Spiritual and
Ethical Issues in the Historical Books of Tanach;
JOSHUA, JUDGES, SAMUEL, KINGS (Nevi’im Rishonim) These four books ostensibly are merely the history of Israel from the entry into the Promised Land until the destruction of the Temple and the temporary loss of independent statehood. In fact they are actually, in a specifically Jewish sense, the most deeply religious and spiritual books of the Bible. One does not have to be specifically Jewish to see or feel the religion and spirituality in the revelations of the prophetic writings or in the words of the Tehillim. They speak to all people, as evidenced by the fact that the Bible is still the world's bestseller and there are millions of non-Jews who regularly recite the Psalms. However, it is specifically and intrinsically Jewish to understand that G-d is revealed in the prosaic material, in the political, social and military events in the lives of ordinary men and women, kings and leaders that are described in the Nevim Rishonim. Here are described the ideology and religious thoughts in Judaism, while in Chronicles we have the purely historical. Yeho'ash Restores the Beit
HaMikdash (Melachim Bet 12) At first, Yeho'ash relied on the kohanim to finance the project through the funds that they received from the people who came to the Beit HaMikdash. They were either to use the gifts brought to them by individuals who customarily gave money to a particular kohen, or the yearly per-capita tax of a half-shekel that every adult male was commanded to give to the Temple (Shmot 30:13) or the freewill offerings of individuals (Bamidbar 18:19) or the equivalent to a person's value as described in Vayikra 27, that was meant to maintain the Temple. However, the kohanim failed to find the necessary funds and did not do anything to renovate and strengthen the House for G-d. The reason for this is not at all clear. Whether it was bureaucratic inefficiency, unwillingness, or whether they wished to wait until all the funds sufficient to complete the project were in hand, seems immaterial to their failure. So too, is the valid supposition that during Atalia's rule the people had become accustomed not to make pilgrimages to the Temple so that their offerings were meager. The half-shekel was meant to finance the communal sacrifices and there is an opinion that these were not offered at all during her reign. Perhaps, Yeho'ash intended that the sums accruing from the half-shekels of these past years would now go to the restoration of the Mikdash while the current sums would go to the communal offerings. Yeho'ash then gave orders to construct a chest so that the people could donate money directly for the restoration and freed the kohanim from any obligation for it. The chest had a slit in the door to prevent pilfering. This chest was placed on the right side of those coming to offer sacrifices on the Altar. From here Chazal learnt that we put the mezuza on the right side of the door as we enter (Menachot 34a). The sums thus collected were sufficient to pay for the stones, wood, gold and silver needed to repair the building and to make new vessels for the Temple service, in lieu of those that had fallen into disuse. They were also sufficient to pay the masons, carpenters and other artisans and workers necessary for the project. Yeho'ash's instructions that the
overseers of the funds did not have to give an accounting to anyone
"since they serve in faith" (12:16), is indeed a surprising one that
speaks of communal trust in addition to the fact that numerous
artisans and workers were involved, which made public accounting
extremely difficult. This verse is reflected in the halakhic ruling
that the gabba'im of tzedaka are not required to give an accounting
of the funds they receive (Bava Batra 40a). Yet we hear other voices
in halakha that perhaps speak of different times and changed
conditions that did not allow for this trust and assumption of
honesty. We are expected to be clean before G-d and Man, so the gabba'ei tzedaka and communal funds should give a complete accounting (Tur and the gloss of the Rama, Yoreh De'ah 256). The Arukh HaShulchan adds that this is obligatory when gabba'ei tzedaka are paid officials and the Rama writes this applies to volunteers too when they are unkosher, self appointed or violent and even when there is gossip about them. "When Moshe walked to his tent he heard the people skeptically remark about his prosperous looks insinuating that some of the wealth that had passed through his hands for constructing the Mishkan had ended in his pockets. He immediately gave an accounting even though it meant repeating the many verses detailing these sums. (Midrash Tanchuma, Shmot 38:21). Furthermore, he made a separation of functions - Betzalel, the architect, Elazar HaKohen as paymaster, and Moshe as recipient of the donations - making corruption more difficult. Even the appearance of impropriety should be avoided: "The kohen whose job it was to empty the charity box in the Temple, did so dressed in a simple shift, without pockets or sleeves and barefoot so there should not be any temptation to steal or the appearance of misbehavior regarding what was in essence, holy money" (BavaBatra 8b). "Yeho'ash did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord all his days, wherein Yehodaya instructed him" (verse 3). Later he changed and we can see two reasons for that. Yehodaya merely instructed but did not really educate him to the values of Judaism, so that with his death, no longer having his instructor, Yeho'ash was unable to continue in those ways. We learn from chapter 24 in Divrei HaYamim Bet that his officials, after Yehodaya's death, began to bow to him and treat him as a god. They said that otherwise he could not have appeared alive after seven years, from the Holy of Holies. So, Yeho'ash began to behave as though he was a deity and deserted G-d (Shmot Rabbah 8:2). Irrespective, his desertion of Hashem led to his murder by Jozacar the Moabite and Jehozabad the Amonnite. "It was fitting that Yeho'ash who was ungrateful to Yehodaya and killed Zechariah the prophet, his son, should be killed by sons of Moav and Ammon who were ungrateful to Avraham who saved their father Lot from the kings" (Rashi to verse 22, quoting the Sifri). This is the 49th installment in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for our times” [The
Parshat R'ei Homepage]
|
