Difference between revisions of "Ten Tribes Vs. One Tribe/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<point><b>Evidence that Binyamin was loyal to the Davidic line</b> – The fact that Rechovam gathers "כׇּל בֵּית יְהוּדָה<b> וְאֶת שֵׁבֶט בִּנְיָמִן</b>" 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 mentioned as being grouped with Yehuda (<a href="DivreiHaYamimII15-1-10" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 15:1-10</a>).</point> | <point><b>Evidence that Binyamin was loyal to the Davidic line</b> – The fact that Rechovam gathers "כׇּל בֵּית יְהוּדָה<b> וְאֶת שֵׁבֶט בִּנְיָמִן</b>" 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 mentioned as being grouped with Yehuda (<a href="DivreiHaYamimII15-1-10" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 15:1-10</a>).</point> | ||
<point><b>Status of Yerushalayim and Binyamin's siding with Yehuda</b> – 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.</point> | <point><b>Status of Yerushalayim and Binyamin's siding with Yehuda</b> – 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.</point> | ||
| − | <point><b>"לְמַעַן עַבְדִּי | + | <point><b>"לְמַעַן דָּוִד עַבְדִּי וּלְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלִַם אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרְתִּי"</b> – These sources could suggest that Hashem kept Yehuda "לְמַעַן עַבְדִּי דָוִד" and Binyamin "לְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלִַם".</point> |
<point><b>Why would Binyamin side with Yehuda?</b> From a political perspective, it does not make sense that Binyamin would have wanted to join Yehuda, its rival from the reign of Shaul.<fn>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.</fn>  Moreover, the tribe would appear to have been prime candidates to join a rebellion with Yerovam, a fellow descendant of Rachel, rather than to back Rechovam!  <br/> | <point><b>Why would Binyamin side with Yehuda?</b> From a political perspective, it does not make sense that Binyamin would have wanted to join Yehuda, its rival from the reign of Shaul.<fn>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.</fn>  Moreover, the tribe would appear to have been prime candidates to join a rebellion with Yerovam, a fellow descendant of Rachel, rather than to back Rechovam!  <br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
<point><b>Status of Yerushalayim</b> – 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).</point> | <point><b>Status of Yerushalayim</b> – 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).</point> | ||
<point><b>What if?</b> 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 created new religious centers and traditions likely played a large role in enlarging the rift between North and South.</point> | <point><b>What if?</b> 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 created new religious centers and traditions likely played a large role in enlarging the rift between North and South.</point> | ||
| + | <point><b>"לְמַעַן דָּוִד עַבְדִּי וּלְמַעַן יְרוּשָׁלִַם אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרְתִּי"</b> – According to this approach, Hashem promised to keep Yehuda for David, but ensur that Yerushalyim, too, despite it being partially within the territory of Binyamin which was meant to</point> | ||
<point><b>Status of Shimon</b> – 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, it is almost impossible to understand how logistically they could have possibly backed Yerovam.</point> | <point><b>Status of Shimon</b> – 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, it is almost impossible to understand how logistically they could have possibly backed Yerovam.</point> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Version as of 08:05, 3 July 2017
Ten Tribes Vs. One Tribe
Exegetical Approaches
Binyamin
Achiyah had included the tribe of Binyamin with Yehuda. The other ten tribes sided with Yerovam.
Ten and One – These sources assumes that the one tribe refers to Yehuda and Binyamin together, while the ten tribes include everyone else, excepting the tribe of Levi. Since the Levites had no inheritance they were never counted as one of the twelve.1
Why isn't Binyamin mentioned? These sources explain that since Binyamin was both less important and less numerous than the tribe of Yehuda, it is not mentioned on its own but only included as part of the more glorified Yehuda. In addition, sine Yerushalayim fell within the borders of both tribes, they were considered as one.
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 mentioned as being 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".
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.2 Moreover, the tribe would appear to have been prime candidates to join a rebellion with Yerovam, a fellow descendant of Rachel, rather than to back Rechovam!
- Hoil Moshe suggests that they only sided with Rechovam out of fear.
- Alternatively, it is possible that their allegiance demonstrates that David's attempts at reconciliation with the tribe had in fact succeeded.3
Status of Shimon – According to this position, Shimon sided with Yerovam, despite their being physically located in the south, within the territories of Yehuda.4 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.5
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,6 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.7 The two tribes had worked together to conquer their territories,8 and Shimon inherited cities within the area allotted to Yehuda: "וַיְהִי נַחֲלָתָם בְּתוֹךְ נַחֲלַת בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה" (Yehoshua 19:1-9).9
Change of plan – Achiyah's words were initially fulfilled, but 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 Binyamin, who was on his northern border. 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 created 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 Yehuda for David, but ensur that Yerushalyim, too, despite it being partially within the territory of Binyamin which was meant to
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, it is almost impossible to understand how logistically they could have possibly backed Yerovam.
