Melakhim B 21: King Menashe - An Idolatrous Kingdom
SEFER MELAKHIM BET: THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS
By Rav Alex Israel
Shiur #25: Chapter 21 -
King Menashe An Idolatrous Kingdom
In the entire book of Melakhim, the
period of King Menashe and his son Amon is singled out for particular ignominy
and divine denunciation. During these years the country becomes awash with
idolatry and an assortment of deviant religious worship, divination and magic.
This is the religious low point of the First Temple era. The manifestations of
Menashe's idolatry overwhelm in brazenness and scope:
"
altars for
Baal
Ashera
he bowed to all the hosts of the heaven and worshipped them and
he built altars for them in the House of God
in both courts of the House of
God. He passed his son in fire, he practiced soothsaying and divination and
consulted the Ov and spirits
and placed the image of the Ashera in the House
[of God]. (21:3-7)[1]
What stimulated this sudden eruption of
idolatry? Why would the son of a loyal king such as Chizkiyahu turn so radically
to paganism? The answer lies with Menashe's strategic affiliations. Menashe's
long reign coincides with the peak of Assyrian power, wealth and prestige. He
wholly embraced his role as an Assyrian vassal, resulting in an unprecedented
fifty-five years of international calm and domestic prosperity. However, there
was a poisonous spiritual corollary; Israel was incapable of withstanding the
deep cultural implications of the association with Assyria. Biblical
archaeologist W.F. Albright noted:
No other
period of cuneiform records has yielded any remotely comparable mass of tablets
relating to magic and divination, and that the royal Assyrian letters of the
time contain numerable references to astrology and magic. It was practically
impossible for a small vassal state to keep from being flooded with such
idolatrous and superstitious practices which were under royal Assyrian
protection. (The Biblical Period From Abraham to Ezra, p. 79)[2]
The religious reader of Sefer Melakhim
is frequently puzzled. How can a single king sway the entire national religious
orientation? Was state religion so powerful? It is important to understand that
in ancient times, religion and society were far from separate. Religion and
science were synonymous; people explained their world through religion. Religion
permeated all life cycle events, all national ceremony, farming and commerce.
Thus, a national alliance with a superpower, even if motivated by military
protection and openness to its economy and culture, could precipitate a huge
shift in religious orientation.
This may be difficult to appreciate from a
modern perspective, but even in our times we find examples of politics
influencing culture. For instance, an affiliation with NATO frequently indicates
an openness to western norms; during the Cold War, an affiliation with the
Soviet bloc influenced the economy, religion, freedom and culture as much as the
military did. Similarly, Menashe's acceptance of Assyrian governance dictated a
wider cultural transformation that permeated every walk of life.
We should not imagine that Menashe's religious
and political reforms were adopted without opposition. Our chapter informs us
that Menashe put so many innocent people to death that he filled Jerusalem with
blood from end to end (21:16). His victims were probably not only political
opponents, but also religious insurgents who challenged the king's odious
spiritual orientation and fought to uphold the national monotheistic tradition.[3]
In a lengthy exhortation, Sefer Melakhim
delivers a severe indictment of Menashe's practices. The text ominously equates
Menashe to Achav (21:3) and to the Amorites who resided in Canaan before the
arrival of Israel in the land (21:2, 13), predecessors whose sinful record led
to their demise. Repeatedly the Temple is referenced as:
The House of
the God, of which God had said, I will establish My name in Jerusalem
In this house and in Jerusalem I will establish My name forever and I
will not again cause the feet of Israel to wander from the land that I gave to
their fathers if they faithfully observe all I have commanded
These associated references form a foreboding motif,
indicating that abuse of the Temple is a direct displacement of God, a
desecration of His name, and that the corruption of the Temple will invite its
destruction.
Both the prophecies of Yirmiyahu
(15:1-4) and Melakhim (23:26-27, 24:3-4) repeatedly attribute the
destruction of the Temple and the national exile to the pernicious religious
regime of Menashe. Our chapter gives the clearest warning of the impending
Churban:
Thus says the
God of Israel: I am going to bring such a disaster on Jerusalem and Judah that
both ears of everyone who hears it will tremble.[4] I will apply to
Jerusalem the measuring line of Shomron and the weight of the house of Achav.[5]
I will wipe Jerusalem clean as one wipes a dish and turns it upside down. And I
will cast off the remnant of My own people and deliver them into the hands of My
enemies. (21:11-14)
Menashe is so evil that the Mishna (Sanhedrin
10:1) groups him with Yerovam and Achav as the three kings whose actions
precluded them a place in the afterlife. The common factor shared by these
leaders is their advancement of idolatrous practices. Yerovam instituted shrines
outside the Temple in Jerusalem, Achav was the first sovereign to abandon God
worship and adopt Baal as the national deity, and now Menashe has introduced
idolatry to Yehuda in an unprecedented manner. With Menashes lengthy tenure,
these practices have plenty of time to become deeply-rooted cultural realities,
and even after his death the kingdom never recovered from the damage.
DIVREI HA-YAMIM: A DIFFERENT ENDING
Sefer Melakhim presents an uncomplicated biography for Menashe.
However, when we study Divrei Ha-yamim we encounter a surprisingly
different account of Menashe's end:
God spoke to Menashe and his people, but they paid no attention. So God
brought the army commanders of the king of Ashur against them; they took Menashe
prisoner, put a hook in his nose, bound him with bronze shackles and took
him to Bavel. In his distress he sought the favor of the Lord his God and humbled
himself greatly before the God of his ancestors. And when he prayed to Him, God
was moved by his entreaty and listened to his plea; so He brought him back to
Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Then Menashe knew that the Lord is God. Afterward,
he rebuilt the outer wall of the City of David
He got rid of the foreign gods
and removed the image from the House of God
He restored the altar of God and
sacrificed thanks-offerings upon it, and told Judah to serve the God of Israel. (Divrei
Ha-yamim II 33:10-17)
The differences are so radical that they appear
almost unbridgeable. First, Melakhim presents Menashe as
irreparably devoted to idolatry and murder. His evil ways seal the fate of
Jerusalem. In Divrei Ha-yamim, however, Menashe's idolatry is a passing
event; he repents and restores Jerusalem to monotheism. Second, in Melakhim
we hear nothing of Assyrian aggression against Menashe, no mention of Divrei
Ha-yamim's account of the capture, incarceration and return of the
sovereign.
We may suggest that Divrei Ha-yamim's
account is historically accurate,[6] yet Melakhim
chooses to censor Menashe's repentance in favor of the dominant strain in his
life his idolatry. Indeed, while Menashe repented in his later days, the
damage was so extreme, the influx of idolatry into the kingdom so prevalent and
the degenerate public culture so pervasive that despite later attempts at
rehabilitation, it was simply an incurable situation too little too late.
Menashe had contaminated the kingdom irreparably. And so, Melakhim
ignores the episode of Menashe's repentance late in his life, preferring to
present an accurate picture of the king's pernicious historic legacy, even if it
does some minor injustice to his personal biography.
MELAKHIM AND DIVREI HA-YAMIM. DISTINCT AGENDAS
Furthermore, we should recall the central
thesis of Melakhim. It attributes the Temples destruction and the
national exile to the sin of idolatry, targeting specifically the monarchy as
the key culprits. Melakhim is a prophetic work, not a history book that
records each and every detail. As such, Melakhim is uninterested in
transmitting the character of Menashe the worst royal offender in a
sympathetic manner, conveying a balance between his early sins and his later
repentance. Melakhim looks to condemn Menashe's idolatry in the harshest
terms. A focus upon his repentance can only obscure the message, so this detail
is omitted.
The philosophy of Divrei Ha-yamim, on
the other hand, reflects other emphases. Divrei Ha-yamim is a Second
Temple book that revels in repentance.[7] Moreover, it
expresses a particular perspective on divine reward and punishment. Whereas
Melakhim asserts that the Churban is the product of the sins of
Menashe, and even the accumulation of sins since the Exodus[8], Divrei
Ha-yamim contends that no generation is punished for the sins of its
forebears.[9] For Divrei
Ha-yamim, the destruction of the Temple in the reign of Zidkiyahu is
punishment for the sins of Zidkiyahu and his generation exclusively.
In Second Temple times, society felt condemned
by the sins of the past: Our ancestors sinned
and are gone; but we bear the weight of their guilt (Eikha 5:7).
Divrei Ha-yamim champions an ideology that promotes the opportunity for
repentance and repair, while upholding a sense of divine justice that blames no
generation for the sins of the past. As such, Divrei Ha-yamim, in
contrast to Melakhim, reports Menashes sins and his punishment. His
incarceration by the Assyrians is retribution for his idolatry, and his long
reign represents the reward for his repentance. Everything is balanced.[10]
THE EXTREMITY OF GOD'S FORGIVENESS
In the wake of Divrei Ha-yamim, the
Rabbinic tradition presents Menashe as the most extreme exemplification of the
principle that no penitent, however evil, is beyond acceptance and repair. The
Talmud relates that Menashe, after being humiliated and tortured by his Assyrian
captors, turned to God reluctantly, as a desperate last resort:
Rabbi Levi
said: [The Assyrians] filled a copper cauldron and placed [Menashe] in it and
lit a fire under it. When he saw his plight, he called out to every idolatrous
deity. When none assisted him, he said, I remember that my father read me a
verse in the synagogue: When you are in distress, and all these things befall
you in the latter days, you shall return to the Lord your God, and listen to His
voice; He will not fail you nor destroy you... (Devarim 4:30). Now I cry
out to God. If He listens to me, well and good; if not, then all kinds of gods
are alike. The angels barricaded the windows of heaven that the prayer of
Menashe would not ascend to God, and they said: Lord of the world! Are You
willing to give gracious hearing to one who has worshipped idols and set up an
idol in the Temple? If I did not accept the penance of this man, replied God,
I should be closing the door in the face of all repentant sinners. God made a
small opening under the Throne of His Glory, and received the prayer of Menashe
through it. (Talmud Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 10)
And the Amora Rabbi Yochanan is
willing to contest the Mishna above and suggests that Menashe will indeed
receive a place in the world to come as a result of his repentance: Rabbi
Yochanan said: Anyone who said that Menashe has no share in the world to come
weakens the hands of repentant sinners (Sanhedrin
103b).
AMON
Amon continues the line trodden by his father. The
text of Sefer Melakhim records him as walking in all the path
that his father had walked, serving the idols that his father had served
(21:21). Interestingly, Chazal see Amons actions as an intensification
of the wrongdoings of his father:
Menashe placed [the idolatrous image] in the Temple
Amon introduced it into
the Holy of Holies (Sanhedrin 103b).
It seems that Amon imitated his fathers
idolatry but failed to learn from his repentance.[11] To this end he
is assessed more negatively than his father: [Amon] did not submit to God as
his father Menashe had submitted (Divrei Ha-yamim II 33:23).
[1] 23:4-14 gives further details of the wide
range of idolatry and the depth of their dissemination in Jerusalem and its
environs: "houses of the ritual prostitutes
women who wove coverings for the
Ashera
priests from the towns of Yehuda
the altars
from Geva to Beer Sheva
horses that the kings of Yehuda had dedicated to the sun
chariots of the
sun." The book of Tzefania dates to this period as well. See its
apocalyptic warnings in chapter 1 and 3, and the depictions of those who
prostrate on the roofs to the hosts of the heavens
those who enrobe in the
clothing of heathens (1:5-8).
[2] Interestingly,
a Talmudic passage corroborates Albright's sentiment that it was practically
impossible not to be swept up in the idolatrous momentum. Rav Ashi encounters
King Menashe in a
dream. He
asks Menashe: Since you are so wise, why did you worship idols? Menashe
replies: If you were there, you would have caught up the skirt of your robe and
sped after me (Sanhedrin 102b).
[3] Chazal record a tradition that Menashe
murdered the prophet Yeshayahu (Yevamot 49b, Sanhedrin 103b). The
assumption that his murderous policy was directed at his religious opponents is
proposed by Y. Kaufman (History of the Religion of Israel, 8th
edition, vol. 4, 234-235) and also by Daat Mikra and Olam
Ha-Tanakh. Kaufman calls Menashe the
Jezebel of the Southern kingdom due to his ardent idolatry and the murder of
the adherents of God. Prof. Yehuda Elitzur brings archaeological evidence
suggesting that due to the idolatry in the Temple in this era, alternative
monotheistic sacrificial sites were established west of Jerusalem by adherents
of monotheism. See his book of collected essays, Israel and the Bible,
pp. 164-173 and 230-234.
[4]
See Yirmiyahu 19:3, which uses
this phrase. Since the chapter there relates to the Molekh in the Hinnom valley,
the entire prophecy might have drawn strongly on the practices of Menashe.
[5]
The measuring line is a horizontal
level which guides the builder to construct the wall in a perfect horizontal.
The weight is a string attached to a weight which allows the builder to create
a perfect vertical line. Of course, with Shomron destroyed, the measuring line
of Shomron is a metaphor for absolute wreckage. For further uses of this
construction metaphor in the context of the Churban, see Amos
7:8-9 and Eikha 2:8.
[6]
Assyrian records
describe how the Egyptian Pharaoh Nekho was brought to Ashur by Assurbanipal as
a prisoner and then restored to his kingship (ANET, 295). In light of this, the
story of Menashe seems like a reasonable historical possibility. The historical
accuracy of this event is broadly discussed in Jacob Liver's lecture: The
Reign of Menashe
in
Studies in
the Book of Kings - Proceedings from The Bible Study
Circle at the Residence of David Ben-Gurion,
vol.2, B.Z. Luria (ed.) pg. 323-348.
One logical problem raises
with the account in Divrei Ha-yamim
is that if Menashe was indeed captured by the
Assyrians, it is probably due to Assyrian concerns of rebellion or disloyalty.
In that scenario, it is unlikely that he would have been able to build
Jerusalem's wall or to undertake a religious revolution upon his return without
again arousing Assyrian suspicions. Liver suggests that the order be reversed.
The return to God and the construction in Jerusalem pre-dated his incarceration
in Assyria. Menashe had come under the influence of anti-Asyrian opinion which
affected religion and national policy. This policy reversal was precisely the
red flag which attracted Assyrian suspicion and led to his imprisonment.
[7]
This is noted by Y Elitzur in
Studies in the Book of Kings - Proceedings from The Bible Study
Circle at the Residence of David Ben-Gurion, vol.2, B.Z. Luria (ed.) pg.339.
[8]
21:15
[9]
This aligns with the perspective of
Yechezkel: The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon
himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself (Yechezkel
18:20).
[10] See Prof. Sara Japhets Ideology of the
Book of Chronicles, 140-144 [Hebrew].
[11]
Abarbanel. See also L. Ginzburg,
Legends of the Jews, vol. 4, p. 281.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!