Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezra 2:63
And the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.
63. the Tirshatha ] This title is here and in Neh 7:65; Neh 7:70 apparently applied to Zerubbabel: Haggai his contemporary calls him ‘Pekhah’ (= Governor), see Hag 1:1; Hag 1:14; Hag 2:2; Hag 2:21. In the same way Nehemiah, who is called the Tirshatha, Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1, is also spoken of as ‘Pekhah’ in Neh 12:26. ‘Pekhah’ was the Babylonian, ‘Tirshatha’ the Persian title for a local or provincial governor. The governors were subject to the satraps, the satraps were responsible to the king.
The word ‘Tirshatha’ is said to be the same as the Persian ‘tarsta’, from ‘tars’ to fear, and to denote complimentarily the awe which the office inspired.
That the ‘Tirshatha’ here mentioned was Zerubbabel is rendered probable by the nature of the prohibition contained in this verse, which none but a native Governor or the High-priest himself would have issued.
that they should not eat of the most holy things] The priests were especially required to eat of the ‘meal-offering’ (Lev 2:3; Lev 2:10; Lev 6:18), the sin offering (Lev 6:26), the guilt offering (Lev 7:6), and of the peace offering (Lev 7:31-34). Certain portions were set aside for the sons of Aaron. The prohibition therefore refers to the ceremonial rules already in force. ‘The most holy things’ is a phrase which can best be illustrated from Num 18:9-11.
The consecration of a priest was accompanied by the sacrifice of a ram which Aaron and his sons should eat. Exo 29:33-37.
A priest excluded from eating of ‘the most holy things’ was therefore only a priest by title and lineage. He could not be consecrated (see Exodus 29), he could not offer sacrifices, he could not enter the holy place.
He was excluded apparently more rigidly than the priest ‘that hath a blemish’, who was forbidden to ‘come nigh to offer the bread of his God. He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. Only he shall not go in unto the veil, nor come nigh unto the altar’ (Lev 21:21-23).
The distinction here made between the ‘most holy’ and the ‘holy’ is important. ‘The most holy’ included the shewbread, the incense, the sin and guilt offering, the drink offering. ‘The holy’ comprised the thank-offering, the firstlings of herd and flock, the first-fruits, the tithe. Of ‘the holy’ things members of the priests’ families might partake. But ceremonial cleanness was in all cases needed.
The declaration of ‘defilement’ excluded those who were defiled from a source of priestly income as well as from the dignity of priestly occupation.
till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim ] In former times the High-priest had enquired of the Lord by Urim and Thummim. After the Captivity, the High-priest had no Urim and Thummim. The Urim and Thummim, along with the Ark, the Shechinah, the Holy Fire, the Spirit of Prophecy, the Oil of Anointing constituted the chief points, for the absence of which the Jews of later times deplored the deficiency of Zerubbabel’s Temple as compared with that of Solomon.
The passages in which enquiry by Urim and Thummim is mentioned are Exo 28:30; Lev 8:8; Num 27:21; Deu 33:8; 1Sa 28:6. In none of these do we find any explanation of what the Urim and Thummim were. They have been identified with ( a) stones in the High-priest’s breastplate, ( b) sacred dice, ( c) little images of ‘truth’ and ‘justice’ such as are found hung round the neck of an Egyptian priest’s mummy.
The writers of the Scriptures have abstained from explanation either because they shrank from making generally known what was regarded with mystery and awe, or because they presupposed their readers’ familiarity with the thing referred to.
The want of Urim and Thummim is not, as Ewald supposed, due to any technical defect in Jeshua’s claim to High-priestly dignity (such as that he was not his father’s eldest son). And this passage tacitly contradicts the assertion of Josephus, that the Urim and Thummim only first failed in the Maccabean era.
The Tirshatha indefinitely postponed the decision. Where documentary proofs were wanting, none but one favoured with Divine perception could pronounce sentence. The words are of importance because they testify to the feeling that the people felt the need of revelation from God, and that they looked forward to the coming of some great High-priest to whom God should make Himself known. They point forward to the coming of the High-Priest ‘full of grace and truth’.
Compare 1Ma 4:46 ‘Until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them’, 1Ma 14:41 ‘Until there should arise a faithful prophet.’
The words ‘Urim’ and ‘Thummim’ mean ‘Light’ and ‘Perfection.’ The LXX renders them in this passage by ; more generally by or and .
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The Tirshatha – i. e., Zerubbabel. See margin. The word is probably old Persian, though it does not occur in the cuneiform inscriptions. Some derive it from a root to fear. See the introduction to the Book of Ezra, first note.
A priest with Urim and with Thummim – See Exo 28:30 note. According to the rabbinical writers, the second temple permanently lacked this glory of the first. Zerubbabel, it would seem by the present passage (compare Neh 7:65), expected that the loss would be only temporary.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 63. The Tirshatha] This is generally supposed to be Nehemiah, or the person who was the commandant; see Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1, for the word appears to be the name of an office. The Vulgate and Septuagint write it Atershatha, the Syriac and Arabic render it the princes of Judah. Some suppose the word to be Persian, but nothing like it of the same import occurs in that language at present. If, as Castel supposed, it signifies austerity, or that fear which is unpressed by the authority of a governor, it may come from [Persian] ters, FEAR, or [Persian] tersh, ACID, the former from [Persian] tarsidan, to FEAR or DREAD.
Should not eat of the most holy things] There was a high priest then, but no Urim and Thummim, these having been lost in the captivity.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The Tirshatha, i.e. the governor, to wit, Zerubbabel; whence Nehemiah also is so called, Neh 8:9; 10:1.
Till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim; that this point, which could not be found out by any human skill or industry, might be determined by Divine direction. Hereby it appears that the Urim and Thummim were lost in the destruction of the city and temple, though the Jews fed themselves with hopes of recovering them, but in vain. Of the Urim and Thummim, see Exo 28:30 Num 27:21; 1Sa 23:9.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
63. Tirshathaa title borne bythe Persian governors of Judea (see also Neh 7:65-70;Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1).It is derived from the Persian torsh (“severe”), andis equivalent to “your severity,” “your awfulness.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the Tirshatha said unto them,…. By whom Jarchi understands Nehemiah, and observes, that their rabbins say he was so called, because the wise men allowed him to drink the wine of the Gentiles, he being cupbearer to the king; but Aben Ezra, with greater probability, takes it to be a name of honour and grandeur in the Chaldee language, as a prince or governor; and no doubt Zerubbabel is meant, the prince of the Jews, the same with Sheshbazzar, Ezr 1:8 according to Gussetius w, this office was the same with that of the king’s commissary in a province, delegated to carry his orders, make them known, and see them put in execution; and that this name Tirshatha is the same with Tithraustes in Aelian x; but that seems to be not the title of an office, but the personal name of a man that was a chiliarch:
that they should not eat of the most holy things; as of the shewbread, and those parts of the sin offerings, and of the peace offerings and meat offerings, which belonged to the priests, which the governor forbid these to eat of, who were rejected from the priesthood:
till there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim; as yet there was not any priest that had them; they were not to be found at the return from Babylon; the governor might hope they would be found, and a priest appear clothed with them, when it might be inquired of the Lord by them, whether such priests, before described, might eat of the holy things or not; but since the Jews y acknowledge that these were one of the five things wanting in the second temple; it is all one, as the Talmudists z express it, as if it had been said, until the dead rise, or the Messiah comes; and who is come, the true High Priest, and with whom are the true Urim and Thummim, lights and perfections to the highest degree, being full of grace and truth; of the Urim and Thummim,
[See comments on Ex 28:30].
w Ebr. Comment. p. 809. x Var. Hist. l. 1. c. 21. Vid. Corn. Nep. Vit. Conon. l. 9. c. 3. y T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 21. 2. z T. Bab. Sotah, fol. 48. 2. & Gloss. in Kiddushin, fol. 60. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Tirshatha, the secular governor of the community, i.e., as is obvious from a comparison of Neh 7:65 with Neh 7:70, Zerubbabel, called Hag 1:1 . , always used with the article, is undoubtedly the Persian designation of the governor or viceroy. Nehemiah is also so called in Neh 8:9 and Neh 10:2, and likewise , Neh 12:26. The meaning of the word is still matter of dispute. Some derive it from the Persian trsdn , to fear, and trs , fear = the feared or respected one (Meier, Wurzelb. p. 714); others from Persian trs , acer, auster, the strict ruler; others, again (with Benfey, die Monatsnamen, p. 196), from the Zend. thvorestar (nom. thvoresta ), i.e., praefectus, penes quem est imperium : comp. Gesenius, thes. p. 1521. The Tirshatha decided that they were not to eat of the most holy things till there should arise a priest with Urim and Thummim, i.e., to give a final decision by means of Urim and Thummim. , according to the later usage of the language, is equivalent to , comp. Dan 8:3; Dan 11:2, and other places. The prohibition to eat of the most holy things (comp. on Lev 2:3) involved the prohibition to approach the most holy objects, e.g., the altar of burnt-offering (Exo 29:37; Exo 30:10), and to enter the most holy place, and thus excludes from specific priestly acts: without, however, denying a general inclusion among the priestly order, or abolishing a claim to the priestly revenues, so far as these were not directly connected with priestly functions. On Urim and Thummim, see on Exo 28:30. From the words, “till a priest shall arise,” etc., it is evident that the then high priest was not in a position to entreat, and to pronounce, the divine decision by Urim and Thummim. The reason of this, however, need not be sought in the personality of Joshua (Ewald, Gesch. iv. 95), nor supposed to exist in such a fact as that he might not perhaps have been the eldest son of his father, and therefore not have had full right to the priesthood. This conjecture rests upon utterly erroneous notions of the Urim and Thummim, upon a subjectivistic view, which utterly evaporates the objective reality of the grace with which the high priest was in virtue of his office endowed. The obtainment of the divine decision by Urim and Thummim presupposes the gracious presence of Jahve in the midst of His people Israel. And this had been connected by the Lord Himself with the ark of the covenant, and with its cherubim-overshadowed mercy-seat, from above which He communed with His people (Exo 25:22). The high priest, bearing upon his breast the breastplate with the Urim and Thummim, was to appear before Jahve, and, bringing before Him the judgment of Israel, to entreat the divine decision (Exo 28:30; Num 27:21). The ark of the covenant with the mercy-seat was thus, in virtue of the divine promise, the place of judgment, where the high priest was to inquire of the Lord by means of the Urim and Thummim. This ark, however, was no longer in existence, having been destroyed when Solomon’s temple was burned by the Chaldeans. Those who returned with Zerubbabel were without the ark, and at first without a temple. In such a state of affairs the high priest could not appear before Jahve with the breastplate and the Urim and Thummim to entreat His decision. The books of Samuel, indeed, relate cases in which the divine will was consulted by Urim and Thummim, when the ark of the covenant was not present for the high priest to appear before (comp. 1Sa 23:4, 1Sa 23:6, 1Sa 23:9, etc., 1Sa 14:18); whence it appears that the external or local presence of the ark was not absolutely requisite for this purpose. Still these cases occurred at a time when the congregation of Israel as yet possessed the ark with the Lord’s cherubim-covered mercy-seat, though this was temporarily separated from the holy of holies of the tabernacle. Matters were in a different state at the return from the captivity. Then, not only were they without either ark or temple, but the Lord had not as yet re-manifested His gracious presence in the congregation; and till this should take place, the high priest could not inquire of the Lord by Urim and Thummim. In the hope that with the restoration of the altar and temple the Lord would again vouchsafe His presence to the returned congregation, Zerubbabel expected that a high priest would arise with Urim and Thummim to pronounce a final decision with regard to those priests who could not prove their descent from Aaron’s posterity. This expectation, however, was unfulfilled. Zerubbabel’s temple remained unconsecrated by any visible token of Jahve’s presence, as the place where His name should dwell. The ark of the covenant with the cherubim, and the Shechinah in the cloud over the cherubim, were wanting in the holy of holies of this temple. Hence, too, we find no single notice of any declaration of the divine will or the divine decision by Urim and Thummim in the period subsequent to the captivity; but have, on the contrary, the unanimous testimony of the Rabbis, that after the Babylonian exile God no longer manifested His will by Urim and Thummim, this kind of divine revelation being reckoned by them among the five things which were wanting in the second temple. Comp. Buxtorf, exercitat. ad historiam Urim et Thummim, c. 5; and Vitringa, observat. ss. Lib. vi. c. 6, p. 324f.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(63) Tirshatha.Interchangeable with Pechah, or governor, as Zerubbabel is called in chapter 5:14 and always in Haggai. It is probably an old Persian term, signifying The Feared.
With Urim and with Thummim.See Exo. 28:30. They were pronounced to be excluded from priestly functions. Without ark or temple, the people had not as yet that special presence of Jehovah before which the high priest could inquire of the Lord by Urim and Thummim. Zerubbabel might hope that this privilege would return, and thought the official purity of the priestly line of sufficient importance for such an inquiry. But the holy of holies in the new temple never had in it the ancient tokens ; and by Urim and Thummim Jehovah was never again inquired of.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
63. The Tirshatha A Persian title of the governor of a district, and, according to Gesenius: equivalent to Your Severity, or Dread Sovereign. Nehemiah is called Tirshatha, (Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1,) and this title is sometimes interchanged with , governor. Comp. especially Neh 12:26. In our text the title Tirshatha is to be understood of Zerubbabel, not, as some have supposed, of Nehemiah.
Not eat of the most holy things For strangers could no more lawfully eat of the hallowed things, such as the remnant of the meat offering, (Lev 2:3,) than they could minister at the altar. Compare marginal references.
A priest with Urim By whom the uncertain genealogy might be settled, and the divine will in the matter be determined. In the former times such matters had been settled by inquiring through those Urim and Thummim on the ephod of the high priest. See 1Sa 30:7-8, and notes on Exo 28:30, and Jos 1:1. From this verse it appears that these sacred media of learning the divine counsel had been lost during the captivity, and we have no reliable record that they were ever replaced.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Enrolling Of The Priests Who Could Not Prove Their Ancestry ( Ezr 2:63-65 ).
Far more important was the situation of the priests who could not demonstrate their ancestry, for this excluded them from priestly office, and from reception of priestly benefits such as the tithe, and the parts of offerings and sacrifices particular to the priests. They would also presumably be liable to pay taxes. The exclusion was necessary because for a non-Aaronide to participate in the priesthood would have been seen as a major sacrilege (compare Numbers 16). The risk could not be taken.
Ezr 2:61
‘And of the sons of the priests,’
Those now mentioned are distinguished from the non-Priests mentioned above. These claimed to be sons of the priests.
Ezr 2:61
The sons of Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz, the sons of Barzillai, who took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after their name.’
The name Hakkoz was a good priestly name being borne by the seventh order of David’s priests (1Ch 24:10). It was also the name of one of Judah’s descendants. But clearly the family could not prove its ancestry. However it may well have done so later, for in Ezr 8:33 we read of ‘Meremoth, the son of Uriah the priest’ who may have been the same as ‘Meremoth, the son of Uriah, the son of Hakkoz’ (Neh 3:4; Neh 3:21). On the other hand that may have been a different Hakkoz, or a different Meremoth.
Barzillai was a wealthy Israelite, a Gileadite, who assisted David during the rebellion of his son Absalom (2Sa 12:31-31). But he was not an Aaronide. The argument of the sons of Barzillai was that they were Aaronides, but that the Barzillai in question had taken the name of his wife’s family, presumably for inheritance purposes. It is clear that at this time the name change was preventing proof of his ancestry. A second consideration might also have been that having inherited wealth he had disqualified himself as a priest in view of the fact that the priest’s only inheritance was to be YHWH (Num 18:20). The name Habaiah is not testified to in the Old Testament.
Ezr 2:62
‘These sought their register among those who were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found, therefore they were deemed polluted and put from the priesthood.’
It would appear that records of ancestry of the priests had been taken to Babylon by the captives, or may even have been memorised and written down once they arrived there and that when these were consulted no trace could be found of the above families. We can compare with this how the ancestry of the kings of Scotland going back many generations were so memorised, and were repeated at the coronation of kings. A similar example was found among the Arabs. Someone who was visiting an Arab encampment described how an Arab got up and related the history of his forebears going back forty generations, and commented that there were others in the assembly who obviously could have done the same, telling who married and who begat whom, and where they lived, and frequently what they had done, and where they wandered. He said it sounded exactly like a chapter of genealogy out of the Bible. In consequence of their failure to prove their ancestry they were considered ‘polluted’ (not proven as Aaronides and therefore unfit to serve) and therefore excluded from the current priesthood. They would, of course, be accepted as Israelites on the same basis as those above. As they were presumably circumcised they would have the same rights as proselytes to take part in the worship of YHWH, and to be adopted as Israelites (Exo 12:48). It is striking that no number is given in respect of these. Their status was pending.
Ezr 2:63
‘And the governor (Tirshatha) said to them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.’
The Tirshatha was clearly in control of matters, and it was his decision, not to exclude them for ever, but to exclude them from eating of the priest’s portions until their position could be determined by the use of the Urim and Thummim, utilised by ‘a (High) Priest’. The Urim and Thummim were the sacred lots carried in the High Priest’s breastpouch (Exo 28:30; Lev 8:8; see also Deu 33:8-10; Num 27:21). These would appear to have given the answers of ‘yes’ or ‘no answer’ (no example is known of a specific ‘no’ being given as an answer). See for example 1Sa 14:41; 1Sa 23:9-12; 1Sa 28:6; and compare their probable use in Jos 7:16-18; 2Sa 2:1. We know of no example of their use after the early monarchy, but that may simply have been because the kings preferred other methods. The Urim and Thummim (beginning with the first and last letters of the alphabet) may have been pieces of wood or stone marked in such a way as to be able to read an answer from them when they were either withdrawn from the pouch, or tossed on sacred ground. Their mention here would, however, appear to indicate that a situation when they would be used might be expected within a reasonable period (certainly the sacred lot is used later – Neh 10:34; Neh 11:1). If this list is a first list, made in the time of Sheshbazzar, as compared with a second list in Nehemiah 7, it would appear that the Tirshatha in question was Sheshbazzar. We can compare the fact that the Tirshatha appears to have been able to decide the use of the Urim and Thummim with the fact that Joshua could do the same through the High Priest (Num 27:18-21).
‘The Tirshatha.’ This would appear to be a Persian title meaning ‘governor’. Indeed Sheshbazzar was probably officially appointed as Tirshatha, with ‘governor’ (Ezr 5:14) being an interpretation of it. The term is also used in the Book of Nehemiah of Sheshbazzar (Neh 7:65; Neh 7:70) and Nehemiah (Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Ver. 63. The Tirshatha Tirshata, or Athirshata, the same as Nehemiah. The word Tirshatha is the name of his employment, and signifies the king’s cup-bearer, says Calmet. Some however think, that Zerubbabel, rather, is meant here. See Neh 1:11. The meaning of the words till there stood up a priest, &c. seems to be, till the Lord himself should decide, by means of the high-priest, whether they were the sons of Aaron or not.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Ezr 2:63 And the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.
Ver. 63. And the Tirshatha said unto them ] i.e. Zerubbabel, the chief magistrate, a man of great power and no less courage, who would not be guilty of passive injustice.
That they should not eat of the most holy things
Till there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Tirshatha = governor (Persian title). Here refers to Nehemiah, as in Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1; Neh 12:26. The Hebrew title is Pechah (Neh 5:14, Neh 5:18; Neh 12:26). Whence the Turkish Pashah. See note on Ezr 5:3.
not eat of the most holy things: i.e. the remains of the meal offering, sin offering, and right shoulder of the peace offerings. Compare Lev 2:3; Lev 10:12-14, Lev 10:16, Lev 10:17. Num 18:9, Num 18:10.
holy. See note on Exo 3:5.
with = for. Urim and with Thummim. See note on Exo 28:30. Num 26:55.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Urim
(See Scofield “Exo 28:30”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Tirshatha: or, governor, The person who held this office at this time was probably Zerubbabel. The word Tirshatha is supposed to be Persian; and if, as Castel supposes, it signifies austerity, or that fear which is impressed by the authority of a governor, it may be derived from tars, “ear,” or tursh, “acid, austere.” Neh 7:65, Neh 8:9, Neh 10:1
should not: Lev 2:3, Lev 2:10, Lev 6:17, Lev 6:29, Lev 7:16, Lev 10:17, Lev 10:18, Lev 22:2, Lev 22:3, Lev 22:10, Lev 22:14-16, Num 18:9-11, Num 18:19, Num 18:32
Urim: Exo 28:30, Lev 8:8, Num 27:21, Deu 33:8, 1Sa 28:6
Reciprocal: Deu 16:17 – as he is able 1Ch 9:1 – all Israel Eze 13:9 – neither shall they be Eze 44:24 – in controversy Hag 1:1 – governor Hag 2:2 – governor
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Ezr 2:63. The Tirshatha The governor or kings commissioner, namely, Zerubbabel: whence Nehemiah is so called, Neh 8:9; Neh 10:2. That they should not eat of the most holy things That they should not partake of the sacrifices offered for sin, nor of the right shoulder of peace- offerings, nor of the show-bread; which were all most holy, and the portion of the priests alone. Till there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim Till the Lord himself should show, by an answer given to some high- priest, inquiring of him by Urim and Thummim, as had been anciently done, whether they were of the line of Aaron or not. But as God had ceased to give an answer this way long before this time, therefore, it was as much as to say, that as their names were not found in the authentic genealogical registers of the priests, they should for ever be excluded, till some divine oracle pronounced them to have a right to the priesthood. Hereby it appears, that the Urim and Thummim were lost in the destruction of the city and temple, though the Jews fed themselves with hopes of recovering them, but in vain. And by the want of that oracle, they were taught to expect the great oracle, the Messiah.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2:63 And the {l} Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with {m} Urim and with Thummim.
(l) This is a Chaldee name, and signifies him who has authority over others.
(m) Read Exo 28:30.