Ezra 7
SECOND RETURN OF THE ISRAELITES
FROM CAPTIVITY UNDER EZRA (chps. 7-8)
1.
DECREE OF ARTAXERXES, AND RETURN
UNDER EZRA, WITH
THE NUMBERS OF THOSE WHO RETURNED, AND THE
NAMES OF
THE CHIEF MEN.
Fifty-seven years after the completion of the temple and
its dedication,
when the long and eventful rein of Darius was over, and his son Xerxes,
probably the Ahasuerus of Esther, had also lived and reigned and
passed
away, and the grandson of Darius, known generally as Artaxerxes
Longimanus, occupied the Persian throne, a further return of
Israelites
from
high priest’s family, a descendant of Seraiah, the
“chief priest” at the time
of
the destruction of
cousin of the existing high priest, Eliashib,
having access to Artaxerxes,
and,
apparently, a certain influence with him, asked (v. 6) and
obtained the royal permission to reinforce the colony in
body of emigrants, and at the same time to convey to
money, which the Babylonian Jews had subscribed towards the
temple
service (Ibid. v. 16).
Artaxerxes appears to have had a high respect for
Ezra; he recognized in him one possessed of wisdom from on
high (v. 25),
and
readily granted him, not only the request that he had made, but an
important commission, which was mainly one of inquiry (v. 14), but
which made him for a time paramount civil ruler of the province,
with
power of life and death over its inhabitants (v. 26); and also
conferred
upon the Jewish people certain valuable gifts and privileges. The terms of
the
decree are set forth in vs.12-26, where the Chaldee
version of
the
text, as published by Artaxerxes, is probably given verbatim et
literatim. After reciting it,
Ezra breaks out into a brief but earnest burst of
thanksgiving and acknowledgment of God’s goodness, which concludes
ch.
7., occupying the last two verses. He then proceeds,
in ch. 8., to give
an
account of the number of the Jews who returned with him, with the
names of their leaders, whom he calls “chief of the fathers.” Having
completed his list in v. 14, he goes on (vs. 15-31) to describe the
circumstances of the journey from
exactly four months, commencing on the first day of the first
month and
terminating on the first day of the fifth month (v. 9). In conclusion,
he
tells us how, after a rest of three days, he discharged himself of the most
pressing of the commissions entrusted to him, delivering over to
the priests
in
charge of the temple the gifts sent by Artaxerxes, and making known to
the
various Persian officials of the district the terms of the royal decree so
far
as they were affected by it (ch. 8:32-36). This
section may be
subdivided into seven parts:
the names of the chiefs (ch.
8:1-14);
(vs.
15-31); and
pressing commissions (vs. 32-36).
THE GENEALOGY OF EZRA (vs. 1-5)
It is plain that this genealogy
is incomplete. It gives no more than sixteen
generations between Ezra and Aaron, whereas the number of generations
between Zerubbabel and Nashon, prince of
1:7; 2:3), was twenty-six (I Chronicles
2:10-15; 3:5-19), and that between
Aaron himself and Eliashib at least as many (Ibid. ch.
6:3-15; 9:11;
Nehemiah 12:10). Six names are omitted between the Azariah and
Meraioth of v. 3, which will be found in I Chronicles 6:7-10; and
at
least three must be wanting between Ezra himself and Seraiah, who was
the
great-great-grandfather of Eliashib, Ezra’s
contemporary
(Nehemiah 3:1; 13:4). The curtailment of genealogies by the
omission
of
names was a common practice of the Jews. A notable instance is the
omission of three royal names in Matthew’s genealogy of our
Lord
(Matthew 1:8).
1 “Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of
Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the
son of Hilkiah,”
The writer makes a marked division between his first and
second sections by means of the words, Now after these things,
which
he
uses in this place only. The actual interval seems to have been one of
between fifty-seven and fifty-eight years, the sixth year of
Darius being B.C.
516, and the seventh of Artaxerxes Longimanus B.C. 458. Artaxerxes is in
the
original “Artakhshatra,” which reproduces the
Persian Artakhshatra
with the change of only one letter. That Longimanus,
the grandson of
Darius, is meant seems to follow from the fact that Eliashib, the grandson
of
Jeshua is high priest under him (Nehemiah 3:1).
Darius, correspond to Jeshua,
Xerxes correspond to Joiakim
Artaxerxes correspond to Eliashib
But for this it would be possible to regard the Artaxerxes
of Ezra (ch. 7.)
and
Nehemiah as Mnemon. Ezra the son of Seraiah. Probably the great,great-
grandson. In the language of the sacred writers, every descendant
is a
“son,” and every
ancestor a “father.” Christ is “the son of David,” and
David “the
son of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1). Joram “begat” Uzziah
(ibid. 8), his
great-great-grandson. Jochebed was “the
daughter of Levi
(Exodus 2:1). Ezra omits the names of his father,
grandfather, and
great-grandfather, who were undistinguished, and claims descent from
Seraiah, the last high priest who had ministered in Solomon’s
temple
(II Kings 25:18). Azariah, the father of Seraiah, does not occur
in either
Kings or Chronicles; but Hilkiah, Azariah’s father, is no doubt the high
priest of Josiah’s time (II Kings 22:4-14; II Chronicles
34:14-22, etc.).
2 The son of Shallum, the son of Zadok, the
son of Ahitub,
3 The son of Amariah, the son of Azariah, the son of Meraioth,
4 The son of Zerahiah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Bukki,
5 The son of Abishua, the son of
Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the
son of Aaron the
chief priest:” This portion of the genealogy agrees
exactly with that of Jehozadak in I Chronicles 6:3-15, excepting in the
omission, which has been
already noticed, of six names between Azariah
and
Meraioth. We may
gather from Ibid. ch.9:11 that a Meraioth is also
omitted between the Zadok and Ahitub of v. 2.
EZRA’S JOURNEY FROM
WITH DATES (vs. 6-10).
In introducing himself, Ezra seems to regard it of primary
importance to state
two
things:
(1) who he was, and
(2) what place he had in a history of which the main object is to
give an
account of the return of
In connection with the former point, he gives, first of
all, his genealogy; and,
secondly, the account of himself contained in vs. 6 and 10. He
describes
himself as “a ready scribe” — one who “had
prepared his heart to seek the
law of the
Lord, and to do it,” and also “to
teach in
judgments.” In connection
with the latter, he is careful to put before us at
once the fact that he too, like Zerubbabel, “went up from
accompanied by priests, Levites, both singers and
porters, Nethinim, and
a
number of the people (v. 7). He adds an exact statement as to the date
of
both his departure and arrival, very natural in one who is his own
biographer, and very interesting to the general
historian. He also, without
any
parade of religious sentiment, acknowledges the hand of God as
directing,
helping, and sustaining him in all his
proceedings, ascribing to the Divine favor,
especially, Artaxerxes allowance of his journey, and his safe accomplishment
of
it within a moderate space of time (vs. 6, 9).
6 “This Ezra went up from
law of Moses, which
the LORD God of
king granted him all
his request, according to the hand of the
LORD his God upon
him.” This Ezra went up. See comment on ch.2:1,
where the same expression -“went
up” —
is used. He was a ready scribe in the law
of Moses which the Lord
God of
piety never to forget
that the law was not a mere human code given by an earthly
lawgiver, not even a national treasure, the accumulation of
centuries, but a
direct Divine gift “the law of the Lord” (v. 10), “the words of the
commandments of the Lord, and
of His statutes to
law which the Lord
had commanded by Moses” (Nehemiah 8:14).
According
to the hand of the Lord his God upon him.
i.e. “by reason of
God’s favor to him.” God, by reason of His favor to Ezra, inclined the
heart of Artaxerxes towards him, so that he granted all his request. The
nature of the “request”
is not directly stated, but may be gathered from the
“letter of Artaxerxes,”
especially vs. 13-14, 16.
7 “And there went up some of the children of
priests, and the
Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the
Nethinims, unto Jerusalem,
in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the
king.” The same
six classes are here mentioned as furnishing colonists
under Ezra which, according to the earlier narrative (ch. 2:70), had
accompanied Zerubbabel. The order in which the classes are mentioned
is
nearly, but not quite, the same. In the seventh year of Artaxerxes.
This is
the
emphatic clause of the verse; Ezra’s main object in the section being to
give the exact date of his journey. As Artaxerxes began to reign in B.C. 464
(Clinton, F. H., vol. 2. p. 380, note b), his seventh year
would be B.C. 458.
8 “And he came to
seventh year of the
king.” And he came to
the
ninth verse it appears that the first day of the first month — the opening day
of
the year — was selected for the commencement of the journey. This was
no
doubt viewed as an auspicious day for beginning an important
undertaking. The time occupied on the way was exactly four months,
which is longer than might have been supposed to be necessary.
Herodotus
reckoned it a three months journey from
younger Cyrus conducted an army from
in
ninety- three marching days (Xen, ‘Anab’ 2 1, § 6) — the distance in
either case being considerably more than that from
even supposing the route followed to have been by Balis
and
caravan, like an army, requires rests; and we hear of one such
rest at Ahava
(ch. 8:15). Cyrus gave his troops
more days of rest than of
movement, and took half the year to reach Cunaxa from
not
be surprised, therefore, that Ezra’s journey occupied four months.
Some delay must almost certainly have been caused by the
perils of the
route (see Ibid. v.31).
9 “For upon the first day of the first month began he to go
up from
According
to the good hand of his God.
For the meaning of
this phrase, see comment on v. 6. The special favor of God here
intended would seem to be deliverance from certain enemies who
designed
to
attack the caravan on the way (see ch. 8:21-23, 31).
10 “For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the
LORD, and
to do it, and to
teach in
prepared his heart, etc. God’s favor
towards Ezra, and the prosperous issue
of
his journey, were the consequences of his
having set his heart on learning
God’s will, and doing it, and teaching it
to others. To seek the law is to aim at
obtaining a complete knowledge of it. To teach statutes and judgments is to
inculcate both the ceremonial and the moral precepts. Ezra appears as a teacher
of
righteousness in ch.10:10-11, and again in Nehemiah 8:2-18
The Reformer (vs. 1-10)
“After these things” — nearly sixty years “after,” as usually understood —
certain other things came to pass. Things so far similar that they
may be
recorded in the same connection; things so far different as to open
out to
us
quite a new part of this book. There is this similarity, for example —
that we have the story here of another and supplementary pilgrimage of
captive Israelites from
these points of difference — that the new pilgrimage is on a
much smaller
scale; and that the story itself is rather biographical than
historical, as
before — all of it, in fact, centering closely round the doings
of one man.
Accordingly, it is with the portrait of this one man, Ezra,
that this new
portion begins. We can see at once, on looking at the portrait,
that he is a
zealous ecclesiastical reformer; and we can easily understand
there being a
great necessity at
and
of what he did there, we shall read by and by. At present we see chiefly
his
fitness for this difficult role; and that in connection:
fit him for the work of Church reformation in several ways.
Ř
As to office. By lineage we see that he was a priest; and therefore an
authorized preacher (Leviticus 10:11; II Chronicles 15:3;
Malachi 2:5-7); and therefore a
person who would have special
facilities in reforming or setting things right, because such
endeavors
would, in his case, be only expected. How can any man teach truth
and right without correcting error and wrong?
Ř
As to tradition.
It may at least be noticed that, according
to this lineage,
very many of the traditions of his peculiar priestly ancestry
would be
specially in favor of reforming work. He belonged, e.g., to
the better of
the two principal priestly lines, viz., that of Eleazar as compared with
Ithamar, to which Eli and his sons (II Chronicles 24:3-4)
belonged.
Also, even in this very abridged
form of his genealogy, how conspicuous
are the individual names of Phinehas
(Numbers 25.; Joshua 22.; Psalm
106:30) and Hilkiah
(II Kings 22.; II Chronicles 34.) in regard to this
point! It could never,
therefore, be said of him, in attempting similar
work, as in I Samuel 10:12.
Ř
As to position.
Being himself descended from Seraiah, the grandfather
or great (or great-great) grandfather of the high priest of
that time (I
Chronicles 6:14; Ezra 3:2;
Nehemiah 3:1; 12:10), he would be not
only a priest, but a priest with peculiar family advantages for
exerting an
influence for good, something as is the case with a “prince of the
blood”
among us. On the whole, while all these things by themselves
would not
necessarily dispose him to become a reformer, they would all help him,
if so disposed.
for such labors. For we find that he had learned:
Ř
How to listen to God. The man who would
reform others must begin by
reforming himself; and this he can only do effectually by means of
an
accurate knowledge of God’s will, that one standard of perfect
right
(see
Psalm 111:10, and end of Luke 11:2). This point secured in the
present instance
o
by Ezra’s discrimination. He knew where to look for God’s
word, viz., in the “Scriptures” of truth, recognizing clearly
their double aspect, as at once human (the “law of Moses”),
and also Divine (which “God had given”). Compare I
Thessalonians 2:13 — “the word of God which ye
heard of us.” He recognized also their peculiar value (which
the “God of
own people (Romans 3:1-2).
o
by Ezra’s diligence.
Being thus valuable, he treated them
accordingly. How much is
implied in that expression, a
“ready scribe”! “
to know the meaning. “Inwardly learning and
digesting,” to know the power. And all together, to acquire
the right use — to be “ready” with them whenever called for.
“But sanctify the
Lord God in your hearts: and be ready
always to give an answer to every man that asketh
you a
reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.”
(I Peter 3:15) A man thus familiar with the “sword
of the
Spirit” (Ephesians 6:17) might naturally be expected to
further the Spirit’s work.
Ř
How to speak to men. Many book-learned men
are too bookish for
this; and, therefore, not fit for reforming efforts. They can
describe
their weapons, but not employ them. Ezra, we find, on the
contrary,
was a man able to persuade men of all ranks and conditions,
whether
superiors, from whom he asked permission to go (end of vs. 6 and
28),
or equals and inferiors, both lay and clerical (v. 7), whom
he persuaded
to go with him. Note,
however, that this second qualification or
attainment was the result of the first, as implied in end of v. 6,
and in
what we afterwards read in ch.8:17-18.
unless he strongly desires it, if difficult of attainment, he is
never likely to
reach it. However favored by circumstances, however qualified in
itself,
the locomotive will never go forward without the requisite
moving power.
This supplied here by Ezra’s
special ambition. We notice:
Ř
Its patience. What is said here (in v. 9) of the length of his journey
from
afterwards in the detailed account of that journey, his waiting for
the Levites, in ch.8:15-20, and subsequent delay for fasting (ibid.
vs. 21-23). What is worth obtaining is worth waiting for.
Perhaps
this conviction is, of all necessities, the most necessary for
success
(James 5:7).
Ř
Its depth. “Ezra prepared his heart.” He was deeply earnest as well as
patient; could strike as well as endure; and not only bide his
time, but
use it too. This a rare combination, but most important, in
doing good
(see
Galatians 6:9; also examples of Jacob, Moses, and Jehoiada,
the
high priest, in II Chronicles 22:12; 23:1-15).
Ř
Its direction. Those qualifying attainments we have spoken of were his
because he had sought them — sought them not only as an end, but
as a
means also to other ends. How definite and complete the
description.
“Ezra had prepared
his heart, to seek — to do — and to teach.” “To
teach in
ambition. First to know and “do” it himself: there
was the path, in his
judgment, that led to that summit (compare I Timothy
4:12, 16;
Titus 2:7). As the Oliver
Goldsmith has written:
Allured to brighter
worlds, and led the way.
Such is the opening portrait of the man whom God had called
then to this
special calling. We may gather from it some general considerations
as to
God’s preparatory work in such cases. We see, e.g. —
back (shall we say?) as Aaron. Certainly before his own birth
(compare
Jeremiah 1:5; Galatians 1:15);
and thenceforward, continually, in all
his early training and studies, and in all the various
hereditary and
circumstantial influences that made him finally the man that he was. This
especially illustrated in the case of the greatest of all these “sent
forth”
(Hebrews 3:1). As far back, at
least, as the birth of Seth, God was
preparing for that of Christ.
of those in
in
those then in
and in
itself for the good of earth (Luke 19:10; John 3:16; I Timothy
1:15).
by Ezra at
whole Jewish dispersion then residing there; and so, afterwards
still, the
whole dispersion. The dispersion, thus preserved, prepared the
way, as we
saw before, for the preaching of the gospel to all nations in
all parts of the
world; which, again, is to prepare for the restoration of
favor, and the consequent fullness of blessing to all mankind
(Romans
11:12, 15). What an extraordinary
power and depth and stretch of
influence for good is implied in these words — “Beloved for the fathers’
sakes.”! (Romans 11:28) And
how constantly we see similar influence
telling on strange peoples and future generations in the history
of the world!
The Exodus under Ezra (vs. 1-10)
“After these things,” viz., the events which culminated in the dedication of
the
temple, and consequent ordering of the service of God. “In the reign of
Artaxerxes king of Persia,”
after an interval of nearly sixty years, during
which the house of the Lord had so fallen into disrepair as to
need
“beautifying,” and the civil state
of the children of the restoration had
become disordered, and needed readjustment. With these purposes,
and
with a view to leading back to
Ezra received a commission from the king. In the text:
EXODUS.
Ř He evinces his social
qualification.
o
He announces himself
as “the
son of Seraiah.” This was
the high priest who was killed by Nebuchadnezzar (II Kings
25:18, 21). Ezra was not immediately
his son, for even
supposing him to have been born the year of Seraiah’s
death,
that would make him now 122 years of age! The immediate son
of Seraiah who went into captivity
was Jehozadak (I Chronicles
6:14-15). Ezra, therefore,
was probably the grandson or great
grandson of Jehozadak, and nephew or
grand-nephew to Jeshua,
the high priest who accompanied Zerubbabel.
By calling himself
“the son of Seraiah” he seems to have claimed now to be in some
sort his representative.
Jeshua was probably deceased. This
stepping over intermediate
generations has other examples in
this list (vs. 1-5), for it
only reckons sixteen from Seraiah to
Aaron, whereas, according to
I Chronicles 6.,
there are twenty-two.
o
Lineage is not without
religious as well as civil advantages.
Sons of Aaron only could
officiate as priests. It was of
substantial advantage to have descent from Abraham when
temporal blessings of the covenant were limited to his seed,
for these were not without their relation to the spiritual,
though these are limited to the children of his faith. Children
of godly persons are generally those who keep up the
succession
of the Church both in its membership and ministry (see Isaiah
65:23).
Ř
He evinces his moral
qualifications. “He was a ready
scribe,” etc.
o
This law is
distinguished as that “which the Lord God of
had given.” The
solemnities of Sinai and the miracles of the first
exodus are here called to mind. Such a
glorious authentication
can be pleaded in favor of no other system of
religion:
§
Buddhism?
§
Hinduism?
§
Confucianism?
§
Mahommedanism?
§
o
This is the
law, therefore, to be studied. Its
author, God.
Its
matter, truth the most sublime. Its
spirit, holiness.
Its end,
heaven.
o
A ready scribe (not a
skilful penman only, but an able
expounder also) of such a law has the noblest qualifications
to be a leader of men.
Ř He evinces his political qualification.
o
He had the commission
of the king. “The king granted him
all his request.”
There was great advantage in this, viz., to
influence the Jews to muster, to influence the heathen to
aid
them.
o
This he had “according
to the good hand of the Lord his God
upon him.” By God’s blessing he had wisdom to influence
the king. That blessing
also disposed the king to listen (ch.6:22).
Note — God is in
everything good; it is our duty to
discern this.
Ř In the muster.
o
He had “some
of the children of
standard were volunteers (see v. 13). They numbered 1773 adult
males, which with a proportionate number of women and
children would make 9000 persons.
o
Amongst these were
persons of influence. There were “priests
and Levites.” Of
these last some were of the families of the
“singers” and of the “porters.”
o
There were also Nethinims, descendants of those “whom David
and the princes had appointed for the service of the Levites”
(ch.
8:20). The limitation of particular functions to families tends
to perfect efficiency. The
service of God in all its departments
should be the most efficient.
Ř In the journey.
o
Incidents are scantily
given. The time occupied was four months
(v. 9). It appears to have been, at least for the able-bodied, a
march; for whence could carriages be procured for the transport
of 9000 persons?
Amongst the requisites they were provided
with they had tents for their encampment (ch.8:15). During
their pilgrimage their hearts would be in
pilgrim on this earth, etc.
o
If incidents are not
particularly given, the success of the enterprise
is, most emphatically. They “went up from
to
as too many do. Ezra had not only the skill to plan an exodus,
but also the energy to carry it out. Many a good thought
perishes
for lack of executive ability. Happy is the coincidence of
noble thoughts and noble deeds.
Ř In the blessing of
God.
o
Ezra “sought
the law of the Lord.” No study:
§
more remunerative
§
more ennobling or
§
more pleasing to God.
o
He sought it in
earnest. “Prepared his heart,” viz., by raising it
above impure prejudices; by seeking
the light of the great
Inspirer
in prayer.
o
He reduced it to
practice. He prepared his heart “to do it.”
Glorious
example. His life was therefore
righteous, and his
influence consequently great:
§
with God.
§
with the king.
§
with the people.
o
And “he
taught it to
viz., precepts and “judgments,”
viz., sanctions (I Kings 6:12;
Ezekiel 11:12). What a degenerate succession from the noble
Ezra were the
scribes of our Lord’s day! Let us
emulate his
qualities.
Ezra and His
Two generations had elapsed between the close of Ezra 6. and the events
with which the final chapters of the book are concerned. The prophetic
voice was silent; Haggai and Zechariah had long since passed
away.
Zerubbabel, the last representative of the house of David, in whose
person
some had looked for a restoration of the Jewish kingdom, was dead. The
high priesthood, which had been filled by the saintly Jeshua,
was occupied
by
Eliashib, who became connected by marriage with two
conspicuous
enemies of the faith of
the
Horonite; he himself “was
allied unto Tobiab,” to whom he gave a
residence “in the courts of
the house of God” (Nehemiah 13:4-7,
28).
Darius had been succeeded by Xerxes, the story of whose
pride,
lasciviousness, passion, and feebleness is one of the most ignoble of the
records of classic history. He was the Ahasuerus
of the book of Esther. We
may
judge from the book of Esther how unfavorable the times were for
carrying on the national and spiritual restoration of
of
the debasement of the settlers in
broke on both Ezra and Nehemiah with painful surprise (Ezra 9.;
Nehemiah
13.). But enough was known to awaken concern; he desired “to
teach in
permission to go up to
scribe; tradition assigns to him a leading part in the formation
of the canon
of Jewish Scriptures. The beginning of the study of Hebrew
literature
belongs to this period; the dignity of the pursuit invested the
name “scribe”
with honor, changed the mere registrar of documents and
chronicler of
events into the scholar and teacher. The change of language
consequent on
the deportation of the Hebrews into
some should draw the inspiring record of the past from the
obscurity of a
dead or dying language, and make
the people acquainted with their
DIVINE MISSION and the duties that mission imposed upon them.
Above all, the law of the Lord
was the object of Ezra’s reverence; he
was “a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which
the Lord God of
had given;” he “had prepared his heart to
seek the law of the Lord,
and to do and teach it.” The character
of Ezra was intimately associated
with his vocation: his were the habits of the student; his virtues were
not those of the statesman, the warrior, or the priest, but the virtues of
the scholar; it was his not to give, but to
interpret, laws.
Ř
The profound
piety of the man first strikes us. The
precepts of the
law were to him “the words of God;” behind the
writings he saw
the august personal authority of the ever-living Ruler of his people.
He lived in awe of His
will; he had a deep conviction of the evil of
sin against Him, so deep that it impressed itself on others;
they who
sympathized with His purpose were those who “trembled at the
words of the God of
consciousness of his mission, and the nearness of God to him in
its fulfilment; again and again he
refers his success to “the
good hand of his God upon him.”
Ř
Ezra had courage, but
it was the courage of the student; not impulsive,
but meditative. He knew and feared the dangers of the way; but
he
knew how to conquer fear (ch.8:21-23). He needed to be aroused
to
effort, and when he was called to action he prepared himself for
it
by consecration (ch.10:4-5). There is a physical, and there
is also a
moral, courage; that is the most enduring bravery which knowing
of
dangers, faces them, trembles but advances, which supplies the
lack of
impulse by resolve. The “fear of the Lord” casts out all
other fear.
Ř
The sensitive
conscience and tender sympathy of the recluse are also
his. Contrast his
manifestation of feeling with that of Nehemiah when
confronted with glaring impiety (ch. 9.;
Nehemiah 13.). Nehemiah is
indignant, Ezra is overwhelmed. Nehemiah “contends,” Ezra weeps.
Nehemiah curses the
transgressors, and smites them, and plucks off
their hair, and “makes
them” amend; Ezra is prostrate from morning
until evening, solemnly intercedes with God on their behalf, and
wins the people to concern and repentance. This is the
sacrificial spirit,
feeling and confessing the sins of others as our own, bearing
their
transgressions, and recovering them by suffering; it is the lesson of
the cross, the Christian spirit.
Ř
The firmness, even
ruthlessness, with which he commands the separation
of the husbands from their wives and children also bespeak
the man of
the study. None have shown themselves more able to rise above
family
ties, none have more imperiously demanded this sacrifice from
others,
than those whose lofty ideal, cherished in the cell, has known
none of
the abatement which we learn to make in social interaction.
There is
room for such men in history, and a work sometimes which none
can
do so well as they. Here are, unquestionably, the elements of
a noble
character. Not the only noble type, nor need we inquire if the
noblest;
enough that his was the character required for the reforms he
inaugurated. Nehemiah was not called to do over again the work
Ezra did. The style of
Nehemiah’s record (Nehemiah 13:23-28)
indicates a very different state of things from that which Ezra
found.
This is the true test of the
value of a man’s character, that he is fit
for the work he has to do; the test of his worth is that he
does
it effectually.
errand. His own object was to teach the people “the
words of the
commandment of the Lord, and of his statutes to
these had always been the crying sin of the nation, and had
entailed on it its
woes (ch. 9:7); the new favor God had
extended to them would be
forfeited if they disregarded His laws (Ibid. v.14). And the disobedience
that would provoke God might be through ignorance as well as throughk
presumption. A nation perishes
through ignorance; the violation of the
Divine order brings SOCIAL
DISORGANIZATION AND RUIN,
it needs not that the
violation be wilful. In the sacrifice offered on his arrival,
together with the renewal of consecration — the burnt offering, and the feast
of thanksgiving — the peace-offering, there occurs again the touching sin
offering, twelve he-goats are sacrificed to acknowledge and ask pardon for
sins of ignorance. In the
disordered state of the times it was certain
there
must have been many defects in the people’s service, many errors,
many
transgressions of which they were not conscious, and THESE MUST BE
CONFESSED! Then he was
charged with a double mission from
Artaxerxes, the gentle prince at that time reigning over
of the temple was to be proceeded with; he was laden with
gifts for this
purpose (ch. 8:25-27); he was charged to
attend to its service, and
empowered to draw from the royal revenues what was needed for a
stately ritual (ch.7:16-17, 22). He was also commissioned to set
magistrates
and judges over the people charged with the administration of
Jewish law,
and he was empowered to execute it (Ibid. vs. 25-26). Artaxerxes knew
that the law of the
Lord was more than a mere ritual, that it prescribed
social customs and regulated the life of the people, and he sympathized
with Nehemiah’s desire to
re-establish its rule. One great reform, however,
overshadows all other works of Ezra; when this is recorded the book
abruptly closes, as if Ezra’s work was done. The story of Ezra’s dismay at
hearing of the marriages of the Jews with the heathen, and his
prompt
dissolution of the marriages, is so far removed from the tolerant
spirit of
modern Christendom that it needs some special observations.
Ř
These were idolatrous
heathen, not monotheistic heathen like the
Persians; they were the heathen
of
with lust and blood. The term “abominations,” as applied to their
customs, is no mere outburst of Jewish arrogance; the tolerant
modern
spirit is revolted by the record. Intermarriage with them meant
sharing
in their festivals, and exposed the Jews to the utmost peril
(compare
Nehemiah 13:26). The past
sufferings of the people should have warned
them against this new folly; it seemed like provoking God, so
soon to
forget the past (ch.9:6-15). The intermarriage of the people, and
especially
of the priests, with idolatrous women was unfaithfulness to
the purpose
for which they had been restored from
confidence reposed in them by Cyrus and his successors; a denial of
the testimony of Zerubbabel and Jeshua (ch.4:3); it argued
indifference to their national position, contempt
of their Divine calling.
Ř
The demand for divorce
seems inconsistent with Paul’s counsel
(I Corinthians 7:14), and
the hopeful charity on which it is based;
with many of Christ’s words, and the spirit of Christ’s life;
it seems to
argue the terror of the separatist rather than the confidence of
the
strong believer. We must not, however, argue the question from a
Christian, but from a
Jewish, standpoint; it is as foolish to look into
the Old Testament for modern ethics as for modern science. The
immense
moral force of the gospel renders possible a genial and tolerant
spirit
which was not possible to an earnest Jew. As a matter of fact,
the
seductions of idolatry had always proved stronger than the attraction
of Judaism; the heathen corrupted the Hebrew, the Hebrew did
not
convert the heathen. (It seems the same today with the world
seemingly
having more of an influence on the Church than the Church on the
world?
CY – 2014) Judaism, with all its signal merits,
was not a missionary faith;
its office was protest, not evangelization; the spiritual
power of the gospel
was not in it — the cross, and resurrection, and the gift of the
Holy
Spirit. The
presence of these forces in Christianity is the reason of
its tolerant spirit; it moves freely in a world which it has
power to
change and sanctify (Mr. Spurgeon said it was the purpose of
Christianity
to sanctify the secular!
- CY – 2014);
its work is not to protest,
but to reclaim; the Son of man came
not to judge the world, but to
save the world.
THE DECREE OF ARTAXERXES WITH RESPECT TO EZRA
(vs. 11-26).
The present decree was of the nature of a firman granted to an
individual. It embodied, in the first place, a certain number of
provisions
which were temporary. Of this character were:
1. the permission accorded to all Persian subjects of Israelite
descent to
accompany Ezra to
2. the commission to Ezra to convey to
by
the king and his chief courtiers to the God of Israel (vs. 15, 19);
3. the permission given him to convey to
of
Jews and others resident in
4. permission to Ezra to draw on the royal treasury to the amount of a
hundred talents of silver, a hundred measures of wheat, a hundred “baths”
of
wine, a hundred “baths” of oil, and
salt to any amount (v. 22); and,
5. an indefinite commission to “inquire” (v. 14).
Besides these temporary enactments, the decree contained
certain
provisions of a more permanent nature.
1. Ezra was invested
with the chief authority over the whole district
“beyond the river,” and
was commissioned to appoint all the subordinate
“magistrates and judges”
(v. 25).
2. He was authorized
to enforce his decisions by the penalties of
imprisonment, confiscation of goods, banishment, and even death itself
(v. 26).
3. An exemption from
taxation of every kind was granted to all grades of
the
sacerdotal order — to the priests, the Levites, the singers, the porters,
the
Nethinim, and the lowest grade of “ministers” — to
all, in fact, who
were engaged in the performance of any sacred function connected with
the
temple (v. 24). This last provision was absolutely permanent, and
probably continued in force down to the close of the empire.
11
”Now this is the copy of the letter that the
king Artaxerxes gave
unto Ezra the priest,
the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the
commandments of the LORD, and
of His statutes to
The
copy of the letter that the king… gave to Ezra. This
decree, as already observed, was a private firman,
one copy of which only
was
made, which was presented to Ezra, and was his authority for doing
certain things himself, and for requiring certain acts of others. The priest.
This is implied in the genealogy (vs. 1-5), but not
directly stated
elsewhere by Ezra himself. Nehemiah, however, designates him
similarly
(Nehemiah 8:2, 9). His most usual title is the “scribe.” A scribe of the
words of the
commandments of the Lord. Not so much
a writer as an
expounder (see above, v. 10).
12 “Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe
of the law
of the God of
heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time.”
Artaxerxes, king
of kings. “King of kings, kkshayathiya
khshaya-thiyanam,” an equivalent of the modern shahinshah,
was a
recognised title of the Persian monarchs, and is found in every
Persian
inscription of any considerable length (Rawlinson, ‘Cuneiform
Inscriptions
of Persis,’ vol. 1 pp. 195, 271, 279,
287, 292, etc.). It was a title that
had
been used occasionally, though not at all frequently, by the Assyrian
monarchs (‘Records of the Past,’ vol. 3. p. 41; vol. 5. p. 8), and
naturally
expressed the fact that those monarchs for the most part maintained
the
native princes on the thrones of the countries which they
conquered (see
Isaiah 10:8). It was less appropriate to the Persians,
whose empire was
in
the main satrapial, but still had a basis of truth to
rest upon, since the
Persian monarch had always a certain number of tributary
kings under him
( cf. ‘Herod.,’ 5:104, 118; 8:142; Xen., ‘Anab.,’ 1:2, §12; ‘Hellen.,’ 4:1,§§
3,4,etc.). The Parthian kings took
the title from the time of Mithridates I.;
and
from them it passed to the Sassanians, who style themselves malkan
malka, from first to last, upon their coins. The God of heaven. On
this
favorite Persian expression see comment on ch.
1:2. Perfect peace.
There is nothing in the Chaldee
original in any way corresponding to
“peace;” and the
participle passage being translated as in the margin of the
Authorized Version — “to
Ezra the priest, a perfect scribe of the law of the
God
of heaven.” And at such a time. Rather,
“and so forth,” as in ch.4:10,
11, 17.
13 “I make a decree, that all they of the people of
priests and Levites, in
my realm, which are minded of their own
freewill to go up to
of
proclamation of Cyrus (ch.1:3), and gives permission not to the Jews only,
but
to all Israelites of whatever tribe, to accompany
Ezra to
That Israelites of all the tribes actually went up to
occasion seems indicated by the “twelve
bullocks for all
those who returned with Ezra offered on their arrival to
the “God
of
(see ch.
8:35).
14 “Forasmuch as thou art sent of the king,
and of his seven
counselors, to enquire
concerning
to the law of thy
God which is in thine hand;”
Ezra received his commission from the king, and from his
seven counsellors, who thus seem to occupy an important position in the
Persian state. They are commonly identified with the “seven princes of
Persia and Media,”
mentioned in Esther (Esther 1:14), “which saw the
king’s face,” and “sat first in the kingdom.” A conjecture,
which, though
not
unreasonable, cannot be said to be substantiated, connects the “seven
counselors” with the seven great Persian septs, or families, which had
privileges beyond the rest, and among them the right of unrestricted
access
to
the royal presence (‘Herod.,’ 3:84). The commission which Ezra
received is described in this verse as one to inquire concerning
and
can
scarcely have been sent to make inquiry whether the law of Moses was
observed or no, since that was certainly not a matter with which
the
Persian government would concern itself. Probably he was to
inquire
generally into the material prosperity of the province, and to
report
thereon.
15 “And to carry the silver and gold, which the king and his
counselors have freely
offered unto the God of
habitation is in
to
be remitted from one country to another under escort. The roads were
never safe from robbers; and the more considerable the
remittance, the
greater the danger of its being intercepted. We hear of its being
usual to
protect the treasure annually remitted to
Roman times by an escort of above 20,000 men (see Joseph., ‘Ant. Jud.,’
18:9, § 1). The
God of
more seems to be meant by “habitation”
here than by “house” in
ch.
1:2-3. Artaxerxes does not regard
Jehovah as a local God.
16 “And all the silver and gold that thou canst find in all
the province
of
priests, offering
willingly for the house of their God which is in
thou canst obtain” — “all
that thou canst get my other subjects to give
thee.” Compare the proclamation of Cyrus (ch.1:4, 6).
17 “That thou mayest buy speedily
with this money bullocks, rams,
lambs, with their meat
offerings and their drink offerings, and offer
them upon the altar
of the house of your God which is in
brethren, to do with the
rest of the silver and the gold, that do
after the will of your
God.” The primary application of the money sent
by
Ezra was to be the maintenance of
the Jewish ritual in its full splendor
(compare the decree of Darius, ch.
6:9-10). The residue was, however,
to
be employed in any way that Ezra,
acting under Divine guidance,
might direct. Apparently,
this residue was actually employed on
beautifying the temple (see
v. 27).
19 “The vessels also that are given thee for the service of
the house of
thy God, those
deliver thou before the God of
The
vessels also. It does not appear that these were sacred
vessels belonging to the temple, like those which Cyrus had entrusted
to
Zerubbabel for restoration to the house
of God. Rather, it would seem,
they were a part of the voluntary “offering”
mentioned in v. 15, in which
they are distinctly included (ch. 8:25-28). We may
perhaps conclude that
the
vessels sent with Zerubbabel had proved insufficient in number for the
great festivals.
20 “And whatsoever more shall be needful for the house of thy
God,
which thou shalt have
occasion to bestow, bestow it out of the
king’s treasure house. 21 And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make
a decree to all
the treasurers which are beyond the river, that
whatsoever Ezra the priest,
the scribe of the law of the God of heaven,
shall require of you,
it be done speedily,” Whatever
more shall be needful.
Here the terms of the
firman are very wide indeed, and
authorize apparently
an
unlimited application of the royal
revenue, or, at any rate, of the revenue
of
the province, to any purpose in any
way connected with the temple.
Probably it was
expected that Ezra’s own discretion would act as a restraint.
If this failed,
the royal treasurers would see that the amounts specified in
v. 22 were not
exceeded. The king’s treasure-house
is not the royal treasury
at
local treasury
of Judaea or
and on
which Ezra was now authorized to draw. Such local treasuries existed
of
necessity under a satrapial system.
22 “Unto an hundred talents of silver, and to an hundred
measures of
wheat, and to an
hundred baths of wine, and to an hundred baths of
oil, and salt
without prescribing how much.” Unto
a hundred talents
of silver. At the lowest
estimate of the Jewish silver
talent, this would be
a
permission to draw on the royal treasury
to the amount of Ł24,000
sterling. If we adopt the views of Mr. R.S. Peele (‘Dict. of the Bible,
Articles, MONEY and WEIGHTS AND MEASURES), it would
authorize drawing to the amount of Ł40,000. A hundred measures
of wheat. Literally,
“a hundred cors of wheat,” as given
in the margin.
The cor is variously
estimated, at 44.25 gallons and at 86.67 gallons.
It contained ten baths. Orders on the treasury for
so much
wheat, wine, oil, and salt sound strangely in modern ears; but
were natural
enough in the Persian system, where taxation was partly in kind,
and every
province had to remit to the court the choicest portion of its
produce.
Wine, corn, oil, and salt were all of them produced
abundantly in
which was “a land of corn
and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land
of oil olive, and of
honey” (II Kings 18:32), and which, in the
region
about the
23 “Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be
diligently done for the
house of the God of heaven: for why should
there be wrath against
the realm of the king and his sons?”
Why should there
be wrath against the realm? In the
seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanns
there was “wrath against the
realm” of
revolted from the Persians in B.C. 460, and in the
following year, with the
assistance of the Athenians, had driven the last Persian out of the
country.
A vain attempt was made by an embassy to
B.C. 459, to force
seventh year, it was resolved that a Persian force should attempt
the
recovery of the revolted country. Artaxerxes gives his firman to Ezra when
this expedition is preparing to start, and partly alludes to the past
“wrath,”
shown in the success of the rebels, partly deprecates any further
visitation.
Without pretending to penetrate the Divine counsels, it may
be noticed that
from the year B.C. 458 things went well for the Persians in
was
recovered in that year or the next; and in B.C. 455 the Athenians were
finally defeated, and the province recovered. The king and his sons. This
mention of the “sons” of Artaxerxes has been regarded as a proof
that the
Artaxerxes of Esther was Mnemon,
and not Longimanus. But it is
quite a gratuitous supposition that Longimanus,
who had attained to
manhood before he ascended the throne, had no sons in the seventh
year
of
his reign. Ultimately he left behind him eighteen sons (Ctesias,
‘Exc.
Pers.,’ § 44).
24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and
Levites,
singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it
shall not be lawful to
impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”
We certify you. The
use of the plural is curious. Hitherto the
king has made every permission and command to rest on his own sole
authority (see vers. 12, 13, 21). Now that
he reaches the most important
point in the whole of his decree — the permanent exemption of a
large part
of
the people from liability to taxation of any kind, his style changes, and
he
says, “We certify you.” Perhaps he speaks in the name of himself and
his
successors; or possibly he means to say that in this matter he has
asked and
obtained the assent and consent of his council (compare ver. 28).
Or
ministers. Rather, “and ministers.” It is generally allowed that the
word
here translated “ministers” is not applied to the Nethinim,
but to that still
lower grade of attendants in the sanctuary called “Solomon’s
servants” in
<150255>Ezra 2:55-58, and <160757>Nehemiah 7:57-60.
It shall not be lawful to
impose toll, tribute, or custom upon them It may be suspected from this
proviso that the Persians exempted from taxation their own (Magian)
priests, though of this there is no other evidence. But they would
scarcely
have placed a foreign priesthood on a higher level of favour
than their own.
25 “And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God, that is in
thine hand,
set magistrates and
judges, which may judge all the people that are
beyond the river, all
such as know the laws of thy God; and teach
ye them that know
them not.” And thou, Ezra. This conclusion would
be
by itself sufficient to remove the
document out of the ordinary category
of
“decrees” or “edicts,” and to render
it, what it is called in v. 11, nish-tevan,
“a letter.” After
the wisdom of thy God, that is in thy hand. i.e. “that is in
Thy possession.” Set magistrates
and judges. Both the words used are
derived from roots signifying “to judge,” and it is difficult to
draw any
distinction between them. The one translated “magistrates” is that
which
gives its title to the Book of “Judges.” Which may judge all the people
that are beyond the
river, all such as know the laws of thy God. The
latter clause is probably intended to be limitative of the
former, and to
consign to Ezra’s government only the Jewish portion of the
population, in
which, however, are to be reckoned the proselytes (see comment
on ch.6:21).
And teach ye them
that know them not. As the other inhabitants of
were not Zoroastrians, but idolaters, Ezra
was given free permission to
spread his religion among them.
26 “And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law
of the
king, let judgment be
executed speedily upon him, whether it be
unto death, or to
banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to
imprisonment.” Finally,
to Ezra is entrusted distinctly the civil
government of the Jewish
people, with power to fine, imprison, banish,
or
put to death offenders, as he may
think right. These powers were
always entrusted by the
Persians to the civil administrators of provinces,
who
were autocrats within their
respective territories, and responsible to
the
king alone for the exercise of their
authority.
EZRA’S THANKSGIVING
ON RECEIPT OF
ARTAXERXES’ LETTER (vs. 27-28).
With an abruptness that may appear strange, but which has many parallels
in
the works of Oriental writers, Ezra passes
without a word of explanation
from Artaxerxes’ letter to his own thanksgiving
upon the receipt of it.
Compare the interjectional prayers of Nehemiah
(Nehemiah 4:4; 5:19; 6:9,14).
27 “Blessed be the LORD God of our fathers, which hath put
such a
thing as this in the
king’s heart, to beautify the house of the LORD
which is in
which he has transcribed,
and not translated, and which is consequently
in
the Chaldee dialect,
Ezra now resumes the use of the more sacred
Hebrew, and henceforth
employs it uninterruptedly to the close of his
narrative. The form of
his thanksgiving a little resembles that of David
in
I Chronicles 29:10. The Lord God of our fathers is an
unusual phrase,
only elsewhere employed by David (Ibid.
v.18) and Jehoshaphat (II
Chronicles 20:6). “God of our fathers” is more
common, being found in
Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 26:7) and Acts (Acts 3:13; 5:30),
as
well as in Chronicles frequently. Which hath put such a thought as this
in the king’s heart. Compare 1:1. and 6:22. All thoughts favorable to the
Jews are regarded by Ezra as impressed upon the hearts of
heathen kings
by
the direct action of God. To beautify. Or
“adorn.” Ezra gathers from the
general tenor of the king’s letter that the adornment of the
temple is his
main object (see comment on v. 17).
28 And hath extended mercy unto me before the king, and his
counsellors, and before all
the king’s mighty princes. And I was
strengthened as the hand of
the LORD my God was upon me, and I
gathered together out of
Hath
extended mercy unto me before the king.
i.e. “hath given me
favor in the king’s sight” — “hath made him graciously disposed
towards me” (see v. 6). And his counsellors and… princes. Compare
the
comment on v. 14. The “counsellors”
and “princes” are the same
persons.
The Extension of the Mercy of the Covenant
(vs. 27-28)
After recounting the wonderful success of his enterprise,
Ezra breaks out
into a rapture of gratitude to God. “Blessed be the Lord God,” etc.
Here:
Ř
This is expressed in
the terms “God of.”
o
This is shown in the
record of the Sinai covenant (see
Deuteronomy 29:10-13). Thenceforward
Jehovah speaks of
Himself
as the “God of
o
So in reference to the
gospel covenant (see Jeremiah 31:31-34;
Hebrews 8:8).
o
So likewise when all
blessings culminate in the bliss of heaven,
and the mercy of the covenant is fulfilled (see Revelation
21:7).
Ř Covenant
relationship subsists in Christ.
o
There is no covenant
relationship with God apart from Him.
He is the impersonation of
promise. He is the depositary of
the promises (see Romans 15:8-9; II Corinthians 1:20).
o
Hence he is distinguished
as the covenant (see Isaiah 42:6; 49:8;
Zechariah 9:11).
Ř The promise of
the Christ was the
establishment of the covenant with
the “fathers.”
o
Hence the covenant in
the family of Noah was limited to Shem,
who was elected to be the progenitor of the promised seed
(see
Genesis 9:26).
o
In the family of Shem
it was afterwards limited to Abraham
for the same reason (Ibid. ch.
17:7-8).
o
In the family of
Abraham Ishmael was excluded and Isaac
chosen (Ibid. ch. 26:24).
o
In the family of Isaac
the limitation was to Jacob (Ibid.
ch.30:13-15).
o
In the family of Jacob
the restriction was to
ch.49:8-10).
o
In the family of
David
(Psalm 89:3-4; Jeremiah 33:19-26).
o
In the line of David
the promise was fulfilled with the
Virgin
Mary (see Luke 1:67-79).
THE MERCY OF THE COVENANT.
Ř The covenant was not established with Ezra.
o
He was of the tribe of
Levi (see vs.1-5). Levi was shut out
when
o
Why then does Ezra
speak of the Lord as his God? This
expression may have reference to the temporal blessings of
the covenant which were made over to all the tribes, and
embodied in the Law. Thus, as he expresses it :
Ř
The mercy of the God
of his fathers was extended to him.
o
Temporal blessings are
extended to all who have connection with
the favored line. Thus Esau was blessed because he was the
seed
of Isaac, who had the promise of the holy seed (Genesis
27:39-40).
In like manner Ishmael had
temporal blessings because he was the
seed of Abraham (Ibid. ch.17:20).
o
But the farther back
the connection is, the farther off is the
person concerned. Hence the Israelites, in general, are spoken
of as “nigh;” while the Gentiles, some of
whom would have
to go back as far as Noah before they touched a patriarch
with
whom the covenant was established, are spoken of as “afar
off”
(Ephesians 2:17).
Ř To this extension of the mercy of the God of the
covenant to Him he
attributes his influence.
o
The king of
felt the influence of his integrity and ingenuity. The people
of
who gathered around him and acted as his lieutenants.
o
But all this influence he
traces to God’s mercy extended to him.
What a rebuke is here to
those who plume themselves upon their
influence or abilities!
THE TRUE REASON FOR THE PERSIAN FAVOR.
Ř The covenant God put it into the heart of the king.
o
God does put
things into men’s hearts. We should see His
hand in all the good that is done by rulers and magistrates.
o
In so doing He serves
the purposes of His covenant. The
measures to which Artaxerxes was prompted
were important
links in the chain of
events which issued in THE ADVENT
OF THE
MESSIAH! The very “temple” which the king
“beautified” was to
become the scene of some of the grandest
predicted events (Haggai 2:5-9; Malachi 3:1). Consider:
Ř How the covenant has molded history.
o
Ancient history is
preserved to us only in so far as it stood
related to the people of the covenant. Persian history is
especially interesting in this view.
o
Modern history is no
less intimately connected with the
people of God. Those
nations who have the purest truth of
the gospel are the most influential in molding the politics of
the world. No matter how “far
off” he may be, no man is
so remote from the covenant as not to feel its influence
in temporal blessing. Whereas every limitation of the
covenant
down to the advent of Messiah tended to remove collateral
lines further off, now since His coming this tendency is
reversed, and He is “lifted up” that He may “draw all men
unto Him” (John 12:32;
see Ephesians 2:13-22).
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES
Library, LLC. All
rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.