Глава 7

1–6. Ezra, his genealogy and characteristics, 7–10. Ezra's arrival in Jerusalem 11–26. Letter of Artaxerxes given to Ezra defining his powers and with commands regarding the Jerusalem temple. 27–28. Concluding remarks. 1Ezra 7:1. After these events, during the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, “After these events” (cf. Gen. 15: 1, 22, etc.) is a common expression among biblical writers, indicating that the following story refers to events later than those described above. The time of these events, however, is not precisely indicated. "In the reign of Artaxerxes". In the original text, the Persian king, during whose reign Ezra left Babylon, is called Artahshashta. I. Flavius ​​(Jude. Ancient. 11 et d.), and after him some old researchers (Michaelis, Fritsche) believed that under Artakhshashta in ch. VII writer Ezres means Xerxes, whose friend, according to Josephus, was Ezra. The newest exegetes, like our glories. and Russian translations usually identify Artakhshashta with Artaxerxes (cf. 1Ezra 4.6). But three Persian kings bore the name of Artaxerxes: Artaxerxes I Longiman (465–424), Artaxerxes II Mnemon (405–358) and Artaxerxes III Ox (358–338). The question arises: under which of the three named kings did Ezra arrive in Jerusalem? Due to the fact that the writer of the book we are considering uses the name of Artaxerxes without any definitions, the question posed is resolved differently. According to the traditional understanding of the book. Ezra, shared by our domestic exegetes, as well as many Western ones, the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem occurred under Artaxerxes I Longimanus around 459 BC. Ganeberg, Kaulen, Mascero, De Solsi believe that Ezra came to Jerusalem under Artaxerxes II Mnemon. Inextricably linked with the issue under consideration is the recently raised question of the chronological relationship between the activities of Ezra and the activities of Nehemiah. Namely: according to 1Ezra 7.8, Ezra arrived in Jerusalem in the 7th year of Artaxerxes. In the 20th year of Artaxerxes (Nehemiah 2.1), Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem, restored the walls of the city, acting together with Ezra, and returned in the 32nd year of the same Artaxerxes to Susa. A little later, Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem for the second time (Nehemiah 13.6). According to the traditional view, all these facts date back to the time of Artaxerxes I Longimanus (465–424), with the mission of Ezra preceding that of Nehemiah. At present, however, this opinion is strongly doubted, and many researchers propose a different chronological order of the facts noted above. Thus, according to Goanaker, the first arrival of Nehemiah and the construction of the walls of Jerusalem falls on the 20th year of Artaxerxes I Longiman (445 BC), while the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem took place after this, precisely in the 7th year of Artaxerxes II Mnemon (398). According to Bellange, Lagrange, and Imbert, Nehemiah's first visit to Jerusalem, which occurred before the arrival of Ezra, took place in the reign of Artaxerxes III, and the arrival of Ezra occurred in the 7th year of Artaxerxes III. The evidence from the sources seems to favor a more traditional view of the course of events and the recognition, first of all, that Ezra's activities preceded Nehemiah's arrival in Jerusalem (and not vice versa). So, 1) in the story of the writers of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah, presented, apparently, in chronological order, first speaks of Ezra (chap. VII-X), and then of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 1.1). 2) Ezra upon his arrival in Palestine, as can be seen from ch. VII-X, did not find the governor of Judea here. This cannot be explained either by the fact that Ezra arrived during Nehemiah's journey to the court of the Persian king, since this journey falls on 20-32. Artaxerxes, and Ezra arrived in the 7th year, nor by the fact that Ezra arrived after the end of Nehemiah’s secondary governorship, since the persons who arrived with Ezra in Chapter VII could not then have been in Jerusalem already under Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2.1). Due to these considerations, the lack of mention in Ezra VII-X about the governor of the Persian king in Judea is most naturally understood in the sense that Ezra arrived earlier than Nehemiah. 3) The traditional opinion about Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem before Nehemiah can be supported by the honorable position that Ezra occupied already during the first governorship of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2.1). This position, it is most natural to think, was created by the activity that is described in Ezra VII-X, and which, thus, falls to the time before the arrival of Nehemiah. 4) As an objection to the traditional opinion about the chronological sequence of the mission of Ezra and Nehemiah, Guanaquer puts forward the fact that Jerusalem at the time of Ezra appears (Ezra VII-X) to be organized and inhabited. Guanaquer believes that the city was brought into such a state, as can be seen from the source (Nehemiah 3–4), only by Nehemiah, whose activity, therefore, preceded the arrival of Ezra. But this consideration cannot be recognized as having special force. In Ezra VII -X there is no mention of the disorganization of Jerusalem, but this does not mean that Jerusalem was already completely arranged. The expression 1Ezra 9.9 (“and they gave us a fence in Judah and Jerusalem”) does not indicate the existence of Jerusalem walls. 5) In 1Ezra 4.7–23 it is reported that Persian officials, together with representatives of some tribes, complained to Artaxerxes about the construction of the walls of Jerusalem by the Jews. From the expression 1Ezra 4.12 “the Jews who went out from you”, it should be concluded that the complaint refers to immigrants who arrived during the reign of Artaxerxes. But from sources it is known that under Artaxerxes only one party of immigrants returned - precisely the one with which Ezra came (1Ezra 7:1-8). Consequently, the attempt to restore the walls of Jerusalem, as mentioned in the complaint, belongs specifically to Ezra. This attempt failed, since the construction of the walls was stopped “by a strong armed hand” (1Ezra 4.23). Nehemiah 1.2–4 must be compared with this evidence. Here it is reported that Hananiah brought news to Nehemiah about the disaster and humiliation of the Jews and that the wall of Jerusalem was destroyed and its gates were burned with fire. This news prompted Nehemiah to intercede to be sent to Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2). From a comparison of 1Ezra 4.7–23 and Nehemiah 1.1, it therefore follows that Ezra arrived in Jerusalem earlier than Nehemiah. The time of Ezra's arrival, according to the traditional view of the course of events, was the reign of Artaxerxes I Longiman (465–424). This is evident from the fact that the high priest Eliashib, the grandson of Jesus, is named among the contemporaries of Ezra and Nehemiah. Since Jesus served as high priest around 520, there is no reason to push back the time of his grandson’s ministry (and therefore the time of Ezra’s activity) further than 465–424, i.e. beyond the reign of Artaxerxes I. Mention in the book. Ezra named after Artaxerxes without any immediate definition is also more understandable if we mean Artaxerxes I. The writer, who knows several kings of this name, could not help but indicate more clearly which king he is talking about. Ezra's name, as explained by Origen, means βοηθός, according to Jerome adjutor, "helper". Ezra's genealogy purports to prove that he is descended from Aaron. A comparison with 1 Chronicles 6.2–14, which lists the descendants of Aaron, shows that in the genealogy of 1 Ezra 7.1–5 some ancestors are omitted, perhaps due to a copyist error. Ezra is called the son of Seraiah. But between Ezra and Seraiah lies a period of about 130 years, since Seraiah, according to 1 Chronicles 6.14, was the father of the high priest Jozedek, who was taken into captivity, and, according to 2 Kings 25.18–21, was killed in Riblah at the command of Nebuchadnezzar. Therefore Seraiah was obviously not Ezra's father and thus Ezra's immediate ancestors are omitted, perhaps because they were not high priests. 1Ezra7:6. this Ezra came out from Babylon. He was a scribe, versed in the Law of Moses, which the Lord God of Israel gave. And the king gave him everything according to his desire, since the hand of the Lord his God was over him. “He was a scribe, versed (sopher mahir) in the law of Moses.” In the oldest biblical books, the word scribe (sopher) means scribe and is used as a title for a government position (cf. 2 Kings 8.17; 2 Kings 12.10). In later writing, sopher means a scientist, a lawyer (cf. Jer 8.8) and is sometimes used as an honorary title (cf. 1 Ezra 7.11). Some exegetes, considering the given honorary title inconvenient in the mouth of Ezra himself, recognize it as a later insertion. But in the use of this title one cannot see “indecent boastfulness” (Shrader, Black) on the part of Ezra, simply because the title is assigned to Ezra in the royal decree and in this place is an excerpt from the decree in his mouth. 1Ezra7:9. For on the first day of the first month was the beginning of the departure from Babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month he came to Jerusalem, since the prosperous hand of his God was upon him, "On the first day of the first month was the beginning of the exit". Probably (cf. 1Ezra 8.31) on the first day of the first month the decision to leave took place, and the exit itself followed later. More details about Ezra's journey are given below. 1Ezra7:11. And this is the content of the letter that King Artaxerxes gave to Ezra the priest, the scribe who taught the words of the commandments of the Lord and His laws in Israel: Art. 11 is the inscription contained below, given in Art. 12–26 in Chaldean, a decree of Artaxerxes defining the powers of Ezra. The decree 1) gives permission to the Jews who remained in Babylon to go with Ezra to Jerusalem; 2) the powers of Ezra are determined and 3) the royal donations for the church are listed. Negative criticism tends to consider the decree unreliable and sees in it a document invented by the writer of the book himself. The authenticity of the decree is contradicted by its general content, which testifies to Artaxerxes’ incredibly merciful attitude towards the Jews, as well as individual expressions that reveal Artaxerxes’ unlikely acquaintance with the Jewish religion and worship. But Artaxerxes’ merciful attitude towards the Jews does not contradict the policy of the Persian kings, as was noted above regarding the decrees of Cyrus and Darius. 1Ezra7:12. Artaxerxes, king of kings, Ezra the priest, perfect teacher of the law of the God of heaven, and so on. The epithet "king of kings" is very often used by the Persian kings in their inscriptions. In the Bible, it is adopted by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 2.37; Ezek 26.7). The king's letter also appends a number of epithets to the name of Ezra. According to Russian in the text Ezra is called “the perfect teacher of the law of the God of heaven,” in the Vulgate he is called the most learned (Esdrae doctissimo). But the meaning of the hald standing here. gemir (Russian translation: “perfect”) is not entirely clear. Artaxerxes' too close acquaintance with Judaism, found in the decree, which confuses researchers, can very simply be explained either by the consideration (Hertzfeld, Rosenzweig, Bertholet) that the decree was drawn up by Ezra himself and Artaxerxes was just signed, or by the fact (Köhler) that the writer sets out the contents of the decree from memory and conveys its contents in his own language. 1Ezra7:14. Since you are sent by the king and his seven counselors to survey Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of your God which is in your hand, The seven advisers of the Persian king are mentioned in Esther 1.14. “According to the law of your God, which is in your hand.” In the above expression there is no reason to see an indication of any special list of the law that was in the hands of Ezra and brought by him to Jerusalem. According to biblical usage (Numbers 31.4; 1 Samuel 14.34), the expression is general in nature and indicates the law in general. 1Ezra7:16. and all the silver and gold that you collect in the whole region of Babylon, together with the free will of the people and the priests, which they will give for the house of their God, which is in Jerusalem; 1Ezra7:17. Therefore, immediately buy with this money oxen, rams, lambs, and their grain offerings and drink offerings, and offer them on the altar of the house of your God in Jerusalem. We are talking about emergency victims, whereas in Art. 21–23 refers to ordinary sacrifices. 1Ezra 7:22. silver up to a hundred talents, and wheat up to a hundred cows, and wine up to a hundred baht, and oil up to a hundred baht, and salt without indicating the quantity. “One hundred talents of silver” - the maximum amount that Artaxers orders to give for the needs of the church - with our money is about 360 thousand rubles. This amount, which, as can be seen from the context, was allocated for the actual purchase of sacrificial animals for public worship, seems too significant and does not correspond to the needs of the church. Köhler therefore considers the number 100 in the place under consideration to have erroneously arisen from the number 10. However, in view of the wealth of the treasury of the Persian kings, one can hardly see anything incredible in the indicated figure. Moreover, the figure is indicated as the maximum. “Wheat up to a hundred cows and wine up to a hundred baht.” Kor, a measure of free-flowing bodies, mentioned in 1 Kings 5.11; Eze 45.14; one hundred cows equal 660 fours; One hundred baht of wine is 3637 liters. 1Ezra 7:23. Everything that is commanded by the God of heaven must be done with diligence for the house of the God of heaven; [See to it that no one stretches out his hand against the house of the God of heaven,] so that there may not be His wrath against the kingdom, the king and his sons. The decree of Darius Hystaspes commanded that expenses for sacrifices be taken into the account of the income of the Trans-Euphrates region (1Ezra 6.9–10). But, apparently, this command was soon canceled (1Ezra 4.6). Whether Artaxerxes' decree was followed is unknown. From Nehemiah. 10:33–35 it is clear that after 13 l. after Ezra's arrival in Jerusalem, the people themselves made contributions for the needs of the sacrifice. 1Ezra7:25. But you, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God, which is in your hand, appoint rulers and judges, so that they judge all the people beyond the river - all who know the laws of your God, and teach those who do not know. 1Ezra 7:26. Whoever does not fulfill the law of your God and the law of the king, let him be immediately judged, whether to death, or to exile, or to a fine, or to imprisonment. The rulers and judges appointed by Ezra had the right to judge “over all the people beyond the river,” i.e. over the Jewish people living in Palestine and generally on this side of the Euphrates. Judgment and administration were to take place according to the law of God. “And those who do not know, teach them...” - this is probably not about the propaganda of Judaism, but in general about the attitude towards foreigners living among the Jews. The law of God, after the command was given for the king to observe it, became the royal law. Therefore, violators of the law are punished according to the civil code. As can be seen from Art. 26, Ezra and the judges appointed by him were given the right to condemn the guilty to death. The validity of this authority has been questioned by some researchers. But Ezra did not condemn anyone to death, and therefore there would be no motive for the fabrication contained in v. 26 powers, if it had not been mentioned in the decree. You might be interested in: