Yes, and another legend is that Jeremiah hid it in a cave on Mount Nebo. In either case, what is Talmudic opinion on what later became of the Ark?
The tone and meaning of the passage you quote and that of Jeremiah 3:16 seem quite disparate if they’re describing the same fact.
And what is opinion about the Temple of Elephantine Island? Given that the Jewish High Priests were frightened of the sacrilege of King Manasses (Josiah’s grandfather), Occam’s Razor leads to a simpler solution.
When they allow it, it also inspires massive protest from the religious community. Just, different religion.
Unfortunately, you can’t separate perception and intention. Any attempt to expand any Jewish religious activity atop the mount (or Christians trying to pray there, too) is seen by the guardians of Islam’s third-holiest site as an attempt to push them aside and out of their place, and an attempt to deliberately insult them. Religion seems to make everyone sensitive.
John Mace:
The Orthodox Rabbinate in Israel is actually quite happy to have Jewish worship on the Temple Mount forbidden, due to the difficulties in doing it properly that I detailed in points 1 and 2 of my first post in this thread. Those who scrupulously observe the Torah would know better than to attempt sacrificial services in possibly the wrong place, in impurity, but in the absence of the government’s prohibition, there would no doubt be groups of zealots who would insist on making half-assed attempts, and doing so would be against Torah law.
septimus:
To the best of my knowledge, the Talmudic opinion is that it remains in the chamber where Josiah hid it.
I don’t think it’s describing the same thing, I think that part of Jeremiah is a prophecy about the return from Babylon and the second Temple, which did not have the Ark.
I’m not sure the Talmud mentions the Elephantine Temple at all. But the scholars of the Talmud certainly believed in the literal truth of the scriptures, including the verse in Chronicles that I quoted earlier, and even if one is skeptical of the “hidden chamber” interpretation of it, it clearly says that Josiah commanded the Levites to put the Ark SOMEWHERE, indicating that it was still in the domain of the King of Judah two generations after Manasseh.
I do not think Talmudic opinion should be taken as undisputed fact. My interest in Ark and Temple is not about Talmudic opinion, but rather what are the best guesses from available evidence and inference.
[1] Jeremiah lived and wrote at the time when Josiah allegedly hid the Ark; he describes an Ark which is mysteriously hidden; but he is not speaking of the same event? Occam’s Razor would cringe.
[2] If anything, this should make the Elephantine Temple more interesting, not less.
[3] Disagree. Josiah may have assumed the Levites had the Ark (or even suspected they took it to Elephantine!), but there’s no evidence he ever even saw the Ark. Quite to the contrary, when you consider the great detail with which other objects are discussed in chapters 34-35 of the book you mention, I find it odd that the Ark, the most sacred object in the world, gets only a single sentence. There’s not even a “And the Levites obeyed his order.” I wonder if this meager mention of the Ark is trying to convey a message by what it doesn’t say.
Do some contemporary Jewish worshiping practices include actual animal sacrifices?
No, they ceased when the Temple was destroyed.
But if the Temple were to be rebuilt, would they resume?
Cool; I must have been thinking of some other debate… Apologies for confusion.
Thank you all for this information … things are a bit clearer to me now and really that’s all one could expect here on a message board.
Are there any Levites left? Those who were designated to administer the Temple … correct me if I’m wrong, but these folks were forbidden to work or keep their own flocks and fields … relying on the sacrifices brought to the Temple for their foodstuffs.
Excuse me if these sound like an 8-year-old’s question, but you give my undo credit to think that … what very little I do know of Judaism is mainly all wrong anyway.
Animals were sacrificed at the Elephantine Temple, perhaps as late as the reign of Darius II (last Pharaoh of the 27th Dynasty). From the source already cited:
septimus:
Read the entire passage in context. He is not describing current status, he is delivering a PROPHECY, telling the Judahites what they could expect to happen if they repent from their sinful ways. The preceding verses say, "Return, faithless people…I will choose you and bring to to Zion, then I will give you shepherds to lead you…in those days, when your numbers will have increased, people will no longer say “The Ark of G-d.” Occam’s razor, nothing, the context is clearly not contemporary but conditional future.
As a historical curiosity, certainly. As a more likely fate for the ark, not until there’s some more evidence and less mere speculation about its age and origins.
What other objects? It describes the idolatrous items he destroyed, and makes mild mention of raw materials for repairs to the structure, but doesn’t say anything about building or storing any other of the temple objects, such as the table, altars or candelabrum. The altar and pots and pans are mentioned, but only in the context of describing the Passover sacrifice that was conducted in that year of Josiah’s reign. It mentions finding the Torah scroll and his reading it. That’s it for anything material in the Temple mentioned in 2 Chronicles 34-35. If anything, his command in 35:3 to the Levites to put the Ark (somewhere) is the ONLY at-all detailed command he issues regarding any Temple object. The fact that a sentence is dedicated to it would imply greater significance, not some sort of back-handed dismissal of it.
watchwolf49:
There are plenty of Levites around.
They were not forbidden to work or own flocks. Levites did not have defined tribal territory in ancient Israel, but they had 48 designated dwelling cities all around the nation, including pasture-land for flocks:
Additionally, they did not receive their income only from consecrated Temple foodstuffs. Levites (collectively) got a tenth-tithe of all (non-consecrated) produce in the land if Israel, and Priests got a lesser tithe of the produce from the Israelites, as well as a tenth of the tithe that the Levites took, plus numerous other mandated gifts, some of which were from Temple-consecrated animals, but many of which were not.
Nothing to excuse; questioning is always welcome.
Ouch … my head … this learning is painful …
May I take it that all this is from commentary? Because all that verse says is (JPS) “Go and set up an altar to the LORD on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite,” which doesn’t make it sound like getting the length of a cubit wrong would be that important, and has no hint of sinfulness if you don’t get it exactly right.
Actually, it sounds like the kind of excuse I would make if my wife wanted me to do something I didn’t want to do – “I’m waiting to hear from the guy about the exact measurements.”
ETA: if they did build a third Temple, would all Jews from all over the world be required to visit it thrice yearly?
Tony Sinclair:
The preceding verses shed more light on that - the significance of the threshing floor is that that’s the spot where the destructive angel was stopped. Although it’s not explicit in verse 18, the connection between the stopping of the destructive angel and the building of the altar is clear from the context, and that particular spot is where the altar is meant to be placed.
The sinfulness of sacrificing elsewhere once a spot has been divinely designated is from Deuteronomy 12:11 - “Then to the place the Lord your God will choose as a dwelling for his Name—there you are to bring everything I command you: your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, and all the choice possessions you have vowed to the Lord.”
The Talmud says that the second Temple could not have been built without three surviving prophets from the days of the first Temple showing them exactly where the altar should be placed.
Yup. You might want to think about investing in whatever companies are likely to get the contracts for road repairs and rest stops on routes to Jerusalem…
What is the relationship between the priestly Levites and the modern kohans?
jayjay:
“Kohan” (or kohen, or cohen, or any number of variant transliterations of the word) is the Hebrew word that is generally translated as “priests.” They are a subset of the Levite tribe (descendants of Levi, son of Jacob), specifically, descended from Aaron (Moses’s brother, a great-grandson of Levi). Modern Kohanim (that’s the proper plural) are direct male-line descendants of those who lived in Temple times.
So if the Temple IS restored, they’d be the go-to population to become priests (or are they already considered priests, just…in reserve?)?
I thought Jeremiah was a bullfrog.
Sorry, someone had to do it!
They’re already priests. It’s a hereditary thing. In Judaism, priest is what you are, not what you do. (Although there are some things that only kohanim can do, and some things only kohanim aren’t allowed to do.)