Difference between revisions of "Historical Backdrop of Yeshayahu 1/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
Before Chizkiyahu's Religious Reform | Before Chizkiyahu's Religious Reform | ||
<p>Yeshayahu rebuked the people soon after Chizkiyahu ascended the throne, and it was these words which sparked the king's religious reform.</p> | <p>Yeshayahu rebuked the people soon after Chizkiyahu ascended the throne, and it was these words which sparked the king's religious reform.</p> | ||
− | <point><b>Chronology of Sefer Yeshayahu</b> – The book is achronological, as Chapter 6 is dated to the year in which Uziyahu died, while the first chapter speaks of the opening year of Chizkiyahu's reign. It is possible that this prophecy was chosen to open the book because it was such a  pivotal one, | + | <point><b>Chronology of Sefer Yeshayahu</b> – The book is achronological, as Chapter 6 is dated to the year in which Uziyahu died, while the first chapter speaks of the opening year of Chizkiyahu's reign. It is possible that this prophecy was chosen to open the book because it was such a  pivotal one, leading to a reformation throughout the nation.</point> |
<point><b>Chizkiyahu's time period</b> – Chizkiyahu inherited a kingdom that was mired in the idolatry introduced by Achaz, and physically devastated by the wars fought in his reign. According to Divrei HaYamim, however, already in the first year of his rule, the righteous Chizkiyahu tried to reverse the religious trend,  re-opening the doors of the Mikdash closed by his father and cleansing Yehuda of its idolatry. The verses do not share what prompted him to veer from his father's practices, but this approach assumes that it was Yeshayahu's rebuke of Chapter 1.</point> | <point><b>Chizkiyahu's time period</b> – Chizkiyahu inherited a kingdom that was mired in the idolatry introduced by Achaz, and physically devastated by the wars fought in his reign. According to Divrei HaYamim, however, already in the first year of his rule, the righteous Chizkiyahu tried to reverse the religious trend,  re-opening the doors of the Mikdash closed by his father and cleansing Yehuda of its idolatry. The verses do not share what prompted him to veer from his father's practices, but this approach assumes that it was Yeshayahu's rebuke of Chapter 1.</point> | ||
<point><b>Description of sins</b><ul> | <point><b>Description of sins</b><ul> | ||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
<point><b>Chizkiyahu's time period</b> – Chizkiyahu was a righteous leader who cleansed Yehuda of the idolatry introduced by his father. The era, however, was one of political turmoil. In the sixth year of his reign, the northern kingdom was exiled by Assyria, and in the fourteenth year, Yehuda itself was attacked and all its fortified cities, with the exception of Yerushalayim, were captured.</point> | <point><b>Chizkiyahu's time period</b> – Chizkiyahu was a righteous leader who cleansed Yehuda of the idolatry introduced by his father. The era, however, was one of political turmoil. In the sixth year of his reign, the northern kingdom was exiled by Assyria, and in the fourteenth year, Yehuda itself was attacked and all its fortified cities, with the exception of Yerushalayim, were captured.</point> | ||
<point><b>Description of sin</b> – Considering that Chizkiyahu was a righteous king, this position must explain how the sins described by Yeshayahu fit his era. R"Y Kara apparently assumes<fn>He does not address the question explicitly.</fn> that though Chizkiyahu himself was righteous, his generation did not follow his lead, but rather continued in the idolatrous and corrupt ways set forth by Achaz.</point> | <point><b>Description of sin</b> – Considering that Chizkiyahu was a righteous king, this position must explain how the sins described by Yeshayahu fit his era. R"Y Kara apparently assumes<fn>He does not address the question explicitly.</fn> that though Chizkiyahu himself was righteous, his generation did not follow his lead, but rather continued in the idolatrous and corrupt ways set forth by Achaz.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>לָמָּה לִּי רֹב זִבְחֵיכֶם</b> – These verses attest to the fact that Chizkiyahu did manage to bring the people back to sacrificial worship of Hashem; however, this approach assumes that he did not lead them to simultaneously abandon their worship of foreign gods.  Thus, Hashem complains: "לֹא אוּכַל אָוֶן וַעֲצָרָה", that He has no desire for sacrifice and festive worship when they are accompanied by "אָוֶן" – idolatry.</point> | + | <point><b>"לָמָּה לִּי רֹב זִבְחֵיכֶם"</b> – These verses attest to the fact that Chizkiyahu did manage to bring the people back to sacrificial worship of Hashem; however, this approach assumes that he did not lead them to simultaneously abandon their worship of foreign gods.  Thus, Hashem complains: "לֹא אוּכַל אָוֶן וַעֲצָרָה", that He has no desire for sacrifice and festive worship when they are accompanied by "אָוֶן" – idolatry.</point> |
− | <point><b>Description of destruction</b><ul> | + | <point><b>Description of destruction</b> – R"Y Kara reads each of the descriptions as referring to the present state of the country in the aftermath of the exile:<br/> |
− | <li><b>"עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה"</b> – R"Y Kara reads "תֻכּוּ" as if it were in the past tense.  Hashem questions Yehuda why they did not learn any lessons from | + | <ul> |
− | <li><b>"אַרְצְכֶם שְׁמָמָה... אַדְמַתְכֶם לְנֶגְדְּכֶם זָרִים אֹכְלִים אֹתָהּ "</b> – R"Y Kara assumes this refers to the present desolation of the land caused by the exile.<fn>He explains "אַדְמַתְכֶם לְנֶגְדְּכֶם" to mean that the land, which they see right now, has been eaten by foreigners.</fn> "לְנֶגְדְּכֶם" | + | <li><b>"עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה"</b> – R"Y Kara reads "תֻכּוּ" as if it were in the past tense.  Hashem questions Yehuda why they did not learn any lessons from His smiting and exiling of the ten tribes.</li> |
− | <li><b>"וְנוֹתְרָה בַת צִיּוֹן כְּסֻכָּה בְכָרֶם"</b> – R"Y Kara maintains that "וְנוֹתְרָה" is past tense<fn>He reads the "vav" of "וְנוֹתְרָה" not as a vav conversive (vav consecutive), according to which the verb would be in the future tense, but rather as a conjunctive, allowing him to translate the pharse "and Zion remained..."  However, the expected form for the conjunctive would have been "ובת ציון נותרה..."</fn> and Yeshayahu is pointing out that after the exile, Yehuda and Yerushalayim alone remained, like an abandoned hut in an empty vineyard. </li> | + | <li><b>"אַרְצְכֶם שְׁמָמָה... אַדְמַתְכֶם לְנֶגְדְּכֶם זָרִים אֹכְלִים אֹתָהּ "</b> – R"Y Kara assumes this refers to the present desolation of the land caused by the exile.<fn>He explains "אַדְמַתְכֶם לְנֶגְדְּכֶם" to mean that the land, which they see right now, has been eaten by foreigners.</fn> He explains "לְנֶגְדְּכֶם" to mean: "לעיניכם" and that the prophet is saying that the land sitting in front of the people right now, has been eaten by foreigners. Shadal questions why Yeshayahu would refer to the land of the ten tribes as "אַרְצְכֶם" if he is speaking to Yehuda.<fn>He suggests that perhaps once there were no longer two competing kingdoms, the prophet could speak of them as one.</fn></li> |
+ | <li><b>"וְנוֹתְרָה בַת צִיּוֹן כְּסֻכָּה בְכָרֶם"</b> – R"Y Kara maintains that "וְנוֹתְרָה" is a past tense verb<fn>He reads the "vav" of "וְנוֹתְרָה" not as a vav conversive (vav consecutive), according to which the verb would be in the future tense, but rather as a conjunctive, allowing him to translate the pharse "and Zion remained..."  However, the expected form for the conjunctive would have been "ובת ציון נותרה..."</fn> and that Yeshayahu is pointing out that after the exile, Yehuda and Yerushalayim alone remained, like an abandoned hut in an empty vineyard. </li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>No mention of ten tribes</b> – Shadal questions this approach, stating that if the chapter was really referring to the exile, such a pivotal event would have been mentioned explicitly by the prophet and not only alluded to.</point> | <point><b>No mention of ten tribes</b> – Shadal questions this approach, stating that if the chapter was really referring to the exile, such a pivotal event would have been mentioned explicitly by the prophet and not only alluded to.</point> |
Version as of 12:06, 22 May 2018
Historical Backdrop of Yeshayahu 1
Exegetical Approaches
During Uziyahu's Reign
The prophecy was relayed during the reign of Uziyahu and relates to the sins of his era. Yeshayahu warned the people of the future devastation slated to befall their land if they did not change their ways.
- Spiritual status – Melakhim II 15:3-4 shares that Uziyahu "did as was right in the eyes of Hashem," excepting the continued use of private altars. Divrei HaYamim also shares that at the end of his life, he became arrogant and thought to usurp the position of the high priest, attempting to bring an incense offering. [Despite the problematic nature of this episode,3 however, this was not an idolatrous act.]
- Political status – Uziyahu's reign was marked by prosperity, military conquests, and expansion of the kingdom. He further engaged in agricultural and building projects, fortifying the country. The text shares that: "וַיֵּצֵא שְׁמוֹ עַד לְמֵרָחוֹק כִּי הִפְלִיא לְהֵעָזֵר עַד כִּי חָזָק".
- "יָדַע שׁוֹר קֹנֵהוּ ... יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא יָדַע... עָזְבוּ אֶת י"י" – Though these verses speak of "not recognizing and leaving God", they need not connote that the nation worshiped idolatry4 and might simply refer to their no longer obeying Hashem's laws in the interpersonal realm, as described above.5
- "לָמָּה לִּי רֹב זִבְחֵיכֶם" – R"E of Beaugency suggests that the people's sacrifices no longer found favor in God's eyes for two reasons: Throughout most of the year, they were offered on prohibited private altars (במות), rather than in the Mikdash.6 Moreover, even when people brought sacrifices to the Mikdash7 (on Shabbat, new moons, or holidays), they did so with the wrong motives, assuming that they the offerings would atone for all their crimes, despite the fact that they continued to sin.
- "כִּי יֵבֹשׁוּ מֵאֵילִים אֲשֶׁר חֲמַדְתֶּם" – R"E of Beaugency maintains that this refers to the trees under which the people set up altars and Asheirot for idolatry. He might assume that despite Uziyahu's worship of Hashem, the nation continued to worship other gods alongside Him. [It is also possible that the nation turned to idolatry only after Uziyhau's sin and punishment; without the guidance of an upright leader, it was easy to revert to idolatrous ways.]
- "עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה" – Yeshayahu tells the nation that there seems to be no point in continuing to punish them in their land,8 with the hopes of them repenting, since they have been punished in this manner from the time of the Judges, to no effect. Thus, "עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד" does not refer to their being smitten in Uziyahu's era, but throughout the generations.
- Other descriptions of destruction – According to R"E of Beaugency, the rest of the descriptions of destruction and punishment, such as: כׇּל רֹאשׁ לׇחֳלִי ,אַרְצְכֶם שְׁמָמָה, and וְנוֹתְרָה בַת צִיּוֹן כְּסֻכָּה בְכָרֶם, refer to the future, when Assyria was to exile the ten tribes, leaving their land barren, and when Sancheriv was to capture all the fortified cities of Yehuda, leaving Yerushalayim alone unscathed. Yeshayahu is warning the people of what will come if they do not change their ways.
During Achaz's Reign
Yeshayahu's words were directed at Achaz and his generation. He decried their sins, and highlighted the resulting destruction that had been wrought on the land in the hopes of encouraging the people to change their ways
- Spiritual realm – Achaz followed the path of Israelite kings, worshiping idolatry and even passing his son through fire. Divrei HaYAmim further describes how he closed the doors to the Beit HaMikdash, replacing the worship there with the building of altars to foreign gods throughout Yerushalayim.
- Political realm – During his reign, the kingdom was attacked by the combined forces of Aram and Israel, leaving the land devastated. Later, Edomites and Philistine forces also infiltrated, capturing cities and taking Judeans captive.
- "יָדַע שׁוֹר קֹנֵהוּ ... יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא יָדַע... עָזְבוּ אֶת י"י" – This approach would understand these verses to refer to the nation's turning their backs on Hashem in order to worship other gods.
- "כִּי יֵבֹשׁוּ מֵאֵילִים אֲשֶׁר חֲמַדְתֶּם" – These verses also speak of the people's idolatry, which were worshiped under trees and in gardens. Indeed, Melakhim II 16:4 says of Achaz specifically: "וַיְזַבֵּחַ וַיְקַטֵּר בַּבָּמוֹת וְעַל הַגְּבָעוֹת וְתַחַת כׇּל עֵץ רַעֲנָן." Alternatively, one could suggest that they metaphorically speak of relying on foreign powers for aid rather than trusting in Hashem. If, so they refer to Achaz's turning to Assyria for aid against Aram and Israel.10
- Interpersonal sins – Despite the fact that neither Melakhim nor Divrei HaYamim speak of the nation sinning in this area, this position assumes that such crimes were rampant as well. Shadal questions, however, that as Yeshayahu appears to focus more on these sins that those in the religious sphere, these seem to be the more egregious crimes. If so, it is strange that they are not mentioned at all in the other accounts of Achaz' reign. Conversely , given the extent of the idolatry during Achaz reign, if he was Yehsyahu's audience, one would have thought that the more of the rebuke would speak of it explicitly.
- This approach might respond that this occurred only at the end of Achaz' reign and Yeshayahu's prophecy was relayed earlier, when the nation was still engaged in syncretic worship of both Hashem and other gods. [As Melakhim II 16 presents Achaz as telling the priests to sacrifice on the new altar he had modeled after the one in Aram, it confirms that sacrifices were still being brought in the Mikdash during parts of his reign.]
- This altar itself might be the reason that Hashem abhorred the nation's sacrifices. They were not problematic only because they were accompanied by injustice and bloodshed, but also because they were being offered on a foreign altar.
- "עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה" – Yeshayahu asks the people why they would want to suffer more; they have already been plagued by Aram and Israel until almost nothing of the nation was left whole.
- "אַרְצְכֶם שְׁמָמָה עָרֵיכֶם שְׂרֻפוֹת אֵשׁ" – These phrases aptly describe the devastation brought to Yehuda in the aftermath of the wars with Aram, Israel, Amon and the Philistines, when only Yerushlayim. As Chizkiyahu says of the era: וַיְהִי קֶצֶף י"י עַל" יְהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלִָם וַיִּתְּנֵם [לְזַעֲוָה] (לזועה) לְשַׁמָּה וְלִשְׁרֵקָה."
During Chizkiyahu's Reign
Yeshayahu delivered this prophecy during the reign of Chizkiyahu. This approach divides regarding both the specific period referred to and the sins being rebuked:
Before Chizkiyahu's Religious Reform
Yeshayahu rebuked the people soon after Chizkiyahu ascended the throne, and it was these words which sparked the king's religious reform.
- Sins of idolatry – At this early point in Chizkiyahu's reign, the people were still mired in the idolatry introduced by Achaz into Yehudah. Thus, Hashem chastises them for forgetting and leaving Hashem (verses 3-4), and tells then that they will be punished for worshiping foreign gods in their gardens (29-30).
- Interpersonal sins – This approach assumes that interpersonal sins accompanied the people's idolatry and, thus, Yeshayahu rebuked them about this as well.
After Chizkiyahu's Religious Reform
After Chizkiyahu brought the nation back to Hashem, they continued to sin in the interpersonal sphere and it is about this which Yeshayahu prophesied.
- Spiritual state –Chizkiyahu is described as a righteous king who eradicated idolatry from the land. The verses in Melakhim and Divrei HaYamim do not speak about the nation's interpersonal behavior during the era, yet verses in Mikhah might suggest that it was filled with corrupt leaders. Mikhah 3, which can be dated to Chizkiyahu's reign,17 describes leaders "הַמְתַעֲבִים מִשְׁפָּט", who judge via bribery, and who build the city with blood.
- Political state – Chizkiyahu began his reign after the land had been devastated by enemies in the time of his father, and saw further destruction during the invasion of Sancheriv of Assyria. Yerushalayim itself, however, was saved.
- According to Shadal the prophecy is aimed at the actions of one particular individual, Shevna, a corrupt leader who had filled the land with dishonest judges and spread immorality among the rich and elite. This Shevna is explicitly named and rebuked for his deeds in Yeshayahu 22, but not all commentators agree with Shadal that his crime was perversion of justice.
- Hoil Moshe, in contrast, does not specify any one problematic leader and assumes that the prophecy might be speaking about the general corruption rampant in Chizkiyahu's era.
- "וְהֵם פָּשְׁעוּ בִי...עָזְבוּ אֶת י"י " – Shadal claims that these phrases do not refer to forsaking Hashem for other gods, but rather to leaving Hashem's upright ways.18 He points to Yeshayahu 59:13 as another example where the phrase "פָּשֹׁעַ בַּי"י" refers to interpersonal behavior, as the verse continues "דַּבֶּר עֹשֶׁק וְסָרָה".
- "כִּי יֵבֹשׁוּ מֵאֵילִים אֲשֶׁר חֲמַדְתֶּם" (29-31) – According to Shadal, the trees and gardens mentioned are metaphors for Shevna and his compatriots whom the dishonest judges relied upon.19 Yeshayahu foretells that these judges will become ashamed of the "strong trees" that appointed them, and in whose shade they sat as they committed injustices and violence. Hoil Moshe, in contrast, suggests that the verses refer to sexual crimes done under trees.
After the Exile of the Ten Tribes
Yeshayahu rebuked the people for both their sins of idolatry and their crimes against their fellow men, bemoaning that they had learned nothing from the exile of their brothers, the ten tribes.
- "עַל מֶה תֻכּוּ עוֹד תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה" – R"Y Kara reads "תֻכּוּ" as if it were in the past tense. Hashem questions Yehuda why they did not learn any lessons from His smiting and exiling of the ten tribes.
- "אַרְצְכֶם שְׁמָמָה... אַדְמַתְכֶם לְנֶגְדְּכֶם זָרִים אֹכְלִים אֹתָהּ " – R"Y Kara assumes this refers to the present desolation of the land caused by the exile.23 He explains "לְנֶגְדְּכֶם" to mean: "לעיניכם" and that the prophet is saying that the land sitting in front of the people right now, has been eaten by foreigners. Shadal questions why Yeshayahu would refer to the land of the ten tribes as "אַרְצְכֶם" if he is speaking to Yehuda.24
- "וְנוֹתְרָה בַת צִיּוֹן כְּסֻכָּה בְכָרֶם" – R"Y Kara maintains that "וְנוֹתְרָה" is a past tense verb25 and that Yeshayahu is pointing out that after the exile, Yehuda and Yerushalayim alone remained, like an abandoned hut in an empty vineyard.
During Reigns of All Four Kings
Yeshayahu relayed this prophecy multiple times, during the reigns of each of Uziyahu, Yotam, Achaz, and Chizkiyahu, as it pertained to all of them.