Malachi - the last prophet? Chapter 1

Rav Sinensky: "Accordingly, Malakhi represents the final recorded nevu’a in Tanakh, concluding the era of Shivat Tzion in particular and prophecy in general. As we will see, there are numerous overlaps between the sefer and the themes we have developed throughout the course of our series."

R. Angel: "Even if Malachi were the last prophet in Tanakh, perhaps there were other prophets after him who did not compose canonical books? There is no categorical statement in prophetic literature formally declaring the end of prophecy; no pronouncement comparable to the Torah's assertion of Moses' unsurpassed prophecy (Num 12:6-9; Deut 34:10). The lack of prophetic books after Malachi does not prove that prophecy stopped with him. Absent empirical text evidence, we can only rely on rabbinic tradition that prophecy ceased with Malachi."

When did Malachi prophesize?

R. Sinensky: "there is good reason to believe that Malakhi prophesied shortly after the period in which Ezra and Nechemia were active."

R. Hayyim Angel: "Ibn Ezra (see below) quotes an anonymous commentator who believed that Malachi lived during the Assyrian period, at least two centuries before Haggai and Zecharia. The book's opening verse states that Malachi propeshied to 'Israel' and that term often refers to the northern kingdom of Israel, which was exiled by the Assyrians in 722-720 BCE. However, Ibn Ezra and later commentators reject this claim on the grounds that Edom still functioned as a nation at the time of the First Temple's destruction, whereas Malachi's opening prophecy is predicated on the historical reality that Edom has been destroyed."

R. Sinensky: "Beyond the chronology, there are a number of points worth noting at the outset. In contrast to Chagai, Zekharia, and the majority of Nevi’im, no dates are mentioned at any point in the work. This unusual feature supports Abravanel’s cogent position that the entirety of Malakhi constitutes a single prophecy. Also noteworthy is the absence of any visions in Malakhi’s recorded prophecies. In this respect, Malakhi resembles Chagai and is unlike Zekharia."

R. Angel: The prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah were - as yet - not fully realized (either due to the failure of all Jews to return to Israel or due to intermarriage....). While the Second Temple had been rebuilt by Malachi's time, the redemption prophecies appeared remote. Many people were poor; Judah was a vassal state of the Persian Empire; most Jews remained in exile. There was no longer a Davidic dynasty. People feared that the the relationship between HaShem and the people of Israel had been severed.

How is Malachi structured?

R. Sinensky: "Perhaps most intriguing is the book’s literary arrangement. Malakhi structures his nevu’a as an ongoing series of dialogues between God and the Jewish People. These conversations appear a total of seven times, forming the sefer’s backbone and, as we will argue later, representing its central motif."

R. Angel: "The Book of Malachi is structured in the format of dialogues. These dialogues are not necessarily transcripts of debates between the prophet and his people. Rather, Malachi uses a rhetorical device that reflects the fundamental sentiments of the people."

What kind of pronouncement?

R. Sinensky: "The navi goes on to decry the hypocrisy of the people. They ask, “In what manner have You loved us?” (1:2). God responds by reminding them that Yaakov and Esav were brothers, yet God will destroy only Edom, which will be known as “the border of wickedness, and the nation forever despised by God” (1:4). The emphasis on familial relations is particularly interesting. As we will see throughout the sefer, Malakhi places great emphasis on the centrality of family relations to our responsibilities not only toward God, but also our fellow Jews and humanity."

R. Angel: In response to Israel's feeling of rejection, HaShem says that Israel is rebuilt and continues to live, unlike Edom.

Defiling the Relationship (1:6-11)

R. Sinensky:

Malachi offers two plausible metaphors for our relationship with HaShem: father or master. Either way we have fallen short. He especially levels these charges against the priests, who scorn God by offering deficient animals upon the altar while denying wrongdoing. Looking at the world through Malakhi’s lenses, the people’s hypocrisy is not just a sin; it undermines the fabric of the intimate relationship between God and His beloved.

The term honor, kavod, represents yet another overlap with Chagai, who emphasizes that the honor of the Second Temple will eventually exceed that of the First. This particular parallel offers insight into the significance of the multiple connections we have noted between Chagai and Malakhi. God seems to say: Although the Second Temple has not yet attained the honor described in Chagai’s prophecy, that is no excuse for relating dishonorably to the sacrificial service.

As if to confirm this reading of Malakhi’s rebuke, the very next verse reads, “You say the table of the Lord can be treated with scorn.” Given the Temple’s relatively sorry state, the priests likely saw no reason to act reverentially toward the service. Moreover, although we do not know the exact date of Malakhi’s prophecy, we get the sense that the Temple had already been functioning for some time. At this point, the Temple was likely no longer a novelty, and quite possibly was taken for granted by the priests.

Here, Malakhi anticipates one of the great challenges to Zionism in our times. Many younger people take the existence of Israel for granted; they did not see the founding of the State or the miraculous victories in wars, such as in 1967. The challenge of the current generation is not to fall into the trap that ensnared the priests – to remain passionately committed to Jerusalem even when its restoration is no longer freshly imprinted upon our hearts.

Continuing to rail against the priests’ hypocrisy, Malakhi adds, “u-mincha lo ertze mi-yedkhem,” “I will accept no offering from you” (1:10). This phraseology is doubly important. First, the word mincha appears six times over the course of Sefer Malakhi. Mincha denotes a gift born of a relationship. That is what God desires from His people, not their insincerity. In this way, mincha is consistent with the theme of intimacy. Second, the term ritzuy, which emphasizes the personal relationship between the people and God, is particularly apt.^[1]

In verse 11, drawing on the language of Tehillim (113:3), Malakhi goes on to contrast the hypocrisy of Jewish worship with the authenticity of the gentiles: “From where the sun rises to where it sets, my name is honored among the nations, and everywhere incense and pure oblation are offered to My name.” This description, of course, seems perhaps overly fantastic. Which nations at the time truly worshiped the God of the Bible with purity?[2] But the point seems to fit nicely with the work’s larger message to this point. How ironic it is that the immediate family members scorn God, while the distant relatives worship wholeheartedly! Indeed, the chapter ends with the sarcastic words: “My name is revered among the nations.”

R. Angel: Malachi condemns the priests who bring defective offerings. "Adding a different dimension of interpretation, Rashi on Genesis adopts a midrashic reading that connects the opening of Malachi (1:2-5) with the ensuing passage (1:5-2:9). The Torah reports that Esau despised his birthright....." "Rashi quotes midrashim that suggest that Esav rejected his birthright because he did not want to be involved with the priestly service. ... Seen through the prism of Rashi's midrashic connection, Malachi's criticism also becomes a subtle threat to Israel." Malachi accuses his generation's priests of spurning HaShem's covenant and their national birthright.