The History of the Divine Service at Altars (41) – The Prohibition of Bamot (18)

***************************************************
In memory of Rebbetzin Miriam Wise, Miriam bat Yitzhak veRivkah z”l,
whose yahrtzeit is on 9 Tevet.
By Rav Yitzchak and Stefanie Etshalom
***************************************************

After examining the chapters dealing with Mikha's idol, we considered the story of the concubine in Giv'a in relation to that story. With that, we concluded our study of the book of Shoftim and now move on to the book of Shemuel.

The book opens with a description of Elkana's pilgrimage to the Mishkan in Shilo. This pilgrimage was a significant innovation in light of the total absence of any connection to the Mishkan in Shilo at the time.[1]

The End of the Mishkan in Shilo

In chapter 1, Scripture tells the story of Elkana and his family's pilgrimage to the Mishkan, Chana's prayer, her encounter with Eli the priest, her bearing a child, and her subsequent prayer of thanksgiving.

In chapter 2, Scripture describes the sad reality of the Mishkan's function under the leadership of Eli's sons, Chofni and Pinchas. They run the Mishkan as their own private fiefdom, behaving in a disrespectful and insensitive way towards those bringing sacrifices, without any commitment to Jewish law.

Among other wrongdoings, they forcibly seize the meat of the sacrifices before the sacrificial fats are burned on the altar. The text is sharp in its critique: "The sin of the lads was very great before the Lord; for the men dishonored the offering of the Lord" (I Shemuel 2:17). In the continuation of the narrative, Scripture states that Eli's sons slept with the women who assembled at the door of the Tent of Meeting. Chazal were inclined to interpret this as referring to an injustice relating to the proper functioning of the Mishkan. According to them, the bird-offerings of women who had recently given birth were placed at the end of the line, because the priests got so little of the meat.[2]

In his critique of his sons' conduct, Eli too seems to distinguish between obligations between man and his fellow, which are subject to human law, and obligations between man and God, where the sole judge is God Himself.

The revelation of the man of God to Eli involves an exceedingly harsh prophecy of punishment: "Why do you kick at My sacrifice and at My offering, which I have commanded in My habitation; and honor your sons above Me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel My people?" (2:29). Here, the conduct of Eli's sons in the Mishkan is described as kicking God's sacrifices and offerings. The revelation ends with Eli being informed about the death of his sons and the cutting off of his seed.

In chapter 3, Scripture relates how the prophecy passed from Eli to Shemuel. Shemuel is informed about a general destruction and calamity which apparently alludes also to the destruction of the Mishkan in Shilo, together with Israel's rout before its enemies, and about the fulfillment of God's words about the dynasty of Eli: "For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever, for the iniquity, seeing that he knew that his sons were blaspheming and he restrained them not. And therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli, that the iniquity of Eli's house shall not be purged with sacrifice nor offering forever" (3:13-14).

In chapter 4, Scripture accounts Israel's crushing loss in the campaign against the Pelishtim at Even-ha-Ezer. Between the two parts of the campaign, both before and after the ark of the covenant of God was brought out to the battlefield, thirty-four thousand people were killed.

The Attitude Towards the Ark of the Covenant

Chofni, Pinchas and the people of Israel saw the ark as a sacred object, whose very presence in the battlefield would ensure Israel's victory. The verses suggest absolute confidence that the ark would bring salvation regardless of the people's deeds and spiritual standing.

This is clearly expressed in the proposal put forward by the elders of Israel: "And when the people had come into the camp, the elders of Israel said, ‘Why has the Lord smitten us today before the Pelishtim? Let us fetch the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of Shilo to us, that, when it comes among us, it may save us out of the hand of our enemies’" (4:3). It is evident that no soul-searching followed Israel's first rout (which resulted in the deaths of four thousand men), and that taking the ark out to the battlefield was not accompanied by fasting, repentance, prayer or supplications. The ark was perceived as a sort of "insurance policy" meant to protect the people of Israel and to lead them to victory on its own.

The sense of confidence that prevailed in the camp of Israel after the ark was brought to the battlefield is expressed in the verse: "And when the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great shout, so that the earth trembled" (4:5). As mentioned above, they clearly did not understand that repentance and introspection were a prerequisite to their success.

Interestingly, this perception of the ark seems to have penetrated the camp of the Pelishtim as well, judging from their immediate response. Scripture states: "And the Pelishtim were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe to us for there has not been such a thing before now. Woe to us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of the mighty gods? These are the gods that smote Egypt with all the plagues in the wilderness" (4:7-8).

From the perspective of both the Pelishtim and the people of Israel, the ark was an unconventional weapon had been brought into the campaign – "these mighty gods." The ark represented the God who had already demonstrated His strength in the smiting of Egypt. The Pelishtim took the new threat seriously, but did not despair. They strengthened themselves, and fought with all their might. By the end of the campaign, they won a great victory over Israel with thirty thousand dead, including the two sons of Eli, and the capture of the ark of God.

In the continuation, Scripture describes the outcome of the war, as reported by a man of Binyamin (identified by Chazal as Shaul, the future king): "And the messenger answered and said, Israel has fled before the Pelishtim, and there has been also a great slaughter among the people, and your two sons also, Chofni and Pinchas, are dead, and the ark of God is taken" (4:17). Scripture describes the calamities in stages, from the lightest to the harshest, making clear that the taking of the ark was the most severe.

Indeed, Scripture immediately states: "And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, that he fell from off the seat backwards by the side of the gate, and his neck was broken, and he died: for he was an old man, and heavy" (4:18). One might have thought that Eli’s inability to withstand the news of the consequences of the war led to his death, but the verse clearly states that the decisive factor was the ark's capture by the Pelishtim.

Scripture then describes the death of Eli's daughter-in-law,

And his daughter-in-law, the wife of Pinchas was with child, near to be delivered: and when she heard the tidings that the ark of God was taken, and that her father–in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed herself and gave birth; for her pains came upon here… And she named the child I-Khavod, saying, “Honor is departed from Israel”: because the ark of God was taken, and because of her father–in-law, and her husband. (4:19-22)

The verse draws a direct connection between Eli's death and the news about the taking of the ark. The name given to the newborn son – I-Khavod – emphasizes the pain in the wake of the ark’s capture, alongside the deaths of the woman's father-in-law and husband. In his commentary to verse 22 (s.v. va-tomer), the Radak notes:

She said this a second time, for at first she said: ‘Honor is departed,’ because of the ark that had been captured, and because her father-in-law and her husband died. And now she said once again with reference to the ark alone: ‘Honor is departed,’ for it was the primary honor.

It seems that even through the naming of the child, Scripture emphasizes the distorted worldview that prevailed among the people. They saw the ark itself as the most important thing in life, ensuring the resting of the Shekhina and absolving the people from all responsibility.

The prophet Yirmeyahu draws an interesting connection between the state of the nation at the time of the destruction of the Mishkan in Shilo and the spiritual reality of the people of Israel in his day (at the end of the first Temple period, apparently in the period of the kingdom of Yehoyakim). Let us examine his words in Yirmeyahu 7. The prophecy opens:

The word that came to Yirmeyahu from the Lord, saying, Stand in the gate of the Lord's house, and proclaim there this word, and say, “Hear the word of the Lord, all Yehuda, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place’” (1-3).

The prophet refers to the attitude that the very existence of the Temple is an absolute given that will never change: "Trust not in lying words, saying, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord" (v. 4). Here too the prophet relates to the people's perception that God is with them, regardless of what they do and how much they sin. He severely rebukes them, saying, that it cannot be that they steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, burn incense to the Ba'al and follow after other gods, while coming to the Temple and offering sacrifices. The Temple is not a den of thieves, and there is no guarantee that it will continue to exist.

The condition for the resting of the Shekhina is as follows:

For if you thoroughly amend your ways and your doings; if you thoroughly execute justice between a man and his neighbor; if you oppress not the stranger, the fatherless and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt. Then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever. (5-7)

Not only is it impossible to detach the existence of the Temple from moral and social conduct, but moral life, justice and helping the weaker elements of society are conditions for the resting of the Shekhina.

The prophet has an interesting formulation regarding the imminent destruction of the Temple:

But go now to My place which was in Shilo, where I set My name at first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of My people Israel… Therefore will I do to this house, which is called by My name, and in which you trust and to the place which I gave to you and to your fathers as I have done to Shilo. And I will cast you out of My sight, as I have cast out all your brothers, the whole seed of Efrayim. (12-15)

The words of the prophet are mentioned once again in chapter 26 (3-6) at the beginning of the reign of Yehoyakim. The prophet is instructed to proclaim these words, omitting nothing:

Perhaps they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may relent of the evil, which I purpose to do to them because of the evil of their doings. And you shall say to them, Thus says the Lord, If you will not hearken to Me, to walk in My Torah, which I have set before you, to hearken to the words of My servants the prophets, whom I send to you, (sending from morning to night, but you have not hearkened) then will I make this house like Shilo, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.

Shilo is mentioned not only because it housed the Mishkan for a significant time period (369 years, according to Seder Olam Rabba), but was nevertheless destroyed. The reference of Shilo also relates to the spiritual reality that led to its destruction and to the absolute confidence in the power of the ark to save, regardless of any mending of ways or repentance before God.

As mentioned above, there are many similarities between the two periods. In Shilo there was blind trust in the ark that it would save the people in any situation. In Jerusalem during the time of Yirmeyahu, the people had confidence in the permanence of the Temple on Mount Moriya without any commitment to spiritual and social repair. This similarity brings the prophet Yirmeyahu to remind the people in chapters 7 and 26 of the atmosphere that surrounded the Mishkan in Shilo and the destruction it caused.

In chapter 26, this prophecy brings the priests and the prophets to demand Yirmeyahu's death: "Why have you prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This house shall be like Shilo, and this city shall be desolate without inhabitant?" (9). Yirmeyahu pleads for his life, saying that God had sent him to deliver this prophecy so putting him to death would be shedding innocent blood. Indeed, the princes and the people respond to the priests and the prophets (false prophets): "This man is not worthy to die; for he has spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God" (16).

At this point, some of the elders of the land mention Mikha's prophecy of destruction in the days of Chizkiyahu: "Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest" (18). Indeed, Chizkiyahu did not execute Mikha, but he rather feared God and prayed before Him. Immediately, God relented of the evil which He had pronounced against them.

Yirmeyahu's Attitude Toward the Destruction of Shilo as a Foundational Historical Event

Thus we see that Yirmeyahu predicted the destruction of the Temple because of sins that were similar to the sins of the people of Israel in Shilo. Let us try to better understand Yirmeyahu's attitude toward the destruction of Shilo.

Scripture introduces Yirmeyahu at the beginning of his book as follows: "The words of Yirmeyahu the son of Chilkiyahu, of the priests who were in Anatot in the land of Binyamin" (1:1), without giving any precise details about his family.

We may recall that Eli was told of the coming calamity:

Behold, the days come, that I will cut off your arm, and the arm of your father's house, that there shall not be an old man in your house. And you shall see a rival in your habitation enjoying all wealth which God shall give Israel; and there shall not be an old man in your house forever. And your descendants I shall not cut off from My altar, but they shall be there to consume your eyes and to grieve your heart: and all the greater folk of your house shall die in the flower of their age. (I Shemuel 2:31-33)

Cutting off the priestly dynasty of the house of Eli means that another priestly dynasty will take the place of his descendants.

It is known[3] that Eli's family traced itself to Itamar the son of Aharon the priest. Later in the book of Shemuel, Scripture describes the continuation of the priesthood: "And Achiya, the son of Achituv, I-Khavod's brother, the son of Pinchas, the son of Eli, was the Lord's priest in Shilo, wearing an efod" (I Shemuel 14:3). That is to say, Achiya, the son of Achituv, the brother of I-Khavod, continued in the priesthood during the time of Shaul.

Later, with Shaul's destruction of Nov, city of the priests, Scripture relates: "And one of the sons of Achimelekh, the son of Achituv, named Evyatar escaped, and fled after David…" (22:20). Achiya is Achimelekh, the son of Achituv, and his son Evyatar flees from Shaul and joins David.

At the end of his life, Evyatar joins Adoniyahu in his attempt to succeed David as king. After Shlomo ascends to the throne, he has the following interaction with Evyatar,

And to Evyatar the priest the king said, “Go you to Anatot, to your own fields; for you are worthy of death: but I will not at this time put you to death because you bore the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because you have been afflicted in all my father's afflictions.” So Shlomo thrust out Evyatar from being priest to the Lord; that he might fulfill the word of the Lord, which He spoke concerning the house of Eli in Shilo. (I Melakhim 2:26-27).

Shlomo casts Evyatar out from serving as priest because he joined Adoniyahu's rebellion. This fulfilled the prophecy delivered by the man of God to Eli that his descendants would be removed from the priesthood. Interestingly, Scripture provides no information about Yirmeyahu's family, apart from the fact that he belonged to "the priests who were in Anatot," in the land of Binyamin. Evyatar, too, returns to Anatot after being banished by Shlomo. 

Could it be that Yirmeyahu is a descendant of Evyatar and the house of Eli? It is possible that Yirmeyahu, as one of the descendants of Eli living in Anatot, prophesies about the impending destruction of the Temple over four hundred years after the destruction of Shilo on account of the sins of Eli and his sons.

Yirmeyahu repeatedly mentions the destruction of Shilo and compares Israel’s excessive trust in the house of God to the confidence of Eli, Chofni and Pinchas in the power of the ark.

According to our approach, Yirmeyahu, a descendant of Eli, warns the people of Israel not to repeat the same sins, as they will lead to the destruction of the Temple. If this hypothesis is correct, then we have a prophetic attempt at a double spiritual repair. First, attempting to reform the people's conduct at the end of the period of the Temple. Second, a historical repair, relating to the sins of the house of Eli which repeat themselves in the days of Yehoyakim, by a prophet who himself descends from the house of Eli.

As we know, this attempt at repair failed and the Temple was destroyed. In the next shiur we will try to understand the reasons for the destruction of Shilo, and the status of the Mishkan, from the destruction of Shilo until the building of the Temple by Shlomo.

 

(Translated by David Strauss)

, full_html, In this shiur we will analyze the Israelites' view of the ark during the time of Eli as well as Yermeyahu's later use of that narrative in his rebuke of the people.