Our sages teach us that the Second Temple was destroyed due to baseless hatred. From an historical perspective, one can surmise that the first Temple’s destruction was also partially due to this same hatred.
During the First Temple era, the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were divided into two independent kingdoms. Israel was eventually conquered by Assyria with no assistance offered by Judah, and Judah, sitting alone, was conquered by Babylon, during a time in which the Kingdom of Israel had already been destroyed.
At this moment, right before Tisha b’Av and in the run-up to the Israeli election, which has the potential to sow seeds of discord in the nation, or alternatively seeds of unity, let us look back and learn from our forefathers. Let us sketch out a summary of the inter-tribe politics of Am Yisrael, and see what a prophesy of Jeremiah can teach us about today’s times.
Throughout the entire biblical era, the tribes alternated between times of unity and discord. Let’s focus on the process that created the Great Divide: the divide between Judah/Benjamin on the one side and Israel/Joseph on the other.
The seeds of the coalescence of these two camps may be traced to Egypt. Joseph, Grand Vizier of Egypt, threatened to enslave Benjamin based on his false accusation that Benjamin had stolen his goblet. Judah risked his freedom to save Benjamin, and thus an alliance started to form between Judah and Benjamin on the one side, with Joseph on the other.
The tragic episode of the concubine in Gibeah took place generations later, following which the tribes of Israel - with Judah leading the way - nearly slaughtered the entirety of the tribe of Benjamin. Right before Benjamin was annihilated, the tribes expressed regret and eventually anointed Saul, a native of Gibeah in Benjamin, as their king. This coronation expressed a desire to reconstitute national unity and signified the tribes' attempt to sow cooperation in the face of bloodshed.
The Benjamite Saul would go on to try to eliminate his Judean rival David, who refused to fight back, possibly in deference to the traumatic memories of the war in Gibeah. This conscious decision to avoid bloodshed may explain his excellent relationship with Saul’s son Jonathan, forming the basis for a reaffirmation of the old alliance between Judah and Benjamin.
Throughout all this, the tribe of Joseph’s son Efraim, the scion of Egypt’s Grand Vizier, and scion of Joshua, the conqueror of the Land of Israel, looked on in indignation as the Prophet Samuel anointed first a Benjamite and then a Judean as king. Eventually, when the moment was ripe, Jeroboam from Ephraim rebelled against King Rehoboam of Judah, at which time Benjamin decided to stay with Judah. Thus, the People of Israel were divided in two, and so too was the family of the Matriarch Rachel.
The years passed, and each kingdom developed alone, like two estranged brothers living their separate lives. The Kingdom of Israel thrived; it possessed greater dimensions, population, potable water, and arable land, and developed into a regional military and diplomatic force.
The Kingdom of Judah was less successful in raw geopolitical and economic numbers, but still managed to imprint its legacy on world history. Judah produced the world’s greatest prophets, finalized the Bible, and was the seat of the Holy Temple.
In the end, Assyria conquered Israel and scattered it to the four corners of the earth. Miraculously, though, Assyria failed to conquer Judah. From this, one can deduce that if the two kingdoms had remained united, perhaps they would have repelled Assyria together. Later, an even greater power, Babylon, threatened to conquer Judah, which remained alone without hope for aid from the north.
Thus, the partition was a direct factor leading to the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel and also threatened to destroy Judah.
In those tense days, the prophet Jeremiah sat in a Jerusalem under the threat of Babylon’s legions, and prophezied a vision that will connect this entire discussion to our contemporary experiences.
" כֹּה אָמַר ה': קוֹל בְּרָמָה נִשְׁמָע נְהִי בְּכִי תַמְרוּרִים, רָחֵל מְבַכָּה עַל בָּנֶיהָ, מֵאֲנָה לְהִנָּחֵם עַל בָּנֶיהָ כִּי אֵינֶנּוּ. כֹּה אָמַר ה': מִנְעִי קוֹלֵךְ מִבֶּכִי וְעֵינַיִךְ מִדִּמְעָה, כִּי יֵשׁ שָׂכָר לִפְעֻלָּתֵךְ נְאֻם-ה', וְשָׁבוּ מֵאֶרֶץ אוֹיֵב. וְיֵשׁ תִּקְוָה לְאַחֲרִיתֵךְ נְאֻם-ה', וְשָׁבוּ בָנִים לִגְבוּלָם... הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים נְאֻם ה', וְזָרַעְתִּי אֶת בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל ואֶת בֵּית יְהוּדָה..."
(ירמיהו ל"א י"ד-ט"ז; כ"ו)
“Thus said God: A cry is heard in Ramah-wailing, bitter weeping-Rachel weeping (mevacah) for her children. She refuses to be comforted for her children, who are gone. Thus says God: Restrain your voice from weeping, your eyes from shedding tears; for there is reward for your labor-declared God: they shall return from the enemy’s land. And there is hope for your future, declares God: your children shall return to their country…See, a time is coming-declares God-when I will sow the House of Israel and the House of Judah with seed…"
(Jeremiah 31: 14-16; 26)
Most of chapter 31 is about longing for Ephraim, and as such, the fact that Rachel cries out to Ephraim specifically from the town of Ramah changes the meaning of the prophesy. Years after Ephraim’s destruction and on the eve of Benjamin’s exile, Rachel calls to Ephraim to return, and she calls to him from the town of Ramah, which sits in the tribal boundary of Benjamin. This prophesy is not a call from any random biblical heroine, rather it is a particular call of a mother who refuses to be comforted until her actual two children return to her, until Joseph/Ephraim returns to his brother Benjamin in his town of Ramah. It is a pleading from the tribal boundary of Benjamin towards his lost brother Ephraim, “my sons, Ephraim and Benjamin, unite!"
The verse uses two different phrases for two different cries. First, Rachel is heard “wailing, bitter weeping" ("נהי בכי תמרורים") because Ephraim and Benjamin have become estranged. And this wailing is also related to the two tragedies caused by this estrangement. Ephraim has been exiled, and Benjamin is facing exile, and if only they had stayed united, neither Assyria nor Babylon could have easily defeated them.
But then she goes one step forward and weeps again (mevacah "מבכה") to her children. This nearly unique grammatical form of the word is a more active form of the usual word for weeping-bocha בוכה. In this form, the connotation may be that rather than weeping out of sadness, Rachel is imploring and begging her two sons that, “Despite your relationship having known its ups and downs, if my sons are not united, I am not complete, and neither are my sons. Please, I implore you, Ephraim and Benjamin, unite!"
Rachel used Ephraim and Benjamin’s filial relationship in an attempt to unite them. This literary parable is obviously a metaphor for the call for an even greater union. Throughout the entire bible, Ephraim is the metaphorical personification of the Kingdom of Israel. And Benjamin’s union with both the patriarch and the tribe of Judah sets him up to represent the Kingdom of Judah. Given this, we can deduce that Rachel’s cry from Ramah towards Ephraim for her two sons to unite, is in fact metaphorically a piercing call for a reunion between the estranged Kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
Rachel’s labor has a reward: “Your children shall return to their country". Not just half of her children, but rather “the House of Israel and the House of Judah" together.
Rachel’s labor is obviously a prophetic parable. She never literally sat in Ramah and cried out. Given that, we can expand her cry to a call for the unity of the People of Israel in our times.
Eighty years after the establishment of the Davidic dynasty, the nation was divided into the Kingdom of Israel (representing economic development, industry, and international relations), and the Kingdom of Judah (representing tradition and the spirit). Their disunity ultimately was the root of their undoing in their battles with Assyria and Babylon. Given all this, it does not take an avid imagination to extend Rachel’s parable to a call for unity between the contemporary Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, the so-called “State of Tel Aviv" and “State of Jerusalem". For a union between both the geographic but also the opposing social milieus and cultures that divide contemporary Israeli society.
The State of Israel rests on two pillars. “The State of Tel Aviv" is a dynamic, modern society, highly influenced by Western values (among other influences). These values provide much good to the State of Israel. Democracy creates stable governments with peaceful transitions of power and a citizenry that feels a sense of connection to its leadership. Classical liberalism grants civil rights to each person. Individualism pushes each person to maximize his or her potential, which is a powerful force driving society towards economic and technological advancement. These values are an essential factor towards Israel’s status as a wealthy start-up nation, as well as its possession of a modern technological defense establishment, and its diplomatic standing as a legitimate nation state. The State of Tel Aviv answers the question of how we live here, and it is obvious that without the State of Tel Aviv, the State of Israel could not survive for even a single day.
But Iron Dome and Waze are insufficient to ensure the survival of the State of Israel. “The State of Jerusalem" is highly influenced by Jewish values (among other influences). These values provide much good to the State of Israel. Connection to God, to the sublime. Mutual responsibility. Being part of a greater story than ourselves. Amazing commandments such as Shabbat and holidays, which build strong families and communities. The sanctity of the Land of Israel, and Jewish longing towards it throughout the generations. The importance of the Jewish people and the aspiration to be a redemptive light unto the nations. The “State of Jerusalem" answers the question of why we live here. It is obvious that without the State of Jerusalem, we would not have survived as a people in the diaspora, would not have returned to the Land of Israel, and it is doubtful if we would have stayed in the land in the face of the difficulties.
So, if we have established that we could not have survived without both the State of Tel Aviv and the State of Jerusalem, then these two entities do not clash but rather complete each other. Rachel refuses to be comforted as long as we are divided because her two children need each other. In a healthy body, no one asks what is more important, the kidneys or the liver, because it is obvious that they do not compete but rather help complete each other. A body cannot live without all its organs, so it would be folly for any of the body’s organs to compete with or be jealous of the others.
Therefore, it is fruitless to compete against ourselves or for one side to try to defeat or fundamentally change the ethos of the other. We must recognize the unique value that the other side brings to the country and be thankful that the State of Israel contains within it different organs that together can build a strong body. It goes without saying that each side may still learn from and teach the other, but only from a perspective of mutual partnership, rather than from a domineering attempt at altering the other.
We need to change our approach. Unity is not just a necessity but rather it is an ideal! If unity is seen as a tactical alliance, it will eventually dissipate as a marriage in which each spouse selfishly focuses on their own needs. But once we realize that both sides are necessary to the whole, and that both sides bring their own unique essential contribution, our tactical alliance turns into a true marriage.
The tragedy of the first half of 2023 was that we almost repeated our ancient mistakes. Some intellectuals even proposed splitting Israel into the State of Israel and the State of Judah, exactly like in the times of Jeroboam and Rehoboam! It is incumbent upon us to utterly reject all these dangerous ideas at their roots. In the last moment, we were forced into uniting in the face of a common enemy. But Rachel goes a step further and implores us to unite as an ideal, and only thus can we merit “I will sow the House of Israel and the House of Judah with seed".