Sanhedrin 133

Jeremiah's constant clashes with the authorities were because of two issues, one religious and the other political – though the classification of the points of division in these modern terms would have been incomprehensible to his contemporaries: for them everything was religious. The religious clash was because of Jeremiah's insistence that the Bet ha-Mikdash in Jerusalem did not grant an automatic immunity. The political division was no less full of rancour. In Jeremiah's childhood world politics had been dominated by Assyria, a country in the northern part of modern Iraq which boasted (justifiably) the greatest empire the world had known. This empire included, of course, the tiny and politically insignificant kingdom of Judah. Suddenly, when Jeremiah was around 30 years old Assyria was toppled by one of her under-princes, by the king of Babylon – a country in the southern part of modern Iraq. (It was analogous to the United States being unexpectedly conquered 'overnight' by Canada.) To Judah's south was that other great power, Egypt; and it was obvious that Egypt would challenge Babylon for world hegemony. Since Judah lay between these two colossi, she would have to 'take sides'. Jeremiah had been told already in his call (Chapter 1) that Babylon would win this contest and that it was to Babylon that Judah must submit if she wanted to survive. The governing circles in Judah chose a policy of alliance with Egypt in the expectation that their 'big brother' would deal with the Babylonian bully.

The initial clash between Babylon and Egypt had resulted in a stand-off. This was not because the two powers were really evenly balanced – as the Judean government thought – but because in the midst of the battle the crown-prince of Babylon one Neduchadrezzar, had to hurry home because his father had just died. Within three or four years the battle was resumed and Egypt was sent hurtling back within her borders, never to sally forth again. In the winter of 598/7 BCE Nebuchadrezzar lay siege to Jerusalem. During the siege the king of Judah died and was succeeded by his eighteen year-old son, Jehoiachin (or "Conya" as Jeremiah affectionately calls him). Jehoiachin made a deal with Nebuchadrezzar: in exchange for the independence of Judah the young king himself and the members of his government and all the cream of Judean society would go into voluntary exile in Babylon. Nebuchadrezzar clinched the deal and Jehoiachin's uncle was appointed puppet-king in Judah while the young king and a few thousand others went off to Babylon in March 597 BCE. This was a terrible blow to the pro-Egyptian policy. (Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he went into voluntary incarceration for the sake of his country, but he was not released until he was fifty-four years old!) The new king of Judah lost no time in recreating the old policy of reliance on Egypt, and when Zedekiah withheld tribute Nebuchadrezzar descended upon Judah and crushed her (in the summer of 587 BCE). However, the incident that has prompted this long excursus took place about seven years before this.

Since nothing succeeds like visible publicity Jeremiah made himself a yoke which he wore around his neck when appearing in public. (The yoke was a kind of wooden collar that was slipped over the neck of the farm animals and through this yoke were passed the reins which gave the driver control over the animal.) This subtile message was not lost on the public in general.

Thus says God, the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel… I have given all these lands into the hands of my servant Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon… All nations shall serve him and his son and his grandson until the time of his land too arrives… Any nation or kingdom that will not … place its neck in the yoke of the king of Babylon will die by sword, starvation and epidemic… Do not listen to your prophets, magicians, dreamers, cloud-gazers and conjurors who tell you not to serve the king of Babylon. They prophesy falsely… [Jeremiah 27:4-10]

The opposition was not to be outdone. In July of 594 BCE a certain Ĥananyah challenged Jeremiah with his own weapons:

Thus says God, the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel: I break the yoke of the king of Babylon! In two years' time I shall restore to this place … Jekhoniah ben-Jehoiakim king of Judah with all the Judean exiles that went to Babylon. I shall bring them back here, says God, for I shall break the yoke of the king of Babylon [28:2-4].

This was a magnificent piece of demagoguery. It neatly circumvented Jeremiah's strongest card – that his teachings had already begun to be fulfilled with the first deportation – and promised a reversal some time in the future. This incident took place in the concourse of the Bet Mikdash, Ĥananyah's home turf, and Jeremiah knew that if he openly opposed Ĥananyah at that place and at that time he was liable to be lynched! His riposte was brilliant:

And Jeremiah the prophet said, "Amen! May God do what you have just prophesied and restore … the exiles from Babylon to this place" [28:6].

Jeremiah then went on to warn Ĥananyah and his enthusiastic audience that the proof of the pudding was in the eating: while God may well reverse a prophecy of doom (for repentance is always a possibility), He never has reversed a prophecy of good promise. Time would tell which of these two prophets was lying. Note that Jeremiah has no way of disproving Ĥananyah's claim to be a divinely-inspired prophet. Ĥananyah, seeing a possible reversal of his success so far, makes a brilliant move. He snatches the yoke from off Jeremiah's neck and breaks it dramatically, exclaiming, "Thus says God: 'Thus shall I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon!'" The text at this point relates rather laconically that "Jeremiah the prophet went on his way". He had lost to a consummate artiste [28:10-11].

All this had taken place in public. Jeremiah now seeks out Ĥananyah privately and reproves him:

Jeremiah the prophet said to Ĥananyah the prophet, "Listen here, Ĥananyah: God did not send you, and you have promised this people a lie! Therefore, thus says God: 'I hereby send you from off the face of this earth. This very year shall you die, because you have spoken falsely in God's name'." Ĥananyah the prophet died that year in the seventh month [September] [28:15-17].

Jeremiah himself stood trial as a false prophet! We have already had occasion to mention his famous (or infamous – it would have depended on your politics!) polemic in the concourse of the Bet Mikdash in which he condemned the misplaced trust of a significant section of the population in the Bet Mikdash. In our last Shiur we learned that Jeremiah had been preaching his usual message in the Temple precincts, but his "usual" message was not one that the priests could agree with. Socially, Jeremiah taught that if Judean society in general did not start acting with greater moral and ethical identity with God's law it could not survive and the very Temple itself would be destroyed. The priestly caste held that God would never destroy His own house, therefore Judah was inviolate regardless of the behaviour of her citizens. Jeremiah's preaching on the occasion in question must have been similar to his preaching elsewhere.

Do you think you can rob, murder, fornicate, perjure yourselves… and just come and stand before Me in this House which bears My Name, and think that you are saved thereby in order to [continue doing] all these atrocities?! Has this House become then a den for reprobate wretches?… [7:9-10]

But on that occasion Jeremiah's message had been further fortified by "proof". Basically he claimed that his message, that Jerusalem was doomed and that the Bet Mikdash would be destroyed, was not new, and that the people's trust in the Bet Mikdash as some kind of fetish, totem or magic charm was not justified by history.

For go now to My place that used to be in Shilo, where I first caused My Name to reside, and see what I did to it because of the wickedness of my people Israel. Now then, because you have done all these things – says God – and because even though I have spoken to you repeatedly and often but you have not listened, because I have called but you have not responded – therefore I shall do to this House upon which My Name is called and in which you place your trust, this place that I gave you and your ancestors, just as I did to Shilo. And I shall cast you out just as I have already cast out all your brethren, the whole progeny of Ephraim [Jeremiah 7:12-15].

This was strong stuff! Jeremiah was in fact saying that God had already done what he (Jeremiah) threatened: the Tabernacle in Shilo had been razed to the ground by the Philistines in the time of Samuel; but that was some 400 years previously. But less than a century ago God had wiped out the whole sister-kingdom of Israel (Ephraim) and had exiled the "lost ten tribes" from the Land of Israel, never to return.

In chapter 26 we learn of the aftermath of this inflammatory sermon.

The priests and prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah saying all these things in God's House. When Jeremiah had finished saying all that God had commanded him to tell the whole people, the priests, prophets and all the people arrested him saying, 'You must die! How can you prophesy in God's Name that this House shall become like Shilo …?' Thus the whole people ganged up against Jeremiah in God's House [26:7-9].

But, miracle of miracles, salvation was at hand. Some other members of the government (the opposition?) hurried from the royal palace to the Bet Mikdash to defend Jeremiah and save him from a lynching. They managed to prevent the prophet's death by announcing that they – the ministers of the government – constituted a court of law and that Jeremiah must benefit from a just trial. The priests and prophets then formally accused Jeremiah before the court of the capital crime of being a false prophet. There was, they reasoned, no need to bring further evidence, because 'you have heard with your own ears' what he had to say – and what he had to say was palpably false nonsense! Jeremiah responded that he could not be a false prophet since it was God who had sent him 'to prophesy against this House and against this city everything that you have heard' and 'if you kill me you will be bringing [the shedding of] innocent blood upon your consciences'.

Both arguments were, from our point of view, almost meaningless. The prosecution were saying that since Jeremiah had said something that "everyone" knows is axiomatically false, he must be lying, he must be a false prophet. Jeremiah's defence was equally weak: I cannot be a false prophet because it is God who has commissioned me! The situation was saved for Jeremiah by liberal precedent being brought to the attention of the court: about one hundred years ago there was another prophet, Micah [the biblical Micah] who said things similar to what Jeremiah was accused of saying [Micah 3:12]. Had good king Hezekiah and the then people of Judah accused Micah and executed him? Of course they did not, because they had been God-fearing… [Jeremiah 26:7-19]