Crisis in Yehudah
Yoshiyahu HaMelech and the other Jewish leaders are petrified after they discover the lost Sefer Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu rolled to the section of the Torah that warns of exile from Eretz Yisrael (Devarim 28). The leadership, in turn, decides to consult Chuldah the Nevi’ah (Melachim II 22:14).
Chuldah and Not Yirmiyahu HaNavi
The Sefer Torah is discovered in the eighteenth year of Yoshiyahu’s reign. The great Yirmiyahu HaNavi begins his career as a prophet in the thirteenth year of Yoshiyahu’s reign (Yirmiyahu 1). Why do Yoshiyahu and the other Jewish leaders choose to consult the far less prominent Chuldah instead of Yirmiyahu? In fact, the Gemara (Megillah 14b) seemingly criticizes the otherwise righteous Yoshiyahu for consulting Chuldah instead of Yirmiyahu HaNavi.
Seek the Best
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 32b) teaches that repetitive language of “Tzedek Tzedek Tirdof,” “justice, justice you shall pursue” (Devarim 15:20) teaches that one should consult the best Beit Din available, “Halach Achar Beit Din Yafeh.” Certainly, regarding the resolution and outcome of a major national crisis, the premier Navi of the time should be consulted, namely, Yirmiyahu HaNavi. We hear of Chuldah only in this instance in Tanach, and thus seems to be a far less prominent Navi than Yirmiyahu. Thus, the choice to consult Chuldah is not only unwise, but also runs against the Halachic and Hashkafic grain.
Nashim Rachmaniyot and Different Styles of Nevu’ah
One explanation the Gemara (Megillah 14b) offers for Yoshiyahu HaMelech’s choice of Chuldah is that “Nashim Rachmaniyot Hein,” “women are inclined to be more merciful.” We have explained earlier that each Navi has his own style and that the personality of the Navi influences the Nevu’ah (Sanhedrin 89a). We noted, for example, that this is why Eliyahu HaNavi prefers that Elisha carry out the prophecy to anoint Chaza’eil.
Yirmiyahu, indeed, is a harsh Navi. Yirmiyahu 24 serves as a prime example, where he presents a Nevu’ah in which he compares the Jews of Yehudah to exceptionally spoiled figs. Thus, it seems Yoshiyahu HaMelech anticipates a very harsh prophecy from Yirmiyahu and therefore thinks it best to avoid him.
This strategy, however, does not work. Chuldah delivers a scathingly harsh prophecy, in which she exclaims the impending Churban in the severest of terms. Most interestingly, Chuldah uses the term “Ko Amar Hashem,” “thus said Hashem,” no less than three times in her Nevu’ah (Melachim II 22:15, 22:16, 22:18). She repeatedly indicates that she represents the unedited and unadulterated word of Hashem, without a hint of any personal slant. She might also be discouraging Yoshiyahu from seeking a “second opinion.”
Yirmiyahu and the Aseret HaShevatim
The Gemara’s second explanation is that Yirmiyahu was far from Jerusalem on a campaign to return the lost ten Shevatim to Eretz Yisrael. Indeed, Sefer Yirmiyahu is replete with allusions to his outreach efforts to the Aseret HaShevatim.
The unforgettable description in Yirmiyahu 31 of Rachel crying for her exiled children and their return to the land is one such example. The tribe of Ephraim was at the epicenter of the exiled Malchut Yisrael, and thus Rachel is described as crying for her exiled children, which eventually leads to the divine promise of their return.
Melachim II 23 includes descriptions of Yoshiyahu’s elimination of Avodah Zarah and Bamot from Beit El and Shomeron, which implies Yoshiyahu’s sovereign control of these areas. The death of the last mighty Assyrian emperor Ashurbanipal in 627 BCE, during Yoshiyahu HaMelech’s reign, begins the steep decline of the Assyrian empire. The end of Assyrian control over northern Israel allows Yoshiyahu HaMelech to assume control over the region. It also offers the first opportunity for the Bnei Yisrael exiled by the Assyrians to return to their homeland.
Conclusion
Chazal are exceedingly careful, precise, and well based in their analysis of Tanach. Our examination of the Gemara’s explanations for the choice of Chuldah has hopefully demonstrated this point. Chazal’s interpretations are not fanciful and whimsical. It is our challenge to examine the Tanach carefully to help us reveal the reasonable basis for their assertions. As the Gemara (Megillah 6a) states “one who claims he has made a great effort and has discovered, is to be believed.”