8 ) .
The Book und ItsMessage The prophecies of Micah are collected as the sixth book in the anthology of Trei 'Asar, or "The Twelve." Its relatively late position, after the words of Obadiah and lonah, may be due to a misappraisal of the date of the preceding works. On the other hand, the placement of the prophecies of Micah between oracles of Nineveh's forgiveness (Ion. 4 : 1 1 ) and its ruination (Nah. 1 : 1 - 6 ) locates the book squarely in the period of Assyrian power. Set within the context of divine mercy and judgment toward Nineveh, the prophecies of Micah are thus theologically charged with the idea of divine sovereignty, for if God can forgive or destroy the people of Assyria, he can also use them to punish His own nation. The role of Assyria as the "rod" of God's anger over Samaria and lerusalem is explicitly enunciated by Isaiah (Isa. 1 0 : 5 , 9 - 1 2 ) , Micah's contemporary. The overall structure of the Book of Micah is threefold.2 Part 1 (Mic. 1 : 2 - 3 : 1 2 ) comprises a series of oracular judgments against Samaria and lerusalem. It begins with pronouncements of divine destruction ( 1 : 2 - 7 ) , is complemented by a series of lamentations for the disaster to befall the towns of the land (1:8-16), and continues with a collection of indictments and predictions of the ruin to descend upon an immoral people ( 2 : 1 - 1 6 ) . The leadership is as corrupt as the wealthy, and deceitful to boot, and so Micah condemns the rulers ( 3 : 1 - 4 ) and false prophets 434 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
(3:5-8) both singly and then together (3:9-12) in a climactic unit. The section concludes with the future fall ofjerusalem (3:12), its language of"ruin" echoing the destruction of Samaria at the outset (1:6). 3 Part 2 changes focus abruptly and shifts from prophecies of doom to a series of prophecies of consolation: for Zion (Mic. 4:1-5, 11-14), for the exiles (4:6-7), for the Davidic monarchy (4:8-10), and for a messianic leader (5:1-5). The result will be both national restoration (5: 6-8) andpurification (w. 9-14). Following this doom-restoration sequence, part 3 (Mic. 6:1-7:20) seems somewhat anticlimactic. It provides an indictment of wrongs done in the past and an instruction for proper actions in the future (6:i-8). There are also further denunciations of injustice (6:9-16; 7:1-6) and the climactic promise of national restoration (7:7-13) and divine forgiveness (w. 14-20). As a whole, then, this part is a resumptive coda echoing material in the previous chapters. It is symmetrical in form: in the initial teaching, the people are instructed to follow God through acts of hesed, or loving-kindness (6:8); while at the end, they are promised the bounty of divine love and forgiveness, because God Himselfdesires hesed (7:18). 4 This aggregation of diverse oracles on separate topics coheres by virtue of the larger thematic clusters involved (judgment-restoration); by virtue of the collocation of mini-groups of subjects (greed and gain) or leaders (rulers, prophets, and priests); and by virtue of the associative linking of materials through repeated terms (e. g., the condemnation of false preaching in Mic. 2:6, } al ta-ttifuya-ttifun, lo'yattifu la-'eleh ("Stop preaching!" they preach.'That's no way to preach"), and 2:11, a-ttiflekha la-ya-yin ve-la-shekha-r ve-ha-yah ma-ttif ha'am hazeh ([If a man were to go about uttering windy, baseless falsehoods: ] I'll preach to you in favor of wine and liquor"—He would be a preacher [acceptable] to that people).5 Note also the conjunction of repeated phrases, used in diverse ways (cf. 3:12 and 4:1). The result is a jagged but arresting series of rhetorical units that replace each other with kaleidoscopic intensity, but that nonetheless combine to make a strong impact upon the reader. Presumably the ancient audience had it easier—receiving the separate units in small and discrete doses. In its present form, this traditional collection of oracles burdens the reader by virtue of its evocative yet elusive energy. Nonetheless, the sheer variety of separate oracles may remind the modern interpreter that ancient prophecy is more a series of shouts than a dispassionate speech, more a series of quick critiques than a composition in any literary sense.6 Overall, Micah's cry condemns the rampant injustice in the land: the intolerable iniquity of the rapacious and power hungry, who dream of greed on their beds and rise to the dark deed come morning (Mic. 2:1-2), and the insatiable lust of the mighty who devour their fellows (3: 2-4) or deceive the gullible and trusting (3:5). Society is undone, says the prophet, by those "who make crooked all that is straight" and who lull the unwary into illusion (3:9, 11). This social evil overwhelms Micah to such a degree that we hardly hear anything about cultic sins. At most we overhear the query of the people who wonder which sacrifices suffice for forgiveness (6:6-7), but this folly is not so much mocked or condemned as replaced with the instruction of justice and hesed (v. 8). This latter virtue is deemed the quintessential divine "demand" or requirement, says Micah; and in telling the people that this "has been told" to the people long before, he implies that such moral rectitude was a known basis for the divine-human bond. It is striking, in this regard, that no mention is made here of either the Torah or the covenant. But the absence of these terms need not imply ignorance of the matter. Surely the very terms of the demand ("justice and goodness") echo an ancient pledge of loyalty and thus make the salvation of the people contingent upon their faithfulness to God and the divine order. (For the important teaching found in6:8, see the discussion of the haftarah for Balak.) Micah's prophetic concerns thus range from criticism to instruction, and through his prophecies of restoration, he also evokes the theme of compassion. We hear, in this regard, of an ingathering of the "remnant" oflsrael, scattered abroad by exile (Mic. 5:6-7), to a renewed glory and rest. Drawing upon older memories and reformulating them, Micah anticipates a new Exodus (7:15) and expresses God's words of forgiveness in the ancient liturgical formula of divine 435
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
mercy (7:18-19; cf. Exod. 34:6-7). The prophet thus reworks his tradition into new words of hope. Like Isaiah, Micah also heralds the centrality of Zion in a new world order—when divine instruction would proceed from Zion for all (Mic. 4:1-5; cf. Isa. 2:1-4). Micah knows this to be a received prophecy (v. 4) but goes beyond it with the vision of a federation of peoples, each of which follows its own god (s) and traditions in the mutual concern for peace.7 The universalism envisaged by this instruction at the beginning of part 2 is balanced by the individual instruction of rectitude and justice found in part 3. These teachings of moral hope and shared destiny offset the divisive behavior condemned elsewhere in the book. If divine instruction for all from Zion marks the future end of fear (Mic. 4:4), the individual instruction of justice is epitomized by God's transcendent grace (7:18). In this prophecy, Micah rises to a liturgical exultation as he proclaims, "Who is a God like You!"— mi }el kamokha. With this statement, the prophet turns his own name, Mikhah (Who is like [unto God]?), into a paean of theological praise. The condemning God of part 1 finally forgives all iniquity—out of faithfulness to His own divine nature (7:18-19) and to tradition (v. 20).
THE BOOK OF HABAKKUK The Prophet and His Times The opening superscription to the Book of Habakkuk provides no reference to contemporary kings or biographical information, and so it was commonly repeated among medieval Bible commentators that "we know nothing about [the prophet's] age or family" (Ibn Ezra, Kimhi, Abravanel). Nevertheless, an old rabbinic tradition does speculate that Habakkuk prophesied during the reign of King Manasseh (698-642 B.C.E.),1 and this position was apparently followed by some medievals.2 But an early seventh-century date is hard to corroborate from the text itself, and so the pseudepigraphical "The Lives of the Prophets" is probably nearer the mark when it states that "[b]efore the captivity [Habakkuk] had a vision of the destruction oflerusalem, and grieved exceedingly."3 Support for this opinion would be the fact that Habakkuk mentions the destructive advance o f t h e Chaldeans, that fierce, impetuous nation" near the outset ofhis book (Hab. 1:6); hence, one may readily suppose that the prophet was a contemporary witness to the rising power of this neo-Babylonian empire. Using similar images, leremiah repeatedly predicted that this scourge from the "north" would justly punish ludah for its sins (ler. 6:22-30; 25:8-9). Nebuchadnezzar's defeat of the Egyptian army at Carchemish in 605 B.C.E. gave an uncomfortable reality and immediacy to such doomsday predictions. Habakkuk surely sensed the swing of fate, but he was clearly dismayed by God's use of this impious foreign power to wreak divine vengeance (see Hab. 1:13-17, and below).
The Book and ItsMessage The Book The Book of Habakkuk appears as the eighth collection of prophecies incorporated in the anthology known as Trei'Asar,or "The Twelve." The arrangers clearly had a sense of its historical provenance, for they placed it immediately after the prophecies of Nahum, which predict the destruction of Nineveh (the capital of Assyria, destroyed in 614 B.C.E.), and just prior to the words of Zephaniah, who is dated to the reign of King losiah (during the period of the rise of the neo-Babylonian empire). This is precisely the period to which the sole historical hint in the Book of Habakkuk (the reference to Chaldea) points. It is notable that Habakkuk lambastes the Babylonians for building cities by means of bloody crimes ('ir be-da-mim [Hab. 2:12; cf. v. 8]), for this is also the idiom used by Nahum to condemn the citizens of Nineveh a few years earlier ('ir da-mim [Nah. 3:1]) and by Ezekiel to arraign lerusalem just prior to its destruction ('ir ha-da-mim [Ezek. 22:2]). A common argot was thus used by these contemporaries to assail 436 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
the murderous lust for wealth in the great capitals of the Near East in the late seventh and early sixth centuries B.C.E. The Book of Habakkuk is literally entitled "The pronouncement [massa'] that the prophet Habakkuk envisioned [hazah].n4: A similar conjunction of the term massa' with vision (hazon) heads the prophecies of Nahum. But Habakkuk's collection is composed of other genres as well. Most notable are the several speech forms that occur in the first two chapters and the fact that chapter 3 is itselfentitled "a prayer." Part 1 of the Book of Habakkuk includes Hab. 1:2-17 and may be divided into three sections. The first is 1:2-4. After the superscription (1:1), the words of Habakkuk open with a searing complaint against God and His justice: "How long, O L O R D , shall I cry out and You not listen, shall I shout to You, 'Violence! ' and You not save?" (v. 2). This indictment is voiced by a double plaint ("how long?" 'ad }anah [v. 2]; and "why?" lamah (v. 3]) found in other prayers for divine rescue (Ps. 74:10-11), and it concludes with a repeated assertion ('al ken, "that is why" and "therefore" [Hab. 1:4]). In context, the complaint functions as an arraignment, though the precise circumstances of iniquity and God's failure to enact "justice" (mishpat) are not stated. Commentators raise two possibilities: either the perpetrators of the violence are the Israelites, in which case the Chaldean attack announced in the next unit (w. 5-11) is proper punishment (but this leaves the subsequent complaint of divine injustice, in v. 12-17, puzzling); or the agents of evil are the Chaldeans themselves, in which case the prophet anticipates their violent advent (but complains to God for using such unjust people as his agents). 5 The second section of part 1, Hab. 1:5-11, constitutes a response to the opening charge. The speaker is now assumed to be God, on the basis of the omnipotent action involved ("For lo, I am raising up the Chaldeans" [v. 6]), and the addressees are presumably the people as a whole (collectively invoked). The images pile up with terror: the enemy eats up the territories, like a vulture, and derides every human bulwark, glorying in its vaunted superhuman might. Jeremiah has envisioned such rapine (Jer. 4:13-14; 6:22-30), as has Isaiah (Isa. 5:26-30), but such horrors ultimately derive from curses that God threatened for religious disobedience (Deut. 28:49-53). The third section of part 1 is Hab. 1:12-17. This section echoes the first one in several respects: in its use of the prophetic voice and its query as to why God countenances treachery, in its reference to the perversion of "justice" (mishpat), and in the rhetorical forms lamah (v. 13) and %lken (v. 17). Moreover, like the initial complaint that "the villain hedges in the just man [tzaddik]" (v. 4), the prophet now asks why God stands idly by "while the one in the wrong devours the one in the right [tzaddik]" (v. 13). Together, the two parts frame the divine punishment in the second section of part 1. Following its prophecy of animals and birds of prey, the dominant image of iniquity here is the fishing net—which unsparingly hauls in its catch and is the object of the people's veneration. The prophet wonders how God can countenance such acts. This is presumably the sense of the first section as well (see above). Part 2 of the Book of Habakkuk comprises chapter 2. This part has two major subunits. In the first unit, Hab. 2:1, the prophet determines to stand fast and wait for God's answer to his "complaint." The answer directly follows. The second unit of part 2 is Hab. 2:2-20, which is composed of two distinct genres. In the first (w. 2-5), God tells the prophet that the destruction of the villains will surely come and the righteous should hold fast to this promise—come what may. In the second (w. 6-20), the prophet is told a series of "Woe" (hoy; NJPS: "Ah") oracles that will be recited against the haughty. These include indictments for greed and moral debasement (w. 6b-8, 9-11, 12-14, 15-17). 6 A final unit (w. 18-20) opens with a critique of idolatry, adds a retort of "Woe," and concludes with a proclamation of trust in God's awesome presence. Part 2 thus concludes with the anticipation of theological triumph: God is in His Abode; let the workers of evil beware. Part 3 of the Book ofHabakkuk is chapter 3. This part has three subunits. It is framed by a superscription (Hab. 3:1) and a subscription (v. 19b), which characterize the content as a "prayer" to be recited "with instrumental music" in "the mode of Shigionoth." Within this frame, the central 437
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
unit itselfhas three sections. In the first of these, 3:2, the prophet is emboldened by confidence in God's promise and calls upon Him to come soon in power-to manifest His power before all. In 3:3-15, the advent of God from His heavenly Abode is then described with awesome mythic force. A vast penumbra of light envelops the scene as the advancing Lord is led by a retinue of fearsome powers. God roars like a storm god, flashes His arrows like lightning, and quashes the roiling seas. The enemies of God will be blasted away as ancient myth is imaginatively renewed before the prophet's eye. Like the battle against the sea and its primordial monsters (cf. Isa. 51: 9), God "will make [His] steeds tread the sea, stirring the mighty waters." As it was, so shall it be enacted again—to fulfill the prophet's opening prayer, "I am awed, O LORD, by Your deeds. Renew them in these years" (v. 2). (For a full discussion of this mythic vision, see the comments for the haftarah for the second day of Shavuot.) The third and final section of this unit is 3: 16-19a. In it, a heavenly vision strikes terror in the prophet—yet he holds fast in faithful hope (v. 16); indeed, though all the earth is blasted to rot, he sings joyfully to God "who delivers" him (w. 17-18). A trace of future fulfillment thus enters the prophet's heart at this moment and "lets [him] stride" confidently "upon the heights" (v. 19a). This concludes the "prayer," after which is found the concluding subscription mentioned earlier. The Message Despite the palpably diverse genres of the book, there is enough coherence among the parts to justify the assertion of Don Isaac Abravanel that the work is "one interconnected prophecy from the beginning of the book to its end." Thus the several complaints of chapter 1 lead the prophet to demand God's answer—which comes in the form of a prophecy in chapter 2. Chapter 3 envisions the long-awaited advent of God against His enemies and ends with a renewed trust in God's deliverance. This confidence resolves the strong theological tension with which the book opens. God is fiercely criticized for countenancing the evil of the enemy, and now, after the prophet's charge to endure these times in faith, Habakkuk exults in his newfound trust that God will judge the earth with righteousness. The earlier word of confidence, given to quick and easy reading (Hab. 2:2-4), is now replaced by an awesome vision of divine judgment andpunishment (3:3-15). These thematic transformations are reinforced on the literary level by a series of verbal variations. Intentional or not, they underscore complex connections among the units. This is especially true of parts 1 and 2. For one thing, the initial prophetic critique of the abuse of the tzaddik ("just man" [Hab. 1:4]; "one in the right" [1:13]) is echoed in God's assertion that "the righteous man [tzaddik]" will be rewarded for his fidelity (2:4); for another, the very term used for this faithfulness ('emunato) harks back to the unbelievable (lo} ta'aminu) attack of the Chaldeans mentioned at the outset of the book (1:5). A similar move from the negative to the positive marks the uses of the verb habit ("look at"). In the first part it appears in all three units, in order to express both disbelief in God's inaction (1:3, 13) and a call to observe the forthcoming violence of the Chaldeans (1:5). It is therefore fitting that just this verb recurs in the second part, in a "Woe" oracle denouncing the evils of this horde—who lewdly intoxicate their foes "to gaze [habit] upon their nakedness [;me'orehem]" (2:15). And as if measure for measure, the punishment announced in part 3 alludes to this crime: for just as the evil ones exposed the nakedness (;me'orehem) of their foes, so will God "bare and ready" ('eryah ta'or) His bow (3:9) and "raze" ('arot) the villains' home from top to bottom (3:13). This is God's great "deed" (po'olekha) (3: 2)—a manifestation of justice that will quash the "work" (po'al) of horrors decried at the outset (1:5). Habakkuk's complaint is thus finally and fully heeded: God will not only send a word of hope, but a work of victory as well. The overall progression among the parts is succinctly captured by another cluster of puns. Thus, though the initial destruction causes all observers to "be utterly astounded" (ve-hitammehu temahu) (1:5), the faithful are advised to wait for God's victory "even if it tarries" {yitmahmah) (2:3) —"for it will surely come" in due course, when God will flash forth in victory and cause "the deep" (tehom) to roar in terror (3:10). These alliterations deftly interlock the three themes of the book: the evil of the Chaldeans, the challenge to await God's advent in faith, and the mythic 438 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
battle itself. God's just power in history is finally vindicated, and Habakkuk challenges God to contain the violence of Babylon and reveal His saving light. The divine response is portrayed in an awesome, apocalyptic spectacle.
THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH The Prophet and His Times The Book of Zechariah is the eleventh book of the Minor Prophets, or Trei 'Asar, "The Twelve." According to its opening superscription, the book is attributed to "the prophet Zechariah son of Berechiah son of Iddo" (Zech. 1:1), and he began to prophesy in the second year of King Darius I (520 B.C.E.), as did Haggai (Hag. 1:1). The prophet is mentioned along with Haggai in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14—both times as involved with the rebuilding of the Temple and both times as "Zechariah son of Iddo." In another contemporary source, we have mention of a priest by the name of Zechariah, of the house of Iddo (Neh. 12:16). If this person is the same as our prophet Zechariah, then he had a priestly background. Zechariah's involvement in the restoration of the Temple and his vision of the purification of the High Priest Joshua (in chapter 3) give ample testimony to his cultic concerns. The period in which Zechariah son of Iddo prophesied is established by the dates in the book itself, which are more precise than the indications found in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14. The dates mentioned are (I) the eighth month of the second year ofDarius I (Zech. 1:1), 520 B.C.E.; (2) the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month of that same year (1:7); and (3) the fourth day of the ninth month of Darius's fourth regnal year (7:1), 518 B.C.E. He thus flourished for two years and was undoubtedly crucial in the effort to galvanize the rebuilding of the Temple, completed in 515 B.C.E. (Ezra 6:15). From the evidence provided, Zechariah began his work about two months after Haggai (Hag. 1:1), labored alongside him for a month or so (the latest date for Haggai is in the ninth month of Darius's second year [Hag. 2:10, 20]), and continued to speak out for two more years after that. Despite this, a tradition in the Jerusalem Talmud (J. Rosh Hashanah 1:1, 66b) considers the beginning of Zechariah's prophecy to predate that of Haggai. This discrepancy notwithstanding, Zechariah was clearly involved with the rebuilding of the Temple (Zech. 1:16; 4:9; 6:12-13), but it was not his only prophetic concern, in contrast to what we know ofHaggai. It is possible that the intense interest in rebuilding the Temple was part of a larger messianic movement that centered around Zerubbabel, a scion of David (see Zech. 6:9-13). But the immediate background was more geopolitical in nature. After Cyrus the Mede had conquered Babylon (539 B.C.E.), he issued edicts giving permission to the Judeans (among others) to renew their ancestral religious practices. Biblical reference to the edict to the Judeans is found in Ezra 6: 1-5, where it is stated that Cyrus ordered the Temple rebuilt and even gave instructions for the temple vessels taken by the Babylonian invaders to be returned (cf. Ezra. 1:7-8). In the event, the Persian satrap of the province of "Beyond the River" (i. e., Trans-Euphrates), Tattenai by name, was suspicious of the Judean undertaking. An official investigation revealed the record of Cyrus's edict in the royal archive of Ecbatana. As a result, Tattenai received orders not to interfere in the process (Ezra 6:6-12). N o doubt Haggai and Zechariah saw all this as part of God's plan—and labored for its immediate realization.1
The Book and ItsMessage The Book of Zechariah may be divided into two large parts, Zechariah 1 - 8 and 9-14, and these parts into several subunits of diverse material. It is generally agreed that the bulk of material collected in chapters 1 - 8 is authentic and from the postexilic period referred to, whereas the 439
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
material in chapters 9-14 has long posed questions of authorship and dating and is often formally distinguished from the earlier oracles and referred to as Second or Deutero-Zechariah. 2 Part 1 of the Book of Zechariah (chapters 1-8) has three distinct subunits: 1. Zech. 1:1-6. After the title (1:1), there follows an opening oracle, which exhorts the people to repent and promises the grace of God in return (1:2-6). This call for religious return is formulated in classical terms and sets a clear spiritual sign over the whole book. 2. There follows a series of eightvisions (Zech. 1:7-6:15): 3 a. Zech. 1:8-17. The prophet beholds a vision of horses and is informed by them that they roam the earth and find it peaceful. The prophet's angelic guide then asks God how long He will withhold pardon and comfort from Judah and Jerusalem and receives an oracle that Zechariah is to recite. It contains God's assertion of intense concern for Zion and the promise that He will return to His city and "My House shall be built in her" (1:16). b. Zech. 2:1-4. The prophet sees four animal horns and four smiths and is informed by the angel that these are the horns that tossed Israel (i. e., the foreign destroyers) and that the smiths will hew down the horns. The oracle is thus a promise of divine destruction on Israel's behalf. c. Zech. 2:5-17. The prophet sees a man holding a measuring line, who says that he is measuring lerusalem. The angel, however, corrects this interpretation and tells him that lerusalem "shall be people's as a city without walls, so many shall be the men and cattle it contains" (2:8), and God adds that He Himself will be a wall of fire round about it and will put His glory within. A series of oracles urging the return of the nation from exile follow, and God again says that He will dwell within the city. d. Zech. 3:1-10. The prophet sees loshua the High Priest before the heavenly council and witnesses his purification and dedication to divine service in the new Temple. In addition to the inauguration of the priesthood, there is a reference to "My servant the Branch" (3:8) —an appelation of the future king of David's line (cf. 6:12; and ler. 23:5-6). This may hint at a future dyarchy, the dual leadership of priest and king.4 e. Zech. 4:1-14. Now the prophet sees a golden lampstand in the Temple with seven spouts; above it are two trees that apparently provide oil to the lamps. The angel informs Zechariah that the spouts are the all-seeing eyes of the Lord (hence the lampstand, or menorah, must symbolize God's own presence), and the trees are the two "sons of oil," or the future priest and king. This latter point thematically accounts for why an oracle of promise to Zerubbabel and a reference to the completed Temple (4:6b-9) has been intruded between the vision (4:l-6a) andits explanation (4:10-14). f. Zech. 5:1-4. The prophet sees a flying scroll and is informed by the angel that it is God's curse that will be visited upon those people who have gone unpunished for having stolen or sworn falsely. g. Zech. 5:5-11. The prophet sees a tub with a leaden disk, which, when removed, reveals a woman seated within. He is told that she is "Wickedness" (v. 8). She is sealed back into the tub, which is carried away by two flying women. The prophet learns that Wickednessin-the-tub will be taken to Babylon, where a shrine shall be built for it. Thus, again, will the Land be divinely purged of its evil. h. Zech. 6 : 1 - 1 5 . The final vision is of four horses and chariots coming from between two mountains of copper. The angel informs the prophet that these are the four winds that go out to all the earth to do God's will. The vision concludes with a divine word announcing an embassy from the exiled community in Babylon. The prophet is bidden to take from them silver and gold and make crowns, which are to be placed on the heads of the High Priest and the one called the Branch (the priestly and royal leaders) and then placed inside the Temple (w. 9 - 1 4 ) . 5 The oracle concludes with the prophet's word that "Men from far away shall come and take part in the building of the Temple," and the final exhortation, "if only you will obey the L O R D your God" (v. 1 5 ) . 440 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
3. Zechariah 7-8. Part 1 of the Book of Zechariah concludes with a series of diverse material: a. Zechariah 7, from the fourth year of Darius I (7:1), 518 B.C.E., presents an inquiry from the people of Bethel to the priests of the Temple and to the prophets. They wish to know whether the fasts of the fifth and seventh months commemorating the destruction of Jerusalem should continue. The question is apparently motivated by the fact that the people are now once again in the homeland. The answer is indirect. Fasting, says the prophet, is done by humans for their own purposes and instruction; and indeed, years ago God had instructed the people to "execute true justice, deal loyally and compassionately with one another" and the like, but they did not harken and were thus cast off the land into exile, and the "delightful land" was itself "turned into a desolation" (7:4-14). The implication seems to be that fasting is in order all the while that the immoral conditions remain that led to the people's ruin. The topic will be taken up in another divine word, found in Zech. 8:18-19 (see below). b. Zech. 8:1-19. Next is a collection of seven promises (8:1-17), each of which is introduced by the formula "Thus said the L O R D of Hosts." The promises include renewed blessing for Jerusalem, the return of the exiles, and the building of the Temple. Following this, the earlier subject of fasting is taken up again—only now the people are given a positive promise and told that the fasts associated with the destruction ofjerusalem shall become occasions for joy and gladness; "but you must love honesty and integrity" (8:18-19). In his emphasis on moral and social ethics, Zechariah speaks like a classical prophet of the preexilic period. c. Zech. 8 : 2 0 - 2 3 . The transformation of ritual life is complemented by God's promise that a multitude of nations shall come "to seek the L O R D of Hosts" ( 8 : 2 2 ) in Jerusalem and to entreat His favor. The influx shall be aroused by God's mighty deeds and the rumor that "God is with [Israel]" ( 8 : 2 3 ) . With this universal pilgrimage to the Temple ofjerusalem, the first part of the Book of Zechariah ends. Zechariah 1-8 is dominated by divine promises and prophetic visions. Indeed, these constitute the centerpiece of the whole first part of the book—occurring within the wider framework of God's opening call for repentance (1:2-5) and the concluding report of the decision of the nations to seek God in Jerusalem (8:20-23). The visions themselves reflect a new moment in Israelite spiritual history, for we do not have here either a divine appearance in a dream (like Jacob, in Gen. 28:10-22) or an inaugural or other manifestation of cosmic significance to a prophet (as in Ezekiel 1 or Isaiah 6). Instead, we have the presentation of a complex of symbolic visions whose inscrutable content is explained by an angelic interpreter. We thus find ourselves on the brink of a whole range of personal experiences accompanied by messianic and apocalyptic promises (cf. Daniel 7-12; 4 Enoch, among others). 6 In Zech. 1:6-6:8, the visions give assurances of God's presence and providence and of the future establishment of the holy Temple. The visions both begin and end with images of horses that convey a sense of God's universal dominion and providence (see visions 2. a and 2. h above). God will roam the earth by means of His agents to oversee the needs of retribution and to begin the process of restoration. This theme of Lordship and judgment is also featured at the center of the collection, in the vision of the lamps that symbolize God's roaming and searching eyes, and in the vision of the scroll of curses that will ferret out and punish the evil ones (2. e and 2. f above).7 As the sequence unfolds, visions of God's universal dominion give way to visions of increasing national concern—note in particular God's promise to dwell in Jerusalem, the purification of the High Priest, and the emphasis on two future rulers for the people. The royal emphasis in visions e (4:6b-9) and h (6:9-15) exists alongside the priestly concern of the visions and the overall interest in the Temple. Of salient importance to the cycle is the teaching that the city of Jerusalem shall again be God's chosen place, where He and multitudes of the faithful shall dwell. These multitudes are not only the people of Israel, who shall come from near and far to settle in a city without walls (so great shall the throng be), but also the multitudes of the nations. These two great themes of 441
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
national ingathering and universal worship frame the visions and indicate a further concern of the final prophetic collection. God says at the very outset, "I am jealous for Jerusalem, and for Zion I am very jealous" (1:14), and then again at the end, "I am very jealous for Zion, I am fiercely jealous for her" (8: 2). 8 This jealousy is none other than God's own zeal—announced in the Decalogue as a divine attribute and emphasized here to give the people comfort that God will neither forgo nor forget His allegiance to His beloved city. The promise of God's return to Jerusalem will also anticipates His settlement in the Holy of Holies of the restored Temple, as Ezekiel had learned in a vision a half-century earlier (Ezek. 43:1-9). Part 2 of the Book of Zechariah (chapters 9-14) presents the interpreter with an entirely different set of materials—and also much consternation. These oracles have been dated to such diverse periods as the time of King Jeroboam II, in the mid-eighth century B.C.E., and the Seleucid rule of a half millenium later.9 Most moderns agree that the final chapters of the book comprise two parts, Zechariah 9-11 and 12-14, and that their placement points to the expectation of divine victory and the universal significance of the Temple in lerusalem. 1. Zechariah9-ll a. Zechariah 9. This section opens with oracles against foreign nations; these peoples are not so much indicted for crimes as punished, and in the end, divine kingship is instituted (9:9-13). The figure of the divine warrior appears in this picture of destruction, along with several gruesome images. In the end, divine war will bring fertility and bounty for the victors (9:16-17). b. Zechariah 10. This chapter contains a congeries of materials, including the request for rain (10:1), improper approaches to God (v. 2), and a battle where Israel fights (w. 3-7; not God, as in chapter 9). Included are references to God's promise about the end of exile (w. 8-12). c. Zechariah 11. This chapter commences with a doom oracle against foreigners (11:1-3); then it shifts to an autobiographical narrative condemning the leaders of the nation—so-called false "shepherds"—along with the symbols of their office (w. 4-16). The woe oracle of v. 17 caps the judgment upon a failed shepherd. From a formal perspective, the two poetic oracles (w. 1-3 and 17) encase the central prose piece (w. 4-16). 2 . Zechariah 1 2 - 1 4 . This entire unit has one superscription, identifying the whole as "A pronouncement: The word of the L O R D concerning Israel" ( 1 2 : 1 ) . Despite the unified focus on Israel, the material is nevertheless fairly diverse in content. a. Zechariah 12. This chapter opens with the centrality of lerusalem in the cosmic battle to come (12:1-6). This is followed by a passage about the future majesty of the House of David (w. 7-8). Next is a quite mysterious depiction of a clan-by-clan ceremony of mourning over the universal annihilation of nations (w. 10-14). b. Zechariah 13. The theme of purgation continues in chapter 13, beginning with the statement that "In that day a fountain shall be open to the House ofDavid and the inhabitants of lerusalem for purging and cleansing" (13:1). An oracle of promise follows, anticipating the removal of idols and false prophets by God, as well as all unclean spirits (w. 2-6). A doomsday prophecy against improper rulers—again called "shepherds," as well as the "shepherd boys"—then follows. After a destruction of most of the evildoers, a portion of the survivors will be purged and refined of their dross; in the end, these people shall acknowledge God, and He will declare "You are My people" (w. 7-9). c. Zechariah 14. This chapter continues with further material about the final days. After a horrendous battle, led by God Himself, all will be transformed: it will be a time of continuous light, of "fresh water" flowing "from lerusalem," and of the elevation of the Lord as "king over all the earth" (w. 6-9). Those of the nations who survive will go up annually to lerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Booths. So important is this universal worship that the prophet proclaims that those of the nations who do not go up to the Temple will receive 442 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
no rain. So grand will this time be that "In that day, even the bells on the horses shall be inscribed "Holy to the L O R D " (V. 2 0 ) . As the capstone to the promises and visions of Zechariah 1-8, chapters 9-11 and especially 12-14 envision a series of battles and transformations. At the center will be Jerusalem, the House of David, and the holy Temple. As with the conclusion to part 1, so also part 2 concludes with a picture of universal worship of the Lord in Jerusalem. However, the second part goes further than the first in its sense of apocalyptic disaster, purification, and divine dominion. Emblazoned over the final chapter is the proclamation that in the end of days, "the L O R D shall be king over all the earth; in that day there shall be one L O R D with one name" ( 1 4 : 9 ) . What was only hinted at earlier now becomes explicit: Jerusalem is and will be proclaimed the center of all the earth, and its Temple will be a fount of blessing and healing waters for all. In a world utterly transformed, the essential holiness and purity of the shrine will affect all pilgrims. Even the bells of the horses will be like objects of priestly purity; even metal pots will be holy vessels for the meat of those who come to Jerusalem for sacrificial worship. With these events, the sacred presence of the Lord in Jerusalem will be manifest, and the earlier promise that Jerusalem would be a city without walls for all peoples will be fulfilled for the glory of God.
THE BOOK OF MALACHI The Prophet and His Times The book bearing the title "Malachi" is the last collection of prophecies in the anthology known as Trei'Asar,or "The Twelve." Haggai and Zechariah, which precede it, are dated to the second year of the Persian King Darius I (520 B.C.E.) and focus on the rebuilt Temple and its sanctity. These matters are central to the Book of Malachi as well, placing it squarely within this late time frame. The fact that a final section of Zechariah (chapters 9-11) both begins (Zech. 9:1) and ends (Zech. 12:1) with prophecies entitled massa} (pronouncement), which also appears in Mai. 1:1, may have further contributed to appending the latter work to it. Don Isaac Abravanel astutely noted that the sequence of these three prophets relates to aspects of the renewed Temple. Thus Haggai, the first, anticipates the rebuilding of the shrine; Zechariah, the second, deals with the rebuilding and its sanctity; and Malachi, the third of the trio, considers the rebuilding a matter of the past and focuses attention on the perversion of rites performed there. Rabbinic tradition regarded the words of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi as the end of biblical prophecy, saying: "When the last prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi died, the Holy Spirit departed from Israel" (Tosefta Sotah 8:2). Thus the Book of Malachi now stands as the very last of the prophetic works beginning with Joshua (the first of the Former Prophets) or Isaiah (the first of the Latter Prophets). Its penultimate verse (repeated as the final verse in rabbinic tradition) anticipates the advent of "the prophet Elijah to you before the coming of the awesome, fearful day of the L O R D " (Mai. 3:23).In context, this expectation reinforces prophecies of a divine judgment to come. As a coda to the prophetic canon as a whole, the verse also functions as a guarantee of messianic hope and the future renewal of prophecy. But just who was this Malachi among the prophets? The question vexed the ancient Rabbis as well, who offered a variety of opinions. According to a cluster of traditions preserved in B. Megillah I5a, there were Sages who held that Malachi was the proper name of an otherwise unknown personality; whereas Rabbi Joshua ben Korhah and Rab understood the word mal'akhi literally, as "My prophet," and respectively identified him as Ezra and Mordecai. Both these identifications show a concern to date the prophet to the Persian period (and other rabbinic traditions regarded this prophet to be one of the Men of the Great Assembly, as well; cf. B. Megillah 17a and B. 443
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Baba Batra 15a). Rabbi Nahman bar Isaac was more specific. Supporting the position attributed to Rabbi loshua, he pointed to internal evidence that linked Malachi with Ezra—namely the strong condemnation in both books concerning intermarriage with foreign women (cf. Mai. 2: 11; Ezra 9:2 and 10:2-3). 1 This thematic link—which has been picked up by many moderns as internal evidence for the early postexilic dating of the book—was repeated in the Middle Ages by R. Abraham ibn Ezra, Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi, and R. David Kimhi (on Mai. 1:1). Kimhi was caustically skeptical about the specific Ezra connection, on the grounds that there is no evidence that Ezra "the scribe" was himself called "a prophet." Be this as it may, the further reference to a divine spokesman in Mai. 3:1 as maPakhi (My messenger) gives added support to the position that the word is a designation of a prophetic role—and not a proper name. External support can be found in the fact that the late prophet Haggai is also called "the LORD'S messenger" (Hag. 1 : 13). Finally, the Septuagint to Mai. 1:1 also lends ostensible support to this view when it says that God spoke through "His messenger." But it is hard to determine whether this translation is based on a different Hebrew version reading (maPakho instead of maPa-khi) or is merely an early interpretation (since the attribution "my" is out of place in the third-person superscription of Mai. 1:1). A work from the first century c.E. or so, known as "The Lives of the Prophets," offers a bit more speculation about this prophet: He was born in Sopha, after the return from the exile. Even in his boyhood he lived a blameless life, and since all the people paid him honor for his piety and his mildness, they called him "Malachi" (meaning angel); he was also fair to look upon. Moreover, whatever things he uttered in prophecy were repeated on that same day by a messenger of God who appeared . . . . While yet in his youth he was joined to his fathers in his own field.2 Clearly this version conflates the possibilities, regarding "Malachi" as both a name and a designation. Presumably, Sopha is Zuph in the territory of Zebulun (cf. 1 Sam. 1:1).
The Book and ItsMessage The Book The Book of Malachi is a precisely wrought collection, with recurrent themes, words, and rhetorical devices. Abravanel speaks of it as "one prophecy, whose language is interfused and interconnected." Indicative of such integration is the repeated reference to a ma-Pa-kh, or prophetic messenger, throughout. Thus the book opens, as noted, with a superscription stating that what follows is a "pronouncement" from God "through Malachi" (or: "through My messenger"). The ensuing condemnation of ritual practice and priestly laxity comes to a head in Mai. 2:7, with a reference to the failure of the priests to perform as a "maPa-kh YHWH" through correct instruction of Torah. After other considerations, the prophet then gives God's pronouncement that He "is sending My messenger \maPa-khiY before the final day of judgment, to prepare for the sudden appearance of the Lord in the Temple (Mai. 3:1). The theme of the importance of paying priestly dues is subsequently repeated, and the book ends with the announcement that God "will send" Elijah the prophet before the great day of judgment, for the sake of reconciliation and repentance. The collection is thus threaded by references to ritual practice and the Temple and by several types of maPa-kh. In this regard, we learn that the "messenger" the people were expecting in 3:1 is no less than the "maPa-kh of the covenant"—quite possibly Israel's tutelary angel.3 With this larger perspective in mind, we may review the structure and contents of the separate parts. The Book ofMalachi may be divided as follows:4 1. Malachi 1:1-5. After the initial superscription (v. 1), an opening divine word states the Lord's love for lacob (representing Israel) and hatred for Esau (representing Edom), whose land will be utterly destroyed (w. 2-5). This oracle appears as a word of hope to Israel, who suffered defeat and exile in 586 B.C.E. at the hands of the Babylonians and some Edomite forces. Traces 444 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
of this Edomite involvement have been identified in various biblical sources (e. g., Ezekiel 35; Obadiah 1:11-14; Ps. 137:7-8; Lam. 4:21-22). 5 2. Malachi 1:6-2:9. This part has three subunits: a. Malachi l:6-9a. The prophet sounds his opening salvo against the priests who "scorn" God's Name through perversion of the sacred sacrifices. An analogy with the royal governor is offered to drive home the offense: If lame or sick offerings were given this human ruler, he would hardly accept them with favor. How much more would God be dishonored and refuse to be gracious to the people? b. Malachi l:9b-14. The Lord of Hosts now condemns the people as well for their ritual impieties. In all the world, the Name of God is honored. Only among His people is it defiled, through lame and sick offerings. This analogy sharpens the sin and evokes a divine curse. c. Malachi 2:1-9. The priests are condemned for failing to honor God's Name and threatened with curses. Formerly the priests of the tribe of Levi honored their covenant with the Lord, teaching Torah truly and performing faithfully as divine "messengers"; but now they have "turned away" and "corrupted the covenant"—for which they will be reviled and rejected by the people. 3. Malachi 2:10-17. This part has three subunits: a. Malachi 2:10-12. The prophet condemns intermarriage with foreign women: the Jews have "one" Father, but have rejected Him by "profaning the covenant with our fathers." b. Malachi 2:13-16. In addition, the people will be rejected at the altar for acts of divorce against their "covenanted spouse," which break faith with their "One" Lord and His will.6 c. Malachi 2:17. Finally, the people are criticized for wearying God with their impious talk and questioning His will to justice. This point provides a transition to the next part. 4. Malachi 3:1-23. This part has four subunits: a. Malachi 3:1-5. Following 2:17, God announces the advent of His "angel of the covenant" who will bring the sinners to justice and act like purifying "fire" and a cleansing "lye." The priests of Levi will be purified and the offering of the people will once again be "pleasing to the L O R D . " b. Malachi 3:6-12. The Lord repeats His concern for Jacob (as in 1:2) and calls upon his "children" to return to His worship and not defraud Him with their offerings. Faithful fulfillment of the tithes will bring blessing. c. Malachi 3:13-18. There is again a condemnation of those who despise God's great Name, and protection is guaranteed to those who revere the Name. True justice will follow, separating the righteous from the wicked. d. Malachi 3:19-24. Balancing 3:1-5, the prophet closes with a reprise of the theme of a coming day of judgment, blazing like fire. The nation is called upon to observe the Torah of Moses. In context, this exhortation is offered in order to save the sinners from doom. God will send Elijah to reconcile parents and children. This renewal of family love will prevent "utter destruction." Jewish liturgical tradition customarily repeats the promise of Elijah's advent as a word ofhope and assurance. The Message The overarching concern of the several pronouncements is to emphasize the contempt and disgrace of God brought about by the people's impious and fraudulent worship. The misuse of the Temple and its service is particularly emphasized—both at the beginning of the book, in connection with the priests' and people's acts of ritual sacrilege (Mai. 1:6-2:9); and at the end, where tithes and their benefits are emphasized (3:6-12). Just as at the outset the impiety is characterized as "scorn" of God's Name and lack of "reverence" for Him (1:6), so too at the close those who "revere the L O R D " (3:16; cf. v. 20) are promised special favor on the day of judgment. The theme of sullying the sacred in thought and deed thus runs across the whole collection. In this regard, intermarriage and divorce are also condemned as sacrilege (2:11, 14). Just as ritual impiety is a breach of the covenant of Levi (2:5), improper marriage is also deemed a covenantal infraction. Not surprisingly, the favor promised the reverent is that they will once 445
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
more be God's covenant people, His "treasured possession" (segullah [3:17]), just as at Sinai centuries earlier (cf. Exod. 19:6). Such an emphasis on ritual propriety does not gainsay the prophet's concern with ethical misconduct and God's righteous judgment. For one thing, divorce is deemed a deep betrayal and act of violence to the wife of one's youth; for another, irreverence for God is said to include those "who practice sorcery, who commit adultery, who swear falsely, who cheat laborers of their hire, and who subvert [the cause of] the widow, orphan, and stranger" (Mai. 3:5). Those who think God indifferent to such matters are in for a rude shock. A purifying fire will blaze forth to separate the righteous from the wicked (3:2, 19), consuming the evil like straw and burning them to ashes with "neither stock nor boughs" left over (3:19). God's justice will then be manifest. Against this the people are duly warned (3:1) and urged to repent and return to God's Torah (w. 7, 22). For their sake, a divine emissary will strive to effect reconciliation (3:23-24a), in anticipation of a more harrowing fate to follow (v. 24b). The nation is urged to listen and to love. The coherence of the prophet's message is inseparable from its stylistic and rhetorical features. In particular, one may mention recurrent words, patterned themes, and rhetorical patterns. Overall, the reader is struck by the recurrence of certain terms throughout the book, which give it thematic coherence and insistence. We have already had occasion to mention the term mal'akh, "messenger," in Mai. 1:1,2:7, and 3:1. Indicating as it does the speaking prophet himself, the holy priests who have betrayed their duty, and the divine figure to come in judgment, all the themes of the book are anchored around this term. Similarly, just as God will "send" (ye-shillahti) a curse against the evil priests who defile His Name (2:2) and betrayed the instructions he has "sent" them (2:4), He hates "divorce" (shallah [2:16]; literally, "sending" or "banishment"), and promises to "send" (sholeah) His messenger to punish the faithless (3:1). The theme of fathers and sons provides a further indication of repetition, which binds the opening condemnation (1: 6) to the intervening call for repentance (3:6-7) and the final hopes of reconciliation (3:17, 24). Significantly, in the condemnation of divorce, the people are criticized for "profaning the covenant of our ancestors"— made between them and their "one Father" in heaven (2:10). Another way recurrent words work in this book is through puns, which open up a particular theological dimension. The feature appears throughout. Typical of it is the pattern of sin and judgment that emerges: the fouled grain (zerac) of the meal offering will be spewn (ve-zeriti) in the offerants' faces (Mai. 2:3); the messenger of the covenant (berit) will cleanse the nation as with lye (borit) (3:1-2); and the partiality (nose'im panim) that the priests show in their ritual rulings (2:9) results in divine disfavor (ha-yissa} panekha) to the offerings (1:8-9). Indeed, the priests' failure to show reverence to God (mom'i [1:6]) and His revered (nora} [1:14-]) Name leads God to tell them to stop lighting (ta'im) the altar fire (1:10) and prepare for a curse (me'emh) that will turn blessings into curses (ve-'aroti) (2:2) — for in the end only those who fear (yir'ei) God and His Name (3:16, 20) will be saved. The thick web of puns thus invokes the patterns of divine providence, the assurance of divine attentiveness, and judgment against the wicked. In yet other cases, particular words produce unexpected plays of argument and irony. Note, for example, the issues of delight and desire in 2:17 and 3:1, drawn together by the verb hafatz:, or the tie between God's condemnation of blemished offering in 1:14 and the promise of unblighted produce i n 3 : l l , drawn together by the verb shah at. In the course ofhis pronouncements, Malachi resorts to pairs of argument to make his point. Thus in connection with his opening case against the priests and those who follow them in ritual laxity and defilement, he contrasts the Israelites who spurn God to foreigners who honor His Name (Mai. l:6-9a; 9b-14). The arguments are linked. The issues of "scorn" and "defiled food" are repeated in 1:6-7 and 12; and the impropriety of the offerings, which even the governor (pehah) would reject, is an utter degradation (hipahtem) of the rite (1:13). (For other puns and verbal plays, see the discussion on the haftarah for Toledot.) Another twinned argument occurs in 2:10-16, where first the people are rebuked for intermarriage (w. 10-12) and then for divorce (w. 13-16). Here, too, the cases are linked not only on the thematic level of marriage, but on the verbal level as well. The issue of"breaking faith" (bagad) recurs in 2:10-11, 14-16; the people 446 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
are rejected for "covering" the altar with tears and their lives with lawlessness (see the verb kissah in 2:13 and 16), and the notion of the "one" God is mentioned in both parts as well (2:10 and 15). Significantly, the terms of love and hate in marriage are used separately to express God's love for the sanctity of proper marriage (2:11) and his hatred of divorce (v. 16). On a larger level, this defilement matches and intensifies the ritual defilement in the shrine of God. There are two rhetorical patterns that deserve special mention at this point. The first of these involves allusions to earlier idioms or speeches in the Bible and their reworking. This often involves excessive irony, as is the case in Mai. 1:6-2:9. A close examination of the condemnation of the priests in this passage shows that every one of the terms used critically is in fact an inversion of the positive uses of these terms in the Priestly Blessing found in Num. 6:23-27. Thus, whereas the priests are told to "put" God's Name ritually upon the people in blessing, they are now condemned for spurning it utterly; and whereas they were to be purveyors of "blessing" and guarantors of God's uplifted face of grace, they are now the recipients of "curse" and raise their own faces in partiality. The effect is unnerving, for it deconstructs the power of blessing through a rhetoric of rebuke. God's word of judgment becomes an ironic and insidious echo of the words of the priests in the shrine—mirroring their deceit and revealing their fate. On a more rhythmic level, rhetorical patterns of question and answer pervade the book. Repeatedly the prophet condemns the people with a given word and then attributes to them a query or reaction ("but you ask" or "say") that allows him to develop in response the terms of reproach (see Mai. 1:6-7, 12-13; 3:7-9, 13-14). In fact all the major themes of the book emerge through this form, whose effect is to sharpen the guilt and insensitivity of the audience by placing the crime in their own mouths. The prophet's pronouncements thus take the tone of mock dialogue, perhaps even the legal form of a cross-examination. In this way the normally open-ended nature of questions is used to trap listeners in their own words. Other uses of the question form in Malachi reinforce the rhetoric of rebuke and entrapment that lies at the book's core. At the same time, the question form invites the listener to new levels of reflection. The dialogical dimension thus strives to lead the people to new religious awareness—lest they be brought to doom on the day of judgment to come. The book ends with a call to "be mindful of the Teaching of My servant Moses" (Mai. 3:22) and then the promise of Elijah's advent before the day of judgment to "reconcile parents with children" (w. 23-24). In context, this call to observance before the time of judgment is to remind the people of the way of salvation. Moreover, as an exhortation at the very end of the prophetic books, it counsels obedience to the law while waiting for the day of judgment. Significantly, an emphasis on Moses and his special relationship to God comes at the end of the Torah also (Deut. 34:10-12). This parallelism between the Pentateuch and the Prophets is striking and significant. Clearly, the final editors of both collections wished to stress that neither wise leaders (like Joshua) nor prophetic promises (like Elijah's advent) could displace the centrality of the Torah given by God to Moses "at Horeb . . . f o r a l l Israel" (Mai. 3:22). As a further mark of editorial closure, the Book of Malachi ends with the promise that the righteous remnant, which will be vindicated on the day of divine judgment, are those "who revere the L O R D and esteem His name" (Mai. 3:16). They are thus the counterpoint to those (laypersons and priests) rebuked at the outset of the prophecies—impudent people who have no reverence for God and contemn His name (see 1:6), who defraud God with improper tithes and sacrifices (1:7-8, 12-14) and thereby bring upon themselves divine curses and rejection (1: 10; 2:2). As reward for their faithful worship and pious performance of Temple obligations, the God-fearers will receive heavenly blessings in abundance (3:10, 20), and on the awesome day to come, they will be protected and favored "as a man is tender toward a son who ministers to him" (3:17; cf. 1:6 for the theme of filial rejection). This vindication—a reconciliation of the faithful to the Lord of Justice, after a time when they felt abandoned (3:13-16) —will be preceded by the prophet Elijah's work of healing among the generations (3:23). The reconciliation between parents and children is thus part of the heavenly renewal between God and his children who serve him (3:24). This theme is reiterated by Ben Sira (48:10) at the beginning of the second 447
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
century B.C.E. and is a key source for the transformation of Elijah into a harbinger of hope in Judaism—a messenger of "good news, salvation, and comfort," whose earthly return betokens the coming of the messianic age.
448 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
NOTES TO OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE TheBook ofjoshua 1. For the conquests of Caleb and Othniel after the death of Joshua, see Rashi at Josh. 15:14-16 and Ralbag at Judg. 1:10. < 2. See the introduction to his commentary on the Former Prophets. A 3. See Albrecht Alt, "Josua," in Kleinere Schriften (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1953), 176-92; and especially, "Das system der Stammesgrenzen in Buche Josua" ibid., 193-202. < 4. See G. Ernest Wright, "The Literary and Historical Problem of Joshua X and Judges 1 "JNES 5 (1946): 105-14. < 5. Cf. Frank M. Cross, CanaaniteMyth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), 274-89. < 6. For a review of the sources examining the composition of Joshua in the preceding generation, see Moshe D. Cassuto, s. v. "The Book of Joshua" EM 3:544-47. A contemporary review with a full bibliography is provided by Robert Boling,/05^w, AB 6 (NewYork: Doubleday, 1982), 55-72. Boling also provides a critique of the influential position of Martin Noth; for his view see, for example, "Studien zu den historisch-geographischen Dokumenten des Josuabuches,"ZDPF58 (1935): 185-255. < 7. On these thematic features, see Moshe Weinfeld, "The Period of the Conquest and of the Judges as Seen by Earlier and Later Sources" VT 17 (1967), especially 105-13. -4 8. Thus in addition to mentioning cities conquered in the narratives, such as Jericho and Ai, the catalogue in Josh. 12:9-24 mentions other cities otherwise unspecified in the text—like Hormah and Arad in the south; Bethel and Tappuah in the Sharon (according to the Septuagint); Tirzah in the central region; andTaanach andMegiddo in the north. In addition, the list mentions kings otherwise unreported, like the king of Goiim. -4 9. For studies on these boundary lists, see Zecharia Kallai, The Tribes oflsrael: A Study in the Historical Geography ofthe Bible (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1967). See also the discussion and literature in Boling,Joshua, 64-66. A 10. See PdRK, piska 11:12 (Va-yhi be-shallah) (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1962], l:187f.); MdRSbY (ed. Jacob N. Epstein and Ezra Z. Melamed [Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1955], 46); B. Sot. 13a; and also the Testament of Simon 8:1-3. For various aspects of the motif and its development, 449
see Joseph H e i n e m a n n , ^ ^ ^ ^ and Its Development (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Keter, 1974), 49-55; and also James Kugel, In Potiphar's House (New York: Harper/Collins, 1990), chap. 5. < 11. See Cross, CanaaniteMyth and Hebrew Ethic; and Boling,705^w, with a full bibliography. A 12. On these leagues (often referred to as a tribal amphicryony), see Boling,7oshua, 129f. A 13. The contents of this "text" is unknown; presumably, it was something like a book of royal rules or ordinances. See Yehezkel Kaufmann, Sefer Tehoshu'a (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1959), 254-55 and n. 7. A
The Book ofjudges 1. For this editorial device of resumptive repetition and for prior literature, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), index, s. v. "Wiederaufnahme"; also see Burke O. Long, "Framing Repetitions in Biblical Historiography"/^! 106 (1987): 385-99. Marc Brettler has also observed this device here and speculated that it indicates that Judg. 1:1-2:10 was originally an appendix to the Book of Joshua, now treated as the prologue to the Book of Judges; see his"Jud 1, 1-2, 10:From Appendix to Prologue," in 101 (1989): 433-35. Whatever the original status of Judges 1, the repetition of Joshua's death notice in Judg. 2:6-10 serves to begin the work with a statement regarding the death of a leader (cf. Judg. 1:1; Josh. 1:1). < 2. The Hebrew term is ruah; NJPS translates more figuratively, "an inspired man." A 3. It is the opinion of Yehezkel Kaufmann, Sefer Shofetim (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 1-4, that there is a clear distinction between "wars of conquest" and "wars of liberation"; he further distinguishes these from the "imperial wars" of the monarchic period (ibid., 4-5). A 4. See John H. Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller, Israelite andjudaean History (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977), pt. 4 (byMiller), esp. sees. 2-3. < 5. See n. 1. In my view, even if Judg. 2:6-10 is part of an editorial resumption, it now functions as the formal beginning of the history through reference to the death of the prior hero. A 6. The meaning of the term shofet, here rendered "chieftain," is much discussed. See the surveys of M. Rozenberg, "The Sofetim in the Bible," in Nelson GlueckMemorial Volume, ed. Benjamin Mazar, Eretz Israel 12 (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society,
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
1975), 77*-86*; and H. Niehr, Herrschen und Press, 1984), 65, speaks of "a world of unrelenting Richtem: Die Wurzel spt imAlten Orient und imAlten terror." A Testament (Wurzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1986). A 20. For links with the birth narrative of Samson 7. Cf. Abraham Malamat, "Charismatic Leader- (Judges 13), see the discussion of the haftarah for ship in the Book of Judges," in Magnolia Dei; The Naso; and for a fuller treatment of 1 Samuel, see the MightyActs of God: Essays on the Bible andArcheology inhaftarah for the first day of Rosh Hashanah. A Memory ofG. Ernest Wright, ed. Frank M. Cross, et al. (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1976), 154. < The Book ofSamuel 8. There have been many separate studies of this section. See, for example, E. O'Doherty, "The Liter1. The view that the narrative deals with the accesary Problem of Judges 1, 2-3, 6," CBQ 18 (1956): sion of David and was intended to glorify Solomon 1-7; Shemaryahu Talmon, "Judges 1" (in Hebrew), was put forth by Leonard Rost, Die Uberlieferung in 1yyunimBe-Sefer Shofetim, Israel Society for Biblical von der Thronnachfolgen Davids, BWANT (Stuttgart, Research 10 (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1966), 14-29; 1926); translated by M. Rutter and D. Gunn as The A. G. Auld, "Judges 1 and History: A Reconsidera- Succession to the Throne ofDavid (Sheffield: Sheffield tion," VT25 (1975): 261-85; and most recently, Marc Academic Press, 1982). This part of his theory Brettler's recapitulation, in "The Book of Judges: Lit- seems doubtful but his isolation of a separate ark erature as Politics,"7&L 108 (1989): 399-402. < and succession narrative has been influential. On these matters, see also the discussion of Marc Z. Brettler, 9. Also noted by Brettler, ibid., 399. < 10. Also suggested by Yair Zakovitch and Samuel "Ideology in the Book of Samuel" in The Creation of Loewenstamm, "Judges, Book of Judges" (in He- History inAncientlsmel (London: Routledge, 1995), chap. 6. A brew), i n £ M 7:585. < 2. For this understanding of Eli's remarks in 1 11. As observed by Kaufmann (Shofetim, 104), Othniel was the first premonarchic chieftain to be Sam. 1:17, see the discussion in the context of the empowered by divine "spirit" (3:10); the cycle con- haftarah for the first day of Rosh Hashanah. A cludes with Saul (1 Sam. 11:6). A 3. See Eugene Ulrich, The Qumran Text ofSamuel 12. Cf. Brettler, "The Book of Judges," and Josephus, HSM 19 (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978), for discussion and earlier literature. A 412-15. < 13. Cf. the wide-ranging and persuasive analysis helpful and ready checklist of the Qumran readings can be found in the notes to The 'New American of Brettler, ibid. A 14. See my discussion in Biblical Interpretation, Translation of the Bible (Paterson, N.J.: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1971), 342-51. < 201-3. < 4. Frank M. Cross argued that the proto-Lucianic 15. Frederick Greenspahn is rightly cautious about generalizing about the consistency of the framing recension is a revision of the Old Greek toward a language and provides details in "The Theology of the Hebrew text type like those in circulation in Palestine (and hence known to Josephus). See his comments in Frameworkofjudges," FT 36 (1986): 388-89. < "The Evolution of a Theory of Local Texts," in Frank 16. H. Reviv, "Types of Leadership in the Period of the Judges" (in Hebrew), Beer-Sheva 1 (1972): M. Cross and Shemaryahu Talmon, Qumran and the 204-21, examines whether the different judges History ofthe Biblical Text (Cambridge, Mass.: Har(so-called major and minor) reflect different types vard University Press, 1975), 306-20. By contrast, of function or different kinds of literary sources. On other traditions of the Septuagint are quite close to the "minor" judges, see more recently, E. T. Mulen, the Masoretic text of Samuel. A Jr., "The Minor Judges: Some Literary and Historical 5. See Brevard Childs, Introduction to the Old Considerations," CBQ44 (1982): 185-201. < Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 17. For some details and discussion, see Green- 1979), 273-75. < spahn, "Theology of the Framework of Judges," 6. The theory of two strata was advanced by H. 392-93. < P. Smith,A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on 18. See also Greenspahn, ibid., 385-86, where the Books of Samuel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, he rebuts the well-known assumption of Noth that 1899), and Moshe Z. Segal, Sifrei Shemuel (Jerusarepentance was one of the features of this historiogra- lem: Kiryat Sefer, 1957); the notion of three strata phy. See Martin Noth, Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Stu-was proposed by Otto Eissfeldt, Die Komposition der dien, 3rd ed. (Tubingen: 1967), 3-4. Greenspahn's Samuelbucher (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrich, 1931). A critique also goes to the core of the assumption that 7. Because of the lack of defining characteristics, I the historiography clearly reflects Deuteronomistic am not convinced by Martin Noth's claim that Samuel features; cf. ibid., 389-91. Among earlier commenta- is part of a comprehensive historical composition. tors, George F. Moore,Judges, ICC (Edinburgh: T. This position was advanced in his Uberlieferungsges&T. Clark, 1895), xviii, also expressed caution about chichtliche Studien: Diesammelenden und bearbeitenden blithe identification of the editor of Judges "with any Geschichtwerke im alten Testament (Tubingen: M. one of the Deuteronomic writers in Dt. or Jos., or Niemeyer, 1943; 2nd ed., 1957); and translated by with the Deut. author ofKings." A J. Doull as The Deuteronomistic History (Sheffield: 19. Referring to Judges 19-21, in particular, Sheffield Academic Press, 1981). < Phyllis Trible, Texts of Terror (Philadelphia: Fortress 8. More recently, W Dietrich, Prophetic und Ges450 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
chichte. Eineredaktiongeschichtliche Untersuchung zum Bickerman, "An Edict of Cyrus,"/BI 65 (1944): deuteronomistichen Gescheichtswerk, FRLANT 108 250-53, has argued that they are independent docu(Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1972), ments. The Babylonian version is translated inANET, has argued that the historical work was redacted in 316 (left column). < the light the of Deuteronomist prophetic-fulfillment 5. Note the frequent allusions to such sources in scheme after prior historical and nomistic redac1 Kings 14:19, 29; 15:7, 23, 31; 16:5, 14, 20; 16: tions. T. Veijola, Die ewige Dynastie: David und die 14, 20, 27, etc. For other archival indications, see Entstehung seiner Dynastie nach der deuter-nomistischen James A. Montgomery, "Archival Data in the Book Darstellung, Annales academiae scientiarum Fennicae, ofKings,'7&L 53 (1934): 46-52. < Series B 193 (Helsinki, 1975), has followed up this 6. See the discussion of Marc Brettler, "Interpreanalysis with an intense focus on 2 Samuel. His tation and Prayer: Notes on the Composition of 1 redactional layers show different degrees of favor Kings 8. 15-53." inMinhah le-Nahum: Biblical and to the monarchy. A summary of the text fragments Other Studies Presented to Nahum N. Sarna, ed. Marc that he uses to support his position is found in Kyle Brettler andMichael Fishbane, JSOTS up 154 (ShefMcCarter, Jr., 2 Samuel, AB 9 (Garden City, N. Y.: field: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 17-35, with Doubleday, 1984), 7. One must admit the sparsity literature. See also my discussion of the hatarah for of the evidence and the absence of characteristic the second day of Sukkot. A Deuteronomic features. A 7. The typology of restorative versus Utopian 9. For this tripartite observation, see Joel Rosen- messianism is developed by Gershom Scholem, in berg, "I and 2 Samuel" in Robert Alter and Frank "Toward an Understanding of the Messianic Idea Kermode, The Literary Guide to the Bible (Cam- in Judaism" in The Messianic Idea injudaism (New bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987), York: Schocken, 1971), 1-36. < 122-45. < 8. The old holy site of Luz entered Israelite reli10. The narrative coherence of the overall com- gious history as Bethel when the Lord appeared to position has inspired several recent literary readings Jacob there in a wondrous vision (Gen. 28:11-18). of the Books of Samuel. These analyses open valu- Rituals of penitence, sacrifice, and divination occur able perspectives on the development of theme and there in the period of the Judges (Judg. 20:18, 23, character. Notable among these achievements is the 26-28), presided over by the High Priest Phinehas work of Robert Polzin, Samuel and 'the Deuteronomist: (son of Eleazar son of Aaron; see Judg. 20:28). It A Literary Study ofthe Deuteronomic History. Part Two: was clearly one of the principal northern shrines, 1 Samuel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, along with Gilgal and Shiloh. The pedigree of Dan 1989); and David and the Deuteronomist: A Liter- was also ancient and had a priestly service descendary Study ofthe Deuteronomic History. Part Three: 1 ing from Jonathan son of Gershom son ofMoses (!) Samuel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, —although later scribes tendentiously read the latter 1993). Overall, Polzin is interested in composition, name as "Manasseh" (Judg. 18:30). < not editing, and he adopts Martin Noth's overall 9. See Moses Aberbach and Levi Smolar, "Aaron, contention that the material in the Books of Samuel Jeroboam, and the Golden Calves" JBL 86 (1967): is part of a larger unity. See his remarks in Samuel and 129-40. < theDeuteronomist, 10-11. < 10. The reference to Judean destruction is gratuitous in a northern summary and is evidently the work of afinaleditor (or glossator). A Deuteronomic The Book ofKings editor most likely added the reference to observance 1. Jehoiachin was exiled in 597 B.C.E. (2 Kings of the law, as well; for this topic not only constitutes 24:12-16); this was the first of the three Judean Deuteronomic expansions elsewhere (see Josh. 1: dispersions (the other two were in 586 and 583 7-8 and 1 Kings 2:3-4, and my discussion of these haftarot for Simhat Torah and Va-yehi, respectively). B.C.E.). < 2. Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (New This line of argument gives support to the contenYork: Harper & Row, 1962), 1:343, has a more posi- tion (based on other good and bad evidence) that a tive assessment when he remarks that by "closing . . . second editorial hand gave final shape to the so-called with . . . the favor shown to Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 25:27 Deuteronomistic History. In this connection, see R. ff.)" this history "points to a possibility with which D. Nelson, The Double Redaction ofthe Deuteronomistic Jahweh can resume"—that is, the reassertion of the History, JSOTS up 18 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic royal covenant with David and his heirs (2 Samuel Press, 1981), 55-63. < 7). Martin Noth, Uberlieferungsgeshichtliche Studien 11. This language reflects the Deuteronomic (1943; reprint, Tubingen: M. Niemeyer, 1967), 87, idiom found in Jer. 7:13, for example. A gives the more sober assessment that this is merely 12. The oracle in 1 Kings 21:9-16 was expanded an editorial updating of information. A by the section in w. 10-15. Comparison with the 3. See the historical superscription in Ezek. 1:1-2 language and sequence in 2 Kings 24:3-4 shows and my comments in connection with the haftarah that the original prophecy was 1 Kings 21:9 and 16. < for the second day of Shavuot. A 4. See the biblical versions of this decree in Ezra 13. Cf. Jan Huizinga, "A Definition of the Con1:2-6 (in Hebrew) and 6:3-5 (in Aramaic). Elias cept of History," in Philosophy and History: Essays 451
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Presented to'ErnstCassirer, ed. R. Klibansky and H. Paton (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1963), 9. < 14. See the full accounting in Weinfeld, DDS, app. A, especially pp. 320-49. < 15. See 1 Kings 12:28; NJPS translates "your god," thus softening and misrepresenting the rebellion. A 16. For the background and motivation of Ahijah's oracles, see the comments of Andre Caquot, "Ahiyya de Silo et Jeroboam Ier," Semitica 11 (1961): 17-27. < 17. Both prophecies seem to be ex eventu (after the fact). Regarding the first, note its fulfillment 300 years later as reported in 2 Kings 23:15-18; close analysis shows that it has been inserted into w. 14 + 19. The second oracle, dealing with the end of Jeroboam and his dynasty, has also been interpolated into a narrative context—in this case the report of the death of Jeroboam's son; see 1 Kings l4:13a + 17. A 18. For an analysis of some compositional features of this unit, see Marc Z. Brettler, The Creation of History in Ancient Israel (London: Routledge, 1995), 119-28. < 19. Regarding 1 Kings 18 andElijah's challenge of Baal worship, see the discussion of the haftarah for Ki Tissa'. A 20. This feature of Deuteronomic historiography has been emphasized by Gerhard von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy, SET, 9 (London: SCM Press, 1953), 78-84. <
TheBook oflsaiah: Chapters 1-39 1. For a discussion of the vision in Isaiah 6 and arguments for and against its serving as Isaiah's prophetic commission, see the haftarah for Yitro. A 2. The personal name Rezin appears as rtzy'n in the large Isaiah scroll from Qumran (lQIsa a 9: 10); in Akkadian transcriptions, the form is Rahi/ qianu. A 3. For the identity of this person, see the proposal of Benjamin Mazar, "The Tobiads" IEJ 7 (1957): 236-37. < 4. See Johann Begrich, "Der syrisch-ephraimitische Krieg und seine weltpolitischen Zusammenhange" ZDMG 83 (1929): 213-37; and more recently, Herbert Donner, in John H. Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller, Israelite andjudaean History (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977), 421-41, esp. 426-27. < 5. See the Assyrian records in D. J. Wiseman, Iraq 18 (1956): 125, rev. 5, and the assessment of Mordecai Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, in HKings, AB II (NewYork: Doubleday, 1988), 191. < 6. On this whole point, see B. Oded, "The Historical Background of the Syro-Ephraimite War Reconsidered," CBQ 34 (1972): 153-65. < 7. Some regard this as an invasion of Assyria in the time of Hezekiah; others see this as part of the Syro-Ephraimite advance. See Hayes and Miller, Israelite andJudaeanHistory, 431. A 8. SeeANET, 284-85. < 9. Overall, Hayim Tadmor, "The Campaigns of
Sargon II of Assur: A Chronological Study,"/CS 12 (1958): 22-40, 77-100. < 10. SeeANET, 287. < 11. Cf. R. T. Anderson, "Was Isaiah a Scribe?" JBL79 (1960): 57-58. < 12. H. L. Ginsberg has labeled the opening twelve chapters "The Diary" oflsaiah; see "Mi-Yomano shel Yesha'yahu ben 'Amotz," 'Oz Le-David, Ben Gurion Festschrift (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 335-50; and also idem, s. v. "Isaiah,"EM, 49-55. < 13. Heinrich Graetz, "Isaiah XXXIV andXXXV' JQR(o. s.) 4 (1891): 1-8). < 14. On this complicated historical material, with a fine assessment, see Cogan and Tadmor, H Kings, 222-57. < 15. On the structure of this piece, see Yair Hoffman, "Le-She'elat Ha-Mivneh shel Shirat Ha-Kerem Be-Yesha'yahu" in Ha-Tzvi 'Yisra'el: 'AsufatMehkarim Ba-Mikra'Le-Zikhram Shel Yisra'el Ve-TzviBroyde (Tel Aviv, 1976), 69-82. < 16. For this event and its background, see the consideration of Victor Hurowitz, "Isaiah's Impure Lips and Their Purification in Light of Akkadian Sources," HUCA 6o (1989), 39-89. < 17. NJPS renders tzedakah as "retribution," but this sense is not required by the context. A 18. For this theologically difficult teaching, see the discussion of the haftarah for Yitro. A
The Book oflsaiah: Chapters 40-66 1. For the Cyrus Cylinder inscription, seeANET, 316. < 2. Cf. Ernst Jenni, "Die Rolle des Kyros bei Deuterojesaja," TZ 10 (1954): 241-56; Carroll Simcox, "The Role of Cyrus in Deutero-Isaiah"j£40S 57 (1937): 158-71. < 3. Cf. Hayim Tadmor, "The Campaigns of Sargon 11 of Assur: A Chronological-Historical Study,"/CS 12 (1958): 22-40, 77-100. < 4. See, for example, Rudolf Kittel, "Cyrus und Deuterojesaja," ZAW 18 (1898): 149ff; Friedrich Stummer, "Einige keilschriftliehe Parallelen zu Jes. 40-66"/Bi 45 (1926): 171-89; Shalom Paul, "Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions,"^OS 88 (1968): 180-186; Morton Smith, "II Isaiah and the Persians,"jL40S 82 (1963): 415-21; and Israel Eph'al, "On the Linguistic and Cultural Background of Deutero-Isaiah" (in Hebrew), Shnaton 10 (198689): 31-35. < 5. See the important analysis of Uriel Simon, "Ibn Ezra Between Medievalism and Modernism: The Case of Isaiah XL-LXVI," SVT 36 (1985): 257-71. < 6. Studies range from observations on catchphrases that link small units, like that of Sigmund Mowinckel, "Die Komposition des deuterojesianischen Buches,"Z4^49 (1931): 87-112, to fuller analyses of literary form and style. For the latter, see Hugo Gressmann, "Die literarische Analyse Deuterojesajas" ZAW34 (1914): 264-97; Joachim Begrich, Studien zur Deuterojesaja, 2nd ed. (Munich: Kaiser Verlag,
452 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
1969), 13-66; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 21-27, 300-305; and Roy Melugin, The Formation oflsaiah 40-55, BZAW 141 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1976), 13-74. See also the observations of Leon Liebreich, "The Compilation ofthe Book o f l s a i a h , " / ^ 46 (1955-56): 259-77; 47 (1956-57): 114-38. < 7. For an overall consideration, see Yehezkel Kaufmann, The Babylonian Captivity and DeuteroIsaiah (New York: Hebrew Union College Press, 1970). < 8. First isolated as the so-called 'Ebed-Yahweh songs by Bernhard Duhm, in his commentary on Isaiah; Das Buch Jesaia ubersetzt und erklart, Gottinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament, III, 1 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892). Subsequent editions in 1902, 1914, and 1922. < 9. For a sampling of the voluminous literature that has developed, see Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 330-36. < 10. In addition to the identification of these materials, some have argued that Isaiah 34-35 is part of the corpus of Isaiah 40-55 (the so-called Deutero-Isaiah); regarding chapter 34, see Marvin Pope, "Isaiah 34 in Relation to Isaiah 35, 40-66," JBL 71 (1952): 235-42; regarding chapter 35, see Heinrich Graetz, "Isaiah XXXIV and XXXV"JQR, o. s., 4 (1891): 1-8. < 11. For these themes in 40-48 in particular, see M. Haran, Bein Ri'shonot Le-Hadashot (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1963). A 12. See Walther Zimmerli, "Zur Sprache Tritojesajas," in Gottes Offenbarung: Gesammelte Aufsatze zumAlten Testament, TBu 19 (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1963), 217-33; andMichael Vishb&ric, Biblical Interpretation inAncientlsmel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 497-98. See now the comprehensive review and analyses of Benjamin Sommer,.^ Prophet Reads Scripture: .Allusion in Isaiah 40-66 (Stanford, Calif.: StanfordUniversityPress, 1999), chap. 3. A 13. See Armond (Aaron) Kaminka, Mehkarim (Tel Aviv: Devir, 1938), 1:19-30, 52-56,159-164; Ronald Clements, "Beyond Tradition History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isaiah's Themes," JSOT 31 (1985): 95-113; and recently, H. G. M. Williamson, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah's Role in Composition and Redaction (Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1992). A 14. See Johann Fischer, "Das Problem des neuen Exodus in Isaias c. 40-55," TheologischeQuanelschrift no (1929): 111-30; Bernhard Anderson, "The Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah," Israel's Prophetic Heritage, ed. Bernhard Anderson and Walter Harrelson (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1962), 177-95; and Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture (New York: Schocken, 1979), 133-38. < 15. For an evaluation, see Yair Hoffmann, "Hazon Hakdashah Ve-Toda'ah Nevu'it" Tarbiz 53 (1985): 170-86. For the form overall, see E. Conrad, Fear Not Warrior: A Study of 'al tira' Pericopes in the Hebrew Scriptures (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985), 453
especially pp. 58-61, 154-57, for links between this phrase and Akkadian literature. A 16. See B. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture, chap. 2 in much detail. A 17. On these matters, see my Biblical Interpretation inAncientIsrael, 118,119 n, 128. And further, idem, "The Hebrew Bible and Exegetical Tradition," Intertextualityin Ugarit and Israel, ed. Johannes deMoor, OTS 40 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1998), 25-28. < 18. Overall, see Moshe Weinfeld, "Ha-Megamah Ha-'Uni-versalistit Ve-ha-Megamah Ha-Badlanit BeTekufat Shivat Tzyon," Tarbiz 33 (1964): 228-42; and Joseph Blenkinsopp, "Second Isaiah—Prophet of Universalism,"7SOT41 (1988): 83-103. < 19. See the valuable study of Sheldon Blank, "Studies in Deutero-Isaiah" HUCA 15 (1940): 1-46, for consideration of the role of prophecy in Isaiah's monotheistic claims, the idea of the people as witness for God, and a helpful review of the problem of identifying the "servant." A 20. For representative evaluations, see Blank, "Studies in Deutero-Isaiah"; Haran, Bein Ri'shonot Le-Hadashot, 33-37, with literature; Eissfeldt, The Old Testament, with literature; Harry Orlinsky, The So-Called "Servant ofthe Lord" and "Suffering Servant" in Second Isaiah (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967); and Antti Laato, The Servant ofthe Lord and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation ofthe Exilic Messianic Programme inlsaiah 55-66, ConBOT 35 (Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1992). For discussions in recent commentaries, see John McKenzie, Second Isaiah, AB 20 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1968), xxxviii-lv; and in EM 6:15-22, with literature. A
The Book ofjeremiah 1. For some attention to these correlations, see Frank M. Cross and David N. Freedman,"Josiah's RevoltagainstAssyria,"JNES 12 (1953): 56-58. < 2. On these events, see M. B. Rowton, "Jeremiah and the Death ofjosiah ,"JNES 10 (1951): 128-30. < 3. For the events, see further H. L. Ginsberg, "Judah and the Transjordanian States from 734-582 B.C.E.," inAlexanderMarxJubilee 'Volume (NewYork: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1950), 1: 347-68; and Abraham Malamat, "The Last Wars of the Kingdom ofJudah,"JNES 9 (1950), 218-27. < 4. There is no explicit reference to Josiah's reform in the Book of Jeremiah, and scholars have been of several minds about it. Typical of those who claim that Jeremiah had a positive view of the reform, see Henri Gazelles, "Jeremie et le Deuteronome" RSR 39 (1951): 5-36; a negative assessment can be found in J. Philip Hyatt, "Jeremiah and Deuteronomy," JNES 1 (1942): 156-73. Overall, see the classic and thoughtful evaluation of the material by John Skinner, Prophecy and Religion: Studies in the Life ofJeremiah. Cambridge: University Press, 1922), chaps. 6-7. A 5. See in MidmshAggadah, ed. Solomon Buber (Vienna, 1894), 2:157 (Mattot, on Num. 30:15).
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
This is a unique and unattributed tradition. See further, next note. A 6. See Tertullian's Adversos Gnosticos, chap. 8, and Jerome's AdversosJovinianum 2:37, in Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 2, col. 137, and vol. 23, col. 137, respectively. Some state that this event occurred in Tahpanhes. Cf. Pseudo-Epiphanius, De vitis Prophetarum, in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. 43, col. 400. < 7. On this theme, see Sheldon Blank, "The Confessions of Jeremiah and the Meaning of Prayer," HUCA 21 (1948): 331-54. < 8. See in the edition of Hayim Horovitz and Israel Rabin (Jerusalem: Bamberger and Wahrmann, 1966), 3-4. < 9. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 300-317. < 10. On the issue of Jeremiah and liturgical materials found in the Book of Psalms, see Yehezkel Kaufmann, Toledot Ha-'Emunah Ha-Tisra'elit (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik and Devir, 1964), 3 (1): 429-23; and the extensive appendix, 605-13. < 11. It has been argued by Friedrich Horst, "Die Anfange des Propheten Jeremia," ZAW 4 (1923): 94-153, and others, that Jeremiah did not begin to prophesy until after the death of Josiah. This argument is contradicted by the reference in Jer. 3:6 and by the prophet's statement in Jer. 25:1-3 (604 B.C.E.) that he has been prophesying for twenty-three years, among other points. See the arguments of H. H. Rowley, "The Early Prophecies of Jeremiah and their Setting"BJRL 45 (1962): 198-234. < 12. See Brevard S. Childs, "The Enemy from the North and the Chaos Tradition,"JBL 78 (1959): 182-98; J. Philip Hyatt, "The Peril from the North inJeremiah,'7&L 59 (1940): 499-519. < 13. Thus Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction, trans. Peter Ackroyd (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1965), 365. < 14. See Hans Bardtke, "Jeremia der Fremdvolkerprophet," ZAW53 (1935): 209-39; 54 (1938): 240-62. < 15. There have been attempts to reconstruct the original scroll of Jeremiah. This is a wildly hypothetical enterprise, engaged in by even the most sober of text-critical scholars; cf. Eissfeld, The Old Testament, 350-52; and Georg Fohrer, Introduction to 'the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968), 394 (right after proclaiming this task to be hopeless; see p. 393). The same and other scholars also fry to construct a Scroll of Baruch, largely made up of materials from chapters 37-44; see, for example, Eissfeldt, pp. 354-55. < 16. See his Zur Komposition des Buches Jeremia (Videnskaps-selskapets Skrifteriv, Hist.-Filos. Klasse, 1913, no. 5; Oslo, 1914). < 17. On the prose sermons, see John Bright, "The Date of the Prose Sermons of Jeremiah"JBL 70 (1951): 15-35. For an attempt to relate the "poetic" material in A with the "prose" materials in
C, see William Holladay, "Prototype and Copies: A New Approach to the Poetry-Prose Problem in the Book of J e r e m i a h J B L 79 (1960): 351-67. For recent extensive studies, see Winfried Thiel, Der Deuteronomischen Redaktion vonjer 1-25, WMANT 41 (Neukirschen: Neukirschener, 1973), and Helga Weippert, Die Prosareden des Jeremiabuches, BZAW 132 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1973). Both of these studies have been critically reappraised by William McKane, Jeremiah, ICC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1986), I: xli-1, and also 1—lxxxviii. A 18. The decisive impact of the Book ofDeuteronomy upon Jeremiah has been forcefully set forth by Kaufmann, Toledot, 433-40; and see the extensive appendix, 613-25. A 19. Regarding the Septuagint, see A. W Streane, The Double Text ofjeremiah (Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1896); a study of this material and the Qumran texts has been made by J. Gerald Janzen, Studies in the Text ofJeremiah, HSM 6 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973). On the Septuagint materials, see also the researches of McKane, Jeremiah, xvi-xxi. A 20. See further, Skinner, Prophecy and Religion, chaps. 8-9. < 21. On this, see Moshe Weinfeld, "Jeremiah and the Spiritual Metamorphosis of Israel," ZAW 88 (1976): 17-56. <
The Book ofEzekiel 1. Ron Zadok, "The Nippur Region During the Late Assyrian, Chaldean and Achemaenid Periods, Chiefly According to Written Sources,"IOS 8 (1978): 266-332. < 2. Jer. 28:1 indicates the date of 592 B.C.E.; the dating of Jer. 27:1 to the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim is impossible, given the references to Zedekiah in w. 3, 12. The dateline is missing in the Septuagint. For the issues, see William Holladay, Jeremiah, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 2:112-116, with literature. For the rebellion, see Nahum M. Sarna, "The Abortive Insurrection in Zedekiah's Day (Jer. 27-29)" El 14 (1978): 89*-97*. < 3. Abraham Malamat, "The Last Kings of Judah and the Fall of Jerusalem," IEJ 18 (1968): 137-56; and idem, "The Twilight of Judah: In the Egyptian-Babylonian Maelstrom," Congress Volume, Edinburgh, 1974, SVT 28 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 123-45. See also K. Freedy and D. B. Redford, "The Dates in Ezekiel in Relation to Biblical, Babylonian, and Egyptian Sources"/40S 90 (1970): 462-85. < 4. All this is considered in detail in discussing the haftarot taken from Ezekiel 1 and 40-48; see the table of contents. A 5. See Robert Wilson, "An Interpretation of Ezekiel's Dumbness," VT 22 (1972): 91-104; and compare the proposal of Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 112-13, 120-21, contending that the
454 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
dumbness refers to being "shut indoors and the ban for Tetzaweh and Parashat Ha-Hodesh (Ezek. 43: on reproving." A 10-27 and 45:16-46:18 [Ashkenazim]; 45:18-46: 6. One may note a substructure within this larger 15 [Sephardim], respectively). A complex, for chapters 14:1-21:4 are marked by al17. On this doom cycle overall, see my remarks ternating tree/vine imagery with reviews of biblical in "Sin and Judgment in the Prophecies of Ezekiel," history; see Michael Fishbane, "Sin and Judgment in 170-87. < the Prophecies of Ezekiel," in Interpreting the Prophets, 18. According to W Zimmerli, this formulary ed. James L. Mayes and Paul J. Achtemeier (Philadel- functions as a kind of proof-saying; see in Ezekiel phia: Fortress Press, 1987), 174-82. < (two volumes), passim. A 7. For the structure and sequence, see Moshe 19. See my remarks in "Sin and Judgment in the Greenberg, "Ezekiel's Program of Restoration," in Prophecies ofEzekiel," 184-85. < ibid., 215-36. < 20. See Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, 209. A 8. Characteristic of this trend is the work of 21. For the complicated theological issues in Gustav Holscher, Hesekiel, Das Dichter und das Buch, Ezekiel 18 and the people's response to the prophBZAW 39 (Giessen: Topelmann, 1924), who sought et's words, see my discussion in Biblical Interpretation to isolate original poetic (or verbal) utterances from in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), later additions; in the end only 144 poetic lines out of 337-40. < 1,235 were judged to be authentic. Charles C. Torrey, Pseudo-Ezekiel and 'the Original Prophecy (New Haven: The Book ofHosea Yale University Press, 1930) proposed that the whole book was a literary fiction composed in the Seleucid 1. Representative are the observations of Hayim period (third century B.C.E.) — and thus similar to Tadmor,"Ha-Reka' Ha-Histori shel Nevu'ot the Book of Daniel. A Hoshe'a," in Sefer Ha-7dvelLe-7ehezkel Kaufmann, ed. 9. For a review of this period of scholarship, see Menahem Haran (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961), Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: 84-88 (Hebrewpagination); Hans W Wolff,Hosea, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974), Fortress Press, 1929), 1:3-9. < xxi; and Francis I. Andersen and David N. Freed10. See, for example, Carl G. Howie, TheDate and Composition of Ezekiel, SBLMS4 (Philadelphia: Society man, Hosea, AB 24 (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, ofBiblical Literature, 1950); and the work of Georg 1980), 31-39. < Fohrer, in "Die Glossen im Buche Ezechiel," ZAW 2. The event is preserved in Assyrian sources, as 63 (1951): 33-53, and Die Hauptprobleme des Buches well. SeeANET, 283. In 2 Kings 15:19, the Assyrian Ezechiel, BZAW 72 (Berlin: Topelmann, 1952). < king is referred to as King Pul. A 3. Reference to Hosea's father and his words is 11. The relationship between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint poses special problems. For found in Lev. R. (ed. Mordecai Margulies [Jerusalem: a comparison of the materials, see G. A. Cooke, Wahrmann Books, 1962], l:142f.). In the Midrash Ezekiel, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1936), xl- he is called Beerah, thus linking him to the Reubenite xlvii. For an analysis of the use of the Greek text for chieftain mentioned in 1 Chron. 5:6, exiled by Tilleunderstanding Ezekiel, see Moshe Greenberg, "The gath-pilneser (the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser Use of the Ancient Versions for Understanding the III, referred to by the hypocorism Pul in 2 Kings 15: Hebrew Text: A Sampling from Ezek 11,1-111,11," 19; this latter designation is found in late cuneiform Congress 'Volume, Goettingen 1977, SVT 29 (Leiden: sources). See Pesikta Rabbati 33 (ed. Meir Ish Shalom [Vienna: Kaiser, 1880], 153b). And see also Rashi E. J. Brill, 1978), 131-48. < 12. This approach has been developed with on Isa. 8:19 and Kimhi on Hos. 1:1. A much force by W Zimmerli, Ezekiel (two volumes). 4. The rabbinic principle is'ayedey de-zutar—mirHis work is marked by many attempts to determine kas, "because it is small, it might get lost." The phrase authentic speech forms and formulae. Instructive seems formulated with respect to the Book ofHosea; research may be found in his "Die Eigenart der but cf. the comment of Rabbenu Gershom on the prophetischen Rede des Ezechiel. Ein Beitrag zum Gemara. A Problem an Hand von Ez 14, 1-11," 66 5. See the survey of H. H. Rowley, "The Mar(1954): 1-26; and "The Special Form-and Tradi- riage of Hosea," BJRL 39 (1951): 200-33; andthe tion-Historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecies," analysis of Yehezkel Kaufmann, Toledot Ha-'Emunah VT 15 (1965): 515-27. < Ha-Yisra'elit, 6th printing (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv: 13. Thus, Moshe Greenberg,Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 Bialik and Devir, 1964), 2 (1): 93-107. For a recent defense of the two-woman approach, see Georg (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 21-24. < 14. See in idem, ibid., and Ezekiel 21-37, AB 22A Fohrer, Introduction to 'the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968), 421. < (NewYork: Doubleday, 1997). < 6. See for example H. L. Ginsberg, "Studies in 15. See in the standard editions, First Introduction Hosea 1-3," in Sefer Ha-7ovel Le-7ehezkel Kaufmann, to the Book of Ezekiel, end. A 16. See in the edition of Louis Finkelstein (New ed. Menahem Haran (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1969), 313. 1961), 50-69. See also Robert Cordis, "Hosea's For a full discussion of the contradictions and pro- Marriage and Message: A New Approach," HUCA posed solutions, see my discussion on the haftarot 27 (1954): 9-35; reprinted in Poets, Prophets, and 455
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
Sages (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1971), 230-54. < 7. See Martin Buber, The Prophetic Faith (New York: Harper&Row, 1960), 111. < 8. Ibid., 112. < 9. Ibid. < 10. A fundamental distinction between Hosea 1 - 3 and 4-14 has been emphasized by Kaufmann, Toledot, 3 (1) 93-95, chap. 3. And H. L. Ginsberg has taken an even stronger position, arguing for two Hoseas—Hosea A, chapters 1-3, and Hosea B, chapters 4-14; see his arguments in "Hosea, Book of," EncJud 8:1010-1023. < 11. See the review and discussion in Martin J. Buss, The Prophetic Word ofHosea: A Morphological Study, BZAWII (Berlin: Alfred Toppelmann, 1969), 28-37. <
TheBook ofjoel 1. For these dates, see the discussions of each of these prophets in "Overview of Biblical Books Excepted in the Haftarot Cycle." A 2. For a consideration of connections between the parts, see the comments of Amos Hakham, Sefer Yo'el, Da'atMikra' (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha-RavKook, 1990), 3-4. < 3. See the views and discussion in Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction, trans. Peter Ackroyd (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 393-94. < 4. Yehezkel Kaufmann, Toledot Ha-'Emunah HaYisra'elit (Tel Aviv and Jerusalem: Devir and Mosad Bialik, 1960), 3:334-47. Others, like ArvidKapelrud, Joel Studies (Uppsala: A. B. Lundquist, 1948), have argued for unity on other grounds, namely features from Ugaritic literature. A 5. According to Bernhard Duhm, "Anmerken zu den Zwolf Propheten," ZAW31 (1911): 187,apoet described a locust invasion in the first part (chapters 1-2); in the second part (chapters 3-4), a synagogue preacher from the Maccabean period developed an eschatological vision. A 6. For some of these considerations and the suggestion of an early fourth-century-B.c.E. date, see Hans Walter Wolff\Joel and Amos, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 4-5. Georg Fohrer has emphasized Joel's use of earlier prophetic material; see his Introduction to the Old Testament, trans. David Green (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968), 429. < 7. See the haftarah for the first day of Sukkot and also "The Book of Zechariah" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle." A
The Book ofAmos 1. Overall, see Menahem Haran, "The Period of Amos' Prophecies," in Ages and Institutions in the Bible (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1972), 267-347. < 2. So Yigael Yadin, Hazor H: An Account ofthe
Second Season of Excavations, 1956 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1960), 20-26, 36f.; and J. A. Soggin, "Das Erdbeben von Amos 1:1 und die Chronologie der Konige Ussia und Jotham von Judah," ZAW 82 (1970): 117-20. < 3. For information bearing on earthquakes in the region, see D. H. Kallner-Amiran, "A Revised Earthquake Catalogue of Palestine," IEJ (1950-51): 223-26; 2 (1952): 48-65. < 4. Jacob Milgrom has suggested that this earthquake is the background for Isaiah's eschatological imagery in Isa. 2:10-22; see "Did Isaiah Prophesy during the Reign ofUzziah?" VT 14 (1964): 178-82. < 5. Ivory inlays have been found in abundance. See J. W Crowfoot and G. M. Crowfoot, Early Ivories from Samaria: Samaria-Sebaste 2 (London: Palestine Exploration fund, 1938). A list of the ivories appears in C. Decamps de Mertzenfeld, ventaire commente des ivoriespheniciens et apparentes, decouvertes dans laproche orient (Paris: de Boccard, 1954), 62-75. < 6. The reference occurs in the Assyrian eponym lists; see Arthur Ungnad, "Eponymen," Reallexikon derAssyriologie 2 (1938): 412-57. For a full listing, see M. Kudlek and E. H. Micklder, Solar and 'Lunar Eclipses ofthe Ancient Near East from 3000 B.C. to 0 with Maps, AOAT Supp. 1 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: NeukirchenerVerlag, 1971). A 7. For other possible references to eclipses, see Isa. 13:10; 50:3. For their symbolic role as a portent of evil, see Jer. 15:9. A 8. This sense for Hebrew nokdim has cognates in Ugaritic and Akkadian. For the former, see P. C. Craigie, "Amos the noqed in the Light of Ugaritic" Studies in Religion 11 (1982): 29-33; for the latter, see in_y CAD, N, 1:333-35, and the discussion of Shalom Paul,Amos, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 34f. < 9. The northern location is already noted by David Kimhi; among moderns, cf. H. Schmidt, "Die Herkunft des Propheten Amos" in Beitrage zur alttestamentliche Wissenschaft: KarlBuddezumsiebzigsten Geburtstag, ed. K. Marti, BZAW 34 (Giessen: Toppelmann, 1920), 158-71. < 10. See Charles C. Torrey, The Lives ofthe Prophets, JBL Monograph Series, 1 (Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946), 26, 40. A 11. See, in particular, Shalom Paul, "Amos 1:3-2: 3:A Concatenous Literary Pattern,"/BZ 90 (1971): 397-43; and his expanded treatment, with other stylistic and form-critical considerations, in Amos, 11-15, 24-30. < 12. For the genre of hoy-oracles, see E. Gerstenberger, "The Woe Oracles of the Prophets"/BZ 81 (1962): 249-63; Richard J. Clifford, "The Use of HOY in the Prophets," CBQ28 (1966): 458-64; W Janzen, Mourning Cry and W5e Oracle, BZAW 125 (Berlin: deGruyter, 1972). < 13. Cf. Robert Gordis, "The Heptad as an Element of Biblical and Rabbinic Stylc," JBL 62 (1943): 17-26; Wolfgang W Roth, "The Numerical Sequence X/X+l in the Old Testament," VT
456 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN T H E HAFTAROT CYCLE
12 (1962): 300-311; Meir Weiss, "The Pattern of Numerical Sequence in Amos 1-2:A Re-examination"JBL 86 (1967): 416-23. < 14. For Hosea, see "The Book of Hosea" in "Overview of Biblical Books Excerpted in the Haftarot Cycle" and the discussions of the haftarot taken from his prophecies. A 15. See the discussion of the haftarah for Vayeshev. For Amos's use of Pentateuchal laws, see Robert Bach, "Gottesrecht und weltliches Recht in der Verkundigung des Propheten Amos," in Festschrift fur Gunther Dehn, ed. W Schneemelcher (Neukirchen Kreis Moers: Verlag der Buchhandlungen des Erziehungsvereins, 1957), 23-34. A 16. See the powerful essay of Shalom Spiegel, Amos vs.Amaziah, Essays in Judaism, 3 (New York: JewishTheological Seminary, 1957). A 17. Yehezkel Kaufmann (The Religion oflsrael, trans. Moshe Greenberg [Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960], 365-67) stressed that Amos viewed Israel's destiny from the perspective of morality alone. A 18. There is a full literature on the subject. See the following influential discussions: Gerhard von Rad, "The Origin of the Concept of the Day of the Lord," JSS 4 (1959): 97-108; Meir Weiss, "The Origin of the 'Day of the Lord'—Reconsidered," HUCA 37 (1966): 29-60; Yair Hoffmann, "The Day o f t h e Lord as a Concept and as a Term in the Prophetic Literature" 93 (1981): 37-50. <
Eastern Studies in Honor of William FoxwellAlbright, ed. Hans Goedicke (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971), 377-92; and J. R. Bartlett, "Edom and the Fall ofjerusalem, 587 B . C . , " PEQ114 (1982): 13-24. < 8. In particular, Obadiah evidences Aramaisms. For example, the verb niv'u that is parallel to nehpesu ("found') in v. 6 is undoubtedly related to the Aramaic stem b-'-y ("seek"). Compare the parallelism in Prov. 2:4. <
The Book ofMicah
1. See Kurt Elliger, "Die Heimat des Propheten Micha," ZDPF 57 (1937): 81-152. < 2. The attempt to determine the authentic words of the prophet and the structure ofhis collected speeches has followed a development from interest in minutiae to larger structures. Characteristic of the first trend, cf. the classic analyses of Bernhard Stade, "Bermerkungen uber das Buch Micha," 1 (1881): 161-72; and also idem, "Weitere Bemerkungen zu Micha 4, 5" 3 (1883): 1-16. For literary studies, see Johannes Lindblom, Micha: literarisch untersucht, Acta Academiae Aboensis, Humaniora 6. 2 (Abo: Abo Alcademie, 1929); B. Renard, Structure et attaches littcraires deMichce I F F , Cahiers de la Revue Bibliques 2 (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1964); J. Willis, "The Structure of the Book of Micah" Svensk ExegetiskArsbok 34 (1969): 5-42; andB. Renaud,Lafbrmationdulivre deMichee, Etudes bibliques (Paris, 1977). A 3. Most modern interpreters agree that the hope TheBook ofObadiah expressed in Mic. 3:12-14 seems contextually mis1. See in the edition of Dov Ratner (reprint, placed. A Jerusalem: H. Vagshel, 1988), 81-82. This opinion 4. For an approach to the conclusion, see the is followed by Saadiah Gaon, in 'Emunot Ifc-De'ot, classic early study of Hermann Gunkel, "Der Michama'amar 3, chap. 8 (ed. D. Slucki [Leipzig, 1864], Schluss," ZS 2 (1924): 145-78. < 69). < 5. Cf. the punning contrast of v. 6 with v. 7: 2. See his comment at v. 10. A halo' devaray yeitivu 'im ha-yashar holekh, "To be 3. See his discussion in SeferHa-Ge'ulah, inKitvei sure, My words are friendly to those who walk in Ramban, ed. Hayim Chavel (Jerusalem: Mosad Ha- rectitude." A Rav Kook, 1963), end of Ha-sha'ar Ha-Ri'shon, 6. For the jagged and intense nature of prophecy, 1:274. < see my essay '"A Wretched Thing of Shame, A Mere 4. On Obadiah 1. He follows Ibn Ezra's formulation Belly': An Interpretation of Jeremiah 20:7-12" in The Biblical Mosaic: Changing Perspectives, ed. Robconcerning the prophet's unknown generation. A 5. See his remark at v 10 (end), after a long discus- ert M. Polzin and Eugene Rothman (Philadelphia sion and rejection of earlier options. Cf. Ibn Ezra on and Chico, Calif.: Fortress Press and Scholars Press, 1982), 169-83, and the response of Geoffrey HartGen. 27:40, and Ramban on Gen. 33:14. A 6. Cf. Samuel R. Driver, Introduction to 'the Lit- man, "Jeremiah 20:7-12: A Literary Response," erature ofthe Old Testament, 10th ed. (New York: pp. 184-95. A slightly different version of this essay Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902), 319 (emphasizing appears in my book, Text and Texture: CloseReadings expression in w. 11-14); Otto Eissfeldt, The Old ofSelected Biblical Texts (NewYork: Schocken Books, Testament: An Introduction (New York: Harper & 1979), chap. 7. < Row, 1965), 403 (emphasizing w. 1-14, 15b); and 7. The relationship between Isa. 2:1-4 and Mic. see also the evaluations of Yehezkel Kaufman, Toledot 4:1-5 has been debated, with every possibility proHa-'Emunah Ha-Yisra'elit (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv: posed; cf. H. Wildberger,7®0/0, BKAT (NeukirschenMosad Bialik and Devir, 1960), 8:365; and Moshe Vluyn: NeukirschenerVerlag, 1972), 74-90. < Z. Sz
OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
10 (ed. Bernard Mandelbaum [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1962], 1:278), for the suggestion that Habakkuk was postexilic. A 2. See Rashi on 2 Kings 21:10, where he annotates the text on the basis of the SOR (adduced above, n. 1)—but without citing it. Kimhi's position is unclear: he cites the rabbinic view (and no other) on 2 Kings 21:10; but since he brings this opinion at the beginning of his commentary to Habakkuk, after saying we know nothing about the man, we may suppose the latter is his view and the rabbinic speculation is brought only for the sake of citing the tradition. A 3. See The Lives ofthe Prophets, Greek text and translation by Charles C. Torrey, JBLMS 1 (Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946), 28, 43. < 4. NJPS simply reads: "The pronouncement made by the prophet Habakkuk." A 5. Some modern interpreters have considered Habakkuk to be a cultic prophet. See J. Jeremias, Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkundigung in der spatter konigszeit Israels, WMANT (Neukirchen: Neukirchen Verlag, 1970), especially, 103-107. < 6. Cf. the string of hoy-oracles in Isa. 5:8-30;
5. The crowns remained in the temple as a memorial throughout the Second Temple; see M. Middot 3:8. < 6. Also see the observations of B. Uffenheimer, VisionsofZechariah, sec. 3, 135-69. < 7. Note also that in the vision of the tub (2. f), the tub is called an "eye in all the land" (Zech. 5: 6). However, the Septuagint and the Syriac versions read "guilt." < 8. 1 have modified NJPS in the first citation, as it condenses the doubling of the stem for jealousy in 1:14, butnotin 8:2. < 9. See especially the dating of the material in O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament, 437-40, where evidence for a late dating is assembled. Among those modern Jewish scholars who have proposed a dating of the material to the First Temple are S. D. Luzzatto, Heinrich Graetz, and Yehezkel Kaufmann. See in particular the arguments of Kaufmann, in his Toledot Ha-'Emunah Ha-Yisra'elit (Tel Aviv and Jerusalem: Devir and Mosad Bialik, 1960), 3:322-33, 4:226-74. <
The Book ofMalachi
10:1-11. <
1. Among moderns, cf. Isidore Levi, "Notes sur Malachie,"REJ23 (1891): 194-95- < The Book ofZechariah 2. See the edition of Charles C. Torrey, The Lives ofthe Prophets, JBLMS 1 (Philadelphia: Society of 1. For this period, see John H. Hayes and J. Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946), 30 (Greek Maxwell Miller, Israelite and Judean History (Phila- text) and45 (English). < delphia: Westminster Press, 1977) 5 515-23, with 3. Cf. NJPS note. The matter is difficult, but supliterature. A port may be found in Jacob's own blessing formula, 2. See the critical analyses of the two blocks in Gen. 48:16, and in the apparent rebuttal of this noOtto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction, tion in Isa. 63:9. Medieval rabbinic tradition gave this trans. Peter Ackroyd (New York: Harper & Row, angel even more exalted status—even the numinous 1965), 429-34, 434-40, and full bibliography; also kavod or Glory of the Throne (see Abravanel and the Georg Fohrer, Introduction to 'the Old Testament, trans. opinionscitedonMal. 3:1). A David Green (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968), 4. According to the traditions preserved in the 460-64, 464-68. < Septuagint, Peshitta, and Vulgate, the last six verses 3. For typical and diverse treatments of the vi- constitute a separate unit. The Masoretic division sions and their meanings, see Benjamin Uffenheimer, has sevenpamshiyyot (or pericopes); Abravanel gives The 'Visions ofZechariah: FromProphecy toApocalyptic eight. My subdivision has eleven. A (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Israel Society for Biblical 5. The biblical evidence is sifted by J. Lindsay, Research and Kiryat Sefer, 1961), 49-131; David "The Babylonian Kings and Edom, 605-550 B.C." Peterson, Haggai and Zechariah, OTL (Philadelphia: PEQ108 (1977): 27-32, especially; the precautionWestminster Press, 1977), ad loc.; and Carol Meyers ary evaluations of J. R. Bartlett, "Edom and the Fall and Eric Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, AB 25b of Jerusalem, 587 B . C . , " PEQ 114 (1982): 13-24, are (NewYork: Doubleday, 1987), 105-336. < well taken but in my view overly restrictive. A 4. For this chapter, see the detailed discussions of 6. A difficult passage; see my discussion in Biblical the haftarot for Be-ha'alotekha and the first Shabbat Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon ofHanukkah. A Press, 1985), 121 andn. 44. <
458 OVERVIEW OF BIBLICAL BOOKS EXCERPTED IN THE HAFTAROT CYCLE
GUIDE TO HEBREW FOOTNOTES Footnotes have been culled from the larger body ofMasoretic lore. Most notes point out a textual anomaly, lest the reader be puzzled or think it a mistake. To decipher the shorthand style, consider that a noted fact must be both unusual and intended.* Hebrew letters are referred to via a single hatch mark. The following glossary lists terms in alphabetical order—without prefixed conjunctions, prepositions, or the definite article. nwm pointed with a dagesb—which for '"1 is rare rabbinic law governing scrolls for ritual use n^n small NTST npi^n division ion unusual spelling—the stated letter is missing -pm unusual spelling—the stated letter ('X or 'H) is superfluous (not part of root or grammatical form) u^rnnnn our base manuscript; the Leningrad Codex tfnp xb) DTQ written but not read aloud; part of the written tradition but omitted in the reading tradition Aleppo Codex—a well-crafted, early medieval manuscript nms QIS inn plural verb form wm TI^ nx]^ TI^ means "enmity, enemy"—a rare homonym unusual spelling—the vowel-letter is superfluous given the way this word is vocalized mpiM pointed or vowelized reading tradition nNnpn nmoa m x nou variant version in other Masoretic manuscripts, preferred by our translators silent nm np] extraordinary dot (nikud) repeated •pyDM pTno caution: those who think (using logic or rules of grammar) that the text should read here as follows are mistaken poetry format; format of this poem h t w (n)rms root; spelling that shows a word's basic meaning myun change of vocalization * For example, the footnote "IDH literally means "The letter is missing." But in context it means: "The letter 'H, which is normal in the spelling of this word, is missing in this instance—according to how the text has come down to us. So when you write the text, leave out that letter here; but when you read the text, supply that missing letter in your mind."
459
TABLE OF TORAH READINGS for Occasions When a Haftamh is Recited WEEKLY SABBATH READINGS GENESIS Bere'shit Noah Lekh Lekha Va-yera' Hayyei Sarah Toledot Va-yetze' Va-yishlah Va-yeshev Mikketz Va-yiggash Va-yehi EXODUS Shemot Va-'era' Bo' Be-shallah Yitro Mishpatim Terumah Tetzaweh Ki Tissa' Va-yak-hel Pekudei LEVITICUS Va-yikra' Tzav Shemini
1:1-6:8
6:9-11:32 12:1-17:27 18:1-22:24 23:1-25:18 25:19-28:9 28:10-32:3 32:4-36:43 37:1-40:23 41:1-44:17 44:18-47:27 47:28-50:26
1:1-6:1 6:2-9:35 10:1-13:16 13:17-17:16
Tazria'
12:1-13:5
Metzora' 'Aharei Mot Kedoshim 'Emor Be-har Be-hukkotai
14:1-15:33 16:1-18:30 19:1-20:27 21:1-24:23
NUMBERS Be-midbar Naso' Be-ha'alotekha Shelah-Lekha Korah Hukkat Balak Pinhas Mattot Mase'ei
461
1:1-4:20 4:21-7:89 8:1-12:16
13:1-15:41 16:1-18:32 19:1-22:1 22:2-25:9 25:10-30:1 30:2-32:42 35:1-36:13
18:1-20:26
21:1-24:18 25:1-27:19 27:20-30:10 30:11-34:35 35:1-38:20 38:21-40:38
1:1-5:26 6:1-8:36 9:1-11:47
DEUTERONOMY Devarim Va-'ethannan 'Ekev Re'eh Shofetim Ki Tetze' Ki Tavo' Nitzavim Va-yelekh Ha'azinu
READINGS FOR SPECIAL SABBATHS Rosh Hodes Mahar Hodesh Shekalim Zakhor Parah
25:1-26:2 26:3-27:34
Weeklyportion;Num. 28:9-15* Weekly portion Weeklyportion;Exod. 30:11-16* Weekly portion; Deut. 25:17-19* Weeklyportion;Num. 19:1-22*
TABLE OF TORAH READINGS
1:1-3:22 3:23-7:11 7:12-11:25 11:26-16:17 16:18-21:9 21:10-25:19 26:1-29:8 29:9-30:20 31:1-30 32:1-52
Ha-Hodesh Ha-Gadol First during Hanukkah Second during Hanukkah
Weeklyportion; Exod. 12:1-20* Weekly portion Weekly portion; verses from Num. 7 relating the prince corresponding to the day of Hanukkah* Weekly portion; the day's Hanukkah portion, as above*
i) of the day
READINGS FOR THE DAYS OF AWE Rosh Ha-Shanah FirstDay Second Day Sabbath Shuvah Yom Kippur Morning Afternoon
Gen.21:l-34;Num.29:l-6* Gen. 22:1-24; Num. 29:1-6* Weekly portion Lev. 16:1-34; Num. 29:7-11* Lev. 18:1-30
READINGS FOR THE FESTIVALS Sukkot (Tabernacles) First Day Second Day Intermediate Sabbath Shemini Atzeret Simhat Torah Pesah (Passover) First Day Second Day Intermediate Sabbath Seventh Day Eighth Day Shavuot (Pentecost) First Day Second Day
Lev. 22:26-23:44; Num. 29:12-16* Lev. 22:26-23:44; Num. 29:12-16* Exod. 33:12-34:26; Num. 29:17-22 (3rdday), Num. 29:23-28 (5th day), or Num. 29:26-31 (6th day)* Deut. 14:22-16:17; a Num. 29:35-30:1* Deut. 33:1-34:12; Gen. 1:1-2:3; Num. 29:35-30:1* Exod. 12:21-51; Num. 28:16-25* Lev. 22:26-23:44; Num. 28:16-25* Exod. 33:12-34:26; Num. 28:19-25* Exod. 13:17-15:26; Num. 28:19-25* Deut. 15:19-16:17; b Num. 28:19-25* Exod. 19:1-20:23; Num. 28:26-31* Deut. 15:19-16:17; b Num. 28:26-31*
READINGS ON WEEKDAY OCCASIONS Ninth of Av Morning Afternoon Fast Day Afternoons Israeli Independence Day
Deut. 4:25-40 Exod. 32:11-14; 34:1-10 Exod. 32:11-14; 34:1-10 Nonec
* Maftir. a On weekdays, Sephardim read Deut. 15:19-16:17. b On Shabbat: Deut. 14:22-16:17. c Some congregations read one of the following passages: Deut. 7:1-8:18; Deut. 7:12-8:18; Deut. 11:8-21; orDeut. 30:1-10. TABLE OF TORAH READINGS
462
INDEX OF HAFTAROT IN ENGLISH ALPHABETICAL; ORDER
'Aharei Mot 129 Balak 178 Be-ha'alotekha 162 Be-har 144 Be-hukkotai (Be-har-Be-hukkotai) 148 Be-midbar 153 Bere'shit 3 Be-shallah 70 Bo' 67 Devarim (Shabbat Hazon) 197 'Ekev 205 'Emor 139 Fast Day Afternoons 331 Ha'azinu 225 Hanukkah, First Sabbath 262 Hanukkah, Second Sabbath 263 Hayyei Sarah 20 Hukkat 174 Kedoshim ('AhareiMot-Kedoshim) 132, 135 Ki Tavo' 217 ' Ki Tetze' 215 Ki Tissa' 92 Korah 171 Lekh Lekha 12 Mahar Hodesh 236 Mase'ei (Mattot-Mase'ei) 191 Mattot (Pinhas, after 17th ofTammuz) 186 Metzora' (Tazria'-Metzora') 125 Mikketz 48 Mishpatim 81 Naso' 158 Nitzavim (Nitzavim-Va-yelekh) 220 Noah 8 Passover, First Day 300 Passover, Second Day 303 Passover, Intermediate Sabbath 307 Passover, Seventh Day 310 Passover, Eighth Day 311 Pekudei (Va-yak-hel-Pekudei) 97, 102 463
Pinhas (before 17th ofTammuz) 182 Pinhas (after 17th ofTammuz) 186 Re'eh 209 Rosh Hashanah, First Day 265 Rosh Hashanah, Second Day 271 Shabbat ha-Gadol 257 Shabbat ha-Hodesh 254 Shabbat Parah 249 Shabbat Rosh Hodesh 231 Shabbat Shekalim 240 Shabbat Shuvah 276 Shabbat Zakhor 243 Shavuot, First Day 315 Shavuot, Second Day 321 Shelah-Lekha 168 Shemini 116 Shemini Atzeret 293 Shemot 58,62 Shofetim 211 Simhat Torah 296 Sukkot, First Day 285 Sukkot, Intermediate Sabbath 290 Sukkot, Second Day 289 Tazria' 121 Terumah 86 Tetzaweh 88 Tisha b'Av Morning 327 Tisha b'Av Afternoon 331 Toledot 24 Tzav 111 Va-'era' 62 Va-'ethannan (ShabbatNahamu) 201 Va-yak-hel 97, 100 Va-yehi 54 Va-yelekh 225 Va-yera' 16 Va-yeshev 43 Va-yetze' 28, 34 Va-yiggash 51 Va-yikra' 106 Va-yishlah 34, 39 Ve-zo't Ha-berakhah 296 Yitro 75 Yom Kippur Morning 281 Yom Kippur Afternoon 284
INDEX OF BIBLICAL PASSAGES Joshua 1:1-18
296
Isaiah 57:14-58:14
281
Joshua 2:1-24 Joshua 5:2-6:1 Joshua 6:27
168 300 300
Isaiah 60:1-22 Isaiah 61:10-63:9 Isaiah 66:1-24
217 220 221
Judges 4:4-5:31
70
Jeremiah 1:1-2:3
Judges 11:1-33 Judges 13:2-25
174 158
1 Samuel 1 Samuel 1 Samuel 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 1 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah Isaiah 465
1:1-2:10 11:14-12:22 15:1-34 20:18-42 6:1-7:17 22:1-51
1:1-31 2:1-12 3:15-4:1 5:26-6:13 7:13-26 7:40-50 7:51-8:21 8:54-66 18:1-39 18:46-19:21 4:1-37 4:42-5:19 7:3-20 11:17-12:17 23:1-9 23:21-25
1:1-27 6:1-7:6 9:5-6 10:32-12:6 27:6-28:13 29:22-23 40:1-26 40:27-41:16 42:5-43:10 43:21-44:23 49:14-51:3 51:12-52:12 54:1-10 54:11-55:5 55:6-56:8
265 171 243 236 116 225,310 20 54 48 86 100 97, 263 102,289 293 92 182 16 121 125 240 303 303 197 75 75 311 58 58 201 12 3 106 205 211 8,215 8,209 331
Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremiah Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezekiel
2:4-28 3:4 4:1-2 7:21-8:3 8:13-9:21 9:22-9:23 16:19-17:14 31:2-20 32:6-27 33:25-26 34:8-22 46:13-28
62,186 191 191 191 111 327 111,327 148 271 144 81 81 67
1:1-28 3:12 20:2-20 22:1-19 28:25-29:21 36:16-38 37:1-14 37:15-28 38:18-39:16 43:10-27 44:15-31 45:16-46:18
315 315 135 129 62 249 307 51 290 88 139 254
Hosea 2:1-22 Hosea 11:7-12:12 Hosea 12:13-14:1 Hosea 14:2-10 Joel 2:15-27 Amos 2:6-3:8 Amos 9:7-15 Obadiah 1:1-21 Jonah 1:1-4:11 Micah 5:6-6:8 Micah 7:18-20 Habakkuk 2:20-3:19 Zechariah 2:14-4:7 Zechariah 14:1-21 Malachi 1:1-2:7 Malachi 3:4-24
153 34 28 28, 276 276 43 132 39 284 178 276, 284 321 162, 262 285 24 257
