Chapter Four. The Divine Presence and a Heavenly Voice Come to Solomon’s Aid—On Sin, Repentance, and Absolution

Solomon is not merely a prefiguration of Jesus, nor simply an ideal king. He is also a king judged by his own misconduct, for his sins against God; and in both Jewish and Christian tradition, his biblical biography occupies a central place in the debate on the nature of crime and punishment, repentance and forgiveness. Nonetheless, Christian literature accorded far more attention to this aspect of Solomon’s biography than did Jewish writers. The correspondence that existed here was not one in which each side responded to the claims of the other, but rather a seemingly shared interest in, or need to address, the biblical account of Solomon’s life. In this chapter, I will present only a few of the many treatments of this subject by Jewish and Christian writers in an attempt to understand the roots of their intensive occupation with the idea of Solomon as a sinner—an occupation that clearly reflects Christianity’s attempt to grapple with the Bible and to do so through exegetical methods. More than one biblical king, after all, was held to account for his sins.

Solomon is not merelyaprefiguration of Jesus, nor simplya ni deal king.H ei s also ak ing judgedb yh is ownm isconduct,f or his sins against God; and in both Jewish and Christian tradition, his biblical biographyo ccupies ac entral place in the debate on the nature of crime and punishment,repentance and forgiveness.
Nonetheless,Christian literature accorded far more attention to this aspect of Solomon'sb iographyt han did Jewishw riters.T he correspondencet hat existed here was not one in which each side responded to the claims of the other,b ut rather as eemingly shared interest in, or need to address,t he biblical account of Solomon'slife.Inthis chapter,Iwill present onlyafew of the manytreatments of this subject by Jewish and Christian writers in an attempt to understand the roots of their intensive occupation with the idea of Solomonasasinner-an occupation that clearlyreflects Christianity'sattempt to grapple with the Bible and to do so through exegetical methods. Moret han one biblical king,a fter all, was held to account for his sins.

*
In the Spanish Chapel of the Dominican church SantaMariaNovella in Florence one mayf ind af resco by Andrea di Bonaiuto entitled "TheT riumph of St.Thomas Aquinas and the Allegory of Christian Learning" (Il trionfo di san Tomaso the wisdomofthe governing body.⁴⁰⁷ In Canto 10:109 -111, Solomon is the author of Songo fS ongs, possessed of the highest wisdom. He is "the fifth light,t he most beautiful among us \b reathes from such love, the whole world down there \D esires vehementlyt oh aven ews of it".⁴⁰⁸ In the fourteenth century,itwas not yetcertain thatthe theologyofthe Dominican St.T homas would indeedt riumph over that of the Franciscans, even though in 1321the Vatican pronounced him asaint,and two years later the Bishop of Paris withdrew his accusations of heresy.Inthe fresco (one of the countless paintingst hat glorify him), St.Thomas is depicted as av ictor-am an who has unifiedf aith and wisdom (the lattere ncompassingA ristotelian philosophya nd the sciences). He sits upon aGothic-style throne wearingablack robe and holding an open book,s urrounded by two sets of five figures representing the Old and New Testaments: David carries ah arp; Moses, the TenC ommandments; Isaiah,the Book of Prophecies;Job, the book that bearshis name; and Solomon, Proverbs. Nine figures of the ten have halos over their heads, and the onlymissing halo is KingS olomon's.⁴⁰⁹ In denying Solomon ah alo, Andrea di Bonaiutoe xpressed the dualityi n Christianity'sattitudes towards him-aduality also reflected in Dante'swork. Solomon-aprefiguration, accordingtoChristology,ofJ esus-was also ak ing who sinnedgreatly, did not repent,a nd never was forgiven. Hence, he did not merit the status of holinessg ranted to the other figures in the fresco( and it is both symbolic and ironic thatt he frescod ecorates the hall of what waso riginallya monastery,whose monks came dailytoconfesstheir sins, hear words of reproof, and be absolved. This ambivalent attitude towards Solomon, prevalent both in Jewish and Christian traditions, was an outcome of internal controversies within both religions regarding the natureofsin, proper expressions of penitence(paenitentia), methodsofpenance, and the significance of sinners' absolution and redemption (actus iustificationis). And, as in other contextslinked to Solomon'smultifaceted legendary image, this duality gave rise to apologetics on the one hand and de- "[…]R egal prudenza e' quell vederei mpair",ar eference to 1K ings 3:9: "Give your servant therefore an understandingmind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil; for whoc an govern this your great people?"  DanteA lighieri (1981,p .3 94). In Henry Wadsworth Longfellow'st ranslation: "The fifth light,t hat amongu si st he fairest,\Breathes froms uch al ove, that all the world \B elow is greedyt ol earn tidingo fi t " .D anteA lighieri (2017, p. 36).  See Norman (1995, pp. 225 -228); Norman does not address Solomon'sm issingh alo. It is relevanti ncidentally to note the figuresa tt he bottom of the fresco,which represent the liberal arts;a mongt hem is Aristotle, representing Philosophy. nunciation on the other.A lthough there were other kingsi nJ udea and in Israel who sinned, and whose wrongdoingsweren ot forgiven, Solomon was the paradigmatic figure in the theological debate on these issues. In the Middle Agesand long afterward-the definition of sin and the question of proper atonement formedb oth the subject of extensive theological discussion and al iterary theme.⁴¹⁰ The debate had practical implications, namelyt he need to clarify the motive of asin,⁴¹¹ the question of whether asinner who repented and atoned could achieves ainthood,⁴¹² and the matter whether ar uler who sinnedc ould atone and be forgiven.⁴¹³

Solomon'sS insa nd Downfalli nJ ewishT radition
It is ironic that the biblical author,i na ttemptingt om agnify and exalt Solomon as aking,attributed athousand wivestohis name,includingaPharaoh'sdaughter;w hat might be considered grandeur was no less as in, whose gravity cast a heavy shadow on the construction of the Temple and on the composition of Solomon'sthree books. It wasnot the fanciful number of women that troubled Jewish and Christian thinkers (and certainlyt he latter could be excusedf or not excoriatingthe practice of gentile marriages) but rather the fact thatthese women preserved and imported their religious practices, among them the worship of idols. Thus, Solomon-the chosen of God, the architect of God'sT emple, the prefiguration of Jesus-became, in both traditions, as inful king.
Regardless of whether 1K ings1 1:3( " Among his wivesw eres even hundred princesses and three hundred concubines;a nd his wivest urned away his heart")e xaggeratesm atters for the purpose of glorifying Solomon, or,a lternatively, as aj ustification for his fall,⁴¹⁴ his heaviests in layn ot in accumulating wivesbut rather in building high places of worship for their religions and participating in their rites.Because he should have restrainedhis wivesintheir idolatry but did not,t he Talmud says, "the Scripture regards him as though he sinned".⁴¹⁵  See Ohly( 1992).  Prudentius( 2011).  On saints of the Church whos inned and atoned for their sins,s ee Dorn (1967, pp. 42 -43).  Solomon'ss ins arer arelym entioned in debates on the question of whether it mayb ej ustified to murder at yrant.  Zakowitch (2015).  Shabbat 56a. All these sourcesaccept,without question, the fantasticnumber of his wives. The Bible recounts that Solomon "loved manyf oreign women […]f rom the nations concerning which the Lordh ad said to the Israelites, 'Yous halln ot enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you; for they will surely incliney our heart to follow their gods'".⁴¹⁶ Furthermore, "when Solomon was old, his wivest urned away his heart after otherg ods; and his heart was not true to the Lordh is God, as was the heart of his father David. ForS olomon followed Astartethe goddess of the Sidonians, and Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.S oS olomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and did not completelyfollow the Lord, as his father Davidhad done. Then Solomonbuilt a highplace for Chemoshthe abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem. He did the samef or all his foreign wives, who offered incense and sacrificedt ot heir gods".⁴¹⁷ The Book of Chronicles downplays the gravity of the sin, mentioning only Solomon'sm arriage to the Pharaoh'sd aughter and that he did not bringh er to live in Jerusalem: He broughtP haraoh'sd aughter from the city of David to the house that he had built for her,f or he said, "My wife shalln ot live in the house of KingD avid of Israel, for the places to which the ark of the Lordh as come are holy".⁴¹⁸ On the other hand, Ezraa nd Nehemiah found in Solomon's example validation for their campaign to convince Jews who returned to Zion to expel their gentile wives⁴¹⁹: "Did not KingS olomon of Israel sin on account of such women?A mong the manyn ations there was no king like him, and he was beloved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless, foreign women made even him to sin. Shall we then listent oy ou and do all this great evil and act treacherouslya gainst our God by marrying foreign women?"⁴²⁰ The Septuagint presagest he apologetic line that would emerge in the future-Solomon did not at least,w orship idols in the highp laces which he built for his wives.⁴²¹ BenS irad oes not denyS olomon'ss ins, but chooses to omit idolatry: "Youd id bow your loins to women, and in your bodyy ou wereb rought into subjection. Youd id blemish your honor,a nd profane your seed, to bring wrath upon your children; And Iwas grieved for your folly".⁴²² Josephus, in contrast,describes the king'ssins at length. Not onlydid Solomon violate Mosaic law, marry manyf oreign women, and succumb in his dotaget o  1K ings 11:1 -2.  1K ings 11:4 -8.  2C hronicles 8:11.  Ezra 10.  Nehemiah 13: 26 -27.S ee Frisch (1997).  Gooding( 1965).  BenS ira4 7:19 -20. their seduction (albeit onlytogratify them), but he also placed images of brazen oxen in the Temple.⁴²³ As for the sages, they weredivided in theirattitudes towards Solomon'ssins, or more precisely, in the ways they employed his imagetotransmit atheological and ethical message, or to express their views about monarchyasaninstitution, while other Sages sought explanations and justifications for his sins, yeta lso stronglyc ondemned him. Others claimed that Solomon married manyf oreign wives "to draw them to the teachingo fT orah and to bring them under the indwelling presenceofGod",⁴²⁴ or even converted all of them to Judaism (Solomon converted onlyP haraoh'sd aughter before marrying her,ord id not marry her at all⁴²⁵); not onlythat but the conversion was valid.⁴²⁶ Alater midrash enumerated Solomon'ssins: "'And King Solomon loved manyforeign women and the daughter of Pharaoh (1 Kings1 1:1). Now was the daughter of Pharaoh not included [among the women]?⁴²⁷ Why, then, was she singled out for special mention? We hereby infer thats he was more beloved thana ll, and, vis-à-vis sin, that she causedh im to sin more than all".⁴²⁸ In Yalkut Shimoni's version, Solomon transgressed the prohibition against marrying manyw ives and took seven hundred wivesa nd threeh undred concubines.H is wisdom and his understanding failed to help him to learn from the experience of Adam that one woman was enough to deceive him.⁴²⁹ On 1Kings §172, it adds that although Solomon did indeed loveGod, he began building the Temple onlyafull four years after he was crowned, and simultaneouslyb rought Pharaoh'sd aughter to the City of David. Citing Jeremiah 32:31 ("This city has aroused my anger and wrath, from the dayi tw as built until this day, so that Iw ill removei tf rom my sight"), it maintains that Solomon was thus responsible for the destruction of the Temple that he built.
Some sages denied the accusation of sin; others argued thata lthough the foreign wivesd id try to draw the king into idolatry,t hey failed, and Solomon even prevented them from building highplaces for the worship of idols. Just be-  VIII, pp. 192-193, in Josephus (1963).  y.Sanhedrin 2:6,20c, attributed to Rabbi Yose. In the views of R. Simeon ben Yohai, R. Hanania, and R. Eliezer,h owever,h is foreign wivesc aused Solomon to sin.  According to b.Yevamot 76a-b.  In Maimonides' anachronistic interpretation, the conversion could not be validb ecause it was not carried out beforearabbinical court (beit din)and the women thus remained idolaters. Mishnah Torah, Hilchot Issurei Biah 13:14 -17.  Sifre Deuteronomy5 2, (ed. Finkelstein p. 119).  Neusner (1987, p. 171).  Yalkut Shimoni Proverbs §962. cause he did not stronglyprotest their intention to build such places of worship in Jerusalem, "Scripture regardshim as though he sinned".⁴³⁰ Other sages asserted that Solomont ook foreign wives "to draw them to the teachingofT orah and to bring them under the indwellingpresenceofGod",⁴³¹ or even that he converted the daughter of Pharaoh before marryingher.⁴³² With regardtoEcclesiastes 7:7 ("Surely oppression makes the wise foolish, and ab ribe corruptst he heart"), MidrashT anhuma⁴³³ has this to say: "When Solomon was engaged in matters in which he did not have to engage, they led him astray,f or it says (in 1K ings 11:4) 'Forw hen Solomon was old, his wivest urned away his heart after other gods'".⁴³⁴ Maimonides did not ignore the fact that the Bible denouncedS olomon, but argued thatitdid so because he sinnedinpracticingidolatry,asin thatcalled for severe punishment.⁴³⁵ Accordingt ot he biblical commentator and philosopher Abraham IbnE zra( 1089 -1167), ak ing such as Solomon, who was wisert han all who livedbefore and after him, was incapable of being seduced into idolatry. The philosopher and statesmanI saac Abrabanel (1437-1508) also held that a wise man like Solomon could never have been beguiled by the senseless notions and abominations that "foolishg entiles" believed in. Such apologetics were at variancew ith the biblical account and have nonetheless endured to this very day.
Still, Solomon paid ap rice for his sins. Accordingt oR esh Lakish, at hirdcentury Amora, "At first,Solomon reigned over the higher beings, as it is written, Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lordasking;afterwards, [having sinned] he reigned [only] over the lower,For he had dominion over all the region on this side the river, from Tifsah even to Gaza.But eventuallyhis reign was restricted to Israel, as it is written, IK oheleth have been king over Israele tc. Later,h is reign was confined to Jerusalem alone,e vena si ti sw ritten, The words of Koheleth, son of David, king in Jerusalem.A nd still later he reigned onlyo verh is  Shabbat 56b.  y.Sanhedrin 2:6, 20c. According to Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, the book Deuteronomy "ascended, bowed down beforet he HolyO ne, praise to Him, and said to Him: Master of the Universe, Youwrotei nY our Toraht hat anyd isposition which is partiallyi nvalidi st otallyi nvalid, and now Solomonwants to uproot a ‫,י‬fromme! The Holy One, praise to Him, said to Him, said to it: Solomon and thousand like him will disappear but nothingf romy ou will disappear". y.Sanhedrin 2:6.  Yevamot 76a.  The Midrash began to takes hape in Palestine in the fifth century.  Tanhuma Buber Vayera 2o nE xodus6 :2.  m.Keritot 1a.
couch".⁴³⁶ Of Solomon'sdownfallR.Ḥiyya bar Abba, another Amora of the third century,s aid: "It would have been better for him if he had cleaned sewers, so that this verse would not be written about him".⁴³⁷ The downfallw as alsod escribed in Song of Songs Rabbah: "Solomon went down by three stages. The first descent was that,after he had been agreat king, rulingfromone of the worlds to another,his dominion was reduced, and he ruled as kingonlyofIsrael […]. The second descent was that,after he had been kingoverIsrael, his dominion was reduced, and he was kingo nlyo verJ erusalem […]. The third descent was that,a fter he had been kingo verJ erusalem,h is dominion was reduced, and he was kingo nlyo verh is own house […]B ut even over his own bed he did not reallyr ule, for he was afraido fs pirits […]R .Y udan said, ' He was king, ac ommoner,h en king, as age, af ool, and then as age,r ich, poor,t hen rich […]R .H unia said, 'He was commoner, king, and commoner,f ool, sage, and fool; poor,r ich, then poor".⁴³⁸ Yeta nother version appears in y.Sanhedrin 2:6: "It is Written: the HolyOne, praise him, said to Solomon 'What is this crown on your head? Descend fromMythrone! Rabbi Yose ben Hanina said, at that moment an angelcame down lookingl ikeS olomon, removed him fromh is throne, and sat in his stead. He was going around in synagogues and houses of study, saying Ia mE cclesiastes,Iused to be king over Israel in Jerusalem'.T hey weret ellingh im, the kings its in his chair of honor and yous ay, Ia mE cclesiastes? They hit him with as tick and broughtadish of beans before him".⁴³⁹ The third-century sageR.S amuelb en Naḥman was adamant on the subject,a ttributing the following to his teacher R. Jonathan ben Eleazar: "Whoever maintainsthat Solomon sinned is merely makinganerror,for it is said, and his heart was not perfect with the Lordh is God, as was the heart of David his father' it was [merely]not as the heart of David his father,but neither did he sin. Then how do Iinterpret, Foritcame to pass,when Solomonwas old, that his wivesturned away his heart?That is [to be explained]asR.Nathan. ForR.Nathan opposed [twoverses]: It is written, Foritcame to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wivesturned away his heart,whereas it is [also] written, and his heart was not perfect with the Lordh is God, as was the heart of David his father, [implyingthat] it was [merely] not as the heart of David his father,but neither did he sin?T his is its meaning: his wivesturned away his heart to go after other gods,but he did  Sanhedrin 20b, trans. H. Freedman, London, 1938.  Tanhuma Vayera 6, and Tanhuma Buber Vayera 2.  Song of Songs Rabbah 1:6. Neusner (1989,p p. 51-52).  y.Sanhedrin 2:6 20c, trans. Heinrich W. Guggenheimer (2010): Studia Judaica 51,DeGruyter, Berlin, p. 100. not go.B ut it is written, Then would Solomonb uild ah ighp lacef or Chemosh the abomination of Moab?-That means,h ed esiredt ob uild, but did not".⁴⁴⁰ Other traditions absolvedSolomonofpunishment,maintaining that the price of his sins was instead paidb yt he Jewish people: Solomon himself escaped penalty due to paternal merit: "Iw ill not,h owever,t ear away the entire kingdom; Iw ill give one tribe to your son, for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, which Ih avec hosen".⁴⁴¹ R. Isaac (a second-generation Babylonian Amora), said on this matter "When Solomon married Pharaoh'sd aughter,Gabriel descended and stuck ar eed in the sea, which gathered as and-bank around it,o nw hich was built the great City of Rome"⁴⁴²-in otherw ords, Solomon'ss ins led directlyt ot he establishment of Rome, which would in futured estroy Jerusalem and the Second Temple.

Heaven comes to Solomon'sA id
When the members of the Great Assemblyw erec alled upon to name Solomon among the threek ingsa nd four laymenc ondemned to have no part in the next world, the figure of David, his father,w as invoked to plead his case, as well as God himself-for to forgive sins of this magnitude heavenlyi ntervention was required: "R. Ashi: The men of the Great Assemblyenumeratedthem. RabJ udah said in Rab'sname: They wished to include another,but an apparition of his father'sl ikeness came and prostrated itself beforethem, which, however,they disregarded. Aheavenlyfire descended and its flames licked their seats,yet they still disregarded it.Whereupon aHeavenlyV oice cried out to them, 'Oyou see those whoare skillful in their work?They will servekings;they will not servecommon people ' (Prov. 22.29). He whogaveprecedencetoMyhouse over his,and moreover,b uiltM yh ouse in seven years, but his own in thirteen, he shall stand before kings;heshall not stand beforemean men. Yetthey paid no attention even to this. Whereupon the Heavenlyvoicecried out, 'Should it be according to thymind?Hewill recompense it,whether thou refuse, or whether thou choose; and not I…".⁴⁴³ In other words, it was for God alone to decide who would have aportion in the next world, independent of the considerations of humans.A ccordingtoanother midrash on Proverbs, the Shekhinah intervened with the Almighty and said to him: "Master,h avey ou ever seen anyone so diligent in doing your work?A nd yett hey wish to count him among those consigned to [eternal] darkness! At that moment,aheavenlyv oice came forth, saying to them: 'He shall attend upon kings; he shall not attend upon those consigned to [eternal] darkness'". ⁴⁴⁴ The gravity of Solomon'ssins is secondary to the fact that the Bible does not record thatS olomonr epented of his transgressions and beggedf or forgiveness, or that he was ever forgiven. No mention is made of his having divorced his foreign wives, destroyed the high places he built for their idolatrous worship, or asked for and receivedGod'sforgiveness. According to the Bible, God did not forgive Solomon, but onlyp romised him that,f or the sake of his father David, his kingdom would be divided onlya fter his lifetime. One might have expected the Sages to address the question of whether Solomon atoned for his sins and whether he wasabsolved; in fact,they hardlydiscuss the issue of his repentance or his absolution. Those Sages who held thatSolomon'ssins had been absolved could onlybase their belief on the fact that he ended his life as ak ing or argue that he acknowledgedhis sins and repented ("because Iquestioned His actions, have Is tumbled"⁴⁴⁵). They find evidence in the fact that "Close to his death the holyspirit rested on him and he composed three books-Proverbs, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes".⁴⁴⁶ Medieval Jewisha pologetics found it difficult to accept that Solomon'sgood deeds could compensate for his sins; hence, even if he regrettedthem, they were not absolved. In Sefer Hasidim (The Book of the Pious),⁴⁴⁷ R. Judah ben Samuel of Regensburg(d. 1217)concluded on the basis of Song of Songs Rabbah that even though Solomon'sbooksbrought merittohis people, for him to escape being denied ap art in the next world required ah eavenlyd efense on the basis of his being David'ss on; the meaning,t herefore, was that even meritoriousa ctions that benefit the manydon ot suffice as defense against one'ss ins, or as ag uarantee of aplace in the world to come.⁴⁴⁸ Bruno, Bishop of Segni (c. 1047-1123),  Midrash Proverbs 22 (Visotzky 1992, p. 156).  Exodus Rabbah 6:1.  Song of Songs Rabbah 1, 8, and parallels.T he Quran also says about Solomon: "And to Dawud (David) We gave Suleiman (Solomon). How excellent (a) slave!V erily, he was ever oft-returningi nr epentance" (Q.3 8:30) without statingw hy he needed to repent.  In fact,the book represents the combined teachingofthe threeleaders of German Hasidim (Pious Ones) during the twelfth and earlyt hirteenth centuries.  Rabbi Judah ben Samuel (1998, p. 262). voiced as imilar judgment from the Christian tradition: "Ar ighteous man who has sinned, can have no absolution".⁴⁴⁹ Over time,n ew elements werea dded to the array of punishments Solomon suffered for his sins. R. Isaac ben Samuel of Acre,one of the greatestk abbalists of the fourteenth century,c ombined mythological (Prometheus), Jewish,a nd Christian traditions,the latter of which he had learned of, accordingtohis testimony, from aChristian who told him about amonk who once sawravens in the desert pecking at aman'sflesh. When he asked, "Whyare yousentenced to this punishment?" the replyw as: "Ia mS olomon, king of Israel".T hen the monk asked: "But whyare youmade to undergo such severe suffering by divine decree and how long will youendureit?" Solomon replied: "Until the Messiah,who is of my seed, shallc ome and the Almighty will forgive me owingt oh im." The kabbalist interpreted this as meaning thatS olomon'sa gonys ymbolized the Shekhinah,s uffering because of the exile of the people of Israel and thatt he ravens wereg entileso rt he forces of defilement,f ated to be overthrown by the Messiah.⁴⁵⁰ In his introduction to aGerman translation (in Hebrew transliteration) of the Book of Proverbs,⁴⁵¹ the maskil Wolf Meir offered an explanation for Solomon's sins: in his old age, Solomon "doveinto the sea of metaphysics" and concluded that all is vanity and divinelyp redetermined; his wivesw eret hen able to take advantageo fh is resulting passivity and weakness and turn his mind their way. In allowing them to build highp laces wheret hey worshipped their gods, he desecrated the Temple of the Lordw hich was treasured by the people, who after his death despised and did not mourn him.
 Bruno of Segni, Sententiae 2P L1 65 \914B. See I. A. Robinson (1983).  Citedi nI del (1995). AS cottish tale maintained that Solomonw as condemned to be devouredd ailyb yt en thousand ravens until the end of the world (Butler 1993, p. 400). According another version appears in as tory written in Germanya tt he end of the thirteenth century,i n which Ashmedai, chief of the demons,p lays ac entral role. God calls on him, commanding him to replace Solomon, whoh as sinned by marryingf oreign women, and promises Ashmedai that he will not be harmed. Ashmedai pushes Solomono ff his throne, takesh is seal, and assumes the form of Solomon; the man himself walks about like ad runkard, beggingf or bread and insistingt hat he is Kohelet [Ecclesiastes] whoo nce reigned as kingi nJ erusalem. He is mocked by everyone he turns to. Bathsheba,his mother,recognizes the pretender to the throne by his donkey feet,and informs Baneihu, whoascertains Solomon'sidentity.The tale ends with the lines: "Thus did the Almighty do for Solomon, whov iolated but one transgression in the Torah, and for anyone violatingt he words of the Sages, all the mores o " .O nt he manuscripts in which the tale appears,s ee Kushelevsky (2011). On this story therein, see ChapterS even.  Verlagd es M.I. Landa, Prague, 1834.

Christianity on Solomon'sS insa nd Repentance ⁴⁵²
"Women, when nothing else, beguiledt he heart Of wisest Solomon, and made him build, And made him bow,t ot he godso fh is wives" John Milton, Paradise Regained (Book II, 169 -171).⁴⁵³ Solomon'ss tatusi ne arlyC hristianity is reflected in the writingso fE mperor Julian, who mocked the "excuses" and apologetic tactics employed to explain away Solomon'ss ins. Despite the lofty virtuesa ttributed to him and his great wisdom, Solomon was incapable of restrainingh is desires and was seduced by awoman'swords. "Is their 'wisest' man Solomon at all comparable with Phocylides or Theognis or Isocrates among the Hellenes […] 'But',they answer, 'Solomon was also proficient in the secret cult of God'.What then?Did not this Solomon serveour gods also, deluded by his wives, as they assert?What great virtue! What wealth of wisdom! He could not rise superior to pleasure, and the arguments of aw oman led him astray!T hen if he was deluded by aw oman, do not call this man wise".⁴⁵⁴ Julian'sd erision was directed at the Christians, but this did not prevent the latter from hurling similar claims against the Jews in order to aggrandize Jesus and ridicule Solomon.J ustin Martyr,f or example, wrotet hat "Id on ot hesitate to quote the Book of Kings, wherei ti swritten thatS olomon committed idolatry at Sidon for the sake of awoman. On the contrary;the Gentiles who know God, the Creator of the world, through the crucifiedJ esus, would rather enduree very torturea nd pain, even death itself, than worship idols, or eat meat sacrificed to idols".⁴⁵⁵ In TheDialogue between Timothyand Aquila, the JewAquila maintains that Solomon did not sacrifice to the idols but crushed them in his hands unwillingly (26.5). To this, the Christian Timothyreplies: "Will Ithen accept this one as ason of God,who did not movetowardrepentanceasManasseh did?[…]He(Solomon)did not keep anyoft he commandments of God, and youk now that! For he even built altars to each one of the idols his wivesworshipped, which he had taken as foreigners[…]know,therefore, that Solomongreatlyprovoked the Lord God of heaven, because he disobeyed him […]k now,OJew, that he worshipped  Vanning(2002)isadetailed survey of the subject.Ihave relied on it greatlythroughout this part of the chapter. Also see Bose (1996), andM. Bloch (1925).  Milton (1994,p .403).  Against the Galilaeans 224D-224E.T rans.Wright,p p. 383 -385.  Justin Martyr (2003,p p. 199 -200). and sacrificed grasshoppers to the idols".⁴⁵⁶ The sinful king symbolizes the punishment of the Jews for theirrejection of Jesus as the Messiah, and at times he is even viewed as the Antichrist.
In TheT estamento fS olomon,t he king confesses that he took numerous wivesf rom manyl ands and says: "the glory of God quite departed from me; and my spirit was darkened, and Ib ecame the sport of idols and demons. Ib ecame weak as wella sf oolishi nm yw ords.⁴⁵⁷ Claiming thatP salm 72 does not applyt oS olomon, the author writes that he does not hesitate to repeat what is writteni nt he book of Kingst hatS olomon has committed idolatry for the sake of awoman in Sidon" (xxxiv), and Origen wroteinthe same vein in his commentary on Song of Songsthat although Solomon wasmost wise, he surrendered himself to "many wives" (referringt o" many nations")w hom he invited to his palace in order to studyt heird iverse doctrines and varied philosophies; he could not keep himself within the rule of divine law, and went so far as to build temples for them and even sacrifice to the idol of Moab.
Christian writingsalso were divided among themselvesconcerning Solomon sins. "The changes in attitude to Solomon throughout the centuries",writes Vanning, "reflect concomitant developments in polemic, political attitudes, philosophical knowledge,B iblical exegesis, religious thought,a nd theology".⁴⁵⁸ Indeed, internal conflict is evidentb eyond anyq uarrel with Judaism. Nonetheless,Iwill not survey the great corpus of debateso nw hether Solomon did in fact sin and repent,nor the corpus of allegorical interpretations of his rise and fall, in part because the size of both is greatlyi nflated by repetitions.
In Adversus Marcionem Tertullian (c. 160-c.2 20)a rgued there was no need for Solomon to be lavish in his polygamyi no rder to sin since Solomon had lost the blessingofGod the very first time he was "delivered up to idols".⁴⁵⁹ Jerome (Hieronymus, 345 -419/20)w rote: "Wast here anyone wiser thanS olomon? Yeth ew as made foolishb yt he loveo fw omen, having been overcome "by the flesh".AccordingtoAugustine "At the beginning of [Solomon's] reign he burned with apassion for wisdom, which he acquired through the loveofthe spirit and lost because of his loveofthe flesh".⁴⁶⁰ As aresult, his house "was full of foreign women who worshipped false gods; and the king himself, who had been am an of wisdom, wass educed and degraded to samei dolatry".⁴⁶¹ "In the person of  9.8 -9. 16,Varner (2004,p p. 157-159 this man Solomonappears both astoundingexcellent and its equallyastounding overthrow,what happened to him at different times, first the good fortune and afterwardt he misfortune, therefore, is nowadays evident in the Church all the same time. ForIthink that signifies the Church, and the evil that befell him signifies that it is beset".⁴⁶² Pope Gregory I(540 -604) compared Solomon to Judas and to the people of Sodom because he receivedhis wisdom at night.⁴⁶³ According to Isidore of Seville(c.560 -636), Solomon'smanygood deeds failed to compensate for his sins,⁴⁶⁴ while Walter Map (1140 -1210), an English clergymanand author,wrote in his collection of anecdotes De nugis curialium (Courtiers' Trifles): "Solomon, the treasury of the Lord'sdelight … had the light of his soul obscured by the thick ink of darkness, lost the perfume of his renown and the glory of his house under the glamour of women, and in the end bowed his knee to Baalim, and from being the preacher of the Lord, turned to be alimbofthe Devil".⁴⁶⁵ The Benedictine reformer (and Cardinal) Peter Damian(1007-1072)wroteinahomily on 2Samuel7that Solomon was redeemed of his sins and was necessarilyholy since he wasaprefiguration of Jesus. Philip of Harvengt (d.1183), abbot of the Bonne Espérance abbey,w rote in his Responsio de damnatione Salomonis that he found no indication in the HolyS criptures of Solomon'sa tonement and absolution. He was contradicted by the author of the twelfth-century Quod pentium Salomonis,who assertedthatthere could be no doubt of Solomon'ssins; after all, the libri Hebraei [Hebrew books] themselvesr ecord thatS olomon was dragged through the streets of Jerusalem, beaten with switches in the Temple, and finally made to forfeit his throne. In TheD escentofChrist into Hell,anapocalyptic text apparentlyw ritten between 138 -168, Solomon, alongside Adam, Eve, and others, is rescuedfrom Hell by Jesus and led to Heaven. Similarly, the text Acta Pilati (Acts of Pilate) contained in the Gospel of Nicodemus, and later in Old English poetry,was inspired by Ephesians 4:7-11, which says that before Jesus ascended to heaven "he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth".⁴⁶⁶ The Franciscan scholastic theologian Bonaventure (1221-1274)r egarded Solomon as an "exemplum of the penitent sinnerw ho receivedd ivineg race".⁴⁶⁷ The question of sin, atonement,a nd absolution was at timesapolitical issue. Al etter from the bishop Fulbert (c.960 -1028)o fC hartresw ritten in 1024 to Hildegar,t he sub-deacon of Chartres,r egarding ad ispute that had arisenb etween Duke Wil- liam of Aquitaine and his bishops cites various sources to persuade the bishops to peacefullysettle the dispute. Fulbert quotes Bachiarius' (c.350-c.425) Liber de Reparatione Lapsi: "Solomon, that wondrous man (ille mirabilis), whodeserves to shareinthe wisdom that sits next to God, rushed intot he embraces of foreign women; and he defiled himself by committingsacrilegewhen he made an image of Chamos,the idol of the Moabites.But sincehe was led by the prophet to acknowledge the error of his way, is he banishedfromthe mercy of heaven? Perhaps youwill say: Nowhere in the canon do Iread that he was repentant […]I have no doubt,b rother, as to his repentance,t hough this was not recorded in the public laws, and he mayh aveb een aj udge all the morea cceptable because he did not do penance, not in front of the people but in the secrecy of his conscience with God as his witness. That he obtained pardon we know from this:t hat when he was released fromh is body, scriptures tatest hat he was buried among the bodies of the Kings of Israel."⁴⁶⁸ Fulbert'sproposed solution was entirelyconvenient for aleader accused of having sinned: his repentanceneed not be public since Solomon'sexample demonstrated thatt he mattero fo ne'ss ins mayb es ettledb etween oneself, one'sc onscience, and God.
Af ourteenth-century Northumbrian poem, Cursor Mundi (The Cursor of the World), depicted aSolomon sorelyrepentant of his lovefor heathen women: "He summonedp rophets and patriarchs and beggedt ob er elieved of crowna nd kingly robes,a nnouncing his purpose to flee, because of his sins, to af oreign country.T ot he patriarchs,k ingship wasd ivine, and they refusedt ol isten to his plan. He then implored them to layu pon him ah ard penance. Accordingly, he was scourgedthrough the streets, the blood streamingfrom his back. He bore all patientlya nd won mercy, afterw hich, lust all forgotten, he ruled well and contributed lasting works to posterity".⁴⁶⁹ In the Legenda Aurea (Golden Legend), acollection of legends about the livesofthe saints written c. 1260 and circulated in hundreds of manuscripts,⁴⁷⁰ the Archbishop of Genoa, Jacopo de Voragine, wrote that "It is said, but Ifind it not in the Bible, that Solomonrepented much of this sin of Idolatry and did much penance, therefore, for he let him be drawnt hrough Jerusalem and beat himself with rods and scourges, that the blood flowed in the sight of all the people".
The idea that the biblical depiction of Solomon'sdownfallwas borne out in observable reality is evident in Johannes of Würzburg's( 1160 -1170) Description of the Holy Land,wherein the author describes how he sawf irsthand the place  TheL etters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres (Behrends1 976,.  In Borland (1933).  Between 1470 and 1530i tw as one of the most printedb ooks in Europe.
whereS olomon worshiped Molech.⁴⁷¹ Similarly, the Russian Orthodoxmonk Ar-senySukhanov,who spent time in Jerusaleminthe 1650s, wroteofvisiting asite whereKing Solomon's "palace of pleasure" once stood, in which he had housed his "manyw ives and concubines,who were brought from diverse countries and faiths" and arranged for them places of worship. Moreover, "Solomon entered the temple of the idolaters,b owed down before them and burned incense. For all this, he wasn ot absolved, in his old ageh ed id wickedness in the sight of the Lord, and died".⁴⁷² Christian theologians werepreoccupied for generations with the question of repentanceand absolution; indeed, this was amatter of greater concern than the nature of his sins and punishment.Inhis Apologia prophetae David,St. Ambrose asserted that as aking David was not subject to human laws, but that he sinned nonetheless by violating God'scommandments, which even aking must obey.⁴⁷³ Several Church Fathers expressed compassion for Solomon since he was tempted by women when he was weak and in his dotage;others absolvedhim entirely.⁴⁷⁴ Yet, if Solomondid atone for his sins, how did he do so?After all, the Bible does not report that he divorced his wivesa nd returned to full observance of God'sc ommandments.⁴⁷⁵ Nor does any midrash attribute to Solomon the typicala ctions associated with aq uest for absolution, such as prayer,f asting,o rc onfession, while his father David did confess: "David said to the Lord, 'Ih aves inned greatlyi nwhat I have done.But now,OLord, Iprayy ou, take away the guilt of your servant; for I have done very foolishly'".⁴⁷⁶ Similarly,Menasseh, the king who built highplaces and altars in Jerusalem, was taken prisoner by the Assyrians,duringwhich time he repented; and after God returned him from his exile,h ea toned by removing the high places he had built.⁴⁷⁷ (This penance wasm ade explicito nlyi nthe minor apocryphal work TheP rayero fM enasseh.)T he inhabitants of Nineveh also soughtG od'sf orgiveness for their evil deeds: "Human beingsa nd animals  Johannes of Würzburg( 1971).  Raba (1986).  This brief summary is based on Bose (1996) andDorn (1967).  See Dorn (1967, pp. 42 -43).  According to a13 th century Armenian manuscript,Solomon commands his chamberlain to burn all his writings,a nd, "havingr epented, he weptb itterly. And God reckoned it to him as repentance".S tone (1978).  2S amuel 24:10.  2C hronicles 33.
shall be covered with sackcloth, and they shall cry mightilytoGod. All shall turn from their evil ways and from the violence that is in their hands".⁴⁷⁸ The Sages doubted the sincerity of the repentance of the people of Nineveh, and only Teshuvat Yonah haNavi,amidrash written between the eighth and eleventh centuries, describes their contrition as am odel of repentance. As for Solomon, who committed the most grievous sin of all-the practice of idolatry-indeed, accordingt os ome sources he repented (not even inwardly), wore sackcloth, or prayed: Yalkut Shimoni⁴⁷⁹ does relatet hat when Solomon was going from house to house begging,apoor man invited him to eat as imple "meal of vegetables" in his home, tellinghim: "this is the wayofthe Lord, to reprovea nd then reconcile… and the Lordwill restore yout oy our kingdom." Yet, even in this tale Solomon, remembering the days of his kingdom, weeps but does not repent.The seventh blessing in Mishnah Ta'anit 2:4reads: "He who answered David, and his son Solomon, in Jerusalem, mayH ea nswer you, and listen to your cry on this day. Blessed art thou, OL ord, who has compassion on the earth!" The words are based on Solomon'sprayeratthe inauguration of the Temple: "Then hear in heaveny our dwellingp lace, forgive,a ct,a nd render to all whose hearts youk now" (1 Kings8 :39). HereS olomon, however,i sa sking forgiveness for the sins of the entirep eople, rather thanf or his own.⁴⁸⁰ The quote most frequentlyc ited as evidence that Solomon was forgiveni s " Close to his death the holys pirit rested on him and he composed three books-Proverbs, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes".H owever,n oJ ewishs ource claims thatS olomon followed in the ways of David, his father,w ho, after his sin with Bathsheba, asked of God to "Wash me thoroughlyf rom mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin" (Psalms5 1:2).⁴⁸¹ The Bible and the Sages do not  Jonah 3:8 -10.  Yalkut Shimoni on Proverbs, §953( 15).  The question regarding who is repentant of asin he committed by not restraininghis earthly appetites preoccupied the Sages; one of the answers is that ar epentant person is one who does not succumb to his urgesortotemptation asecond time. Mishnat R. Shmuel HaHasid states that self-mortificationi sa lso required. See Kushelevsky (2011,p p. 54-161).  In Muslim polemical literaturea gainst the Jews,the favorable attitude towards Solomon is called into question. Abū Muḥammad ʿAlī ibn Aḥmad ibn Saʿīdibn Ḥazm (999 -1064), aprolific scholar and native of Cordoba who, in his book Refutation of Ibn al-Naghrija the Jew, MayG od Curse Him addressed ab ook ascribed to Samuel HaNagid that disparaged the Quran, held that the original sin had alreadybeen committed at Solomon'sbirth: Solomon was an outcome of the adulterousr elations between Judah and Tamar and David and Bathsheba. This was one man's opinion, and it rancounter to the Quranic descriptions above. The Quran clears Solomon of any sin: 'YetS olomon did not disbelieve" (Q.2 :102 ("The Cow")). Elsewhere, it statest hat "he was even turningi nr epentance[ towardA llah]" (Q.3 8:30 ("Sad")). The eleventh-century Tales of overlook David'shuman failings or his transgressions because his confession of his sin onlyserves to underscorehis greatness and his righteousness;yet,inSolomon'sc ase, there is no basis for such aclaim since he never admits his sin or betraysana wareness of his human frailty.S ages, preachers,a nd commentators who came to his defense⁴⁸² all defended his past,b ut not his future.M aimonides, for example, wrotet hat "there is no king in Israel" who was not the seed of both David and Solomon, and that whoever disagrees denies the Toraha nd Moses. Such ap osition was probablyareaction to Christological de-scriptionsofJesusasa"son of David" and to the eradicationofSolomon'smemory as the second in thatdynasty.Maimonides also wrotethat the "King Messiah will arise and restore the kingdom of David to its former state",and that it would be at its finest when a "king will arise who will possess more wisdomthan Solomon and meditate on the Torah, as did his ancestor David".⁴⁸³ It is David who serves as amodel for the observanceoft he commandments and for meditationonthe Torah, while Solomon is 'the wisest of all,' who spoke in the divine spirit.I nMishnah Torah/ Sefer ha-Mada,M aimonidesd iscusses "the practice of repentance" and cites several quotes from Ecclesiastes ("Remember your creator in the days of your youth",12:1) and Proverbs ("but the righteous are established forever",1 0:25).⁴⁸⁴ But Solomond id not adhere to these rules, "and onlyr epented on the dayofh is death and died penitent,a ll his iniquities are pardoned to him, as it is said: 'before the sun and the light and the moon and the stars are darkened and the cloudsreturn with the rain' (Ecclesiastes 12:2)".⁴⁸⁵ The Sages ascribed many virtuesand good deeds to Solomon, includingthe idea that by virtue of his proverbs and his studyo ft he Torah, the people were able to delve into the moreo bscurem eaningso ft he Torah.⁴⁸⁶ Nevertheless, his sin of idolatry was not forgotteni nJ ewisht radition, and even though the days of his reign markedt he peak period of the monarchy, he was excluded from its restorative visions of redemption. David is the "eternal" king of Israel, mentioned as afatherofthe nation alongside Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob in the version of the prayer "mi she-berakh" (HeW ho Blessed Our Fathers) spoken on the Sabbath, on festivals,f or the ill, and for women giving birth.
The Sages, thus, do not cite Solomona sa ne xample of ar epentant sinner, even if "One hour of repentance and good deedi nt his worldi sb etter than all the time in the world to come".⁴⁸⁷ In contrast,t he Christian theological discussion of Solomon'ss ins held that his punishment symbolized that of the Jews for having rejected Jesusasthe messiah. Yet, within Christianity,itisimpossible to ignore Solomon'sC hristological role as the prefiguration of Jesus and as the author of Proverbs, Song of Songs,and Ecclesiastes. Thus, Andrea di Bonaiuto's frescod id not exclude Solomon from St.Thomas' entourage, but onlyd eprived him of ah alo, and he was regarded as as ymbol and ideal model of ak ing.
While Jewisht radition stresses thatt he women who seduced Solomon were gentiles, and thus forbidden to him, in Christian tradition the sin the women represent is that of the temptations of the flesh and the limits, or even the weakness, of wisdom vis-à-vis faith. It deals extensively with Solomon'ssins in order to emphasize the great distance between him and Jesus and, in so doing,e stablish Jesus' place as the "true" son of David.
Did the Sages, for their part,w ish to distance Solomon from Jesus in the story of Joshua ben Peraḥyah, Jesus' young "teacher"⁴⁸⁸ who deniedthe former' request to return to study under him, insisting that "Anyone who sins and causes the public to sin, he is not capable of repentance"?⁴⁸⁹ Here, Jesus' sin wasthat he "performed magic and led other astray towardi dolatry".
It seems then that the Christian theologians' preoccupation with Solomon's sins was born of ad esire to created istance between him and Jesus, though he prefigured the latter.I nt he Christian tradition, no heavenlyv oice arrivest oe nsure his place in the world to come.⁴⁹⁰ He was not the "true Solomon" because Solomon was not,a sA ugustine wrote, innocent of all sin like Jesus,⁴⁹¹ whose death upon the cross bought forgiveness for all of humanity'ss ins.
The "correspondence" between Jesusa nd Solomon on the subjects discussed in the previous three chapters existed primarilyo nt he Christian side and was expressed in af ew contradictory aspects: (a) Solomon was not a "Son of God" like Jesus; (b)S olomon was expelled from the genealogyo ft he House of David, while Jesus was the "Son of David";( c) Jesus was "greater  Mishnah Avot 4:17.  See Chapter Six.  Sanhedrin 107b.  See Hägerland (2012).  "No sin could be found in Christ himself", City of God XVII:9( Augustine 1984,p .7 37). than Solomon",t he "true Solomon";a nd (d) Solomon was ap refiguration of Jesus. Judaism responded to these claims by rejecting Jesus'" sonship",t hough without establishingS olomon'ss onship as ac ounterpoint,a nd by rejecting Jesus' place in the House of David. Yet, Judaism did not arguet hat Christianity had appropriated Solomon'st hreeb ooksw ithout claiming thatt heir author was "greater than Solomon",a nd the correspondence did not end there.