Ten Tribes Vs. One Tribe/2

Ten Tribes Vs. One Tribe

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Binyamin

Achiyah meant that Binyamin and Yehuda would remain under the rule of the Davidic dynasty, while the other ten tribes would side with Yerovam.

Sources:RadakMelakhim I 11:13Melakhim I 11:32Melakhim I 12:20Melakhim II 17:18About R. David Kimchi, RalbagMelakhim I 12:20-21Melakhim I Toalot 11:39About R. Levi b. Gershom, AbarbanelMelakhim I 11About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, MetzudotMetzudat David Melakhim I 11:13Metzudat David Melakhim I 11:30Metzudat David Melakhim I 12:20-23About R. David Altschuler, Hoil MosheMelakhim I 12About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi,

 "וְהַשֵּׁבֶט הָאֶחָד יִהְיֶה לּוֹ": The missing tribe

• These sources assume that Achiyah's words "וְהַשֵּׁבֶט הָאֶחָד יִהְיֶה לּוֹ" referred to Yehuda and Binyamin together.  Binyamin is not mentioned on its own and only included as part of the more glorified Yehuda since it was both less important and less numerous than the tribe of Yehuda. In addition, since Yerushalayim fell within the borders of both tribes, they were considered as one.
• R. Medan suggests, instead, that the phrase "וְהַשֵּׁבֶט הָאֶחָד יִהְיֶה לּוֹ" refers to both parts of the verse's continuation (מושך עצמו ואחר עמו).  The verse should thus read as if written: וְהַשֵּׁבֶט הָאֶחָד יִהְיֶה לּוֹ לְמַעַן עַבְדִּי דָוִד [וְהַשֵּׁבֶט הָאֶחָד יִהְיֶה לּוֹ] וּלְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלַ‍ִם הָעִיר אֲשֶׁר בָּחַרְתִּי.  According to this reconstruction, there is no missing twelfth tribe at all.¹
• Alternatively, one could posit that it is only Binyamin which is referred to in Achiyah's words, "וְלִבְנוֹ אֶתֵּן שֵׁבֶט אֶחָד", while Yehuda is not mentioned at all. The prophet explained that Hashem is giving Rechovam one tribe besides his own.²³

"וְנָתַתִּי לְךָ אֵת עֲשָׂרָה הַשְּׁבָטִים" – The ten tribes included everyone else except the Levites. Since the Levites had no inheritance, they are not considered in the count of twelve at all.⁴ 

Evidence that Binyamin was loyal to the Davidic line – The fact that Rechovam gathers "כׇּל בֵּית יְהוּדָה וְאֶת שֵׁבֶט בִּנְיָמִן" to quell Yerovam's rebellion supports the idea that both tribes together had been left under the control of the Davidic dynasty.  During the reign of Asa, as well, Binyamin is explicitly grouped with Yehuda (Divrei HaYamim II 15:1-10).

Status of Yerushalayim and Binyamin's siding with Yehuda – According to this approach, Yerushalayim was always meant to be under the jurisdiction of the Davidic dynasty.  Since Yerushalayim was within the territory of Binyamin, it too had, of necessity, to be under the control of David's line.

"לְמַעַן דָּוִד עַבְדִּי וּלְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלַ‍ִם אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרְתִּי" – These sources could suggest that Hashem kept Yehuda "לְמַעַן עַבְדִּי דָוִד" and Binyamin "לְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלַ‍ִם".⁵

Why would Binyamin side with Yehuda? From a political perspective, it does not make sense that Binyamin would have wanted to join Yehuda, its rival from the reign of Shaul.⁶  Moreover, the tribe would appear to have been prime candidates to join a rebellion with Yerovam, from the tribe of Ephraim anda fellow descendant of Rachel! 

• Hoil Moshe suggests that Binyamin only sided with Rechovam out of fear that they would otherwise be attacked.⁷
• Alternatively, it is possible that their allegiance demonstrates that David's attempts at reconciliation with the tribe had in fact succeeded.⁸

Status of Shimon – According to this position, Shimon sided with Yerovam, despite their being physically located in the south, within the territories of Yehuda.⁹  However, it is difficult to see how Yehuda would tolerate having pockets of a rival nation within its borders. This might be the reason why, later, in the time of Asa, people from Shimon are mentioned as part of a group of Israelites who decided to veer towards Yehuda.¹⁰

Shimon

Achiyah had included Binyamin among the ten tribes who were to rebel with Yerovam. The missing twelfth tribe was Shimon, which had been subsumed under its neighbor, Yehuda, already in the period of the Conquest.

Ten and one – According to this approach, the ten tribes mentioned by Achiyah included Binyamin, whom the prophet assumed would naturally join the House of Yosef in their rebellion,¹¹ while the one tribe referred to Yehuda itself.

The missing tribe – Only eleven tribes are mentioned because already in the era of the Conquest, Shimon had been subsumed under Yehuda and lost its own independent identity.¹² The two tribes had worked together to conquer their territories,¹³ and Shimon inherited cities within the area allotted to Yehuda, thus losing distinct tribal status.¹⁴

Change of plan – Achiyah's words were initially fulfilled, only to be overturned soon afterwards.  When the rebellion first began, all of Israel (including Binyamin) did in fact turn on the House of David and " לֹא הָיָה אַחֲרֵי בֵית דָּוִד זוּלָתִי שֵׁבֶט יְהוּדָה לְבַדּוֹ". However, in an effort to reassert his rule over the country, Rechovam forced his control over his northern neighbor, Binyamin. Only because Shemaya the Prophet then forbade him to fight, did Rechovam not continue to re-subjugate the other tribes.

No other mention of "ten tribes" – Never after our story is the Northern kingdom said to comprise ten tribes, because in the end they were really only nine.

Status of Yerushalayim – According to this approach, it is possible that the original plan was for Yerushalyim to be an international city.  Lying on the border between Yehuda and Binaymin, which was to have been the border between the two kingdoms, Yerushalayim and the Mikdash were meant to be a cultural and religious center open to all of Israel (north and south alike).

What if? Sharing Jerusalem would likely have prevented Yerovam from building the two calves, as there would not have been the same fear that returning to Jerusalem would mean a return to Rechovam. In addition, sharing a religious center would likely have ensured that close ties remained between the two countries, promoting peace and the possibility of forming a confederation.  The fact that, in the end, Yerovam felt the need to create new religious centers and traditions likely played a large role in enlarging the rift between North and South.

"לְמַעַן דָּוִד עַבְדִּי וּלְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלַ‍ִם אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרְתִּי" – According to this approach, Hashem promised to keep only Yehuda for David but simultaneously promised that even though Yerushalayim was partially within the territory of Binyamin which was intended to be part of Yerovam's kingdom, it would not be considered part of the Northern Kingdom (but open to both).

Status of Shimon – Considering that Shimon was located within the borders of Yehuda it is very logical that they would be included in the Southern kingdom, under the rulership of the Davidic line.  In fact, from a logistical standpoint, it is almost impossible to understand how they could have successfully backed Yerovam.

Philosophical Issues: Can a Prophet Err? This position raises an important theological question: is it possible for a prophet to err, or for a prophey not to be fulfilled?

¹ This possibility, however, does not work with Melakhim I 11:36, which also mentions one tribe but is not worded in a way that would allow the phrase to be doubled and to refer to one tribe for the sake of David and another for the sake of Yerushalayim.  It also encounters considerable difficulty from Melakhim I 12:20, which states, "לֹא הָיָה אַחֲרֵי בֵית דָּוִד זוּלָתִי שֵׁבֶט יְהוּדָה לְבַדּוֹ" and does not mention Binyamin.

² The reasoning given, "לְמַעַן הֱיוֹת נִיר לְדָוִיד עַבְדִּי כׇּל הַיָּמִים לְפָנַי בִּירוּשָׁלַ‍ִם" is very logical, for only if Binyamin joined Rechovam would David's descendants be able to maintain control over Yerushalayim.

³ Since the Levites had no inheritance, they are not included as one of the twelve tribes at all. {twelve is reached by Yosef being split into two, Menashe and Ephraim.]

⁴ The number twelve is reached due to Yosef being split into two tribes, Ephraim and Menashe.

⁵ See R. Medan above who says this explicitly.

⁶ In fact, the last time the tribes gathered as a group of ten against Yehuda, claiming  "עֶשֶׂר יָדוֹת לִי בַמֶּלֶךְ", was during the prelude to the rebellion of the Benjaminite, Sheva b. Bichri.

⁷ Since they were geographically the closest tribe to Yehuda, and fairly small, they would have been the first candidates for punishment.

⁸ See Choice of Yerushalayim for the possibility that David's main goal in choosing his capital city had been to promote peace with Binyamin.

⁹ See Yehoshua 19:1 and Shofetim 1:3 and Shofetim 1:17.

¹⁰ See Divrei HaYamim II 15:9.  The verse itself, though, supports the idea that Shimon was originally considered Israelite and only during the reign of Asa did some members of the tribe switch allegiances. See also Divrei HaYamim II 34:1-7 which similarly appears to include Shimon with other members of the Northern Kingdom, sharing how Yoshiyahu purified cities from Menashe and Ephraim, and Shimon through Naphtali.

¹¹ They were natural allies, both being descendants of Rachel. [See Shemuel I 19:21, where Shimi of Binyamin refers to himself as "רִאשׁוֹן לְכׇל בֵּית יוֹסֵף".]

¹² As above, the tribe of Levi, too, is not considered since they did not inherit their own portion.

¹³ See Shofetim 1:3 and 1:17.

¹⁴ See Yehoshua 19:1-9: "וַיְהִי נַחֲלָתָם בְּתוֹךְ נַחֲלַת בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה".  See also Ibn Ezra and Radak that this was a fulfillment of Yaakov's words in his blessing to Shimon and Levi, "אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל".