Tanach Thoughts

According to Shmuel 1:10:21 , Shaul's family was part of a clan called Matri (Matrites). Curiously, in aggadic descriptions of Shaul's full genealogy all the way to Binyamin, Matar or Matri or Matari or something similar is nowhere to be found (see here ). Little is otherwise known about this clan. Ze'ev Erlich thought  that the Matrites lived in what is now known as Khirbet Rimnah, as nearby there's a later site called Khirbet al-Matari - evidently preserving the name of the Matrites. Both sites are located in the vicinity of the Gibdeonite cities, and since it's known that Shaul's family came from that region, this suggestion is quite plausible. The name of the forefather of the family, Matar or Matari or Matri, shares the root of MTR (מט"ר), 'rain' (often referring to abundant rain). However, a few days ago I came across another possibility: This article by Norbert Nebes (p. 19, line 3) mentions that in Ethio-Sabaean, a 1st millennium BCE Semiti...

This post title is based on this post title because the subjects are similar. I read a very interesting essay on Shabbat by Yitzchak Avishur . It's titled (in Hebrew) "Literary Inventions and Historiographical Descriptions in Chronicles 1:5 - Which Tiglath Pileser Exiled Be'erah the Reubenite Prince?" As you can already guess from the post title, the answer to the essay's title's question is Tiglat Pileser I , who lived around the year 1100 BCE. Avishur examines the different events described in Chronicles 1:5 and points out that it would be illogical to think that the verse "his son Beerah—whom King Tillegath-pilneser of Assyria exiled—was chieftain of the Reubenites" ( ibid. 6 ) refers to the same event described in the verse "So the God of Israel roused the spirit of King Pul of Assyria—the spirit of King Tillegath-pilneser of Assyria—and he carried them away, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought t...

 Some thoughts on some peculiar name-changes in Shmuel: King Shaul's only surviving son after his fall at the hands of the Plishtim was Yishvi . But upon becoming king of most of the tribes, he's called Ish-Boshet . Not a very honorable name. In Divrei Hayamim we learn that one of his names or maybe his full name was really Eshba'al . Avimelech, son of Gidon, who was also known as Yeruba'al , is called Avimelech ben Yeruboshet . Yehonatan's son Mefiboshet's real name, according to Divrei Hayamim was Merivba'al . We're starting to see a theme here. Most commentators - both ancient and modern - who make note of this, explain it by saying that the author of Shmuel had something against the word "Ba'al", as though it refers to the Canaanite god Ba'al, and he sought to rid Ba'al worship. Bible critics claim this is evidence that Shaul held pagan beliefs and worshiped both Hashem and Ba'al. However, the Tanach is never afraid to point...

 As promised yesterday, a cool story about Michmas: Michmas, as we know, was the place where Yehonatan, son of King Shaul, nearly-single-handedly defeated a legion of Plishti soliders ( Shmuel 1:13:16-14:15 ). Many millennia later, another army found victory there, echoing back to the same tactic victoriously wielded by Yehonatan and his arms-bearer. As recounted by Major Vivian Gilbert in " The Romance of the Last Crusade: with Allenby to Jerusalem ", ch. XIII (pg. 180-186): "The first things we bought after the capture of Jerusalem were Bibles and matches. We had recently received a welcome issue of army cigarettes from the base, but the army service corps forgot to send up matches. We used the Bibles as guidebooks to Palestine, and remarkably fine ones they turned out to be! It was wonderfully interesting to read the history of all the places we were visiting daily, and men in the ranks were as keen as the officers. It was no uncommon sight to come across cockney sol...

  (Image from Shay Charka 's נגיד שבבא בתנ"ך (highly recommended)) Ask just about any bible academic, and they'll tell you that whoever authored Chronicles was basically writing pro-Davidic propaganda. Okay, pro-Davidic-- as opposed to what? Pro-Shaulian, of course. That's right, Am Yisrael's first official king (setting aside whatever halachic status Moshe may have held, and also, l'havdil, setting aside Avimelech, son of Gidon), King Shaul, while mentioned in Chronicles, doesn't get that much limelight, certainly nowhere close to that of David (David's kingdom covers almost all of Chronicles 1, and most of Chronicles 2 is dedicated to his descendants' stories). Bible critics are quick to notice this, and generally deduce that this means that the author of Chronicles was anti-Shaul and pro-Davidic, and did everything in his power to reduce Shaul's role in the history of Am Yisrael. Now me, I believe in our sages' tradition that Chronicles ...

I thought I would do something a bit different this time, and perhaps I'll do this again from time to time, which is give my thoughts on a Tanach-related book I've read. Earlier this week, I finished chipping my way through Shaul and Binyamin by Ben Tzion Luria. I thought it was an interesting book, however, it's got one major downside that I'll address shortly. First of all, the upsides: Luria had a fascinating way of breaking down Tanach verses and reading between the lines. He has many fantastic chiddushim in the book and I think it's well-worth reading, even if one - such as myself - doesn't agree 100% with all of his ideas. One of the things I liked best is right in the first chapter: He explains why logically researchers should accept Chazalic traditions about Tanachic events and uses for evidence the Talmudic traditions of the genealogies of certain famous figures from the time. This was an issue that had bothered me since I read Malchut Beit David by Yaa...