Was Ezra a High Priest
2013; Volume: 41; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
0792-3910
Autores Tópico(s)Botanical Research and Chemistry
ResumoThe books of Ezra and Nehemiah detail the return of the Jewish exiles from Babylon. These books feature Ezra the Scribe as a religious leader of the fledging Jewish community in Jerusalem. He is introduced in the Tanakh with the following genealogical lineage: Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, the son of Shallum, the son of Zadok, the son of Ahitub, the son of Amariah, the son of Azariah, the son of Meraioth, the son of Zerahiah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Bukki, the son of Abishua, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the chief priest (1) ... (Ezra 7:1-5). This passage traces Ezra's descent all the way back to Aaron, the first high priest (kohen gadol). Nonetheless, rabbinic tradition teaches that Ezra himself was not a high priest. Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 list all those exiles who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel. Ezra's name is conspicuously absent from this list because he only returned to Jerusalem later, in the seventh year of King Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:7-8), (2) one year after the Holy Temple had been rebuilt. TB Megillah 16b notes Ezra's absence during the early days of the restored Temple and asks why he did not leave Babylon earlier. The Talmud then explains that Ezra did not want to leave Babylon while his teacher, Baruch ben Neriah, was still alive; he therefore had to wait until Baruch's death before leaving for Jerusalem. The Midrash adds the following to this talmudic discussion: The Temple was actually consecrated because Ezra did not arrive at the time, for had Ezra arrived then, Satan would have filed accusations against the Jews, arguing that Ezra would better serve as high priest than Jeshua ben Jehozadak. This is because even though Jeshua ben Jehozadak would have been a high priest son of a high priest, Ezra was more righteous than he (Song of Songs Rabbah 5:2). (3) This discussion clearly establishes the classic rabbinic position that it was not Ezra but his brother's son Jeshua who served as high priest (see I Chron. 5:40, which states that Jehozadak was a son of Seraiah, Ezra's father). This is also implied in the list of high priests in Nehemiah 12:10-11, all of whom were lineal male descendants of Jeshua ben Jehozadak. However, when tracing the transmission of the Masorah (chain of tradition), Maimonides (Rambam) mentions the rabbinical court of Ezra, known as the Men of the Great Assembly, (4) and notes that the last of these sages was Simeon the Just, whom he describes as the high priest some time after Ezra. (5) This seems to imply that Maimonides understood Ezra to have been a high priest. (6) Rabbi Menahem Meiri (1249-c. 1316) echoes the words of Maimonides and adds that Ezra was the first high priest of the Second Temple. (7) Thus, Maimonides and Meiri assume that Ezra had indeed served as high priest. In fact, Rabbi Hayyim Yosef David Azulai (Hida; 1724-1806) relates that he found a manuscript of Maimonides to that effect. In this manuscript, Maimonides observes that he compared his Torah text with an ancient Torah scroll in France written by Ezra the high priest. (8) Azulai infers that Maimonides believed that Ezra was indeed a high priest, in consonance with his opinion above. Elsewhere, Azulai questions the position of Maimonides in light of the aforementioned midrash which states that Jeshua, not Ezra, was the high priest. (9) Rabbi Ya'akov Emden (Yavetz; 1697-1776) writes that Maimonides' source is Tractate Parah (3:5) of the Mishnah, (10) which records all historical instances of preparing a red heifer (parah adumah) for use in purification: Who prepared them? Moses did so first; Ezra, the second; and after Ezra five more were prepared according to Rabbi Meir. The Sages say that seven more were done from Ezra's time onward. Who prepared them? …
Referência(s)