Shiur #14: Chapter 14 ֠Yerovamӳ Demise
Sefer
Melakhim: The Book
of Kings
By Rav Alex
Israel
Shiur #14: Chapter 14 Yerovams
Demise
In chapter
13, we read of the incident in which Yerovam's sacrificial altar was publically
condemned by a prophet from Yehuda. With "moftim," miraculous signs
proving his authenticity, the Ish Elokim cautioned Yerovam that the path
he had chosen was religiously mistaken, warning that the bones of his priests
would eventually be burnt upon that very altar. Yerovam failed to heed the
warning:
Even after this incident,
Yerovam did not turn back from his evil ways but kept on appointing priests from
the ranks of the people for the bamot
Thereby, the House of Yerovam
incurred guilt to their utter annihilation from the face of the earth.
(13:33-34)
Whereas the
prophet in chapter 13 did not target Yerovam explicitly, preferring to direct
his message at the altar, in our chapter Yerovam receives his own personal
prophecy of doom.
PROPHETS AND
THEIR KINGS
The backdrop
to the story is that Yerovam's child has fallen ill with a life-threatening
sickness. From the fact that "all Israel mourn him" (14:12,18), we may deduce
that this child is the heir to the throne.
At that time, Aviya son of
Yerovam became ill. And Yerovam
said to his wife, Go disguise yourself, so that you will not be recognized as
the wife of Yerovam. Then go to Shiloh. Achiya the prophet is there the one
who told me I would be king over this people. Take ten loaves of bread with you,
some cakes, and a jar of honey, and go to him. He will tell you what will happen
to the boy.
It is apparent from the
story that Yerovam cannot visit Achiya Ha-Shiloni personally, and he sends his
wife in his stead. But if Yerovam cannot appear before Achiya, why not select a
different prophet? One candidate would be the navi zaken living in
Beit-El, of whom we read in chapter 13. Why couldnt Yerovam seek his
counsel?
It is obvious that he seeks
the prophet "who told me I would be king over this people." Achiya designated
Yerovam as the king; Achiya is thus the address for the fate of the heir to the
throne. The irony is that it is will be Achiya who will pronounce the demise of
Yerovams royal dynasty.
The scene here touches upon
some clear parallels to the Shaul-Shmuel relationship:
1. Gifts to the prophet: In
order to gain counsel of the navi, one brought a
gift.
Here, Yerovam instructs his
wife, "Take ten loaves of bread with you, some cakes, and a jar of honey, and go
to him."
Before Shauls early
encounter with Shmuel, we read, "Shaul said to his servant, If we go, what can
we give the man? The food in our sacks is gone. We have no gift to take to the
man of God. What do we have? The servant answered him
again. Look, he said, I have a quarter of a shekel of silver. I will give it
to the man of God so that he will tell us what way to take. (Shmuel I
9:7-8)
2. In both cases, God
informs the prophet of the arrival of the guest in
advance:
With Yerovam's wife: "God
had told Achiya, Yerovams wife is coming to ask you about her
son
"
With Shmuel: Now the day
before Shaul came, the Lord had revealed this to
Samuel: About this time tomorrow, I will send you a man from the land of
Benjamin. Anoint him leader
" (Shmuel I 9:15-16)
3. The most evocative
connection is the disguise:
Here, we read how Yerovam's
wife disguises herself to meet the prophet. Towards the end of Shauls life, we
read, "Shaul disguised himself, putting on other clothes, and at night he and
two men went to the woman. Consult a spirit for me, he said, and bring up for
me the one I name
Then the woman asked, Whom shall I bring up for you?
Bring up Samuel, he said." (Shmuel I 28:7-11)
The symmetry moves a stage
forward when we recall that both circumstances reflect a nevua that
pronounces the demise of the king, the death of his son (or sons), AND the
defeat of all Israel.[1]
Of course, this parallel
scene, augmented by all the other common features that we have noted between the
Shaul and Yerovam in previous classes,[2]
amount to a strong link. In both cases, the navi who appoints the king
announces their rejection, and we have the impression that the thrust of that
navi's prophecy was inextricably linked to that particular king.[3]
We would do well to reflect
on the fact that in both the cases of Shaul and Yerovam, the king has not
exactly been consulting with the navi throughout their tenure. Shaul
broke off ties with Shmuel after Shmuel's pronouncement of renunciation.
Likewise, it would seem that Yerovam has not been consulting with Achiya
regarding his religious reforms and his new cultic shrines. These men are
estranged from their spiritual benefactors, but are forced to turn to them when
their very survival is in peril. Of course, they each seek life and discover
that the very opposite will come to them.[4]
SUBTERFUGE
As we have
mentioned, Yerovam's wife disguises herself for her meeting with Achiya. The
pesukim mock this feeble attempt when they inform us that "Achiya could
not see, for his eyes had become sightless with old age."
What was the
purpose of this concealment?
He was
concerned that people would say that he was inquiring of the prophets of God,
rather than the prophets of his [golden] calves. (Malbim)
He knew that
Achiya hated him, for he had removed himself from the way of God. He said to
himself: If Achiya knows it is my wife, he will prophecy nothing but bad
tidings. (Radak)
Many figures
dress up in Tanakh. For some, the objective is to be able to deliver a message
that would otherwise not be received or heard.[5]
In those cases, the effect is theatrical and the aim of the costume is to convey
a lesson that will access and penetrate the recipient (usually the king) before
it is deflected.
But in this
case, if we follow the Radak, the impression that is given is that the
navi will bless people (or curse them) in accordance with his personal
feelings towards the recipient. Is that really the case? This can be understood
in one of two ways:
When a
prophet inquires [of God] regarding a given matter, he inquires regarding that
issue specifically
If he [Achiya] did not know that this was Yerovam's wife, he
would inquire only as to whether the sick child would live and maybe he [the
navi] would pray for him. But if he knew that it was Yerovam's wife, then
he [the navi] would prepare to inquire of God regarding all matters of
the House of Yerovam, for this is [not a private but] a public matter.
(Malbim)
According to
this interpretation of the Radak, Yerovam thought that he would gain greater
assistance and a better chance for his son if he would be treated merely as an
individual rather than the crown prince. Yerovam wishes that his sick son be
treated like any other child before the prophet.
But a second
possibility for Yerovam's concealment is that he felt that the anger of the
navi would condemn him. This is reminiscent of the episode of Yaakov
seeking a blessing of the blind Yitzchak in his old age; if one can trick the
purveyor of the blessing, one may emerge with a blessing rather than a curse.
Our story fails to follow the Yaakov story, however, and is more akin to the
case of Bilaam, who is brought to curse Israel, but says: "I could not of my own
accord to anything good or bad contrary to the Lord's command. What the Lord
says, that I must say" (Bamidbar 24:13). The prophet cannot independently
adapt the word of God in accordance with his personal inclinations.[6]
No matter to what extent Yerovam conceals his wife, and no matter how blind the
prophet may be, God will send his word of truth to his prophet and deliver His
pronouncement.
I think that
the insertion of this masquerade into the story continues a theme that was
dominant in our previous chapter. Yerovam is continually attempting to
circumvent the word of God, manipulating his mandate to his own designs. This
subterfuge cannot work. God's inexorable word will be delivered, even if human
beings attempt to twist and distort it.
In this
case, the messenger sent by the king Yerovam in order to bring about the child's
recovery actually becomes the reverse - an agent of God bearing a message of
death. The excruciating return journey of Yerovam's wife, fully cognizant that
her entrance into her home will bring about her child's death and the bitterness
of her bereavement, drives home the irrevocable divine verdict. In a sinister
echo of the "mofet," the prophetic sign of the previous chapter, the very
death of her child establishes the veracity of Achiya's prophecy. (Had Yerovam
heeded the first sign, then the second awful indication would not have
transpired.)
There is a
slight dissonance between what the navi says and what actually
transpires. The navi tells Yerovams wife that "when you come to the CITY
the child will die"(14:12), but the child only dies "when she entered the
THRESHOLD OF HER HOUSE" (v.17). This interplay between the physical house or
home of Yerovam and the royal "House" or dynasty of Yerovam (14:10, 13) is
deliberate.[7]
The death of the child at the moment of entry into the house is indicative of
the end (or death) of Yerovam's royal house.[8]
THE
CONDEMNATION
Achiya's
pronouncement is divided into two:
14:6-14
Yerovam's punishment
14:15-16
National Punishment
(The
fulfillment of these punishments occurs later in the sefer: Yerovams in
15:29-30 and to Israels in Melakhim II 17:21-23.)
Yerovam's
punishment is expressed in furious and crude terminology. First, God articulates
Yerovam's guilt with phrases taken from Achiya's initial prophecy to
Yerovam:
If you do whatever I
command you and walk in my ways and do what is right in My eyes by
keeping my statutes and commands, as My servant David did, I will
be with you. (11:38)
Here:
But you have not been like
My servant David, who kept My commands and walked in My
ways with all his heart, doing only what was right in My eyes.
(14:8)
Hashem adds that
Yerovam "acted worse than all those who preceded" him.
The
punishments expressed here include coarse references to "dung" and "those who
urinate against the wall."[9]
The prediction regarding Yerovam's descendents, that "he who dies in the city
shall be devoured by dogs, and anyone who dies in the field will be eaten by the
birds" (v.11), is reminiscent of the ranting of Goliath (Shmuel I 17:44)
and most probably an echo of contemporary expressions of carnage and
decimation.[10]
(Only in the case of Achav and Izevel do we see these words carried out
literally.[11])
We can only suggest that this crass "street language," which indicates total
destruction, reflects the fury and anger with Yerovam's sins, and the consequent
determination to eliminate all his descendents. Indeed, when the punishment
happens to Yerovam's son, Nadav, the pesukim deliberately stress, "He did
not spare a single soul of the House of Yerovam
in accordance with the word of
God in the hand of
Achiya Ha-Shiloni."
The language
which constitutes this pronouncement of absolute destruction against errant
royal dynasties becomes a periodic feature of Sefer Melakhim. It recurs
time after time, dynasty after dynasty, addressed to each of the royal houses of
the Northern Kingdom (see 16:1-2, 21:20-25, and Melakhim II
9:8).
EFES ATZUR
VE-EFES AZUV
However, one
phrase has deeper connections. The mysterious phrase, "atzur ve-azuv"
(14:10), translated as "bond and free" (JPS), relates to a phrase in Shirat
Haazinu. There, we are told (Devarim 32:37):
For the Lord
will vindicate His people,
And take
revenge for His servants,
When he sees
that his might is gone,
And neither
bond nor free is left. (efes atzur ve-efes azuv)
The song of
Haazinu is a poem that foresees the ups and downs, the turbulence of sin
and punishment, within Israel.[12]
In that shira, the removal of "bond and free" from Israel is indicative
of reaching the lowest point, on the one hand, but also of a reversal of
fortunes from bad to good, a gesture of God demonstrating mercy and reentering
the picture. The usage of these words referring to utter destruction in
Melakhim is borrowed from Haazinu. When we hear this phrase, we
should understand their implications: despite the trouble up ahead, God is in
control. They suggest that after the violence and chaos, better times will come.
They also indicate that the events described here in Sefer Melakhim are
included in the events that God always knew would transpire in Israel.
MITIGATING
PHRASES
In this
vein, there are arguably two mitigating phrases in this otherwise depressing
prophecy, and Chazal pick up on them. The first is when Achiya utters the
punishment of Am Yisrael: "God shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in
the water (14:15).[13]
The
gemara interprets this in a positive manner, as indicative of the
endurance of Israel.
Better is the curse with
which Achiya Ha-Shiloni cursed Israel than the blessing with which the wicked
Bilaam blessed them. Achiya Ha-Shiloni cursed Israel by a reed, as it is said,
For the Lord shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water. Just
as a reed grows in well watered soil and its stem is renewed and its roots
are numerous, and even if all the winds of the world come and blow upon it they
cannot dislodge it from its place, but it sways in unison with them, and as soon
as the winds subside, the reed still stands in its place, [so may Israel be].
But the wicked Balaam blessed them by the cedar. Just as the cedar does not
stand in a place of water
immediately the south wind blows upon it and uproots
and overturns it on its face." (Sanhedrin 105b)
The second
"positive" phrase is when Achiya says:
He alone
will be brought to burial, because in him there is found some good to
Hashem, God of Israel, in the House of Yerovam.
(14:14)
This
pasuk is difficult to understand. What is the "good thing" that is in
Yerovam's house, and who in particular did something good? Maybe this is
deliberately left ambiguous so as to confer some good to Yerovam, but yet to
obscure it.
Nonetheless,
Chazal suggest (Moed Katan 28b) that Achiya, Yerovam's
son, had done something positive to reverse his father's actions. R. Zera
suggests that "he abandoned his turn [in Yerovam's Beit Ha-Bamot) and
himself went up to Jerusalem." R. Chanina bar Pappa suggests that "he rescinded
the guards that his father Yerovam had placed upon the roads so that the people
would go up to Jerusalem." This indicates that even Yerovam's family contested
his categorical ban on ascent to Jerusalem and sought to reverse their father's
actions.
SHEKHEM TO
TIRTZA
This episode
concludes with Yerovam's death and the succession of his son, Nadav. One final
note should be made before we leave Yerovam. Our story informs us (14:17) quite
incidentally that Yerovam's palace is in a town called Tirtza. The Tanakh
was apparently uninterested in informing us that Yerovam had built a new capital
city in Tirtza! As we know, Yerovam's initial center was Shekhem (12:25). We
shall see however, that over the next period, Tirtza is the royal capital city
(16:9, 15-18). This will only change in the era of Omri, when the capital moves
to Shomron (16:24). At a future opportunity, we will explain the appeal of
Tirtza and the eventual success of Shomron as the Northern
capital.
[1]
See
Melakhim I 14:15, and Shmuel I
28:19
[2]
These include the tearing of the coat,
appointment in the countryside, and use of similar language; see shiur 10
and shiur 11 note 13.
[3]
This is
particularly pronounced in the case of Shmuel, whose name is closely tied to
that of Shaul (see Shmuel I 1:20, 27-28) and who mourns the Shauls
failure see Shmuel I 16:1-2 and the Abarbanel's comments
there.
[4]
We might add that both stories involve descendants of Rachel who struggle
against the would-be king from the tribe of
Yehuda.
[5]
Such as the navi who talks to Achav (Melakhim I 20:35-41)
and the woman from Tekoa (Shmuel II
15).
[6]
This
theme deserves deeper analysis. After all, Avraham is told, "Those who bless
you, I will bless" (Bereishit 12:3), indicating that the power of
blessing is his. Elisha, irritated by some mocking youths, curses them, and are
mauled by bears (Melakhim II 2:23-25); when Elisha is treated well by the
Shunamite woman, he blesses her with the birth of a child (Melakhim II
4). Yet we can still say with confidence that regarding a person's destiny, it
is the word of God that prevails and His intent alone, rather than the
instinctive human pronouncement of the prophet. Of course, greater investigation
is needed regarding the episode of Yaakov and Esav and the
berakhot.
[7]
See Shmuel II 7, where there is a similar interplay between the
concepts of the physical house (of God and David) and the royal House of David
(his dynasty).
[8]
I saw this observation in Jerome Walshs book on Sefer Melakhim,
part of the Berit Olam series. He takes this further, suggesting a pun of
sorts - "saf ha-bayit" (the threshold) of the palace echoing "sof
habayit" the end of Yerovam's dynasty. I think the pun, while tempting, is
unsubstantiated by the text.
[9]
See the Radak, who offers the various options of meaning here: 1) even
the dogs will be wiped out. 2) The male line of the family will be destroyed. 3)
This is a shortened form that indicates people of intelligence and discerning
qualities. (This third option also appears in Targum and Rashi.)
This phrase recurs in Melakhim I 16:11, 21:21, and Melakhim
II 9:8, as well as in Shmuel I 25:22.
[10]
Daat
Mikra
[11]
Melakhim I 22:37 and
Melakhim II 9:35.
[12]
For a
good understanding of Shirat Haazinu, see R. Elchanan Samet's shiur:
http://www.vbm-torah.org/parsha.60/51haazin.htm
[13]
Since
the punishment is that they shall be exiled "beyond the river," the navi
uses a water metaphor here.