David’s daughter is raped by her brother, right inside the palace and their father is silent. What does this terrible tale of domestic violence have to do with a petition to change the Hebrew name of a beloved flower? It’s about the power we have to still change the way we live and love, not let the traumas of our patriarchal past dictate our present and hopeful future; save each other from the violence that’s everywhere, even in the names of violets.
Power can corrupt even the most promising of princes and political leaders.
In King David’s court morality keeps devolving into familiar patterns of greed, familial violence, sexual abuse and corruption that all prophets rail against, again and again. In today’s painful chapter that spans five years, the firstborn prince destined to be David’s heir turns out to be a rapist whose vile actions discredit him from becoming the next king - he is murdered by his own brother in an act of revenge.
Halbertal and Holmes frame today’s chapter in the context of its political polemics:
“After having narrated the traumatic tale of dynastic change, from the house of Saul to the house of David, our writer now turns to the politically agonizing story of an intradynastic or intergenerational transfer of power. While so doing, the author of the Book of Samuel uncovers tensions and contradictions inherent in dynastic structures that reach far beyond the issue of incapable heirs to the throne randomly tossed up by genetic flux..
David’s family would survive in power for hundreds of years until the destruction of Judah and the exile to Babylon. Yet here again, as earlier, the author of the Book of Samuel shows how the most profoundly problematic features of political life become luminously visible at their origins… —the rape of Tamar and the rebellion of Absalom.”
Amnon, son of Ahinoam and King David, is the firstborn prince and he falls in love, or lust, with Tamar, his half sister, daughter of David and Maacha, the Princess of Geshur, a small northern kingdom.
Guided by his cousin, Amnon comes up with a devious plan to get Tamar. He pretends to be sick in bed, and convincing his father the king that the only way he’ll heal is for his sister Tamar to make special food for him and feed him herself:
“ Amnon lay down and pretended to be sick. The king came to see him, and Amnon said to the king, “Let my sister Tamar come and prepare a couple of heart shaped cakes in front of me, and let her bring them to me.”
Amnon’s despicable plan is lost in translation and perhaps also lost on his father. The Hebrew word for ‘heart shaped cakes’ most often translated in English as ‘cakes’ is “Levivot’ - fried cakes of sorts. But the same Hebrew word can be read as “Levavot’ - hearts. Amnon is hinting at what his heart desires - beyond healing or comfort food. But David either misses it - or chooses to ignore the ominous tone - he dispatches the young princess to her half-brother’s chambers.
What happens next is described in excruciating detail. Despite her protests, Amnon rapes Tamar and then has his servants throw her out of the room, treating her as a mere object, hated and despised.
Tamar wails loudly, rips her ornamented tunic, making sure her shameful rape is a matter of public court business, while proclaiming her innocence. She finds refuge in her brother’s house, Prince Absalom hosts but hushes his sister, forbidding her from talking about the matter any further. She remains in his home, desolate.
What does David do? Nothing.
The text in our version of the story clearly indicates that “When King David heard about all this, he was greatly upset” but in another version found in the Qumran caves -evidence of earlier, other manuscripts of this story before it became the official canon also gives a reason for the king’s silence: “But he did not vex the spirit of Amnon his son, for he loved him, since he was his firstborn.”
Whichever version, Tamar’s awful fate is sealed, and she is silenced, never to be heard from again - betrayed by her family.
“Like so many victims of domestic sexual abuse, Tamar is trapped by family. Raped by a close family member, she is denied her right of reaction. She is the victim of both brothers: first by Amnon’s rape, then by Absalom’s silencing. Nobody looks at her as a person. To Amnon, she was an object of lust and then hate; to Absalom, she is a crisis that has to be contained. Tamar’s own feelings do not enter into their calculations.
Tamar, whose voice has gone from rational argument to stammering supplication to loud outcry, is now silent. She will be heard no more. Like so many other victims of domestic rape, she joins the conspiracy of silence that dooms her. “
What’s the purpose of this story in the greater context of the House of David’s rise to power? Is this part of the pattern in which later editors portray David and his family as unfit to rule? Is it part of the plot of Solomon’s heirs to define him - and not his brothers - as the just king the people deserve - or continued partly veiled critique of the monarchy itself? Frymer-Kensky continues to explore this saga, with an eye to the names that may reveal about the authors’ intent:
“From the point of view of Tamar, the monarchy has changed nothing. The very names of the characters tell the tragedy with dramatic irony. Their names exemplify the ideal king: a true and trustworthy (Amnon from a’mn) father who brings well-being (Absalom from a’b “father” and šalom) “well-being, peace.” But together they fail dismally to nourish the palm tree (tamar), who is destroyed. In this new monarchy, the weak can still be victimized by the powerful, girls are vulnerable to violence, and violence against them still spreads unchecked until it culminates in civil war. The monarchy does not solve the problem that is its only reason for being: it cannot govern society so that outrage will not occur.”
The chapter ends with Absalom trapping Amnon, killing him, and then fleeing to his grandfather, the King of Geshur. When David hears the news of his firstborn’s killing he too rips his clothes in grief, as Tamar had done earlier, and his entire court does the same. But the gesture of grief and torn trust does little to heal Tamar or the family. Three more years will go by before the next chapter in the family feud will claim its next move.
There’s one more troubling post script to this story. In the early 20th century, the revival of the Hebrew language engaged many poets, scholars, and linguists. Among their many pursuits was the choice of Hebrew names for flowers that were not known in earlier biblical times. Pansies, for instance. Also known as viola-tricolor, these beloved beauties got their English name from the French word for ‘thought’ or ‘reflection’ - Pensee. But when a Hebrew name was sought, the poet Saul Tchernicovsky turned to his Russian roots for inspiration. Based on a Russian fairy tale, Pansies are known as ‘Ivan and Maria’ - brother and sister who are separated as babies, unite as adult lovers, and turned into flowers to forever preserve their forbidden love in a format that won’t seem too problematic. Why our poet thought it’s worth preserving this sad tale and awful biblical rape story inside blooming spring gardens forever is yet another sad mystery. Perhaps they deserve a better new name?? There is a petition going around!
Below the Bible Belt: 929 chapters, 42 months, daily reflections.
Become a free or paid subscriber and join Rabbi Amichai’s 3+ years interactive online quest to question, queer + re-read between the lines of the entire Hebrew Bible.
Enjoy daily posts, weekly videos and monthly learning sessions. 2022-2025.
How can a closer and critical reading of this cornerstone of our culture help us rethink our values and live more honest, happy, healthy lives?
This is a brilliant and rich offering, Amichai. So many threads.
I would like to say something about the word "patriarchy". The common cultural association is, I believe, that patriarchy=men who abuse power. It is basically a perjorative. The word literally means father-power, and yes, in the historical, mythical, and biblical narratives fathers are the clan and kingdom rulers. They happen to be fathers because fathers (men) sired the generations and created the dynasties, True enough. But the problem isn't with fathers, it's with power (archy). Lord Acton famously said that ,"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I daresay that matriarchy---were we to have a historical and mythical record of such---would have its own corruptions.
What is impressive about the "archos" of the surviving male (written) traditions is how evident the sins of the fathers are. One finds there very few stories of benevolent and admirable fathers, certainly very few in the Bible. Sad.
This is a brilliant and rich offering, Amichai. So many threads.
I would like to say something about the word "patriarchy". The common cultural association is, I believe, that patriarchy=men who abuse power. It is basically a perjorative. The word literally means father-power, and yes, in the historical, mythical, and biblical narratives fathers are the clan and kingdom rulers. They happen to be fathers because fathers (men) sired the generations and created the dynasties, True enough. But the problem isn't with fathers, it's with power (archy). Lord Acton famously said that ,"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I daresay that matriarchy---were we to have a historical and mythical record of such---would have its own corruptions.
What is impressive about the "archos" of the surviving male (written) traditions is how evident the sins of the fathers are. One finds there very few stories of benevolent and admirable fathers, certainly very few in the Bible. Sad.