Shlomo's Monarchy in Jerusalem (III)

 

            In the previous lecture, we focused on the details of the Temple, on the changes that resulted from the transition from Mishkan to Mikdash, and on the significance of those changes. In this lecture, we will examine the entirety of Shlomo's actions on behalf of the Temple.

1. THe pact with Chiram, king of Tzor

1.  David and Chiram

The beginnings of the connection with Tzor traces back to the days of King David. Immediately after describing David's conquest of Jerusalem and the establishment of his monarchy therein, Scripture tells of the assistance that Chiram provided David in connection with the building of his palace – both materials and workers:

And Chiram king of Tzor sent messengers to David, and cedar trees, and carpenters, and masons, and they built David a house. (Shmuel II 5:11; parallel found in Divrei Ha-Yamim II 14:1)

            This assistance did not come in response to a request on the part of David, but rather on the initiative of Chiram, which some interpret as a sign of Chiram's appreciation of David for his war against Tzor's enemy, the Pelishtim. The friendship between David and Chiram continued throughout the period of David's kingdom (Melakhim I 5:15).

2.  Shelomo and Chiram 

The connection between Shlomo and Chiram is described in Melakhim I 5:15-32; 9:11-14, 26-28; 10:11, and 22 (and in the parallel passages in Divrei Ha-Yamim II 2:2-15; 8:2, 18; 9:10, 21).

According to the report in Melakhim, with the foundation of Shelomo's monarchy, Chiram turned to him with the request that he be allowed to continue the warm and friendly relations that he had enjoyed with the kingdom of Israel in the time of David:

And Chiram king of Tzur sent his servants to Shlomo, for he had heard that they had anointed him king in place of his father; for Chiram always loved David. (Melakhim I 5:15)

            Presumably, Chiram also heard about Shlomo's wisdom, as is reported in the previous verse regarding the rest of the kings. Shlomo responded by asking Chiram to provide him with cedars from the Lebanon, and Chiram agreed to send Shlomo as many cedar and cypress trees as he desires. In exchange, Shlomo provided Chiram with wheat and oil for food for his household year by year (according to the Radak, throughout the period that Chiram's men worked in Shlomo's service). Chiram and Shlomo's workers worked together in transporting the wood and preparing the wood and the stones. Chapter 9 relates that Chiram also provided Shlomo with gold and that Shlomo offered to give him twenty cities in the Galil, but Chiram was not pleased with them. Later in that same chapter, we read about the international gold trade that Shlomo and Chiram developed at Yam Suf.

            This extensive and diversified activity led to a pact between the two kings:

And the Lord gave Shlomo wisdom, as He promised him, and there was peace between Chiram and Shlomo; and they two made a league together. (Melakhim I 5:26)

            There are a number of differences[1] in the report in Divrei Ha-Yamim I, only a few of which we will mention here:

• Whereas in Melakhim, Shlomo wanted to give Chiram twenty cities in the Galil, in Divrei Ha-Yamim, Chiram gave Shlomo cities and Shlomo rebuilt them and settled them with members of the people of Israel (Divrei Ha-Yamim II 8:2).[2]
• In Divrei Ha-Yamim, there is no mention of a pact between Shlomo and Chiram.
• According to Melakhim, Chiram – the craftsman that Chiram king of Tzur sent Shlomo for smith work in the Temple – was from the tribe of Naftali and a coppersmith, whereas according to Divrei Ha-Yamim, he was a multi-talented craftsman ("skillful to work in gold and in silver, in brass, in iron, in stone, and in timber, in purple, in blue, and in fine linen, and in crimson; also to engrave any manner of engraving, and to work all kinds of artistic work;" Divrei Ha-Yamim II 2:13) from the tribe of Dan.

Incidentally, this joining of the tribe of Dan (Chiram the smith from Tzur) to the tribe of Yehuda (Shlomo) in the construction of the Temple is reflective of Divrei Ha-Yamim's tendency to describe through various literary means the construction of the Mikdash as a continuation of the construction of the Mishkan. Thus writes the midrash:
 

You find that when the Mishkan was made, two tribes shared in the work. R. Levi said in the name of R. Chama son of R. Chanina: The tribe of Dan and the tribe of Yehuda. The tribe of Yehuda – Betzalel; the tribe of Dan – Oholi'av ben Achisamakh of the tribe of Dan. And similarly in the construction of the first Temple, two tribes were partners. "And King Shlomo sent and fetched Chiram from Tzur" (Melakhim I 7:13), the son of a widow from the tribe of Dan, and Shlomo ben David who was from the tribe of Yehuda. (Pesikta Rabbati 6).[3]

3.  THe significance of the pact

The pact established between Shlomo and Chiram raises two questions: First of all, how is it possible to enter into a treaty with Chiram?[4] In several places, the Torah forbids Israel to enter into a pact with the nations of the world. Thus, for example, we find in Shemot 23:32: "You shall make no covenant with them, nor with their gods;" similarly, in Shemot 34:12: "Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land to which you go."

Second, what is the spiritual significance of the partnership of the people of Tzur in the building of the Temple?[5]

In this lecture, we will deal exclusively with the second question.

R. Ovadya Seforno (Shemot 38:21-22) finds fault with allowing foreigners to take part in the building:

[The Torah] tells us the virtues of this Mishkan, by which reason it was worthy to be everlasting and not to fall into the hands of the enemy. First, because it was the "Tabernacle of Testimony," where the tablets of testimony were [deposited]; second, "as they were rendered according to the commandment of Moshe;" third, because it was through "the service of the Levites by the hand of Itamar,' for indeed the charge of all the parts of the Mishkan were in the hands of Itamar; fourth, "And Betzalel the son of Uri, the son of Chur, of the tribe of Yehuda made…," the leaders of the craftsmen of the Mishkan's work and its articles were noblemen and the righteous ones of the generation, and therefore the Shekhina rested on the work of their hands, and it did not fall into the hands of their enemies. But the Temple of Shelomo [was built by] workers of the nations of the world, and although the Shekhina did rest there, its sections deteriorated and it was necessary to repair the breaches of the house, and eventually it all fell into the hands of the enemy. But the second Temple, which did not meet even one of these conditions [and] the Shekhina did not come to rest in it at all, fell into the hand of the enemy; for indeed, the second Temple was not "the Mishkan of the testimony" since there were no tablets of testimony in it [at all] and it was Koresh who charged it [that it be built], and [also] there were no sons of Levi there, as Ezra attested when he said: "And I inspected the people and the priests but found there none of the sons of Levi" (Ezra 8:15), and among those who occupied themselves with the building were Tzidonites and Tzorites, as is explained in the book of Ezra (3:7). (Seforno, Commentary to Shemot 38:21-22)[6]

According to the Seforno, the first and second Temples fell into the hands of the enemy because they were built with the participation of craftsmen from Tzor and Tzidon, whereas the Mishkan, the craftsmen of which were all of noble lineage and among the righteous of the generation, never fell into enemy hands. Accordingly, the Mikdash should have been built exclusively by members of Israel, without the participation of foreign craftsmen.[7]

            In the words of the prophets themselves, however, we do not find any criticism whatsoever regarding Shlomo's allowing the artisans and craftsmen of Tzor to participate in the construction. An attempt should, therefore, be made to find positive meaning in the participation of the Tzorites in the building of the Temple.

            Various prophets prophesied about Tzor: Yechezkel dedicates three chapters to Tzor (26-28); Yeshayahu – "the burden of Tzor" (chap. 23); and Yo'el (6:6-8) and Amos (1:9-10). These prophecies (and especially the prophecies of Yechezkel, which devote the most attention to Tzor) imply three important characteristics of Tzor.[8]

            In chapter 27, Yechezkel likens Tzor to a ship "perfect of beauty" (v. 3), constructed of the most precious and beautiful materials from all over the world. The motif of beauty is repeated also in the next chapter, in a lamentation over the king of Tzor:

Son of man, take up a lamentation for the king of Tzor, and say to him, “Thus says the Lord God; You are a seal and a paragon, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. You have been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, the ruby, the crysolithe, and the diamond, the emerald, the shoham, and the jade, the sapphire, the turquoise, and the beryl, and gold; the workmanship of your settings and your sockets was in you, in the day that you were created they were prepared. You were the far covering keruv; and I have set you so. You were upon the holy mountain of God; you have walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.” (Yechezkel 28:12-14)

            We have here a detailed description of Tzor being likened to the Garden of Eden, filled with parallels to the Temple (keruv, covering, holy mountain, the stones of the choshen, and others).[9] It is therefore "fitting to take of the beauty of Lebanon which is reminiscent of the beauty of the Garden [of Eden] and establish it in the Temple" (the words of R. Shaviv – see note 8).[10]

            Another characteristic of Tzor is its cosmopolitanism – it was "a merchant of the peoples" (Yechezkel 27:3). Tzor's location on the Mediterranean coast turned it into an international center of commerce and culture, as is spelled out in the continuation of that chapter (27:12-25; see also Yeshayahu 23:8). In this sense, Tzur was a miniature representation of all the nations in the world, and perhaps its participation in the construction of the Temple heralds the prophetic vision that in the future all the nations will recognize God's kingship and go up to Jerusalem for judgment. In other words, during that period Tzor was a fitting conduit to connect the entire world to the building of the Temple, and when the time comes also to reach the Temple and recognize the monarchy of God.

            Another characteristic of Tzor, which connects it to the construction of the Temple in a different way, is its great pride, which is expressed in the pride of its prince:

The word of the Lord came again to me, saying, Son of Man, say to the prince of Tzor. Thus says the Lord God: “Because your heart is lifted up, and you have said, ‘I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seas;’ yet you are a man, and not God, though you have your heart as the heart of God. Behold, you are wiser than Daniel; there is no secrete that they can hide from you; with your wisdom and with your understanding you have acquired riches and have gotten gold and silver in your treasures. By your great wisdom and by your trading you have increased your riches, and your heart is lifted up because of your riches. Therefore, thus says the Lord God: Because you have set your heart as the heart of God, behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon you, the most terrible of the nations. And they shall draw their swords against the beauty of your wisdom, and they shall defile your brightness. They shall bring you down to the pit, and you shall die the deaths of them that are slain in the heart of the seas. Will you yet say before him that slays you, I am God? But you are a man, and not God, in the hand of him that slays you. You shall die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, says the Lord God. (Yechezkel 28:1-10)

            The beauty, the power and the universal recognition of his protection filled the prince of Tzor with pride and the feeling of "I am a God, I sit in the seat of God."[11] The participation of Tzor – which regards itself as the supreme kingdom on earth – in the construction of the Temple is a repair of this conception, inasmuch as it constitutes recognition of the supremacy of God. This point was already noted by the Zohar:

Chiram made himself into a god, and when Shlomo came, he removed him from this idea, and Chiram thanked him for that. And we have learned: R. Yitzchak said in the name of R. Yehuda: Shlomo sent Chiram a certain demon who went down to the seventh level of Gehhinom and brought him up. Every day, Shelomo would send Chiram messages with that demon, until he repented, and he thanked Shlomo for that. (Zohar, Vayikra 61a)

            In this context, it should also be noted that Tzor had acquired its great riches through wrongdoing and injustice (Yechezkel 28:16-18), and the connection to the Mikdash and Jerusalem, the city of justice, was able to repair this disgraceful trait as well.

            This idea of repairing the sins of Tzor, the cosmopolitan kingdom of commerce and culture, which perhaps represents the entire world, fits in well with Shlomo's perception of the Mikdash as an eternal and universal Temple designated for the repair of the entire world. Just as Shlomo's marriages with foreign, idol-worshipping women were meant, according to some opinions, to draw them closer to God (Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 2:6), so too his covenant with Tzor – which saw itself as the pinnacle of humanity, even though it acquired its wealth unjustly – may have been part of his attempt to repair it, as part of the repair of the entire world, by way of the Temple.[12]

            Practically speaking, this goal was not achieved, neither in the days of Shlomo nor during the entire first Temple period.[13] Shlomo himself went after Ashtoret, god of the Tzidonites (Melakhim I 11:5),[14] and over the course of the generations, the commercial connections led to marital alliances: the marriage of Ach'av to Izevel, daughter of Itba'al, king of the Tzidonites. This brought the worship of Ba'al to the kingdom of Israel (Melakhim I 16:31), from where it arrived also in the kingdom of Yehuda by way of Atalya (see Melakhim II 11:14).[15]

            In the end, Yechezkel sees the connection between Tzor and Jerusalem in a negative light:

Because Tzor has said against Jerusalem, “Aha, she is broken that was the gates of the peoples; she is turned to me,” I shall be filled with her that is laid waste. (Yechezkel 26:2)

In the continuation of that very prophecy, the relationship between Tzor and Jerusalem is presented as the reason for the great destruction of Tzor. The gemara (Megilla 6a) learns from the aforementioned verse that there exists an antithetical relationship between Tzor (which is replaced in the gemara by Ceasaria, in accordance with the reality of the period) and Jerusalem:

Caesaria and Jerusalem – if someone tells you that both of them have been destroyed, do not believe him; that they are both settled, do not believe him; Caesaria is destroyed and Jerusalem settled, or Jerusalem is destroyed and Caeasaria is settled – believe him. As it is stated: "I shall be filled with her that is laid waste" (Yechezkel  26:2) – if this one is filled, that one is laid waste, if that one is filled, this one is laid waste.[16]

            It follows from what we have said that it is possible to relate to the connection with Tzor in different ways. On the one hand, the Seforno criticizes the connection and its consequences, something that also later left its mark on the relationship between the kingdoms of Israel and Yehuda and those of Tzor and Tzidon. On the other hand, in Tzor lies the potential for great repair.

4) Lebanon and the temple[17]

            When Moshe pleaded to be allowed entry into Eretz Yisrael, he said:

I pray you, let me go over, and see the good land that is beyond the Jordan, the goodly mountain region and the Lebanon. (Devarim 3:25)

            According to the plain sense of the text, Moshe was referring to two main regions: the central mountain massif of Eretz Yisrael and the Lebanon to its north. The midrashic understanding of "Lebanon" as a reference to the Mikdash stems from the cedars of Lebanon that Chiram sent Shlomo and from which the Mikdash was constructed. This is explicitly stated in Bereishit Rabbah (15:1):

R. Yochanan said: The world was not worthy of using the cedars, which were created exclusively for the sake of the Temple. This is [the meaning of] what is written: "The trees of the Lord have their fill; the cedars of Lebanon" (Tehillim 104:16), and Lebanon means the Temple. This is what is written: "The goodly mountain region and the Lebanon." (Devarim 3:25).

Yonatan ben Uziel, other opinions in Chazal, and the Rishonim, however, understood differently:

"The goodly mountain region" – this refers to Jerusalem; "and the Lebanon" – this refers to the Temple. (Mekhilta De-Rashbi, 17:14)

            Calling the Temple by the name "Lebanon" is explained in Midrash Zuta to Shir Ha-Shirim (4:8) as follows:

"Come with me from Lebanon, my bride, with me from Lebanon" (Shir Ha-Shirim 4:8). What is Lebanon? This is the Temple, which was called Lebanon. And why was it called Lebanon? Whoever would go up there with a sin in his hand would not leave from there before his sins would become white (mitlabenim) as snow, in fulfillment of what it says: "Though your sins be like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow" (Yeshayahu 1:18).[18]

            Yet another interpretation of this designation is found in Vayikra Rabbah (1:2):

R. Tavyumi said: Because all hearts (levavot) rejoice in it. This is what is written: "Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth" (Tehillim 48:3). And the Rabbis said: Because of "My eyes and My heart shall be there perpetually" (Melakhim I 9:3).

Here the word Lebanon is understood in the sense of "heart" (lev), alluding to the joy that is found in the hearts of all in the Temple, and to God's heart (i.e., Divine providence), which is found there at all times.

            The vitality that the metaphor of heart bestows upon the Temple expresses itself in another way in yet another interpretation of the cedars of Lebanon:

The cedars which Chiram king of Tzor sent to Shlomo for the construction of the Temple smelled of life and were green. R. Levi said: When Shlomo brought the ark into the Temple, all the trees and cedars that were there turned green and produced fruit, as it is stated: "Those that are planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God" (Tehillim 92:14). And they produced fruit and were a source of great income to the young priests, until Menasheh brought an idol into the Holy of Holies, and the Shekhina removed itself, and the fruits dried up, as it is stated: "And the flower of Lebanon fades" (Nachum 1:4). (Tanchuma, Teruma 11)[19]

            It is possible that the significance of the connection between the Temple and the Lebanon (and between Shlomo, king of Jerusalem, and Chiram, king of Tzor) should be understood in light of Lebanon's being the northern end of Eretz Yisrael. According to this, the connection between the Temple and the Lebanon expresses the relationship between the heart, which sits in the center, and the outermost reaches of the country: the entirety of Eretz Yisrael – including its northernmost region – is connected to the source, the Temple, and receives its vitality from it. The heart bestows of its vitality even on the most distant and northern (tzafon; and perhaps also concealed – tzafun) end. "Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth: Mount Zion, the sides of the north, the city of the great King" (Tehillim 48:3);[20] "Like the dew of Chermon descending upon the mountains of Zion: for there the Lord has commanded the blessing, even life for evermore" (ibid. 133:3) – the material abundance and blessing from the north connect with the mountains of Zion, where the eternal blessing is found, "even life for evermore."

2. What did SHlomo Actually Do in connection with the construction of the Temple?

1.  What use did Shlomo make of THOSE THINGS THAT had been prepared by His father, David

At the end of the description of the construction of the Temple, it is stated:

So was ended all the work that king Shlomo made for the house of the Lord. And Shlomo brought in the things which David his father had dedicated; the silver, and the gold, and the vessels, he did put in the treasuries of the house of the Lord. (Melakhim I 7:51; parallel found in Divrei Ha-Yamim II 5:1)

            Why didn't Shlomo use what his father David had consecrated? This is explained in Pesikta Rabbati (6):

Some [of the Rabbis] explain this to his credit; others explain it to his discredit.

Those who explain this to his credit: David petitioned for this, saying to Him: Master of the universe, I see in my prophecy that the Temple will eventually be destroyed, and all that I have set aside comes from houses of idol worship that I destroyed. Let not the nations of the world say: What did David think? He destroyed the house of our gods and made a house for God; our gods stirred up and took their revenge and destroyed the house of God. Therefore, he prayed that Shlomo should not need them.

And those who explained this to his discredit: During the days of David, there were three years of famine. David had several storehouses filled with silver and gold that he had set aside for the building of the Temple. He should have spent the money to keep the people alive, but he failed to do so. God said to him: My children are dying of hunger and you amass money for the construction of a building. You should have used it to keep people alive, [but] you did not do so. By your life, Shlomo will not need to take anything from it whatsoever.

            Abarbanel adds:

Just as He did not want David to build the Temple during his lifetime on account of the great amount of blood that he had spilled, so too He did not agree that the Temple should be built with the money that he had amassed in his wars from the spoils of the nations. But Shlomo, who was a man of peace and whose money was amassed in a just and peaceful manner – he was to build the Temple from that money, and not from anything else, for the Lord will give strength to His people, and the Lord will bless His people with peace.[21]

It is also possible that we are dealing here with an expression of independence: Shlomo wanted to build the Temple by himself.

This notwithstanding, Divrei Ha-Yamim explicitly states that Shlomo made use, at least in part, of what had been prepared by David (and it deals there with spoils of war!):

Likewise, from Tivchat and from Kun, cites of Hadar'ezer, David took very much brass, with which Shlomo made the brazen sea, and the pillars, and the vessels of brass. (Divrei Ha-Yamim I 18:8)

            Moreover, it seems evident that Shlomo made use of the Temple plans that David had given him; in light of what is stated in Divrei Ha-Yamim I (28:19): "All this, said he, is put in writing by the hand of the Lord who instructed me, all the works of this pattern." In light of Chazal's tradition regarding the Temple scroll that had been handed down from Moshe to David and from David to Shlomo, it does not stand to reason that Shlomo made changes in the original plans. Similarly, there is no reason to assume that Shlomo instituted changes in David's division of the priesthood and the Levites into mishmarot (Divrei Ha-Yamim I 23-26).

2.  the things that Shlomo did on his own

• Bringing of the craftsmen and construction materials (including his turning to Chiram regarding craftsmen, cedars, cypress trees and gold).
• Inviting Chiram the brass worker from Tzor, who was responsible for all the brass work.
• The actual building of all the structures and vessels.
• Bringing the ark up from the city of David to the Temple and standing all the vessels in their proper places.
• All aspects of the dedication of the Temple.

3. The construction of the first temple by David and Shlomo

1.  THe temple and Jerusalem – joint project of two kings

Until now, we have emphasized, based on the plain sense of Scripture, the part played by each of the two kings in the construction of the Temple. David initiated the building, sought out the place, found it, acquired it, erected an altar, and prepared the plans, the mishmarot, and the ma'amadot. Shlomo added craftsmen and building materials, executed the building of the structure and the vessels, brought up the ark from the city of David to the Temple, and dedicated God's house.

In addition, Chazal assert in several places that David was also a partner in the construction proper: David constructed the foundation, and Shlomo the building itself. Thus, for example, we find in the following midrash:

"And for a sacrifice of peace offerings" (Bamidbar 7:17) – this refers to David and Shlomo… and both of them built the Temple: David made the foundation and Shlomo built it up. (Bamidbar Rabbah 13:14)

Similarly, Tosafot in Berakhot (18a) expound the expression "two lion-hearted men of Mo'av" (Shmuel II 23:20) – "this refers to David and Shlomo, who built the Temple and who came from Ruth the Moabite woman."

We see, then, that the Temple – and more than that, Jerusalem in its entirety as the city of the Temple – was the joint project of David and Shlomo. Each of the two kings made his own unique contribution, but only together did they fashion the perfect creation of a city with a Temple at its center:

Our Rabbis taught: Which is a coin of Jerusalem? David and Shlomo on one side and the holy city of Jerusalem on the other. (Bava Kama 97b)

2.  The significance of the fact that the temple was built by two kings

Why was the Temple built by two kings, rather than by a single king? There are several possible answers to this question.

First, this may have been to preclude the situation in which a king feels that it was he who, with his great strength and abilities, "arranged" a place for the Master of the universe, and among his various royal construction projects also built a house for God. The fact that two kings participated in the project lessens such a feeling.

Second, the fact that the Temple was built by father and son bestows an element of permanence. The establishment of a permanent royal dynasty is what allowed for the construction of the Temple, and it is this dynasty which built it.

And third, the Temple was built by two kings with very different dispositions. David started out in life as a shepherd and engaged in many great struggles before ascending to the throne; David is the model for the trait of lowliness and humility and the feeling of profound dependency upon God, on the one hand, and upon the tribes of Israel, on the other. David's ceaseless devotion to the Temple, which manifested itself even before he served as king in practice and which continued even after he was explicitly told that he himself would not be able to build the Temple, is one of his most striking qualities. Another of his traits was his unmediated connection to the ark, the vessel that more than anything else expresses the resting of the Shekhina. All these account for the fact that the Temple was attributed to David ("A psalm, a song for the dedication of the Temple; of David"), the root of whose soul was in the house of God.

Shlomo, on the other hand, was born into the royal court and received on a silver platter a kingdom that enjoyed extensive and peaceful borders and grand economic abundance. The entire world came before him and recognized his wisdom, power, wealth, and influence: not dependence on the tribes, but rather the appointment of a royal mechanism of governors ruling the people; not lowliness and humility, but rather great self-confidence and profound recognition of his value in the eyes of his people and the entire world. As opposed to David, Shlomo's clear connection was not to the ark, but to the high place in Giv'on – to the altar and the sacrificial service. In all of these – his nature, his personality and his qualities – Shlomo complemented David, and thus the Temple was built by the two of them: David – who was the foundation, the starting point - and Shelomo, the successor, who represents permanence in all of its senses.

Summary

            In this lecture, we completed our analysis of Shlomo's contribution to the construction of the Temple. We examined the details of the covenant with Chiram and its spiritual significance, we investigated where Shelomo made use of what had been prepared by David and where not, and we concluded with a discussion of the significance of the fact that the Temple was built by both David and Shlomo.

            In the next lecture, we will discuss the relationship between the house of the king and the house of God.

(Translated by David Strauss)