YINR 929: Tanach Yomi

Josh Blechner
  • 5.0 (1)
  • Judaism
  • Updated Daily

A short thought for each chapter/perek in Tanach for Tanach yomi/daily Bible study by Josh Blechner

  1. 16h ago

    I Kings 9: Whistling past/present/future the Graveyard

    Chapter 9 is God’s response to Shlomo’s prayer during the dedication ceremony. The structure is similar to the tochacha/rebuke and blessings and curses in Vayikra and Devarim. God begins by accepting Shlomo’s prayer and promising that the Temple will endure if the people follow God. However, if they begin worshiping idols, then the Temple will be destroyed. “And as for this House, (it will be) (it once was) exalted, everyone passing by it shall be appalled and shall whistle. And when they ask, ‘Why did the LORD do thus to the land and to this House?’” (וְהַבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִהְיֶה עֶלְיוֹן כָּל־עֹבֵר עָלָיו יִשֹּׁם וְשָׁרָק וְאָמְרוּ עַל־מֶה עָשָׂה ה׳ כָּכָה לָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת וְלַבַּיִת הַזֶּה) (Verse 8). There is a little ambiguity with the first part of the verse. In context the verse seems to be talking about the destruction of the Temple and the aftermath. However, the Hebrew seems to be in future tense “This house it will be exalted” (וְהַבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִהְיֶה עֶלְיוֹן). Rashi inserts a missing sentence in between the first phrase and the rest of the verse. He interprets the verse as “This house will be exalted (but if you do not follow my ways then this house will be destroyed) and everyone who walks by will be appalled and will whistle....” Metzudat David sees this as a classic Biblical flip tense wherein the tense of the word is actually the opposite of the modern Hebrew. According to him, the verse should read: “This house that was exalted everyone who walks by will be appalled and will whistle…” This mirrors the Targum who adds the words “will be destroyed” to his translation. Ralbag takes a third approach and reads this as a reference to the present holiness of the Temple. “This house that is currently exalted (will be destroyed) and everyone who walks by will whistle.” In context, with verse 7, it would seem out of place for it to be future tense. “Then I will sweep Israel off the land which I gave them; I will reject the House which I have consecrated to My name; and Israel shall become a proverb and a byword among all peoples” (וְהִכְרַתִּי אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵעַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָהֶם וְאֶת־הַבַּיִת אֲשֶׁר הִקְדַּשְׁתִּי לִשְׁמִי אֲשַׁלַּח מֵעַל פָּנָי וְהָיָה יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמָשָׁל וְלִשְׁנִינָה בְּכָל־הָעַמִּים) (verse 7). Also, the parallel verse in II Chronicles 7:21 is written in past tense: “And as for this House, once so exalted, everyone passing by it shall be appalled and say, ‘Why did the LORD do thus to this land and to this House?’” (וְהַבַּיִת הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר הָיָה עֶלְיוֹן לְכָל־עֹבֵר עָלָיו יִשֹּׁם וְאָמַר בַּמֶּה עָשָׂה ה׳ כָּכָה לָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת וְלַבַּיִת הַזֶּה). Given all of this, why does Rashi interpret this as the future tense? Rashi must have looked at the parallel verse in Chronicles and wondered why the verse here is different. If the author meant it to be past tense here, then it should have matched Chronicles. The fact that it does not, may be to send the message that even in the context of this destruction there is still hope for the Temple to still be exalted in the future.

  2. 3d ago

    I Kings 8: Party on Shlomo

    It is party time in Jerusalem. The Temple iscomplete. The Ark and some of the vessels are now in their new (hopefully)permanent home in the Temple. Shlomo composes an epic prayer asking God tolisten to the supplications of the people in the Temple. The people gathertogether in the Temple courtyard and sacrifice so many animals that everyoneloses count. “So Solomon and all Israel with him—a great assemblage, [coming]from Lebo-hamath to the Wadi of Egypt—observed the Feast at that time beforethe LORD our God, seven days and again seven days, fourteen days in all” (verse65).  Why does the verse say they ate anddrank for seven days and yet another seven days? Why not just say fourteendays? The Talmud in Moed Katan 9a explains that these were two distinct sevenday periods. The first was for the dedication of the Temple, and the secondseven was for the Holiday of Sukkot. The reason the two weeks are separate isto teach the principle of not mixing two happy occasions together. For example,one should not schedule a wedding on a holiday. The Talmud posits that perhapsthe fact that Shlomo did not have the dedication ceremony on Sukkot was becausethe Temple was finished earlier, and slowing down the building would be aviolation of the principle that one should not delay in doing mitzvot. In theend, the Talmud concludes that the fact that the verse lists the two seven-dayperiods separately is proof that the issue here is mixing happy occasions. Itis also possible that the celebration was meant to last seven days. Both thePassover and Sukkot holidays are seven days, as was the dedication of theTabernacle. Perhaps the text is explaining that the people were so overjoyedwith the completion of the Temple that they decided to stay an additional sevendays. This structure would mimic the idea of Shmini Atzeret- a holiday that isadded on to Sukkot as a bonus day for celebration. Here, the book of Chroniclesprovides a little more context: “On the twenty-third day of the seventh monthhe dismissed the people to their homes, rejoicing and in good spirits over thegoodness that the LORD had shown to David and Solomon and His people Israel” (IIChronicles 7:10). Radak, Metzudat David, and Malbim all emphasize that theverse deliberately preserves the distinction between the two seven-day periods.The people were not simply celebrating for fourteen consecutive days. Rather,they experienced two different occasions of joy: first the dedication of theTemple and then the festival of Sukkot. Perhaps this is why the Navi resistscombining them into a single number. The completion of the Temple was not meantto replace the existing holidays of the Torah, but to stand alongside them. Thepeople therefore celebrated the new House of God for seven days and thenimmediately turned to celebrate one of God's oldest festivals for anotherseven. In this way, the Temple was woven into the existing fabric of Jewishlife rather than becoming a celebration unto itself

  3. 4d ago

    I Kings 7: 13 going on 7

    In chapter six, the texts states that the building of the temple took seven years. According to chapter 7, Shlomo took 13 years to build his palace. The commentators are almost unanimous explaining that this discrepancy is meant to praise Shlomo. While he took 13 years to build his palace, which is extensively detailed in this chapter, he rushed the building of the Temple to make sure it was completed in a much shorter seven years. Abarbanel is the lone dissenter, but not on the praise part, just that the 13 years encompassed the building of all of Shlomo’s palaces. But why would the text go to such a detail about Shlomo’s house? On its face it may be to show his wealth. Like an HGTV design show, the text goes in meticulous detail about all the extravagant design elements in Shlomo’s palace. However, it is also possible that the text describes this to Shlomo’s detriment. That is, Shlomo only took seven years to build a Temple, but when it came to his own house, he was very meticulous taking 13 years to build it. In the description of his wealth in chapter 5, the text brings up his many stables, and in chapter 7 that he built a whole separate palace for the daughter of Pharaoh. Both hint at the violation of the Torah prohibition for kings not to have too many wives and to many horses. In fact, these will also end up being part of Solomons downfall later on.

  4. 5d ago

    I Kings 6: Illegal Building Permit

    Four hundred and eighty years after the Israelites left Egypt, Shlomo begins to build the Temple. Back in Exodus, God was very clear with Moshe about the plans for the Tabernacle. “and let them make Me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them. Exactly as I show you—the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all its furnishings—so shall you make it” (Exodus 25:8-9) (וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם׃ כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ אֵת תַּבְנִית הַמִּשְׁכָּן וְאֵת תַּבְנִית כָּל כֵּלָיו וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ). Shlomo does not get any similar directive. Why does God not give Shlomo detailed plans like was given to Moshe? Unlike the Mishkan, whose design was dictated in painstaking detail by God, the Temple appears in Kings as a human initiative inspired by divine promise. Why the difference? In the last chapter he told Hiram that his father wanted to build the Temple, but God told David he could not because he was surrounded by war. “But now the LORD my God has given me respite all around; there is no adversary and no mischance. and so I propose to build a house for the name of the LORD my God, as the LORD promised my father David, saying, ‘Your son, whom I will set on your throne in your place, shall build the house for My name’” (5:18-19) (וְעַתָּה הֵנִיחַ ה׳ אֱלֹהַי לִי מִסָּבִיב אֵין שָׂטָן וְאֵין פֶּגַע רָע׃ וְהִנְנִי אֹמֵר לִבְנוֹת בַּיִת לְשֵׁם ה׳ אֱלֹהָי כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר ה׳ אֶל דָּוִד אָבִי לֵאמֹר בִּנְךָ אֲשֶׁר אֶתֵּן תַּחְתֶּיךָ עַל כִּסְאֶךָ הוּא יִבְנֶה הַבַּיִת לִשְׁמִי). Shlomo on his own decides to build the Temple based on what Natan told David back in II Samuel. God does not direct Shlomo to build the Temple, nor does God provide the details. God first appears well into the construction when he tells Shlomo: “’With regard to this House you are building—if you follow My laws and observe My rules and faithfully keep My commandments, I will fulfill for you the promise that I gave to your father David. I will dwell among the children of Israel, and I will never forsake My people Israel.” (verses 12-13) (הַבַּיִת הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה בֹנֶה אִם־תֵּלֵךְ בְּחֻקֹּתַי וְאֶת־מִשְׁפָּטַי תַּעֲשֶׂה וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת־כָּל־מִצְוֺתַי לָלֶכֶת בָּהֶם וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת־דְּבָרִי אִתָּךְ אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְתִּי אֶל־דָּוִד אָבִיךָ׃ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלֹא אֶעֱזֹב אֶת־עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל). God uses the same language from Exodus- “I will dwell amongst them,” but this time the promise only happens after the building is substantially completed. The difference could be how God sees the nation each time. In the wilderness, the people had been freed from slavery and they had just worshipped the Golden Calf. The young nation was in no position to do anything on their own. God needed to hand hold at the time. God showed the people exactly what type of Tabernacle God wanted. This was also a way to avoid having the people create another idol. They had to know this was from God. During the time of Shlomo, the people were more established. God wanted the Temple to come organically from the people. This includes the design in addition to the desire. Shlomo on his own came to the conclusion that it was time to build the Temple his father could not build, and he set about putting all the effort into doing so. Once God saw that, then God was able to make the same promise he made to the people back in wilderness 478 years before.

  5. 6d ago

    I Kings 5: Smarter than the Average Bear

    He was the wisest of all men: [wiser] thanEthan the Ezrahite, and Heman, Chalkol, and Darda the sons of Mahol. His famespread among all the surrounding nations” (verse 11) (וַיֶּחְכַּםמִכָּל־הָאָדָם מֵאֵיתָן הָאֶזְרָחִי וְהֵימָן וְכַלְכֹּל וְדַרְדַּע בְּנֵימָחוֹל וַיְהִי שְׁמוֹ בְּכָל־הַגּוֹיִם סָבִיב). Chapter 5 continues thediscussion of Shlomo’s wealth and his wisdom. Verse 11 claims that his wisdomwas greater than four individuals. Who were these four individuals? Rashipoints to a verse in I Chronicles 2:6 to show that these were relatives of Shlomowho were descendants of Yehudah. “The sons of Zerah: Zimri, Ethan, Heman,Chalkol, and Dara, five in all” (וּבְנֵי זֶרַח זִמְרִי וְאֵיתָן וְהֵימָןוְכַלְכֹּל וְדָרַע כֻּלָּם חֲמִשָּׁה) (I Chronicles 2:6). These names alsoappear as expert singers from the tribe of Levi later in Chronicles. “Thosewere the appointed men; and their sons were: the Kohathites: Heman the singer,son of Joel son of Samuel…” (וְאֵלֶּה הָעֹמְדִים וּבְנֵיהֶם מִבְּנֵיהַקְּהָתִי הֵימָן הַמְשׁוֹרֵר בֶּן־יוֹאֵל בֶּן־שְׁמוּאֵל) and “On the leftwere their kinsmen: the sons of Merari: Ethan son of Kishi son of Abdi son ofMalluch” (וּמִשְּׂמֹאלָם אֲחֵיהֶם בְּנֵי מְרָרִי אֵיתָן בֶּן־קִישִׁיבֶּן־עַבְדִּי בֶּן־מַלּוּךְ) (I Chronicles 6:18 and 29). Some of the namesappear in the musical directions in Psalms: “A song. A psalm of the Korahites.For the leader; on maḥalath leannoth. A maskil of Heman the Ezrahite” (שִׁירמִזְמוֹר לִבְנֵי־קֹרַח לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל־מָחֲלַת לְעַנּוֹת מַשְׂכִּיל לְהֵימָןהָאֶזְרָחִי) (Psalm 88) and “A maskil of Ethan the Ezrahite” (מַשְׂכִּיללְאֵיתָן הָאֶזְרָחִי) (Psalm 89). That would imply that these individualswere expert musicians and lyricists, but verse 11 compares the wisdom of Shlomoto these individuals, so it would seem like an odd comparison if it were theseindividuals. The midrash explains that each of these names refers to someone inTanach. Man is Adam, Ethan is Avraham, Heman is Moshe, Chalkol is Yosef, Dardais the generation of the wilderness. The idea is that Shlomo was greater inwisdom than all of these scions of Israelite history. Perhaps the text does notlist these individuals by name so as not to embarrass them. Of course, thatbegs the question why list them at all. If Solomon’s wisdom is meant to beportrayed as the gold standard in the world, it would also be odd to only listIsraelites here. Although Solomon predated the great Greek philosophers by 500years, it is possible that these names referenced other great thinkers in theAncient Near East or Mediterranean. Perhaps these were the “fathers” to Plato,Socrates, and Aristotle.

  6. Oct 11

    I Kings 4: How Many Priests Does it Take to Screw in a Lightbulb?

    David was king over Judah, then all of Israel, but it never seemed like he had steady control over the many tribes. Shlomo sets up a sophisticated administrative state with prefects sent out to each of the tribes. The first part of the chapter details Shlomo’s top officials- similar to chapter 8 of II Samuel, but something seems off in the list. “These were his officials: Azariah son of Zadok—the priest Elihoreph and Ahijah sons of Shisha—scribes; Jehoshaphat son of Ahilud—recorder, Benaiah son of Jehoiada—over the army Zadok and Abiathar—priests…” (verses 2-4). Why are Azariah, Zadok, and Abiathar all listed as priests? Didn’t Shlomo send Abiathar home in chapter 2? Rav David Kimchi believes that this is a different Abiathar. Abarbanel explains that both are listed because Abiathar had been the Kohen Gadol. Shlomo deposed him and made Tzadok the Kohen Gadol, but once someone is considered the Kohen Gadol, they still maintain the honor of the office, even if they are not officially in the position anymore. Ralbag adds that Abiathar would fill in for Tzadok when Tzadok was unavailable to work as the Kohen Gadol. Metzudat David explains that when Shlomo elevated Tzadok to be the Kohen Gadol, Azariah took over as the military priest from Tzadok. This is why he is listed in addition to Tzadok and Aviatar. Metzudsat Tzaion’s opinion would be a little sharper if Azariah was the one listed with Benaiah the new chief of the army instead of with the scribes. Malbim explains that Kohen is not necessarily priest but could also just mean a high ranking official. Based on that listing, it is possible that Azariah was some sort of priest scribe, while Zadok was the Kohen Gadol and Abiatar was demoted to military priest.

  7. Oct 9

    I Kings 3: Split Second Decision

    Chapter 3 details the famous story of the two women fighting over a baby. After an introduction highlighting Shlomo’s wisdom, the chapter jumps directly into the story as the ultimate example of Shlomo’s wisdom. Two prostitutes come before Shlomo with a dilemma. One of the women gives the background. The two gave birth around the same time in the same house. One night while they were sleeping, the other woman’s baby died because its mother lied down on it. According to the first women, the second woman then secretly snuck into her room and switch her dead baby with the other woman’s live one. When the fist woman woke up, she at first was startled to see her son dead, but then realized it was not her baby. The first woman asks Shlomo to force the second woman to give her the baby. The second woman protests that the first woman is making up the story. Shlomo immediately asks for a sword. He tells the two women that he will cut the baby in half and give each woman one half of the baby. The second, accused, woman cries out and tells Shlomo to give the baby to the first woman. She would rather the baby live than it be killed. The first woman is fine with neither of them having the child. Shlomo decrees that the baby remain with the second woman. Her compassion for the child reveled that she is the true mother. “When all Israel heard the decision that the king had rendered, they stood in awe of the king; for they saw that he possessed divine wisdom to execute justice” (verse 28). Why does this story send such shockwaves through the land that it is the ultimate sign of Shlomo’s wisdom? The Malbim explains that the people were impressed with how swiftly Shlomo figured out the dilemma. His immediate call for the sword showed that he quickly figured out the problem. Metzudat David explains that the people were impressed by the creative sword test. Radak points to the second part of the verse as the key revelation. The people feared Shlmo’s wisdom because they believed that his judgment was divinely inspired. It is also possible that the people were impressed that Shlomo would give his time to dispense justice in a dispute between two prostitutes. He cared for the result, even for these two women and their bastard child. It is also possible that the people were in awe with how Shlomo did not flinch when he decreed that a child should be cut in half. Shlomo did not deliberate or even ask for advice. This showed that he had complete confidence in his decree and what he thought the result would be.

  8. Oct 8

    I Kings 2: The Godfather

    To the best experience possible reading chapter 2, one needs to play Nino Rota’s famous score for The Godfather in the background. With all the transitions in leadership in Tanach, there are actually only a handful of discussions between successor leaders. Moshe to Joshua is one and David to Shlomo is another. There is no other king to successor speech recorded in Tanach for the rest of the books of kings. We can glean certain aspects of David’s character from his lessons to Shlomo. David’s message to Shlomo comes in two parts. The first is the holy message. David instructs Shlomo to love and follow God, to keep God’s commandments, and to always stay true to God. The second part of David’s message is the human message. This part is the Godfather part where David instructs Shlomo to take care of all the people who have harmed or helped David during his reign. The style of this messaging is the perfect example of David’s life. It encapsulates that two worlds that David lived in and was known by- the world of the book of Psalms and the world of death and destruction. The same man that helped compose one of history’s greatest works of poetry and prayer was also the man who spend most of his life on the run- escaping Shaul, Yoav, Avshalom, Sheba, even Adonijah on his death bed. David’s charge to Shlomo also reveals David’s true feelings and another struggle that he had to deal with during his life. In his lifetime he let Yoav run all over him, on is death bed he could finally charge someone to get rid of the man that helped and undermined him his entire reign. When David fled Jerusalem, Shimi cursed him on the way out. Faced with such humiliation, he urged his followers to be calm. But on his deathbed, he lashed out, and revealed what he wanted to do years before. He instructed Shlomo to keep his promise but set a standard that would be impossible for Shimi to uphold. In fact, the story fast forwards and tells us that Shimi ends up being killed for refusing to follow the strict rules. Shlomo takes these instruction one step further. He also takes out Adonijah his rival brother after Adonijah tricks Batsheva into requesting Avishag as a wife. Shlomo also dealt with competing priestly families and finally completes the curse that God made through Samuel made against the house of Eli the Kohen. Shlomo dismisses Evyatar, Eli’s descendant, from the priesthood, and transfers it over to Tzadok. With all of David’s loose ends tied up nicely, Shlomo can start his reign with a clean slate and in peace.

See All (298)

About

A short thought for each chapter/perek in Tanach for Tanach yomi/daily Bible study by Josh Blechner

Information

  • Creator
    Josh Blechner
  • Years Active
    2025 - 2026
  • Episodes
    298
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © Josh Blechner
  • Show Website
    YINR 929: Tanach Yomi