Bible Commentaries

The decision of Darius. - Ezra 6:1-5. At the command of Darius, search wasmade in the archives of the royal treasury; and in the fortress of Achmethain Media, was found the roll in which was recorded the edict published byCyrus, concerning the building of the temple at Jerusalem.

Ezra 6:1

Search was made in the house of the books where also thetreasures were deposited in Babylon. מהחתין, partic. Aphel ofנחת; see Ezra 5:15.

Ezra 6:2-4

“And there was found at Achmetha, in the fortress that is in theland of Media, a roll; and thus was it recorded therein.” In Babylon itselfthe document sought for was not found; though, probably the search theremade, led to the discovery of a statement that documents pertaining to thetime of Cyrus were preserved in the fortress of Achmetha, where therecord in question was subsequently discovered. אחמתא, thecapital of Great Media - τὰ Εκβάτανα , Judith 1:1, 14, or Ἀγβάτανα (Herod. i. 98) - built by Dejokes, was the summer residence of the Persian andParthian kings, and situate in the neighbourhood of the modern Hamadan. Achmetha is probably the Old-Median or Old-Persian pronunciation ofthe name, the letters אחם on Sassanidian coins being explained as denotingthis city (Mordtmann in the Zeitschrift der deutsch morgenl. Gesellschaft,viii. p. 14). The citadel of Ecbatana probably contained also the royal palace and theofficial buildings. For בּגוּהּ is found in some MSS and editionsבּגוּהּ; but Norzi and J. H. Mich. have Pathach under ו as the betterauthorized reading. דּכרונה, stat. emph. of דּכרון,memorandum, ὑπόμνημα , a record of anything memorable. Thecontents of this document follow, Ezra 6:3-5. First, the proclamation of KingCyrus in the first year of his reign: “The house of God at Jerusalem, letthis house be built as a place where sacrifices are offered.” The meaning ofthe words following is doubtful. We translate מסובלין ואשּׁוחי: and let them raise up its foundations, i.e., itsfoundations are to be again raised up, restored. אשּׁין, foundations (Ezra 4:12); מסובלין, part. Poel of סבל, to carry, to raise (notto be raised). סבל often stands for the Hebrew נשׂא, tocarry, to raise up, to erect; compare the Samaritan translation of Genesis 13:10: וסבל את עגין, he lifted up his eyes. סובל אשּׁין analogouswith מוסדי ד קומם, Isaiah 58:12, and signifies to erect buildingsupon the foundations.

(Note: The Vulgate, following a rabbinical explanation, has ponantfundamenta supportantia, which is here unsuitable. The conjecture ofBertheau, who labours, by all sorts of critical combinations of theletters in the words מסובלין ואשּׁוחי, to producethe text תמנים מאה אמין אשוהי, “its foundation length 180 cubits,” isas needless as it is mistaken. The interpretation of the words in thelxx, καὶ ἔθηκεν ἔπαρμα , and Pseudo-Ezra 6, διὰ πυρός ἐνδελεχους , are nothing else than unmeaning suppositions.)

Expositors are divided as to the dimensions of the new temple, “its height60 cubits, and its breadth 60 cubits,” Antiq. xi. 4. 6; while Solomon'stemple was but 30 cubits high, and, without the side-buildings, only 20cubits broad. We nevertheless consider the statements correct, and the textincorrupt, and explain the absence of the measure of length simply by thefact that, as far as length was concerned, the old and new temples were ofequal dimensions. Solomon's temple, measured externally, inclusive of theporch and the additional building at the hinder part, was about 100 cubitslong (see the ground plan in my bibl. Archaeol. Table II. fig. 1). Tocorrespond with this length, the new temple was, according to the desireof Cyrus, to be both higher and broader, viz., 60 cubits high, and as manywide, - measurements which certainly apply to external dimensions. Zerubbabel's temple, concerning the structure of which we have no furtherparticulars, was externally of this height and breadth. This may be inferred from the speech of King Herod in Joseph. Ant. xv. 11. 1, in which this tyrant, who desired to be famous for the magnificenceof his buildings, endeavoured to gain the favour of the people for therebuilding of the temple, which he was contemplating, by the remark thatthe temple built by their forefathers, on their return from the Babyloniancaptivity, was 60 cubits too low, - Solomon's temple having been doublethat height (sc. according to the height given in 2 Chronicles 3:4, 120 cubits) - and from the fact that Herod made his temple 100 or 120 cubits high. Hence the temple of Zerubbabel, measured externally, must have been 60cubits high; and consequently we need not diminish the breadth of 60cubits, also given in this verse, by alterations of the text, because Herod'stemple was likewise of this width, but must understand the givendimensions to relate to external height and breadth. For in Herod's templethe holy places were but 60 cubits high and 20 wide; the holy place, 40cubits long, 20 wide, and 60 high; the holy of holies, 20 cubits long, 20wide, and 60 high. And we may assume that the dimensions ofZerubbabel's temple preserved the same proportions, with perhaps themodification, that the internal height did not amount to 60 cubits, - an upperstorey being placed above the holy place and the holy of holies, as inHerod's temple; which would make the internal height of these placesamount to only about 30 or 40 cubits.

(Note: While we acknowledge it possible that the holy and most holyplaces, measured within, may have been only 40 cubits high, wecannot admit the objection of H. Merz, in Herzog's Realencycl. xv. p. 513, that 20 cubits of internal breadth is an inconceivable proportionto 60 cubits, this being the actual proportion in Herod's temple, asMerz himself states, p. 516, without finding it in this instance”inconceivable.”)

In like manner must the 60 cubits of breadth be so divided, that the 5cubits internal breadth of the side-buildings of Solomon's temple must beenlarged to 10, which, allowing 5 cubits of thickness for the walls, wouldmake the entire building 60 cubits wide (5 + 10 + 5 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 5).

(Note: The conjecture of Merz in his above-cited article, and ofBertheau, that the dimensions of Zerubbabel's temple were doublethose of Solomon's, - viz. the holy and most holy places 40 cubits highand 40 wide, the upper chambers 20 cubits high, the side-chamberseach 10 cubits high, and the whole building 120 cubits long, - must berejected as erroneous, by the consideration that Herod's temple wasonly the length of Solomon's, viz., 100 cubits, of which the holy ofholies took up 20, the holy place 40, the porch 10, the additionalbuilding behind 10, and the four walls 20. For Herod would by nomeans have diminished the length of his building 20, or properly 40cubits. We also see, from the above-named dimensions, that the 60cubits broad cannot be understood of internal breadth.)

The statement in Ezra 6:4, “three layers of great stones, and a layer of newtimber,” is obscure. נדבּך means row, layer, and stands in theTargums for the Hebrew טוּר, “used of a layer of bricks;” seeGesen. Thes. p. 311, and Levy, chald. Wörterbuch, ii. p. 93. גּלל אבן, stone of rolling, one that is rolled and cannot be carried, i.e., agreat building stone. חדת, novus, as an epithet to אע, isremarkable, it being self-evident that new wood is generally used for a newbuilding. The lxx translates εἷς , reading the word חדה (Ezra 6:3). This statement involuntarily recalls the notice, 1 Kings 6:36, thatSolomon built the inner court, ארזים כּרתת וטוּר גזית טוּרי שׁלשׁה; hence Merzexpresses the supposition that “this is certainly a fragment, forming theconclusion of the whole design of the building, which, like that in 1 Kings 6:36, ends with the porch and the walls of the fore-court,” Thus muchonly is certain, that the words are not to be understood, as by Fritzsche on1 Esdr. 6:25, as stating that the temple walls were built of “three layers oflarge stones, upon which was one layer of beams,” and therefore were notmassive; such kind of building never being practised in the East in oldtimes. “And let the expenses be given out of the king's house.” This ismore precisely stated in Ezra 6:8 of the royal revenues on this side the river. נפקא the expense (from נפק, Aphel, to expend),therefore the cost of building.

Ezra 6:5

“And also let the vessels … be restored, and brought again to thetemple at Jerusalem, to their place, and (thou) shalt place them in thehouse of God.” On the matter of this verse, comp. Ezra 1:7 and Ezra 5:14. Thesing. יהך (comp. Ezra 5:5) is distributive: it (each vessel) to its place. ותחת (comp. אחת; Ezra 5:15) cannot, according to thesense, be third pers. fem. (neutr.), but only second pers. imperf. Aphel:thou shalt place. None but Sheshbazzar can be addressed (Ezra 5:15), though heis not named in Ezra 6:3. The historian is evidently not giving the contents ofthe document word for word, but only its essential matter; hence he infersthe address to Sheshbazzar from the answer of the Jewish elders (Ezra 5:15). Perhaps it was also remarked in the document, that Coresh caused thesacred vessels to be delivered to Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:8).

Ezra 6:6-12

Acting upon the discovered edict, Darius warned the governorand royal officials on this side the Euphrates, not to hinder the building ofthe house of God at Jerusalem. On the contrary, they were to promote itby furnishing what was necessary for the work, and paying the expensesof the building out of the royal revenues to the elders of the Jews (Ezra 6:6-8). They were also to provide for the worship of God in this temple suchanimals as the priests should require for sacrifice (Ezra 6:9, Ezra 6:10), under pain ofsevere punishment for transgressing this command as also for any injurydone to the temple (Ezra 6:11, Ezra 6:12). This decree was undoubtedlycommunicated to the governor in the form of a written answer to hisinquiries (Ezra 6:13). Without, however, expressly stating this to be the case,as Ezra 6:1 and Ezra 4:17 would lead us to expect, the historian gives us in Ezra 6:6. the actual contents of the royal edict, and that in the form of a directinjunction to the governor and his associates on this side the river: “NowTatnai, governor, … be ye far from thence.” The suffix וּכנותהון, and their associates, is indeed unsuitable to the form of an address,of which Tatnai and Shethar-Boznai are the subjects; the narrator,however, in using it, had in mind the title or introduction of the royalletter. On this matter, comp. Ezra 5:6. רחק and רחיק, to be farfrom, figuratively to keep from anything, e.g., from good, Psalm 53:2. מן־תּמּה, from thence, from Jerusalem; in other words, trouble yourselvesno longer, as, according to Ezra 5:3, you have done about what is beingdone there.

Ezra 6:7

“Let the work of the house of God alone.” שׁבק with anaccusative, to leave anything, to let it go on without hindrance. “Let thePechah of the Jews (Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel) and the elders of the Jewsbuild this house of God in its place.” The ל to לשׂבי introducesa second subject with special emphasis: And as far as regards the elders ofthe Jews, i.e., the Pechah, and especially the elders.

Ezra 6:8

“And a decree is (hereby) made by me, what ye shall do to theseelders of the Jews, i.e., how you shall behave towards them (עם עבד = עם עשׂה, Genesis 24:12.), to build thishouse, i.e., that this house may be built: namely, (ו expl.) of the royalmoneys, of the custom (מדּה, see remarks on Ezra 4:13) on thisside the river, let expenses (the cost of building) be punctually given tothese men, that there be no hindrance.” לבטּלא דּי־לא, that there be nocessation or leisure from work, i.e., that the work is not to bediscontinued. On the construction of the לא with the followinginfinitive, comp. Daniel 6:9. The Vulgate renders the sense correctly by neimpediatur opus.

Ezra 6:9

“And what is needful, both young bullocks and rams and lambs,for the burnt-offerings of the God of leaven, wheat, salt, wine, and oil,according to the word of the priests at Jerusalem (i.e., as the priests shallrequire for the service of God), let it be given them day by day withoutfail.” מה is joined with the plur. fem. of the partic. חשׁחן, and is defined by the enumeration which follows. משׁח,properly the anointing, then oil as the means of anointing. On להוא and להון, see remarks on Ezra 4:12. שׁלוּ דּי־לא, that there be no failure.

Ezra 6:10

The end the king had in view in all this follows: “That they (thepriests) may offer sacrifices well-pleasing to the God of heaven, and prayfor the life of the king and of his sons.” ניחוחין (comp. Daniel 2:46) are sacrifices agreeable to God, ניחוחין ריח (Leviticus 1:9, Leviticus 1:13, and elsewhere), i.e., sacrifices pleasing to God. Cyrus hadcommanded the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem, because heacknowledged the God of Israel to be the God of heaven, who had givenhim the kingdoms of the earth (Ezra 1:2). Darius was treading in hisfootsteps by also owning the God of the Jews as the God of heaven, anddesiring that the blessing of this God might rest upon himself and hisdynasty. Such an acknowledgment it was possible for the Persian kings tomake without a renunciation of their polytheism. They could honourJahve as a mighty, nay, as the mightiest God of heaven, without beingunfaithful to the gods of their fathers; while the Jews could also, in theinterest of their own welfare, pray and offer sacrifices in the temple of theLord for the life of the king to whom God had caused them to be subject(comp. Jeremiah 29:7). Accordingly we find that in after times sacrifices wereregularly offered for the king on appointed days: comp. 1 Macc. 7:33,12:11; 2 Macc. 3:35, 13:23; Joseph. Antiq. xii. 2. 5, and elsewhere.

Ezra 6:11

To inculcate obedience to his command, Darius threatens topunish its transgression with death: “If any one alters this command, let abeam be torn from his house, and let him be fastened hanging thereon.” Toalter a command means to transgress or abolish it. אע, a piece ofwood, a beam. זקיף, raised on high, is in Syriac the usual word forcrucified, and is to be so understood here. מחא, to strike, with על, strike upon, fasten to, nail to. This kind of capital punishment wascustomary among the Assyrians (Diod. Sic. ii. 1), the ancient Persians, andmany other nations, but seems to have been executed in different mannersamong different people. Among the Assyrians it generally consisted in theimpalement of the delinquent upon a sharp strong wooden post; comp. Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 355, and Nineveh and its Remains, p. 379, with the illustration fig. 58. According to Herod. iii. 159, Dariusimpaled as many as 3000 Babylonians after the capture of their city( ἀνεσκολόπισε ). Crucifixion proper, however, i.e., nailing to a cross, alsooccurred among the Persians; it was, however, practised by nailing thebody of the criminal to a cross after decapitation; see the passages fromHerodotus in Brissonii de regio Persarum princip. l. ii. c. 215. “And let hishouse be made a dunghill.” See remarks on Daniel 2:5 and 2 Kings 10:27.

Ezra 6:12

Finally, Darius adds the threat: “The God who has caused Hisname to dwell there, destroy every king and (every) people that shallstretch forth the hand to alter (this command), to destroy this house ofGod at Jerusalem.” The expression, “the God who has caused His name todwell there,” is indeed specifically Israelitish (comp. Deuteronomy 12:11; Deuteronomy 14:23; Jeremiah 7:12; Nehemiah 1:9), and therefore undoubtedly originated with the Jewishhistorian; but the matter itself, the wish that God Himself would destroyhim who should injure His temple, recalls the close of the inscription ofBisitun, wherein the judgments of Ahuramazda are imprecated upon himwho should dare to injure the image and inscription, and his blessinginvoked upon him who should respect them (Berth.).

The execution of the royal decree, the completion of the building, and thededication of the new temple. - Ezra 6:13 Tatnai and his associate diligentlyexecuted the commands of Darius. “Because Darius the king sent (i.e.,despatched to them the letter, whose contents have just been given, Ezra 6:6),they speedily acted accordingly in the manner stated” (כּנמא).

Ezra 6:14

The elders of the Jews, moreover, built, and they prosperedthrough the prophesying of Haggai and Zechariah, who thereby effectedthe resumption of the work, and promised them success. ב is used of therule by which, or manner in which anything is done. “They built andfinished (the building) according to the commandment of the God of Israel,and according to the command of Cyrus, Darius, and Artachshasta, kingsof Persia.” The naming of Artachshasta presents some difficulty; for sinceit is impossible to conceive that a predecessor of Darius is intended by aname which follows the name of that monarch, none but ArtaxerxesLongimanus can be meant, and he did not reign till long after thecompletion of the temple. Cleric. and J. H. Mich. explain the mention ofhis name by the consideration that Artaxerxes, by his edict (Ezra 7:15, Ezra 7:21),contributed to the maintenance, though not to the building, of the temple.

(Note: “Nam etsiremarks Calovius in J. H. Mich., adnotatt. uber. adh. l., “non ad structuram templi conduxerit proprie edictum Artaxerxis, quae Darii secundo anno incepta et sexto absoluta fuit,Ezra 6:15 ad ornamenta tamen et additamenta eam spectasse dubium non est: quae ab ipso, ceu rege post Cyrum et Darium erga Judaeos Persarum omnium benignissimo, profecta hic celebraturSimilarly but morebriefly explained by Clericus.)

It may in this instance be questionable whether the name ארתחשׁשׁתא wasadded by the author of the Chaldee section, or by Ezra when he introducedthis into his book. We believe the latter to be the correct view, because theChaldee section, to judge by the אמרנא, Ezra 5:4, was composedby one who lived contemporaneously with the building of the temple,while from the date of the completion of the temple to the seventh year ofArtaxerxes fifty-seven years elapsed.

Ezra 6:15

And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar(the twelfth month), which is the sixth year of the reign of King Darius. שׁיציא, according to the Keri שׁיצי, with the א dropped,is the Shaphel of יצא, to bring a thing to an end, to finish it. Theform שׁיציא is not a participle pass. formed from the Shaphel(Gesen.), for this would be משׁיציא, but a Hebraized passiveform of the Shaphel in the meaning of the Targumistic Ishtaphal, likeחיתיוּ, Daniel 3:13, and חיתית, Daniel 6:18, with the activeהיתיו, Daniel 6:17. In the Targums שׁיצי has mostlyan active, and only in a few passages the intransitive meaning, to end, to beat the end; comp. Levy, chald. Wörterbuch, s.v.

(Note: Instead of the “third day,” which the lxx also has, inaccordance with the Hebrew text, 1 Esdr. 7:5 gives the three-and-twentieth day of the month Adar, - a statement which Bertheauarbitrarily insists upon regarding as the original reading, because “theview that the compiler altered the third into the twenty-third day,because it seemed to him more fitting to assume an eight days'celebration of the dedication (comp. 1 Kings 8:60; 2 Chronicles 29:18),and to fill up therewith also the eight last days of the year, is ratherfar-fetched.” Such a view, however, would be entirely consistent withthe whole spirit of 1 Esdras.)

Ezra 6:16-17

The sons of Israel, more exactly the priests and the Levites,and the rest of the sons of the captivity, kept the dedication of this houseof God with joy. חנכּה עבד = the Hebrew חנכּה עשׂה, tocelebrate the dedication (2 Chronicles 7:9). בּחדוה, Hebrewבּשׂמחה; see Nehemiah 8:10. They brought for the dedication ahundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs as burnt-offerings, and twelve he-goats for a sin-offering for all Israel, according tothe number of the tribes of Israel, because the temple was intended for theentire covenant people, whose return to the Lord and to the land of theirfathers, according to the predictions of the prophets, was hoped for(comp. e.g., Ezekiel 37:15., Jeremiah 31:27.), not, as older expositors thought,because certain families of the ten tribes, who had before settled in Judah,were also among those who returned (J. H. Mich. ad h. l.).

Ezra 6:18

At the same time, the priests and Levites were appointed,according to their classes and divisions, to the service of the temple, thatthey might henceforth fulfil their office, each class in its week (2 Chronicles 23:4; 2 Kings 11:9). והקימוּ corresponds with the Hebrewויּעמידוּ, Ezra 3:8, and elsewhere. As Bertheau justlyremarks, “The services of public worship, which after the completion ofthe temple were to be performed by the priests and Levites, according toancient ordinance, are here spoken of.” With these words the Chaldeesection closes.

Celebration of the feast of the passover, and of the feast of unleavenedbread, in the year following the dedication, as an historical testimony tothe fact that the worship of God with its festivals was regularly carried onin the new temple.

Ezra 6:19-20

The feast of the passover, on the fourteenth day of the firstmonth, took place only a few weeks after the dedication of the temple. The reason given in Ezra 6:20 - for the priests and Levites had purifiedthemselves without exception (כּאחד, like Ezra 3:9); they wereall clean, and they killed the passover for all the sons of the captivity (i.e.,the laity who had returned from exile), and for their brethren the priests,and for themselves - has in this connection the meaning: Then thecongregation celebrated the passover, and they were able to keep and toeat the passover, because the priests had purified themselves that theymight be qualified for performing the office incumbent upon them ofsprinkling the blood; and the Levites were also clean, that they might beable to kill the lambs for the whole congregation (comp. the remarks on 2 Chronicles 30:17, etc., and 2 Chronicles 35:11, 2 Chronicles 35:14). From the days of Josiah, it seems tohave been customary for the Levites to take the place of the heads offamilies (Exodus 12:6, etc.) in slaughtering the passover lambs for the wholecommunity, both priesthood and laity: for the laity, that no person whowas unclean might kill the paschal lamb; for the priests, that their laboursmight be lightened, the sprinkling of blood and the offering of sacrificesoccupying them far into the night (2 Chronicles 35:11, 2 Chronicles 35:14-15). And this customwas followed at this time also. The priests are called אחיהם,brethren of the Levites, as in 2 Chronicles 29:34; 2 Chronicles 35:15.

Ezra 6:21

Thus the sons of Israel who had returned from captivity, and allthat had separated themselves unto them from the uncleanness of theheathen of the country to seek Jahve the God of Israel, could eat thepassover. הארץ גּויי = הארץ עמּי, Ezra 10:2, Ezra 10:11, are the heathen races dwelling in Palestine. Theexpression is not essentially different from הארצות עמּי, Ezra 9:1., Ezra 3:3, and is only distinguishable therefrom, inasmuch as thelatter appellation includes not merely the heathen inhabitants of Palestine,but also the heathen of other lands, as the Moabites, Ammonites,Egyptians, etc. (Ezra 9:1.). Those who had separated themselves from theuncleanness of the heathen to them (the Jews) to seek Jahve, are notproselytes from heathenism (Aben Ezra, Rashi, Clericus, and others), butIsraelites, who had till now lived in Palestine, and mingled with theheathen inhabitants of the land. They were descended from those Israelites whom the kings of Assyria andBabylon had not carried away from the realms of Israel and Judah, andwho with respect to religion had combined heathenism and the worship ofJahve (2 Kings 17:32, etc.), and thus defiled themselves with heathenimpurity, but who now, after the erection of the temple, joined themselvesto the new community, for the purpose of worshipping with them theGod of their fathers in His temple, according to the law of Moses. For, asBertheau rightly remarks, “in the days of Ezra the princes of the newcommunity complain that the laity, the priests, and Levites do notseparate from the people of the lands (Ezra 9:1); reference is made to thedangers which threaten the Israelites, because they dwell in the holy landamong the unclean (Ezra 9:10). To separate from the uncleanness of the nationsmeans to renounce intermarriage and other connection with them. Ezra 10:2, Ezra 10:10. They are Israelites who are summoned, Ezra 10:11, to separate from thepeoples of the land; the seed of Israel is, in Nehemiah 9:2, separated from thesons of the stranger, and in Nehemiah 10:29 they who separate from them areevidently Israelites, for, when they bind themselves to walk according tothe law of God, they are said to join their brethren, i.e., their fellow-countrymen.” Hence in this passage also we cannot but regard those whoseparated themselves as Israelites, dissolving their connection with theheathen for the sake of the God of Israel.

Ezra 6:22

Hereupon they kept the feast of unleavened bread for sevendays with joy; for the Lord had made them joyful, and turned to them (i.e.,had made them joyful by turning to them) the heart of the king of Assyria. With regard to the expression, comp. 2 Chronicles 20:27; Nehemiah 12:43. The kingof Assur is the Persian king Darius, who as ruler of the former realm ofAssyria is thus designated. The turning of this king's heart to themconsisted in this, that their hands were strengthened for the work of thehouse of God, i.e., that through the goodwill of the king they were enabledto complete the building of their temple, and to restore the worship of theGod of Israel. On בּ ידיהם חזּק, comp. 1 Samuel 23:19.