The Jerusalem Temple in Pesiqta Rabbati: From Creation to Apocalypse

Abstract

This article discusses midrashic interpretations in Pesiqta Rabbati that focus upon the Jerusalem Temple. In the author’s view, the enfolding apocalypse in Pesiqta Rabbati is expressed in a meta-narrative that integrates exegetical units concerning the past and the future of the Jerusalem Temple. The homiletic units suggest a timeline from the time of creation, when God contemplated and planned the Temple, to the end of time. The first human being, Adam, and the patriarchs of Israel each played decisive roles in developing ideas about the Temple, when the site of the Temple is discussed. The choice of Solomon over David as the first Temple builder is addressed and interpreted in ways that state that the Temple is named after David. Pesiqta Rabbati evaluates the construction of the Temple, which involved miracles. Major concerns in Pesiqta Rabbati are the Temple dedications and the festival of Hanukkah.

Since the text of Pesiqta Rabbati is arranged according to the Jewish liturgical year, the homilies also mention the Temple service, the direction of prayer, and other liturgical aspects. However, in the apocalyptic vision of Pesiqta Rabbati, the major focus is on the destruction of the Temple. The well-known legend of the keys that are cast toward heaven by the high priest is integrated into the homiletic corpus of Pesiqta Rabbati as well. God himself elected to burn his Temple and suffers, which expresses the idea of co-suffering with the exiles. A specific group of people, who are faithful to God and lament the destruction, are the Mourners for Zion. Pesiqta Rabbati briefly engages in the attempt by Julian the Apostate to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple (in the fourth century), but the text proposes that God will cleanse Jerusalem of idolatry in the time-to-come. The request to rebuild the Temple, the time of redemption, as well as the roof of the Temple on which the Messiah will appear, and the “Pearly Gate” complete the apocalyptic time-line from the beginning of the Temple to the day of the final judgment.

The Temple in Jerusalem was built pursuant to instructions from God according to the Hebrew Bible. It was the place where worshipers would come to perform sacrifices of animals and submit offerings to God in fulfillment of the Law. For most Jews, it was the only place on earth where sacrifices could be performed. Nevertheless, the prediction that God would invoke judgment against his people, exiling them and destroying their sacred place, is already found in biblical prophecy. These prophetic messages and the destruction of the Solomonic Temple, as well as the Herodian Temple, were all matters for interpretation in rabbinic literature with every work filling in another perceived interpretive gap.

Haggadic literature contains a vast amount of interpretations concerning the Temple, including its conception, construction, and destruction,¹ as well as rabbinic visions of the Temple’s reconstruction at the end of days. In respect to the destruction² and the rebuilding of the Temple, I perceive a development in the rabbinic responses to these events, which vary at different time periods and in different midrashic works.³ Some works, such as Lamentations Rabbah, focus upon the sins of Israel and the ensuing destruction of the Temple,⁴ while other midrashic works focus upon the Temple from its beginning to the end of time,⁵ but they usually do not present a cohering, theologizing perspective of all the critical events concerning the Temple, its creation, destruction, and rebuilding. In this article, I concentrate upon the homiletic work Pesiqta Rabbati which presents a homogenous view in regard to the Jerusalem Temple. Pesiqta Rabbati focuses upon the Temple from its beginning to the end of time.⁶ Pesiqta Rabbati dates to the fifth/sixth century C.E., but it contains much older Tannaitic material from the first century C.E. and even earlier material.⁷ Pesiqta Rabbati combines messianic⁸ and apocalyptic tropes from Jewish, and possibly non-Jewish sources, in a unique manner that is absent from other rabbinic texts from late antiquity, including the almost parallel document, Pesiqta de-Rav Kahana (ca. fifth century C.E.). In my view, Pesiqta Rabbati contains a crystallization of rabbinic concepts that mainly derive from the land of Israel of the first five centuries C.E., while the dates of the redactional stages that led to the composition of the entire work are uncertain. The text of Pesiqta Rabbati is situated at the end of the creation and collection of rabbinic exegetical traditions in the land of Israel, before constant groups of new conquerors made such activities impossible. Subsequently, there may have been additional reasons for the transfer of the exegetical core traditions of Pesiqta Rabbati to the Diaspora.

This article analyzes the interpretations related to the Jerusalem Temple in Pesiqta Rabbati with occasional references to other rabbinic texts,⁹ and consists of the following subparts: 1) Pesiqta Rabbati as an Apocalyptic Text; 2) The Integrative Meta-Narrative of Pesiqta Rabbati: Past and Future of the Temple; 3) Creation and the Temple; 4) The Site of the Temple; 5) The Construction of the Temple; 6) The Temple Dedications; 7) The Temple Service, Prayer Direction, and Liturgical Aspects; 8) The Destruction of the Temple; 9) Julian the Apostate’s Attempt to Rebuild the Jerusalem Temple; 10) The Mourners for Zion, the Request to Rebuild the Temple, and the Time of Redemption; 11) The Roof of the Temple and the “Pearly Gate.”

1. Pesiqta Rabbati as an Apocalyptic Text

The midrashic homiletic work Pesiqta Rabbati offers a combination of rabbinic and non-rabbinic ideas in regard to the Temple. As portrayed in Pesiqta Rabbati, the Jerusalem Temple is at the center of the future consolation and redemption of Israel. The darshan—the homilist, editor, preacher who shaped the work—attempts to seek a rationale for the apparent triumph of the nations that flourish, while Israel is suffering and waiting for its redemption. The darshan not only laments the past, but also provides consolation for the present and hope for the future. Within this rabbinic consolation “theology,” the Temple represents the cornerstone of the future redemption and of the messianic age. The texts in Pesiqta Rabbati attempt to close the gap between the difficult contemporary situation of the darshan and the expected events at the end of days that the faithful followers of God and the Messiah will ultimately face.

Since the destruction and reconstruction of the Temple are intricately related to notions of apocalypticism, I contend, based upon the material presented in this article, that we can identify in haggadic literature several types of apocalyptic representations of the Temple. These representations were shaped by apocalyptic religious beliefs and they interact on different levels. My assumption is that the Temple in the apocalyptic framework may be seen as simultaneously manifest on the interpretive, cultural, and even symbolic level. One of the goals of this article is to explore possible interconnections between the complex, multi-faceted expressions related to the destruction of the Temple as an apocalyptic representation culminating in the belief in its reconstruction and the physical edifice of the Temple prior to its destruction. ¹⁰ First and foremost, the midrashic work Pesiqta Rabbati repeats and expands the existing tropes concerning the mourning over the destruction of the Temple, and it memorializes the Temple while offering consolation to the righteous of Israel. In its plan of consolation, Pesiqta Rabbati maps a coherent vision of post-destruction events and their eschatological relevance by integrating previous texts into its construct of a new viable Temple that is related to the heavenly Temple.

2. The Integrative Meta-Narrative: Past and Future of the Temple

An integrative approach to the topic of the Temple in a rabbinic text requires the application of established critical theories. I wish to utilize the term “meta-narrative” to approach this topic. The objective of the darshan of Pesiqta Rabbati may have been to construct a meta-narrative, since a meta-narrative is a “privileged discourse” intended for a certain group of people.¹¹ A meta-narrative retains the capacity of eventually offering the truth from the midrashic authors’ perspective, for example, the truth about history and Israel’s relationship with God. Generally, the term “meta-narrative” refers to a story or narrative that is presumed to be governed by generalities and represents a final and apodictic truth. It represents a concept of truth which posits that something is known with absolute certainty.

In applying the views of Jean-François Lyotard to rabbinic texts, we may state that the rabbinic texts implicitly express a belief in meta-narratives, whereas post-modern interpreters do not share this belief.¹² The theory of a meta-narrative, as explained by Lyotard, enables us to integrate the messages of different textual units of Pesiqta Rabbati into an overlapping gramma, an overlapping sentence of summation. I view the construct of the meta-narrative as a viable theoretical option in assessing midrashic texts, because it provides a larger framework than the mere analysis of the smaller units that contributed to the process of creating rabbinic works. The metanarrative may also elucidate the forces shaping singular midrashic texts that are found within the multitude of late antique and medieval midrashic works. The Jerusalem Temple is the centerpiece of the meta-narrative in Pesiqta Rabbati; all events are subsumed under the idea that the Temple conforms to a divinely predetermined development, from Creation to the end of time. In Pesiqta Rabbati, the meta-narrative presents as its major theme the transition into the apocalypse, with its destructive forces and the final salvation of the righteous. This meta-narrative is not explicitly set forth in words, but its components may be raised from the propositions in this particular rabbinic text.

In light of the compositional nature of Pesiqta Rabbati, one has to consider that the expectations and expressions concerning the apocalypse that existed in the first and early second century C.E. were articulated in texts that were shared by Jews and Christians.¹³ The apocalyptic vision surrounding the Temple in Pesiqta Rabbati was shaped by a darshan, who conveyed consistent messages of destruction, consolation, redemption, and the end of days. From the darshan’s perspective, these messages were thought to be communicated throughout the history of Israel and these messages could be discovered through scriptural exegesis.

In its engagement with apocalypticism, Pesiqta Rabbati presents a cultural transformation and inversion of themes relating to the Temple, which are inserted into the rabbinic discourse and its “theology.”¹⁴ For example, the authors of Pesiqta Rabbati adapted details concerning the Temple of the past, as found in previous texts, and applied this information to a vision of a future Temple. From the perspective of intertextuality, Pesiqta Rabbati is a response to ideas that had been formulated earlier, whether explicit or implicit. Thus, the text of Pesiqta Rabbati reframes and reformats the hope for a new Temple for its intended audience.

The meta-narrative of Pesiqta Rabbati concerns the display of apocalyptic textual strategies. This meta-narrative is parallel to the ordered literary and homiletic structure found in Pesiqta Rabbati, which follows the progression of the liturgical year from Hanukkah to Simḥ at Torah.¹⁵ The highly unusual aspect of the text presenting eight Hanukkah homilies immediately focuses upon the Temple, its past dedications, and its future restoration. A model of the meta-narrative of Pesiqta Rabbati could yield the following pattern of integrating the Temple, as shown in Figure 1:

Figure 1.

This integrative diagram presents the meta-narrative that the darshan conceivably may have planned and mapped for the document of Pesiqta Rabbati when he collected the textual material. It should be emphasized that the Temple appears in virtually every homily in this text.

3. Creation and the Temple

The apocalyptic character of Pesiqta Rabbati is partially based upon a construct of a religious history of the Temple, from creation to the eschaton. In an early exegetical midrash, it is stated that God created the Temple first, before the universe;¹⁶ this tradition is continued in later midrashic works. Consequently, the rabbinic history of the Jerusalem Temple begins with an haggadah concerning the creation of the universe. “At the beginning of the creation of the world, the Holy One, blessed be He, made as it were a tabernacle in Jerusalem in which He prayed: May my children do my will that I shall not destroy my house and my sanctuary” (Midr. Ps. 76:3). Other sources in the early stratum of Tannaitic, midrashic texts confirm that the Temple was contemplated by God at creation,¹⁷ and that it was designated as the building in which God would dwell.¹⁸ Emphasizing the existence of the Temple in God’s plan for the world during creation is also found in Pesiqta Rabbati. This idea of the eternal nature of the Jerusalem Temple, conceived prior to creation and surviving the end of days, is consistent with the apocalyptic approach to history, which starts with a summary of primordial events¹⁹ as related to a divine plan that is revealed, and which, in the case of midrash, may be discovered through scriptural exegesis.

Pesiq. Rab. 6:13²⁰

Another comment: [all the work] was finished (1 Ki 7:51), “the work” is not written here, but “all the work” that is the work of Creation was finished, [as it says:] for he rested from all His work which God in [His] creating [was] to make (Gen 2:3). It does not say “made,” but to make, that is, an additional work remained to be made. [Only] when Solomon came and built the Temple would the Holy One say: Now the work of creation is finished: all the work … is finished (1 Ki 7:51). Therefore, he was called Solomon, because it was [through the work of his hands] that the Holy One completed the work of the six days of creation.

The above passage demonstrates the religious significance of the Temple and its relationship to God. The Temple fulfills creation and is viewed as the completion of the divine work of creation. Furthermore, it implies that the planners and builders of the Temple, including King David and King Solomon, were involved in co-creation with God. David and his son Solomon fulfilled the divine work begun during the six days of the creation of the world. The relationship between the Temple and divine creation elevates the Temple in the consciousness of the rabbinic commentators; one aspect of its holiness is its relationship to the creation of the entire world. Although the Temple had been planned prior to creation, it was incumbent upon Israel to build the Temple upon entrance to the land (Pesiq. Rab. 12:19–26). After expounding variations on the theme of Amalek’s vicious slaying of the Israelites on their way out of Egypt (Deut 25:18) and the punishment of Agag (1 Sam 15:33), the midrash integrates a lemma from Deut 25:19 into the discussion of the future establishment of the Temple. Upon their entrance into the promised land, Israel was commanded to perform three tasks: to appoint a king, to build a Temple, and to blot out the remembrance of Amalek.

4. The Site of the Temple

The site of the future Temple in the land of Israel in a specific tribal region is described as a deeply disputed issue in midrashic literature; the exegesis of several scriptural lemmata concludes that the future Temple would be erected in the region assigned to the tribe of Judah. This tradition is found in Tannaitic, as well as in exegetical and later midrashim (Sif. Zut. 10:29; Sif. Deut. 352; Midr. Tannaim 33:12).

The site of the Temple, the Temple mount, is deeply engraved into Jewish memory.²¹ The rabbis recognized the immeasurable holiness of this mount. In an extension of the vision of Isaiah (Isa 2:2, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established as the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills), Jerusalem is viewed by a Diaspora Jew of the second century B.C.E. as “situated in the center of the land of Judah on a high and exalted mountain” (Letter of Aristeas, 83). In a baraita, the view of the Temple as the highest place in the land of Israel is connected with Deut 17:8, “Then shall you arise, and get yourself up unto the place which the Lord Your God shall choose,” which shows that the Temple is higher than the rest of the land of Israel, and the land of Israel is higher than all other countries (b. Qidd. 69a). Associated with this description of the Temple and Jerusalem as both holy and topographically high is the idea that the site is also the center of the world and “the navel of the earth.” This concept is found in Philo, who described Jerusalem “as situated in the center of the world” (Legat., 294). Similarly, Josephus states in regard to Judea that “the city of Jerusalem lies at its very center, and for this reason it has sometimes, not inaptly, been called the ‘navel’ of the country” (BJ 3:51–52). This idea is also found in midrashic texts; the lemma “navel of the earth” (Ezek 38:12) serves as the base text for further interpretations that depict a concentric notion of holiness, from the periphery of a circle to its center.

Pesiq. Rab Kah. 26:4 (Mandelbaum ed.)²²

As the navel is set in the middle of a person so is Israel the navel of the world, as it is said: That dwell in the navel of the earth (Ezek 38:12). The Land of Israel is located in the center of the world, Jerusalem in the center of the Land of Israel, the Temple in the center of Jerusalem, the heikhal in the center of the Temple, the ark in the center of the heikhal, and in front of the heikhal is the even shetiyyah [foundation stone] from which the world was started.

The antiquity of this idea is attested by a parallel passage in the apocalyptic text 2 En. 23:45, in which the metaphor “the navel of the earth” is connected with the site of Adam’s creation (“And that Melchizedek will be priest and king in the place of Araunah saying, In the navel of the earth where Adam was created”). These traditions focus upon the centrality of the Temple, as well as Jerusalem; thus, the most important holy site in Judaism is centrally located in a city and at the center of the entire earth. This centrality also pertains to the sacrifices offered at the Temple and the central locus of the presence of God. Furthermore, the Temple site is the location in which several decisive events in history, as recounted in the book of Genesis, occurred (see Gen. Rab. 22:7; Pirqe R. El. 23, 31), thus adding to the theme of centrality. Similar concepts indicate that the Temple was viewed as a “lap” (Pesiq. Rab. 12:22) or the “lap of the world” (Tanḥ. Ki Tetze 10). A passage in the Bavli extends the concept and maintains that the entire world was created from Mount Zion (b. Yoma 54b), the assumed original location of the Temple mount.

Mount Moriah, on which Solomon built “the House of the Lord” (2 Chr 3:1) was identified with a mountain in the land of Moriah, on which Abraham bound Isaac on the altar. The reference to Moriah connects the site of the Temple with the promise given to the patriarch Abraham (Gen 12:1–3). This identification places the unique holiness of Jerusalem and its election as the site of the Temple to a time prior to David’s conquest of the site of the future city of Jerusalem. The inner-biblical interpretation of the aqedah in the late biblical period identified Mount Moriah with the site on which Solomon built the Temple (2 Chr 3:1).

Homiletical midrashic interpretation expands the biblical account in a series of legends, which heighten the dramatic nature of Mount Moriah (ARN a, 33; Midr. Va-Yosha′ 36). In midrash, there are different versions of the aqedah. In one group of midrashic texts, Abraham is the hero (Lev. Rab. 29:8); in the other, it is Isaac, who accepts his fate (Gen. Rab. 56:11).²³ All these midrashic passages reaffirm that critical events transpired on Mount Moriah, which is equated with the site of the Temple.

The patriarchs of Israel are involved in the divine plan to select a Temple site. The connection to Jacob is expressed in a statement that Jacob’s ladder stood at the site of the Temple (Gen. Rab. 69:7), based upon interpretations of the verse, “This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven” (Gen 28:17). Each patriarch is referred to as a friend of God. The site of the future Temple is explained in a midrash as a mountain, a field, a palace, and the place where God revealed himself:²⁴

Pesiq. Rab. 39:4–5

The God of Jacob (Ps 81:2). Why is Jacob mentioned rather than any other Patriarch? Thus taught our Masters: In the measure a man measures out, in the same measure it is measured out to him (mSot 1:7). [A parable] of a king who had three friends. He was about to build a palace [and] he brought the first [friend] and said; Look at this place where I am about to build a palace for myself. This friend said to him: Ever since I can remember, it has been as a mountain. The king brought the second [friend], who said to him: Ever since I can remember, it has been as a field. The king sent him away and brought his third friend who said: Ever since I can remember, it has been as a palace. The king said to him: As you live, when I build that palace I will call it by your name. Similarly, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, were friends of the Holy One. Abraham called the Temple “mountain,” as it is said Abraham called the place, in the mount where the Lord is seen (Gen 22:14). Isaac called it “field,” as it is said See the smell of my son is the smell of the field [that the Lord has blessed] (Gen. 27:27). But Jacob called it “palace,” as it is said How awesome is this place. This is none other than the House of God (Gen 28:17).

In describing the site of the Temple, Pesiqta Rabbati utilizes tropes that are drawn from a variety of traditions, such as material found in Josephus, Tannaitic, and amoraic sources. These interpretive tropes are combined into a single homiletic message that culminates in the description of the religious importance of the Temple’s location.

The altar of the Temple was the site of earlier altars, according to several midrashic texts. Gen. Rab. 14:8 relates that Adam was created from the earth of the site of the altar in Jerusalem. Adam was created from a pure and holy place, the site of the Temple (Pirqe R. El. 12). The Yerushalmi (y. Naz. 7:2, 56b) states: “[Adam] was created from the site of his atonement.” R. Eliezer b. Jacob states that Adam offered a sacrifice “on the great altar in Jerusalem” (Gen. Rab. 34:9) and several other biblical characters are said to have sacrificed there (Pirqe R. El. 31). This uniqueness was due to Jerusalem becoming the focus of Israel’s atonement through the sacrifices offered in the Temple. This is an important idea in reading the Temple as a cornerstone of the unfolding apocalyptic scenario, since sacrifices were always brought to the same geographical location, the altar of the Temple that will be reinstated in the future.

In a homiletic unit, in which the midrashic exegesis focuses upon the scriptural lemma “remembered” (1 Sam 2:21), it is stated that King David found Adam’s altar. King David, who is an ancestor of one of the candidates for an apocalyptic Messiah, is part of this chain of tradition. The text also binds David into the chain of biblical figures who have decisive roles in the construction of the Temple.

Pesiq. Rab. 43:6–7

So the Lord remembered Hannah (1 Sam 2:21) … David went immediately. This is written, And David, according to the saying of Gad, went up as the Lord commanded. And Araunah looked, and saw the king and his servants coming on toward him; and Araunah went out, and bowed before the king on his face upon the ground (2 Sam 24:19–20). And there he found the altar to which Adam had brought offerings, where Noah had brought offerings, where Abraham had brought offerings. As soon as [David] found the place, he began measuring it, saying: from here to there will be the Temple Court, from here to there will be the Holy of Holies, as it is written Then David said, This is the House of the Lord God (1 Chr 22:1). And from which point were the measurements made? [From the following point]: This is the altar of burnt offerings (ibid.).

5. The Construction of the Temple

The construction of a sacred building is a difficult task that requires the utmost care. In a concluding unit of a homily (ḥ atimah) it is stated that the Temple, similar to the Tabernacle, was built by the tribes of Dan and Judah and their descendants, including Solomon, the son of King David. The response to the issue of why Solomon and not David built the Temple, has to be exegetically derived from Scripture.²⁵

Pesiq. Rab. 6:19

Another comment: all the work … was finished (1 Ki 7:51). You find that when the Tabernacle was built, two tribes were partners in the work. R. Levi said in the name of R. Hama ben R. Hanina: The tribe of Judah and the tribe of Dan. The tribe of Judah [was represented by] Bezalel, {ed. pr. and the tribe of Dan by Oholiav, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan (Exod 35:34)}. So, the same two tribes were partners in the work of building the Temple, and King Solomon sent [and out of Tyre fetched Hiram], a widow’s son (1 Ki 7:13–14) of the tribe of Dan and Solomon himself was the son of David, who was of the tribe of Judah. R. Levi said in the name of R. Hama ben R. Hanina: Thus, a man should not abandon his family business, even as the verse states: Indeed, the Almighty shall be your gold, and your precious silver (Job 22:25). He is our God and our precious thing, and we are Your people. [As] David said: For he is our God; and we are the people of His pasture, [and the sheep of His hand. Even today, if you will only listen to His voice!] (Ps 95:7). End.

The involvement of David in the construction of the Jerusalem Temple is one of the key issues in the apocalyptic vision construed in Pesiqta Rabbati, although there are other texts, for example, Midrash Psalms, that have textual clusters concerning David’s participation in this project and enhance David’s status.²⁶ The building materials were collected by David from temples of other gods and set aside for the future Temple. Since David foresaw that the Temple would subsequently be destroyed, he did not want to allow the impression that it was destroyed because of this foreign material. He wanted to prevent other nations of the world from concluding that their gods were instrumental in the destruction of the Temple, because these gods could work from inside the building. Pesiq. Rab. 2:10–11 suggests another reason why David did not actually build the physical Temple: If the Temple had been built by David, it would have been indestructible and God would not have been able to carry out his destruction of the Temple in order to discipline his people and to prepare Israel for its ultimate redemption. Although the Temple was not built by David, it was named “The House of David.”

Pesiq. Rab. 2:10

Another comment: A Psalm and song for the dedication [of the house; of David] (Ps 30:1). Come and see, Solomon builds the House and it is called after the name of David. Why so? Indeed David deserved to build it. For a certain reason he did not build it. Even though he had intended to build it, Nathan the prophet came and said to him: You shall not build [the House], as it is written: You shall not build the House for Me (1 Chr 17:4). Why? Because you have shed much blood upon the earth before Me (1 Chr 22:8). When David heard this, he was afraid, saying: Behold, I am deemed unfit to build the Temple. R. Judah [bar Ilai] said, [the Holy One, said: David], do not be afraid. As you live, in My view [shedding the blood of the nations] is similar to the shedding of the blood of a gazelle or of a deer, therefore it says: you have shed much blood upon the earth (ibid.). [The lemma] upon the earth is nothing, but a gazelle and a deer, as it is written: [the unclean and the clean may eat … of the gazelle, and … of the deer]. Only you shall not eat [the blood; you shall pour it out] upon the earth like water (Deut 12:15–16).

Pesiq. Rab. 2:11

Another comment. The Holy One said: As you live, in My sight all the blood you did shed is deemed as offerings, as it is written: [And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, You have shed abundant blood, and have made great wars; you shall not build a House to My name,] because you have shed much blood upon the earth before Me (1 Chr 22:8). R. {ed. pr.: Shimon ben Yoḥai} said: in the words you have shed much blood upon the earth before Me (ibid.), the phrase before Me hints at offerings, as in [And he shall kill the] bullock before the Lord (Lev 1:5). David said to Him: If this [is the case], then why may I not build the House? The Holy One said to him: If you were to build it, it would endure and never be destroyed. [David] said to Him: How wonderful! The Holy One said to him: It is revealed and known to Me that [Israel will] sin; I will cool My wrath through this and destroy [the Temple], so that Israel will be delivered, for thus it is written: Standing like an enemy, He has bent His bow (Lam 2:4); and it is written: Upon the tabernacle of the daughter of Zion He has poured out His fury like fire (ibid.). The Holy One said to [David]: As you live, since you did intend to build the House, even though Solomon your son will build it, I will ascribe it to your name: A Psalm and song for the dedication of the House of David (Ps 30:1).

The above interpretation in Pesiq. Rab. 2:11 implies knowledge of the following passage in Chronicles:

Then David said, “This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the altar of the burnt offering for Israel.” And David commanded to gather together the foreigners who were in the land of Israel; and he set masons to hew dressed stones to build the House of God.… And David said, “Solomon my son is young and tender, and the house that is to be built for the Lord must be exceedingly magnificent, of fame and of glory throughout all lands. I will, therefore, now make preparation for it.” And David prepared abundant materials before his death. Then he called for Solomon his son, and charged him to build a house for the Lord God of Israel. And David said to Solomon, “My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build a house to the name of the Lord my God; And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, ‘You have shed abundant blood, and have made great wars; you shall not build a House to my name, because you have shed much blood upon the earth in my sight. Behold, a son shall be born to you, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies around; for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quiet to Israel in his days. He shall build a house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever’”

(1 Chr 22:1–10).

The Chronicler describes the extensive preparations made by David to build the Temple, whereas the text in Pesiq. Rab. 2:10–11 focuses upon one lemma from Chronicles (1 Chr 22:8) to support the argument that David shed the blood of animals by associating this lemma with another lemma in Deut 12:15–16. Consequently, the shedding of blood by David is viewed as similar to the offering of sacrifices. In a dialogue between God and David, it is stated in the divine speech that God would not destroy a Temple built by David. The text utilizes some apocalyptic language, since this message is “revealed.” God needed to destroy the Temple in order to ameliorate his anger at his people and to prepare Israel for its ultimate salvation. The text implies that Israel would have been destroyed in the future if David had built the Temple, rather than Solomon.

David was denied the honor of building the Temple. According to the interpretation of the Chronicler, it is implicit that the reason for this denial was not the shedding of the blood of Bathsheba’s husband by King David (cf. 2 Samuel 11).

1 Chr 17:1–12

[1] And it came to pass, as David sat in his house, that David said to Nathan the prophet, “Behold, I live in a house of cedar wood, but the ark of the covenant of the Lord remains under curtains …” [4] “Go and tell David my servant, Thus said the Lord, You shall not build me a house to dwell in … [11] And it shall come to pass, when your days are fulfilled, when you must go to be with your fathers, that I will raise up your seed after you, who shall be of your sons; and I will establish his kingdom.[12] He shall build Me a house, and I will establish his throne forever.”

Another passage offers a different interpretation for the exclusion of David; it states that fire would not come down from heaven if the Temple had not been built by Solomon (Pesiq. Rab. 2:5). Generally, the narratives in Pesiqta Rabbati emphasize the righteousness and wisdom of the divinely designated builder. The construction of the Temple by Solomon is an important aspect of the apocalyptic views in Pesiqta Rabbati. Miraculous events transpired during the construction of the First Temple, for example, workmen did not die and their construction tools did not break. However, the workers died after the construction was finished to prevent other nations from using the same workers in the construction of their buildings. Additionally, the workers would receive their reward in the world-to-come.

Pesiq. Rab. 6:15

Another comment: [the work] was finished … and there was peace (1 Ki 7:51). Of all the workers building [the Temple] not one of them died, not one of them became sick, no eye felt pain. No belt was ripped; no trowel or axe was broken. Not a single tool used in the work of the building broke, became worn out or nicked. Therefore, it says: all the work progressed in peace (ibid.).

Further miracles included that the stones built themselves into the Temple. Pesiq. Rab. 6:16 states: “R. Berekhya said: Each stone lifted itself, came flying and mounted [to its proper place].” Scriptural proof is 1 Kgs 6:7: “for the house built itself … was built of stones made ready ... brought there.” This lemma is compared to Dan 6:18: “and a stone brought itself, and laid itself upon the mouth of the den.” The pivots of the hinges in the walls of the Temple were of gold (Pesiq. Rab. 6:7), which implies that the building was magnificent; scriptural proof is 1 Kgs 7:50. These assertions foreshadow the eschatological Temple that will be perfect and partially consist of precious stones. In a statement of R. Eleazar, it is claimed that the work on the Temple was comparable to the work done on Jacob’s tomb (Gen 50:7), thus connecting the Temple to this patriarch and the sophisticated artwork of his Egyptian tomb.

Midrashic texts present a legend²⁷ that pharaoh Necho²⁸ sent construction workers, who were close to death, to King Solomon; however, Solomon in his superior wisdom sent them back clothed in shrouds. This legend serves as an interpretation of a scriptural lemma in 1 Kigs 5:10. Exceeding the wisdom of Egypt is exemplified by Solomon, who is wiser than any pharaoh. Solomon is directed by the Holy Spirit, whereas Pharaoh utilizes “astrologers,” who, compared to Solomon, have very limited capacities in predicting the future. Implicit in this legend is the polemic against Egyptian concepts and Egyptian buildings that would have invoked the memory of the suffering of the Israelites in Egypt.²⁹ The Temple that was actually built in Jerusalem in the land of Israel by an Israelite king is symbolic of a new beginning for the nation of Israel.

Pesiq. Rab. 14:21

[Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east] and all the wisdom of Egypt (1 Ki 5:10). What kind of wisdom was found in Egypt? When Solomon was occupied with building the Temple, he sent [a message] to Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and said to him: Send me craftsmen, metal workers and masons to [build] the Temple. What did Pharaoh do? When he received Solomon’s message, he sent [a request] to assemble all his magicians and sorcerers. He told them: Predict with your sorcery who among the craftsmen are destined to die this year. I will come to [Solomon] with a complaint and tell him: On account of the artisans you have killed, give me their value in money. They immediately brought the people who were destined to die that year. So Pharaoh sent [them] to Solomon. When they came to Solomon he foresaw [in his wisdom] that they would die, so he sent them back to [Pharaoh] with this message in their hands: If you were in need of funeral shrouds, and you did not have any, I send you herewith shrouds and coffins. Bury your dead! He gave them shrouds and sent them off, [Solomon] excelled all the wisdom of Egypt (ibid.).

6. The Temple Dedications

Subsequent to the dedication of Solomon’s Temple, there were additional dedications of the Jerusalem Temple. Pesiqta Rabbati reflects upon several of these Temple dedications and compares the dedications of the Temple to the “dedications” of the universe at the time of creation. The apocalyptic view pertains to the world-to-come or the afterlife, which will be dedicated by God. Pesiq. Rab. 2:2 is one of a few rabbinic texts that contain parts of the “Hanukkah miracle” in narrative form:³⁰ “When the Hasmoneans … defeated the Greek kingdom, they entered the Temple and found eight iron spearheads, which they set up and they lit lights in the [grooves of the spears].” This dedication (Hanukkah) of the Temple is the liturgical occasion for the homily and it is placed within a series of dedications that are significant as the following text demonstrates:

Pesiq. Rab. 2:3

And how many dedications are there? Seven dedications, as follows: the Ḥanukkah of heaven and earth, as it is said and the heaven and the earth were finished (Gen 2:1). What dedication [Ḥanukkah] was there? God set the two great lights in the firmament of heaven (Gen 1:16). And the dedication of the [city] wall, as it is said: at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem … [they sought the Levites … to bring them to Jerusalem, to celebrate the dedication with gladness] (Neh 12:27). And the dedication of returning from the Diaspora [the Babylonian captivity], as it is said: they brought offerings at the dedication of this house of our God (Ezra 6:17). And the dedication of the [Hasmonean] priests, the [dedication] for which we kindle the lamps. And the dedication [Ḥanukkah] of the world-to-come, as it is said: When I free Jerusalem it will be with lamps (Zeph 1:12). And the dedication of the princes, as it is said: This was the dedication offering the altar … [at the hands of the princes of Israel] (Num 7:84). And the dedication of the [first] Temple, as read in the ‘inyan [portion of the day]: A Psalm; a song for the dedication of the house of David (Ps 30:1).

The above text is a homily in the liturgical canon presented in Pesiqta Rabbati. The passage demonstrates the artful form of the rabbinic homily, including its ability to connect numerous concepts to one festival, namely Hanukkah. In the continuation of the above homily, it is stated that the Temple was dedicated in the month of Tishri in order to bring rejoicing into the month of Abraham’s birth. There is a series of dedications in Pesiqta Rabbati and they are connected to other occasions and events that are significant in the Jewish calendar and the liturgical year, as well as in the apocalyptic meta-narrative concerning the Temple (Pesiq. Rab. 1:4).

7. The Temple Service, Prayer Direction, and Liturgical Aspects

The Hanukkah (dedication) homilies connected Pesiqta Rabbati and its interpretations to the liturgical calendar as celebrated at the Temple and in the worship services in synagogues. The term “Temple” has several connotations in midrash: on the one hand, it refers to a physical building in a specific city, Jerusalem, in the land of Israel; on the other hand, it is an idea, a spiritual concept in contrast to the tangible place, which is its earthly manifestation. This spiritual aspect of the Jerusalem Temple may explain why pilgrimages by Jews continued even after the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple by the Romans (b. Ned. 23a) in 70 C.E., when the Temple was no longer visible in its physical glory. These pilgrimages served primarily as occasions for mourning the destruction of the Temple and for offering prayers for its restoration. It was customary to rend one’s garment in mourning for the destruction of the Temple upon first seeing the Western Wall or the Temple Mount.³¹

Although the homiletic material in Pesiqta Rabbati may date from different time periods and from multiple sources, the darshan purposely focused upon the spiritual meaning of the Temple and the lessons that could be derived from this edifice as an artifact of memory. The daily sacrifices ceased when the Temple was destroyed. The cessation of the daily sacrifices is dated to the seventeenth of Tammuz within a series of calamities, including the end of days: “The time arrived that was determined for Zion and Jerusalem to be destroyed. Such times are determined for all human beings, a time of destruction has been determined for everything that exists” (Pesiq. Rab. 26:16). Among the items to be destroyed was an idol that had been erected in the Temple. Pesiq. Rab. 15:3 states that the Temple offerings were shown to Abraham. “The Holy One showed four things to our father Abraham: The Torah, the offerings, gehinnom and the kingdoms [of the nations].”³² This sentence may be viewed as an abbreviated history of the Temple from its inception in the Bible to its destruction by the foreign nations.

Other rituals relating to the Temple are occasionally mentioned in Pesiqta Rabbati, for example, the offering of first fruits, Pesiq. Rab. 15:35. Temple taxes, such as the half shekel offerings, are also integrated into the text of Pesiq. Rab. 10:1; this passage contains quotations from m. Sheq. 3:1 and material similar to m. Sheq. 4:1. Furthermore, the Temple tax, as mentioned in m. Sheq. 1:1, is compared to Roman taxes (annona militaris) in Pesiq. Rab. 10:1.

The importance of the Temple service is emphasized through the use of a popular quotation from m. Avot in the following textual passage:

Pesiq. Rab. 5:9

Our Masters taught: The universe stands firm because of three things: because of the Torah, because of the service, and because of [God’s] mercies (Av. 1:2). You [find] that there were twenty-six generations from the time the universe was created until the time the Torah was given; the Holy One provided them out of His mercy. Indeed, with these twenty-six in mind, David spoke twenty-six verses: ... for His mercy provided for the universe etc. O give thanks to the Lord; for He is good; for His loving kindness endures for ever. O give thanks to the Lord of lords; for His loving kindness endures for ever. To Him who alone does great wonders; for His loving kindness endures for ever. To Him who by understanding made the heavens; for His loving kindness endures for ever (Ps 136:1–26). Go and see and you will find the twenty-six.

The above text focuses upon the time that elapsed between critical markers in the religious history of Israel, from creation to the revelation of the Torah there were twenty-six generations according to this passage. This number of generations is compared to the enumeration of twenty-six verses in a Psalm of David (Ps 136:1–26) that has become a part of the Shabbat and festival prayer service.³³ The measured lapse of time from creation to revelation is significant because in the apocalyptic expectation in Pesiqta Rabbati the next critical determination of time would be the lapse of time between the destruction and restoration of the Temple.

Prayer direction is an essential requirement in Judaism; the direction of the worshiper is toward the Temple.³⁴ Additionally, within the context of prayer, there are several concentric circles of importance of facing the sacred place. This is reinforced in Pesiqta Rabbati³⁵ by citing m. Ber. 4:5 in a Yelammedenu passage,³⁶ which invariably cites a Tannaitic text. The result is that the Temple itself is not only a physical and spiritual entity, but serves as a constant directional signal in prayer.

Pesiq. Rab. 33:1

I, I myself, am He who comforts you; {ed. pr. who are you,} [that you should be afraid of a man who shall die, and of the son of man who shall be made as grass] (Isa 51:12). Let our Master instruct us: One who prays, upon what should he turn his heart? Thus taught our Masters: toward the House of the Holy of Holies [m. Ber. 4:5]. R. Eliezer ben Jacob said: If he prays outside the Land, he should turn his heart toward the Land of Israel {ed. pr.: If he were to pray in the Land of Israel, he should turn his heart toward Jerusalem}. If he prays in Jerusalem, he should turn his heart {ed. pr.: toward the Temple. If he prays in the Temple, he should pray toward} the house of the Holy of Holies.

This directionality in the prayer service of the heart is subsequently repeated in the same consolation homily. The focus of the following unit is the fire that destroyed the Temple; through textual reasoning it is claimed that God himself was accountable for the destruction of his Temple toward which everyone turned in prayer.³⁷ The location of the Temple is described in exegetical moves that utilize lemmata from the Song of Songs. These lemmata emphasize the beauty of the location, as well as the strong emotional attachment of the worshipers to the Temple.

Pesiq. Rab. 33:2

R. Avun {ed. pr.: Avin} Ha-Levi Berabbi said: Like the tower of David is your neck built with turrets [talpiyot] on which hang one thousand shields, [all of them shields of mighty men] (Cant 4:4). What are turrets? [It means the] hill [tel] toward which all turn [ponim] during prayer. R. Yoshua ben Levi said: It is the Temple [hekhal] in front [lifnay] (1 Ki 6:17). What is in front [lifnay]? That is [the Temple] toward which all faces turn. After all this praise it is written: Open your doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour the cedars (Zech 11:1). From above He has sent fire [into my bones] (Lam 1:13).

The longing and affection for Jerusalem and the Temple were also expressed in the liturgy.³⁸ On weekdays, it is customary to recite Psalm 137, in memory of the Temple’s destruction, immediately prior to the recitation of the grace after meals, which includes a prayer for the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This introductory Psalm includes the vow, “If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning” (Ps 137:5). The amidah is recited facing toward Jerusalem, and on weekdays contains an entire paragraph beseeching God to return to Jerusalem, rebuild the city, and reestablish the Davidic dynasty.³⁹

8. The Destruction of the Temple

The trope of the destruction of the Temple permeates Pesiqta Rabbati and is a focal point of several apocalyptic homilies. The destruction is divided into several key events: breaching the walls, burning, and looting. The Temple was burnt down on the Ninth of Av (Pesiq. Rab. 26:17). The zodiacal sign for the month of Av is the lion, and it is stated that Nebuchadnezzar fulfilled this sign, because he was called “the lion.”⁴⁰ Utilizing animals for kingdoms is a typical sign of apocalyptic accounts of history and predictions concerning the future; this apocalyptic strategy is implemented by the darshan. According to the text, the messenger conveying the destruction of the Temple, the prophet Jeremiah, attempted to avoid prophesying the destruction, but he had been chosen by God since the days of creation for this task.⁴¹ Based upon Jer 37:1–2:

And King Zedekiah the son of Josiah reigned instead of Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, whom Nebuchadrezzar King of Babylon made king in the land of Judah. But not he, nor his servants, nor the people of the land, listened to the words of the Lord, which He spoke by the prophet Jeremiah,

the midrash states that the angels implored God to spare the city and the Temple by reminding God of the “merits of the Fathers,”⁴² the tribes, the prophets, the disciples of rabbis (the righteous), and by referring to the name of God.

Referring to the merits of ancestors expresses the idea that past events should also determine future events and that the prophecies concerning the destruction and the rebuilding of the Temple would be fulfilled. Although the destruction had been revealed to the biblical patriarchs,⁴³ the destruction was momentarily delayed. The homily ends with the prayer, “May it be Your will, O Lord our God and God of our Fathers, that You rebuild Your sanctuary soon, in our days.”⁴⁴

The involvement of angels in the destruction of the Temple, as well as in the apocalypse, is part of the narrative in Pesiqta Rabbati 26, which recapitulates the events of the destruction with a specific religious focus: the righteous suffer, they are slaughtered, but there is a divine reason behind the slaughter. In the future, the righteous will be redeemed. The text states that an angel breached the walls of Jerusalem, “And he announced that the enemies should come and enter the House, the Master of which was not present” (Pesiq. Rab. 26:18). However, the Temple was set aflame by angels, not by the “enemies.” This emphasizes that God abandoned his house, the Temple. The homily also preserves the narrative of the High Priest, who threw the keys of the Temple toward heaven and was subsequently slaughtered by the enemy.⁴⁵

Pesiq. Rab. 26:18–19

The enemies came and set up their platform on the Temple Mount. Then they went up to this platform, which was centrally located at the [exact] location where King Solomon used to sit, when he took counsel with the elders. There the embellishments of the Temple had been planned {ed. pr.: there the enemies sat and took counsel with the elders as how to burn the Temple.} As they were deliberating, they lifted their eyes, and behold, four angels were descending, in their hands four flaming torches, which they placed at the four corners of the Temple, and set it on fire. When the High Priest saw the Temple was on fire, he took the keys and cast them toward heaven. He said: Here are the keys of Your House; I have been an unworthy custodian of it.… When the priests and the Levites saw that the Temple was on fire, they took the harps and trumpets and threw themselves with them into the flames.

The destruction of the Temple resulted in the great suffering of God, according to the homiletic texts. The homily that follows (Pesiqta Rabbati 28) is intricately related to Pesiqta Rabbati 27/28 and contains a lengthy lamentation, deploring the destruction of the Temple and the Babylonian exile. The exilic circumstances described in the text were mapped upon the subsequent exiles, making their exile comparable to the first exile in Babylon. The midrash (Pesiq. Rab. 28:1) establishes that God was weeping; this is based upon the lemma “wept” in Ps 137:1, “By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, we also wept, when we remembered Zion.” This Psalm refers to the tears of the exiles, and by extension, the lemma “also” is applied to God, who is co-suffering with humans. Another midrash specifies that God wept during the day, while Israel was weeping at night (Pesiq. Rab. 29/1:1–2).

Some historians would adopt a structuralist explanation as to the causes of the destruction of the Temple and the defeat at the hands of the Romans.⁴⁶ This explanation might be reduced to a particular causation, such as socioeconomic factors. In contrast, midrash explains the destruction of the Temple by referring to sin, human deficiencies, and the neglect of the divine commandments.⁴⁷ Still another historical approach would focus upon the question of who is guilty or who is responsible. This method would seek to establish a relationship between the culpability of the Romans and the oppression of the Jewish population within the given historical continuum of Roman-Jewish relations in the political history of the land of Israel. On the other hand, midrash contends that it required God’s own will to destroy his vineyard and his house, the Jewish people, and the Temple. The focus of the passage below is co-suffering in a homiletic midrash, which leads to the situation that God himself needs to be comforted. There is no attempt in midrash at synchronizing the homiletic events and the actual historical events in the land of Israel under Roman occupation, as is demonstrated in the following passage:

Pesiq. Rab. 29/30:26

Another comment: Comfort, Comfort (Isa 40:1). R. Berekhya Ha-Kohen Berabbi says: Comfort Me. In the way of the world, if a man owns a vineyard and bandits [lēstaí] come and cut it down, who needs comfort, the vineyard or the owner? Similarly, if a man owns a house and bandits [lēstaí] come and burn it down, who needs comfort, the house or the owner? You are My vineyard.

Not only Israel needs comfort after the catastrophe, God also needs to be comforted. The above passage addresses the devastation of Israel and the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. Midrash often reads like a recital of the major stages in the relationship between God and Israel that unfolds in history. Historical events in rabbinic thought are shaped by the vicissitudes of Israel’s relationship with God. For Jacob Neusner, attempting to write history based upon midrashic stories is a “violation of the premises” of this type of rabbinic literature—the premise being that midrash is exegetical in nature.⁴⁸

God’s suffering over the destruction of the Temple is similar to the Messiah’s severe suffering,⁴⁹ when he arrives to bring salvation to Israel and to rebuild the Temple. The text set forth below suggests that God suffers because he has not been sitting on his throne in his beloved city since the destruction of the Temple.

Pesiq. Rab. 36:6

During the week [seven year period] when ben David comes, they will bring iron beams and they will put them on his neck until the Messiah’s body is bent. He will scream and weep, and his voice will rise up to the height [of heaven]. He will say in His presence: Master of the universe, how much can my limbs endure? {ed. pr.: How much my spirit?} How much my breath [spirit]? Am I not but flesh and blood? It was this moment that David bewailed, saying: My strength is dried up like a potsherd (Ps 22:16). In that hour the Holy One says to them {ed. pr.: him}: Ephraim, My true Messiah [Messiah of my righteousness]. You have already accepted [this suffering] from the six days of Creation. Now your suffering is like My suffering, since the day on which wicked Nebuchadnezzar destroyed My Temple and burnt My sanctuary, and exiled My children among the nations of the world, by your life and by the life of My head! I have not sat on My Throne. And if you do not believe, see the dew that is upon My head: My head is filled with dew, [My locks with the drops of the night] (Cant 5:2). In that hour, [the Messiah] will say in His presence: Master of the universe, now my mind is at rest, for it is sufficient for the servant to be like his Master.

R. Levi said: in that hour when the Holy One says to the congregation of Israel: Arise, shine for your light is come (Isa 60:1), [and Israel] will say: Master of the universe, in the future You lead us. At that hour The Holy One will turn around and acknowledge it and say to her: My daughter, you spoke well, as it is said: My beloved speaks and says to me, [Arise, my love, my beautiful one, and come away]

(Cant 2:10).

In the Song of Songs (Cant 6:4), the beloved is compared to the holy city, and its holiness, beauty, and greatness are extolled in numerous passages (see, e.g., Ps 48:2–3; 50:2; Lam 1:1). The midrash continued this tradition. One passage in the Bavli (b. Suk. 51b) asserts that one who has not seen Jerusalem in her glory, which includes the Temple, has not seen a beautiful city in his entire life.

An intense focus upon the time of salvation and reconstruction of the Temple is an indication of apocalypticism. A passage in Pesiqta Rabbati calculated the length of time through gematria to determine the duration of the existence of the first Temple by mentioning the eighteen high priests that ministered in the Temple over a period of 410 years. In comparison, the priests of the second Temple were corrupt and morally flawed. The extended text of this passage correlates God’s anger with the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem, as well as attempting to provide a specific, predictable timetable for the reconstruction of the Temple.

Pesiq. Rab. 47:24

Another comment: With this [bezot] shall Aaron come [into the holy place: with a bull calf] (Lev 16:3). R. Berekhia said: The term bezot signifies four hundred and ten, the letter bet means two, the letter zayin means seven, the letter aleph means one, the letter taw means four hundred. He said to him: With this [bezot] [means] that [the Solomonic Temple would exist for a period of exactly four hundred and ten years]; he said to him: shall Aaron come {ed. pr. Are we to understand, then, from God’s saying to Moses: with this shall Aaron come [ibid.] that Aaron lived four hundred and ten years? No, this verse means that} the eighteen High Priests who were to minister during the four hundred and ten years would come in such a consistent succession, son following upon son, that their ministries would be considered as one, identical, O Aaron, with yours. In this sense the verse states: With this [bezot] shall Aaron come. But the verse does not apply to the Second Temple, because in its time the priests used to outbid one another for the office of the High Priest, thus there were eighty High Priests who served in the [Second] Temple. Therefore the first part of the verse the fear of the Lord prolongs days (Prov 10:27) applies to the priests of the First Temple and [the conclusion of the verse the years of the wicked shall be shortened] applies to the priests of the Second Temple.

According to the homiletic texts, certain parts of the Temple will never be destroyed, for example, the Western Wall, which is mentioned in a messianic homily (Pesiq. Rab. 15:21): “My beloved is like a gazelle or a young hart (Cant 2:9). R. Jose ben R. Hanina said: like the young of a gazelle. Behold he stands behind our wall (ibid.) that is the Western Wall of the Temple that will never be destroyed.”⁵⁰ The lemma “our wall” in Song of Songs is interpreted as “the Western Wall.” This interpretation is related to the divine presence and the Messiah. Another homiletic text, Midrash Tanhuma, states in the name of R. Aḥa “The shekhinah will never leave the Western Wall of the Temple” (Tanḥ., ed. Buber, Shemot 10). The concept that God’s shekhinah dwelled in the Temple emphasizes that God is present on earth. One question that concerned the darshan of Pesiqta Rabbati was, whether the shekhinah could have been removed from the Temple during its destruction, involuntarily or voluntarily, and needed to be restored as well.

The site of the Temple retains God’s shekhinah (Pesiq. Rab. 47:17);⁵¹ another messianic homily also emphasizes God’s eternal presence at the site of the Temple is emphasized (Pesiq. Rab. 32:4). Furthermore, other theological interpretations included that the destruction of the Temple cooled God’s anger and thus, spared Israel (Pesiq. Rab. 2:11, see above). According to homiletic midrash, the destruction of the Temple was to be remembered (Pesiq. Rab. 29:1), which expresses the idea that the remembrance of the Temple destruction was added to the liturgical calendar that organizes the cycle of special days, feasts, and fasts.

Three minor fasts are observed each year to mourn different stages of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, and the major fast occurs on the ninth of Av. Jerusalem’s importance in liturgy and ritual is predicated on the belief in the messianic restoration of the Jewish commonwealth in the land of Israel, for which the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its Temple have always been the main symbol. Pesiqta Rabbati represents the bridge between midrash and liturgy; some of its passages contain tropes that are part of the liturgy on the days before the ninth of Av.⁵² Similarly, the additional prayer, the Naḥem prayer on the ninth of Av mentions Jerusalem and the Temple. Additionally, the tropes concerning the destruction and the ensuing consolation in Pesiqta Rabbati relate to the cycle of the haftarot. Eleazar ben Kalir integrated into his liturgical texts midrashic legends relating to the Temple and its destruction.⁵³ The analysis of midrash and its liturgical uses, as well as the intertextuality between liturgical poems and midrash, need to be further explored.⁵⁴ In my opinion, Pesiqta Rabbati is a critical text in that it often reflects liturgical practice and occasionally serves as the basis for the liturgy of the synagogue.

9. Julian the Apostate’s Attempt to Rebuild the Jerusalem Temple

In addition to the severe mourning over the loss of the Temple and the interpretive attempts in the homiletic midrashim to grasp the magnitude of this event, the reconstruction of the Temple was a major concern in the texts. The Roman Emperor Julian the Apostate attempted to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple in the fourth century;⁵⁵ the major Jewish reflection of this enterprise is found in Pesiqta Rabbati. Nevertheless, it should be noted that Julian’s plan is also discussed in Roman literature.⁵⁶ In a homily that focuses upon lemmata from Zephaniah, Pesiqta Rabbati 8 refers to Julian’s attempt to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple. In his discussion of the relevant passages in Pesiqta Rabbati 8, Joshua Schwartz identified the locations mentioned by the prophet Zephaniah with specific sites in Jerusalem; the Fish Gate is the city wall, the mishneh is part of the residential quarter of the upper classes, and the makhtesh is the commercial area near the Tyropean Valley.⁵⁷ However, Pesiqta Rabbati maps these locations upon sites in different cities in the land of Israel, other than Jerusalem. Michael Avi-Yonah relates the locations mentioned in Pesiqta Rabbati to the revolt against Gallus in 351⁵⁸ and states: “The text mentions three out of the four cities which are listed by Jerome as having taken part in the revolt.”⁵⁹

The failure of Julian to rebuild the Temple was ascribed to an earthquake and to rabbinic ambivalence about the project. The darshan in Pesiqta Rabbati maintains that if God had abandoned Israel, He would search for Israel, and God would ultimately restore the Temple. The urgent question that Israel posed was: When will this happen? This is a typical apocalyptic question. The historical locales cited in the text appear to suggest that this passage is indeed based on a historical era when Christian Rome was in control of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

Pesiq. Rab. 8:5–6

Another matter: And it shall come to pass at that time [that I will search Jerusalem with lamps] (Zeph 1:12). One searches with lamps, not by the light of the moon, nor by the light of the sun. At Passover the search for leaven that must be removed is not made by the light of the moon, nor by the light of the sun. Lamps are lighted to search for the leaven. Similarly, in the future the Holy One, blessed be He, will use only lamps to search Jerusalem in order to remove idolatry from it and to root out the evil impulse. Therefore it is said: I will search Jerusalem with lamps

(ibid.).

Another matter: And it shall come to pass at that time that I will search Jerusalem with lamps (Zeph 1:12). Israel said to Him: Master of the universe, when will You do this? He said to them: After I have first done what is written in the preceding verse. What is written in the preceding verse? And in that day, [says the Lord] a cry from the fish gate (Zeph 1:10)—that is, from Acco, which is in the midst of fish. And a wailing from the second [mishneh] (ibid.)—that is, from Lydda, which is second in importance only to Jerusalem. And a great crashing from the hills (ibid.)—that is, from Sepphoris, [on the hills]. Wail, you inhabitants of Makhtesh (Zeph 1:11)—that is, of Tiberias, which is set in this makhtesh [geological depression]. The Holy One said: I will execute justice in those four places for that which the nations of the world did in them [the four places], at that time I will search Jerusalem with lamps

(Zeph 1:12).

The context of the above text asserts that, after divine retribution has transpired in the cities of Acco, Lydda, Sepphoris, and Tiberias, God will subsequently judge the idolaters (Christians) and destroy them in Jerusalem. The above text refers to the search for leaven and its removal prior to Passover. The leaven could very well be a metaphor for the Christian presence in the land of Israel. On another level, this passage refers to the final judgment, when God promises to liberate Jerusalem. The events at the end of time are analogized to the search for leaven prior to Passover and to the memory of the Exodus and the redemption from Egypt, which freed the Hebrews from servitude to the Egyptians. In the passage set forth below, the midrashic interpretation, which utilizes the same verse (Zeph 1:12), focuses upon ḥapes (search) and presents a different reading, ḥophesh (free).

Pesiq. Rab. 8:1

The Holy One said: Even as lamps used to be kindled in my Holy House in this world, so I will do when I rebuild Jerusalem. From which [scriptural passage]? From the concluding prophetic [reading]: When I set free Jerusalem with lamps

(Zeph 1:12).

In the context of this homily, this freedom from oppression could refer to any foreign entity in the land of Israel, the Romans, the Byzantines, or the Persians. The rebuilding of the Temple is mentioned in the expanded text of this homily. Furthermore, the above passage, according to Schwartz, “considered the reign of Julian … as a herald to the messianic era.”⁶⁰ This messianic expectation and the building activities in the proximity of the Temple mount can be firmly placed in the fourth century C.E. Since this is the concluding chapter of the eight homilies on Hanukkah in Pesiqta Rabbati, the text suggests that the festival of Hanukkah would eventually result in the rededication of the Temple. This understanding is accomplished by a radical reading of Zephaniah by the darshan in which the above passage from Pesiqta Rabbati claims that other groups, that is, the Christians, would be purged from Jerusalem. This radical reading is significant since Christians interpreted Zephaniah as relating to the destruction of Jewish Jerusalem.⁶¹ Pesiqta Rabbati read the same verse as a promise by God to cleanse Jerusalem and to restore the Temple.

10. The Mourners for Zion, the Request to Rebuild the Temple, and the Time of Redemption

A distinct group of mourners are mentioned in Pesiqta Rabbati 34, which is a homily about the mourners for Zion, aveley Tsion, a term mentioned in Isa 61:3:

To appoint to those who mourn in Zion, to give to them a garland instead of ashes, the oil of joy instead of mourning, the garment of praise instead of the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that He might be glorified.

The mourners for Zion grieve and lament the destruction of the Temple. The specific time of their activity is not mentioned; however, they play a significant part in the redemption of Israel. The Messiah appears because of their prayers. Israel is divided into the aveley Tsion, who will bring the Messiah, and those who mock the aveley Tsion. This inner Jewish division between followers and “others” is reminiscent of the line of demarcation between the faithful followers of God and the sinners in apocalyptic literature.⁶² The group aveley Tsion may have been active as late as the ninth century;⁶³ from the perspective of apocalyptic theory, they represent the followers of a Jewish Messiah and are described as intense mourners for the destroyed Temple. The aveley Tsion are a strong reminder of the destruction of the Temple, which provides the liturgical occasion of this homily. God grieves because the Temple was destroyed, and He suffers with Israel and the aveley Tsion are co-sufferers with God. Furthermore, the people who will be directly affected by the apocalypse may be associated with the members of aveley Tsion; in fact, the text in Pesiqta Rabbati describes their calling for a very specific mission, mainly preparing the way for the Messiah. The most intriguing aspect of this composition may be the emergence of an elect group just before the dawn of the end of days.

The text set forth below focuses upon the restoration of the Temple and Jerusalem, as well as the group that is waiting for the redemption.

Pesiq. Rab. 34:6

Another interpretation: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion … behold your king comes (Zech 9:9). He who is called king is the one who is meant to rule over the generations that have been and over the generations that are to be. And the Holy One will have it proclaimed and said to all the righteous men of the world, even though your obedience to words of Torah is pleasing to Me, yet you wait only upon My Torah, you do not wait for My kingship. Hence I have declared by oath that for him who waits for My kingship I Myself shall bear witness in his behalf, as it is said: Therefore wait you for Me says the Lord, until the day that I rise up to witness (Zeph 3:8). Those who have waited for Me are the Mourners for Zion who grieved with Me because of My House which is destroyed and because of My Temple which is desolate. Now I bear witness for them, each of whom scripture describes in the verse With one who is of a contrite and humble spirit (Isa 57:15). Do not read With one who is of a contrite spirit, but he that is of a contrite spirit grieves with Me. Such are the Mourners for Zion who humbled their spirits, listened meekly to the abuse of their persons, keeping silent, and yet did not consider themselves particularly virtuous.

The slightly parallel homily in Pesiqta de Rab Kahana (suppl. 8, Mandelbaum ed.) cites a different verse: “Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad for her, all you who love her; rejoice greatly with her, all you who mourn over her” (Isa 66:10). In this homily, the angels attending the throne of God are those who “mourn over” the destruction of the Temple.

In the text version of the editio princeps of Pesiqta Rabbati, in the beginning of the work, in a homily for rosh ḥodesh, before the eight homilies for Hanukkah, the darshan poses the crucial question: When will the Temple be restored?

Pesiq. Rab. 1:4, ed. pr.

{Israel said to Him: Master of the universe, when will You restore us to the glory of going up [to Jerusalem] during the three pilgrimages and see the countenance of the shekhinah? When will You return us to that glory? See how long has the House of our life [the Temple] been destroyed. It is already a jubilee [seven times seven years], seven hundred and seventy-seven years and now it is already 1151}

These concerns in regard to the rebuilding of the Temple and the responses provided by the darshan in the editio princeps of Pesiqta Rabbati (from seventeenth century Prague) contain ideal-typical apocalyptic numbers based upon the number seven.

The resurrection of the righteous will transpire at the end of days after the apocalypse. Pesiq. Rab. 1:15 poses the question: How will the dead from the Diaspora reach the land of Israel? This question is important in regard to the Temple, as well as the adjacent prime location for the resurrection, the Mount of Olives.

Pesiq. Rab. 1:15

And if this is so [then] the righteous who were buried outside the Land will not [be resurrected]? R. Eleazar in the name of R. Simai said: God will make tunnels in the ground and they will roll like tubes and they will come to the Land of Israel and when they come to the Land of Israel the Holy One will give them their souls, Thus said God the Lord, He who created the heavens, and stretched them out; He who spread forth etc. He who gives breath to the people upon it (Isa 42:5). And you have a full scriptural verse in Ezekiel: And you shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves (Ezek 37:13), and I will cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you to the land of Israel (Ezek 37:12). In that hour, I will put My spirit in you, and you shall live (Ezek 37:14). You learn {ed. pr: I learn} that in the days of the Messiah the dead of the Land of Israel [will be] living; and that the righteous outside the Land will come to it and will be living on the [Land].

In an approach that is typically apocalyptic, the question is raised, when the Temple will be restored. The rebuilding of the Temple is viewed as having restorative qualities that includes the resurrection of the dead. Jews have wished to be buried on the Mount of Olives, believing that its proximity to the Temple Mount would save them time and travail when Jerusalem and its Temple will be restored and the dead will be resurrected. As a result of this belief, many Jews traveled from the Diaspora communities to spend their final years in Jerusalem and be buried there. Pesiqta Rabbati resolves the problem of a distant burial by implying that the deceased would be transported in underground passages from the Diaspora to the earthly locus of resurrection, the land of Israel, in close proximity to the “house of our life,” namely, the divinely restored Jerusalem Temple.

The question as to the duration of time the Temple will be in ruins is repeated and a different perspective is assigned to this question in a consolation homily. God is bound by his own law, to “make restitution” as expressed in Exod 22:5; one has to “make restitution” for the fire that one has kindled. Therefore, God himself is required to comfort his people and to rebuild the Temple. Additionally, the return of the exiles is implied.

Pesiq. Rab. 33:3

Israel said to him: Master of the universe, until when [will the Temple be in ruins]? Did you not write in your Torah He that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution (Exod 22:5). It is You who kindled [the fire], for it is said, From above He has sent fire into my bones (Lam 1:13). And You must rebuild it and comfort us; not through an angel, but You with your glory. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: By your lives! Thus I will do, as it is said: The Lord does build up Jerusalem, He gathers the dispersed of Israel (Ps 147:2). And I am He that will comfort you. From where do we know that He will comfort us? From what we read in the homiletic verse from the Prophet: I, I myself, am He who comforts you

(Isa 51:12).

11. The Roof of the Temple and the “Pearly Gate”

In addition to the notion that the Western Wall will be ever-present, there are specific parts of the Temple building that surface in homilies pertaining to redemption and restoration. A passage that seems to be unique to Pesiqta Rabbati states that redemption will transpire from the roof of the Temple upon which the Messiah will be standing.

Pesiq. Rab. 36:8

R. Isaac said: In the year in which the king Messiah is revealed, all the kings of the nations of the world will be at war with one another. The king of Persia will make war against the king of Arabia, and the king of Arabia will go to Edom to take counsel from Edom. The king of Persia will again devastate the whole world and all the nations of the world will be agitated and frightened, they will fall {ed. pr. upon their faces} and it will seize them with pangs like the pangs of a woman in labor. And {ed. pr.: Israel, agitated and frightened}, will say: Where shall we go, where shall we come? [God] will say: My children, do not be afraid; the day of your redemption has arrived. And this latter redemption will not be like your first redemption, {ed. pr.: for following your first redemption}, you [suffered] anguish and servitude from the kingdoms, but during the latter redemption, you will have no anguish or servitude from other kingdoms.

Our Masters taught: At the hour when {ed. pr. the king Messiah appears}, he comes and stands on the roof of the Temple and will make a proclamation to Israel and he says: Meek ones, the day of your redemption has come. And if you do not believe me, see His light which shines upon you, as it is said: Arise, shine; for your light has come, [and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you] (Isa 60:1). And it has shone only upon you and not upon the nations of the world, as it is said: For, behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peoples; [but upon her you the Lord will arise, and His glory shall be seen upon you]

(Isa 60:2).

At the same hour the Holy One will brighten the light of the king Messiah and of Israel, and the nations of the world will be in darkness and gloominess and all of them will walk by the light of the Messiah and of Israel, as it is said: And nations shall walk at your light, [and kings at the brightness of your rising] (Isa 60:3). And they shall come and lick the dust of the feet of the {ed. pr.: king} Messiah and of Israel, as it is said: let them that dwell in the wilderness bow before him (Ps 72:9) [and they shall bow down to you with their face toward the earth], and lick up the dust of your feet (Isa 49:23). And they will come and fall upon their faces before the Messiah and before Israel and they say: Let us be slaves unto you and each and every one in Israel will have two thousand and eight hundred slaves, as it is said: [Thus says the Lord of hosts:] In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men from the nations of every language, shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, We will go with you; for we have heard that God is with you (Zech 8:23). End.

The above concluding unit of an apocalyptic homily suggests that the final redemption of Israel will be different from previous redemptions. The text contains a passage marked “Our Masters taught,” which usually introduces a Tannaitic quotation; however, this unique passage could be defined as “pseudo-Tannaitic,” since it is not found in the available Tannaitic texts. In this case the darshan could be making a new statement, which he claims to have found in the tradition. It is a perplexing passage,⁶⁴ and we do not know the actual meaning of the roof mentioned in the passage. Is it the roof of the Temple before the destruction? Is it the roof of a future, rebuilt Temple? Is it the area of the destroyed Temple where the roof would have been?

Numerous apocalyptic visions focus upon the restoration of the Temple. The rebuilding will be accomplished for the sake of the tribes of Israel and the Torah (Pesiq. Rab. 4:3) by God in the time-to-come (Pesiq. Rab. 20:3; 28:1). There will be a future time for the sacrificial offerings, as stated by R. Ḥanina in the name of R. Tanḥum bar Yudan (Pesiq. Rab. 52:8). This new Temple at the end of time will be rebuilt or, alternatively, released from heaven and descend to earth.⁶⁵ There is a heavenly Temple that corresponds to the earthly Temple, according to a midrashic text (Pesiq. Rab. 20:19). Based upon Isaiah’s vision of a heavenly Temple (Isa 6:1), as well as Jeremiah’s vision (Jer 17:12), scriptural interpretation further developed the idea of a heavenly Jerusalem (“Jerusalem above”) (as for example, in Test. Levi 18:6). The targumic rendering (Targ. Jonathan)⁶⁶ and exegetical midrash specifically address the concept of a Temple above and a Temple below,⁶⁷ which is continued and elaborated upon in Pesiq. Rab. 20:19: “When Moses finally arrived on high, The Holy One, opened the seven firmaments and showed him the heavenly Temple.” This passage in Pesiqta Rabbati, which contains a heavenly journey of Moses, is apocalyptic and reveals secrets to Moses, including the future Temple.

By contrast, the midrash of the heavenly Temple in midrash Tanḥuma is exegetical:

Tanḥuma Naso 19

Come and see, when the Holy One, Blessed be He, instructed Moses to make Him a sanctuary, He said to him: Tell [the Israelites] that it is not because I have no place to dwell that I ask them to make Me a sanctuary, for seen before the universe was created My Temple existed on high, as it is said: O Throne of Glory on high from the beginning (Jer 17:12), and it is said: I saw my Lord seated upon a high and lofty throne (Isa 6:1). It is because of My love for you that I abandon the Temple above which was established before the universe was created, and I shall go down and dwell among you, as it is said: And let them make Me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them

(Exod 25:8).

In haggadic passages in the Talmud, God declares that He would destroy his earthly dwelling before the celestial dwelling (b. Sanh. 94b). God declares his solidarity with the exiled Jewish people by swearing that He will not enter the heavenly Jerusalem until He can enter the earthly one (b. Ta’an. 5a). The sages asserted that God would rebuild Jerusalem and never destroy it (Tanḥ. Noah 11), and some sources in the apocalyptic literature (2 En. 90:28–29; 4 Ezra 7:26; 10:54) claim that the heavenly Jerusalem will ultimately descend and take the place of the earthly one.⁶⁸

A vision relating to the restoration of the Temple as the spiritual center of Judaism is the extraordinary description of the Temple gate. The Temple gate will be made of a hollowed out gem at the end of days.

Pesiq. Rab. 32:7–10⁶⁹

Behold, I will lay your stones with colors (Isa 54:11). R. Abba bar Kahana said, like stibium, as it says: with colors she painted her face and then attired {ed. pr. her head} (2 Ki 9:30). And set your foundations with sapphires (Isa. 54:11)…

And your gates of gems hollowed out, and all your borders of precious stones (Isa 54:12). The Holy One will hollow out the great gate of the Temple, together with its two small gates, from a gem, a pearl of the purest glow.

The restored Temple and the future city of Jerusalem will be expanded beyond their previous parameters (Pesiq. Rab. 1:21) and surpass the previous Temple that was built by human beings.⁷⁰ The ideological nexus between the Temple’s destruction and the eschatological reappearance of the Temple is based upon the theodicy that emerged from the destruction of the Second Temple.⁷¹ When the time for the eschatological Temple arrives, it will be heavenly

12. Summary

This article discusses midrashic interpretations in Pesiqta Rabbati that focus upon the Jerusalem Temple within an apocalyptic frame of reference. In my view, the enfolding apocalypse in Pesiqta Rabbati is expressed in a meta-narrative that integrates exegetical units concerning the past and the future of the Jerusalem Temple. The homiletic units suggest a timeline from the time of creation, when God contemplated and planned the Temple, to the end of time. Adam and the patriarchs of Israel each played decisive roles in developing ideas about the Temple, when the site of the Temple is discussed.

The choice of Solomon over David as the first Temple builder is addressed and interpreted in ways that state that the Temple is named after David. Pesiqta Rabbati evaluates the construction of the Temple, which involved miracles. The role of King David is important in regard to the future redemption, since one of the Jewish Messianic figures is a descendant of David. Major concerns within the apocalyptic framework of Pesiqta Rabbati are the Temple dedications and the festival of Hanukkah.

Since the text of Pesiqta Rabbati is arranged according to the Jewish liturgical year, the homilies also mention the Temple service, the direction of prayer and other liturgical aspects. However, in the apocalyptic vision of Pesiqta Rabbati, the major focus is the destruction of the Temple. The wellknown legend of the keys that are cast toward heaven by the high priest is integrated into the homiletic corpus of Pesiqta Rabbati as well. God himself elected to burn his Temple and suffers, which expresses the idea of cosuffering with the exiles. A specific group of people, who are faithful to God and lament the destruction, are the mourners for Zion. Pesiqta Rabbati briefly engages in the attempt by Julian the Apostate to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple (in the fourth century), but the text proposes that God will cleanse Jerusalem of idolatry in the time-to-come. The request to rebuild the Temple, the time of redemption, as well as the roof of the Temple on which the Messiah will appear, and the “Pearly Gate” complete the apocalyptic time-line from the beginning of the Temple to the day of the final judgment.