QUEEN HELENA OF ADIABENE

Helena the Queen

Once upon a time in a place called Adiabene^[1]Adiabene was in Northern Mesopotamia, west of the Eurphrates river, in today’s Iraq. link to Adiabene on Wikipedia there lived a most unusual queen named Helena. She and her husband Monabaz reigned supreme– that is until her husband’s^[2]Helena was also Monabaz’s sister. According to Rashi, Monobaz the King, son of Queen Helena, was from the Hasmonean family (Rashi, Baba Batra, 11a). death. Thereafter her son Izates became king. Through a most providential turn of events both Helena and Izates embraced Jewish tradition. Their metamorphosis is recorded by the first century historian Josephus^[3]Antiquities of the Jews, XX, 49-53. who describes that it resulted from a fateful encounter ^[4]Although, we are not privy to the details of this fortuitous meeting, the ramifications of it are awe-inspiring. The coincidental becomes fortuitous and the fortuitous becomes providential. There is a Hebrew saying: ‘harbeh shlichim laMakom’—God has many messengers.  These messengers are in the right place at the right time, inspiring people to undergo transformational experiences. Helena’s meeting with Annais, the Jewish merchant, brought her to accept the observance of Torah. Similarly, the Rabbis tell us of the following encounter of the Jewish people with angels as they receive the Torah at Mt. Sinai:

What did the Holy One Blessed be He do? He sent down to earth 1,200,000 ministering angels, so that every person in Israel, will be touched by two angels; one angel places its hand on their heart and another angel elevates their neck so that they see the Holy One Blessed be He face to face. (Pesikta Rabbati 20:3)

God has many messengers. Angels can take many forms. A creative interpretation of this phenomenon was offered by daughter, Leora Malka Levy, when she was in 12th grade, as an introduction to her art exhibit entitled “Ministering Angels”:

Sometimes things are difficult and every one wants to aspire to something lofty. My something lofty are the angels. I find a certain calmness and serenity in angels, that you can’t really feel if you are not an angel. Sometimes, one needs to leave our world for a moment, to be elevated, to be in the place of angels, to feel the closeness of God. To be above the little things, to manage to see the larger picture, the whole, the good. In art I find a good place, an imaginary place where one can go when looking to distance themselves. Art allows you to go wherever you’d like, to be in a good place, a place which is both colorful and white, both high and low, a different place. I also believe that almost everyone feels this need at some point or another, and perhaps by my creations, I manage to let them come with me and rest a little. The distancing is momentary but I also believe that the angels remain to protect us, that they are a part of our life to some degree or another. My work is not the only one, nor the most important, but it is the most comforting. —

Leora Malka Levy in the year 30 C.E. with a Jewish merchant named Annais. Rabbinic sources^[5]Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 46:11 on the verse in Gen. 17:11, recount the following version of the story:

“You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin”—Like a sore the foreskin is attached to the body. And it happened that Monabaz and Izates, the sons of Ptolemy the King, were sitting and reading the Book of Genesis when they came to this verse, “You shall circumcise.” One turned his face to the wall and began to cry, and the other also turned his face to the wall and began to cry. One went and circumcised himself, and the other circumcised himself. After a few days, they were sitting and reading the Book of Genesis, and when they reached the verse, “You shall circumcise,” one said to his companion, “Woe to you, my brother.” He said, “Woe to you, my brother, and not to me.” They revealed the matter one to another. When their mother became aware, she went and said to their father, “A sore has developed on their flesh, and the physician has prescribed that they be circumcised.” He (their father) said that they should be circumcised. How did the Holy One, blessed be He, repay him? Said Rabbi Pinchas: When he went forth to war, an ambush was set for him, but an angel descended and saved him.

(Translation appears in: Lawrence H. Schiffman, “The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources”, in Josephus, Judaism and Christianity, ed. Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata, (Detroit, 1987) p. 301)

This alternative version of how the sons of Helena converted has Helena again as the catalyst for enabling the circumcision to take place. This is extremely significant since as a woman she doesn’t do the circumcision, but she is the one who enables it, just like Zipporah, the wife of Moses, was the catalyst for the circumcision of their son (see Exodus 4:24-26).)) suggest alternative renditions of Helena’s transformation which deepen our understanding of this glorious woman and her soul-stirring leap of faith.

Helena’s personal transformation served as a springboard for a lifetime of invaluable contributions to history and humanity in general, and to Jewish history and the Jewish people in particular. 

After her conversion, Helena left Adiabene and spent the latter part of her life in Jerusalem where she built herself a palace^[6]

This palace is likely the one unearthed in December 2007 by Israeli archeologists during a six-month excavation in the Givati parking lot just outside Dung Gate in Jerusalem’s Old City, opposite the Temple Mount. Doron Ben-Ami, the archeologist who directed the dig, said the elaborate edifice discovered, which is an anomaly in the landscape of the lower city at the end of the Second Temple period – otherwise marked with only modest buildings – was probably a palace built by Queen Helena.

According to the prominent 1st century historian Josephus, Helena’s family built lavish buildings in the City of David, which stood out at the time in a largely residential area that was noted for its almost complete absence of public or monumental buildings. The well-preserved structure which was uncovered in the excavation is an impressive architectural complex that includes massive foundations; walls, some of which are more than five meters tall and are built of stones that weigh hundreds of kilograms; halls that are at least two stories tall; a basement level that was covered with vaults; and remains of polychrome frescoes, water installations and mikvaot.

The palace, which was destroyed by the Romans when they demolished the Second Temple in 70 CE, was dated to the end of the Second Temple period by pottery and stone vessels, as well as an assortment of coins from that time.
The narrow openings that were discovered in the basement level of the structure were likely used by its inhabitants to flee shortly before the Romans destroyed the palace.
The building was destroyed by dismantling the walls of the large structure, causing the massive stone walls and ceilings from the upper stories to collapse onto the basement.
The archeologists carrying out the dig have not yet found any inscription to identify the building they uncovered, but according to Ben-Ami there is a “high probability” that the site was indeed Helena’s palace. and played a crucial role in the religious history of the city. Insight into her influence upon the life and times of the people of Judea can be found in three major sources; Josephus, Rabbinic literature, and archaeology.

Josephus serves as the major source of information about her conversion story. However, most remarkably, rabbinic literature serves as the source of Helena’s inner spiritual life! This fact is absolutely mind- boggling insofar as Helena was both a woman and a convert! And yet the mesmerizing power of Helena the Queen is a clear testimonial to her uniqueness and to the mystery of majesty.

Helena the Nazarite

Rabbinic sources relate to Helena’s all-encompassing acceptance of the commandments.  However, in a bold move, she took upon herself the unusual commandments of the Nazarite^[7]

From the Hebrew word nazir, which means “consecrated” or “separated”, a Nazarite is a Jew who took the ascetic vow described in Numbers 6:1-21.
This vow required the man or woman to:

• Abstain from wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins, and according to some – alcohol and vinegar from alcohol .
• Refrain from cutting the hair on one’s head.
• Avoid contact with the dead, even those of family members, as well as any structure which contains a corpse or a grave.

After following these requirements for a designated period of time (which would be specified in the individual’s vow, and not to be less than 30 days), the person would immerse in a mikvah and make three offerings, a lamb as a burnt offering (olah), an ewe as a sin-offering (hatat), and a ram as a peace offering (shelamim), in addition to a basket of unleavened bread, grain offerings and drink offerings, which accompanied the peace offering. – a heightened state of aeseticism and purity.

The Mishnah^[8]The Mishnah in tractate Nazir 3:6 tells the story of Helena’s Nazarite vow:

One who took many Nazarite vows, completed his vow and then came to the Land of Israel- The House of Shamai say he is a Nazarite for thirty days and the House of Hillel say: from the beginning.

It is told of Heleni the Queen who’s son went to war, and she said: “If my son returns safely from the war, I will become a Nazarite for seven years.” And her son returned from the war, and she was a Nazarite for seven years. At the end of the seven years, she moved to the Land of Israel, and the House of Hillel instructed her to be a Nazarite for an additional seven years. At the end of seven years she became impure, and she was therefore a Nazarite for twenty-one years. R. Judah said: She was only a Nazarite for fourteen years. informs us that Helena observed the Nazarite laws in accordance with the views of the House of Hillel. Seven years before she left Adiabene, her decision to take Nazarite vows was to help her son in battle and assure his safety. Upon his successful return from the front^[9]

In post biblical sources we find references to others who took Nazarite vows in relation to victory in war. The book of Macabees (I Mac 3:42-54) mentions Nazarites in the time of Judah the Macabee, before the battle of Emmaus:

Now when Judas and his brethren saw that miseries were multiplied, and that the forces encamped themselves in their borders: for they knew how the king had given commandment to destroy the people, and utterly abolish them; They said one to another, Let us restore the decayed fortune of our people, and let us fight for our people and the sanctuary.

Then was the congregation gathered together, that they might be ready for battle, and that they might pray, and ask mercy and compassion. Now Jerusalem lay void as a wilderness, there was none of her children that went in or out: the sanctuary also was trodden down, and aliens kept the strong hold; the heathen had their habitation in that place; and joy was taken from Jacob, and the pipe with the harp ceased. Wherefore the Israelites assembled themselves together, and came to Maspha, over against Jerusalem; for in Maspha was the place where they prayed aforetime in Israel. Then they fasted that day, and put on sackcloth, and cast ashes upon their heads, and rent their clothes, and laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images. They brought also the priests’ garments, and the firstfruits, and the tithes: and the Nazarites they stirred up, who had accomplished their days. Then cried they with a loud voice toward heaven, saying, What shall we do with these, and whither shall we carry them away? For thy sanctuary is trodden down and profaned, and thy priests are in heaviness, and brought low. And lo, the heathen are assembled together against us to destroy us: what things they imagine against us, thou knowest. How shall we be able to stand against them, except thou, O God, be our help? Then sounded they with trumpets, and cried with a loud voice.

A parallel story of a royal family converting to a different religion in relation to victory in battle is the case of Constantine who converted to Christianity based on a revelation before he went to battle.

In 312 C.E. Constantine fought the famous Battle of the Milvian Bridge, just outside Rome, defeating the army of Maxentius and thus firmly establishing himself as ruler in the West. According to Eusebius, Constantine dreamt that if he carried the sign of the cross into the battle he would win, and after his success in the war, he attributed the victory to the Christian God and converted to Christianity. Constantine’s mother, Helena, also converted to Christianity, under her son’s influence. Helena fulfilled her Nazarite vows.

When she arrived in Palestine, the House of Hillel instructed her to continue her Nazarite observances for another seven years.

This Mishnah is instructive in that it describes Helena as actually undertaking the vow of a Nazarite. The hypothetical possibility of a woman Nazarite is offered by the Torah:^[10]

The biblical passage teaching the laws of a Nazarite does not differentiate between men and women, and specifically states: “If anyone, man or woman, explicitly utters a nazarite’s vow to set himself apart for the Lord…”

See the commentary of R. Efraim Lunshitz, the Keli Yakar, Numbers 6:2, “Ish oh Isha”, which elaborates on the explicit reference to women in the biblical verse.

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelites and say to them; If anyone, man or woman, explicitly utters a nazarite’s vow to set himself apart for the Lord, he shall abstain from wine and any other intoxicant; he shall not drink vinegar of wine or of any other intoxicant, neither shall he drink anything in which grapes have been steeped, nor eat grapes fresh or dried… Throughout the term of his vow as nazarite, no razor shall touch his head; it shall remain consecrated until the completion of his term as nazarite of the Lord…                                                  

(Numbers 6:1-5)

But, Helena is among the very few women^[11]

The bible specifically mentions two women who took Nazarite vows, both in relation to their barren state: The wife of Manoah and Hannah, the mother of Samuel. The wife of Manoah was directly instructed to become a Nazarite by the angel of God, for her future son, Samson, was meant to be a Nazarite already in utero. Hannah apparently takes upon herself the Nazarite vow, in an attempt to give birth to her son, Samuel.

Later post biblical and rabbinic sources mention many cases of Nazarites within the Jewish community throughout the second Temple period, though usually they are not mentioned by name. Beginning with the story of the anonymous shepherd in the time of Shimon HaTzadik (Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 1:1, 36d and Babylonian Talmud Nazir, 9b), through the aforementioned story of the Nazarites in the time of Judah the Macabee (IMac 3:42-52), and the 300 poor Nazarites in the time of Yanai and Shimon Ben Shatah who came to Jerusalem asking the authorities for help in financing their Nazarite offerings (Jerusalem Talmud, Nazir, 5:5, 42b).But none of these Nazarites are mentioned by name and we know nothing of their biographical details.

On the other hand, there are three Jewish Nazarite women, who are specifically mentioned by name during the Second Temple period: Queen Helena, Queen Berenice, the older daughter of Agrippa I and sister of Agrippa II and Miriam the Tadmorite.

Queen Berenice was the eldest daughter of Agrippa I and sister of Agrippa II, who lived during the second half of the first century. Her Nazarite vows are mentioned by Josephus in The Jewish War II, 15:1:

She came to Jerusalem to fulfill her vow to God, for it is common for people who have successfully overcome a difficult disease or some other tragedy, to accept upon themselves a vow, that thirty days before bringing their sacrifice, they will drink no wine and will not cut their hair. And when Berenice came to pay her vow, she stood barefoot in front of the forum and prayed to Florus [the Roman governor] for her people, but Florus was not moved by her, and her life was hanging opposite him.

Berenice was from a royal Helenistic family. She was infamous for living with different kings. But we also know from Josephus that she was involved in trying to prevent the deterioration of the relationship between the Romans and the Jews. This entailed endangering her life before the Roman governor, Florus. On the other hand, she was also in danger of revenge from those who did not believe in a compromise. It seems that this may have been the danger from which she was wished to be saved, which caused her to take the Nazarite vow, although it is not clear from Josephus whether her Nazarite vow was related to her request from Florus to save her people.

In Josephus, the Nazarite offering comes at the end of the thirty days, and seems to serve as a sacrifice of thanksgiving, the Nazarite vow becoming a precursor to this sacrifice. This is similar to the biblical description of the Nazarite offering.

As opposed to Helena, who fulfilled her vow only after her son returned in peace from war, Berenice seems to have used the vow as a part of her effort to save her people- she fulfills it before she approaches the governor with her request, seemingly to receive heavenly help for her effort. As it turns out, we find out that her vow did not help and her request from the governor was not fulfilled.

The period of thirty days for a Nazarite vow is not mentioned in the Bible, but Rabbinic discussion mentions a minimum of thirty days- which may be reflected in Josephus’ description.

Miriam the Tadmorite, is a female Nazarite mentioned in the Mishnah. She was from the city of Tadmor, a desert town in Syria. The story of her Nazarite vows is brought in Mishnah Nazir 6:12:

One upon whom one of the bloods was sprinkled and he became unclean – Rabbi Eliezer says, He forfeits all. And the Sages say, He may bring the rest of his sacrifices and he will become clean. They said to him, It once happened to Miriam the Tadmorite that one of the bloods was sprinkled for her, and they came and spoke to her about her daughter who was in danger, and she went and found that she was dead, and the Sages said, She should bring the rest of her sacrifices and she will become clean.

This mishnah discusses the case of a Nazarite who became impure during the process of the sprinkling of the blood as he was bringing one of his Nazarite offerings. The Sages bring the case of Miriam the Tadmorite, who after giving her first offering found out about her daughter who was sick and found her dead, thus becoming impure. In her case, the Rabbis taught that she should bring the rest of her sacrifices and become clean. We know no other biographical details about Miriam. It is not clear from the mishnah how long she had been a Nazarite and why she took the vow. It could be that that the mention of her daughter’s illness serves only to explain the reason Miriam became unclean and has nothing to do with her vow, although one may also surmise that the daughter’s illness was the impetus for taking the Nazarite vow- similar to the vow of Berenice above. recorded by name as having actually taken the vow.

Two biblical stories relate to women who took nazarite vows. Both of them were motivated by their crisis of infertility to take this drastic step.

The first is the story of Manoach’s wife,^[12]

The mother of Samson, in Judges 13:2-7:

And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bore not. And the angel of the Lord appeared to the woman, and said to her: ‘Behold now, you are barren, and have not borne; but you shall conceive, and bear a son. Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink no wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing. For, you shall conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come upon his head; for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb; and he shall begin to save Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.’ Then the woman came and told her husband, saying: ‘A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible; and I asked him not whence he was, neither told he me his name; but he said to me: Behold, you shall conceive, and bear a son; and now drink no wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing; for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death.’

For further reading see:
“And Manoach Went after his Wife- the Place of the Woman in Biblical Society”, (Heb.) in Uriel Simon, Seek Peace and Pursue It (Tel Aviv: Yedioth Ahronoth Books, 2002), pp. 94-113 and Tikva Frymer-Kensky, Reading the Women of the Bible, (New York: Schocken, 2002), pp. 77-78 Samson’s mother, found in Judges 13:3-5, the second is that of Hannah, Samuel’s mother, found in I Sam 1:11,15.

Click the buttons for more information on Biblical Women Nazirites:

Nazirite Vows

The fact that Helena began fulfilling her initial vows as a Nazarite in Adiabene is not in keeping with rabbinic law, whereby this commandment and the concomitant rituals can only be upheld in the Holy Land. The misconstruance can be seen in another example of a non-Jew who sees the light and comes to appreciate the sanctity of the land of Israel^[13]The sanctitiy of the Land of Israel is the reason that the vow can only be taken in Israel. As portrayed in the words of Naaman, the General of Aram:
“And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him; and he said: ‘Behold now, I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel;” (II Kings 5:15 and makes a commitment to it: the story of Naaman the general of Aram.

Click the button for more information on Naaman and the servant girl:

Helena’s Sukkah

Helena’s actions are also used in an innovative halakhic twist to explore legal precedent. In Mishnah Sukkah 1:1 R. Judah and the sages debate the maximum height of a sukkah. The sages limited its height to twenty cubits, R. Judah permitted higher. R. Judah proves his point through reference to Queen Helena’s sukkah that was higher than twenty cubits and visited by the sages none of whom criticized its height. Since women are not obligated to perform the time-bound commandment^[14]According to Jewish law, women are exempt from performing positive commandments which are time-bound (mitzvot aseh she’hazman graman).
The Talmud in Kiddushin 33b teaches this rule. There are, however, many exceptions to the rule- mitzvot which though they are positive and time-bound, women are still obligated to keep (such as the positive commandments of Shabbat and lighting the Chanukah candles).
The Talmud brings a list of time-bound positive commandments that women are specifically exempt from, one of them being residing in the Sukkah. of building and sitting in a sukkah it is odd that Helena’s sukkah was used as a case in point.^[15]

Tal Ilan, in her book, Integrating Women into Second Temple History, gives an alternative explanation to Helena’s Sukkah observance, by claiming that Helena was acting in accordance with the ruling of Beit Shammai. She compares it to another story of a woman and a Sukkah:

Women, slaves and minors are exempt from [residing in the] Sukkah. A minor who does not need his mother is obligated [to reside in] the Sukkah. Once Shammai the Elder’s daughter-in-law gave birth, and he removed the ceiling [over her in order to create a Sukkah] and covered it with branches for the sake of the minor. (Mishnah Sukkah 2:8)

Originally Shammai’s actions were reported to refute the first ruling, namely that women are exempt from residing in the Sukkah, by allowing the parturient mother to participate in the commandment. If Beit Shammai followed Shammai in requiring women to participate in the commandment of Sukkah and Helena built a Sukkah and dwelt in it (as reported by R. Judah) she was obviously following the ruling of that school.

See: Tal Ilan, Integrating Women into Second Temple History, Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999, pg. 68.

A sukkah higher than twenty cubits is invalid. R Judah said: It is valid. He said to them: It is told of Queen Helena’s sukkah that it was twenty cubits high and the sages went in and out of it, and none of them said anything. They said to him: That is because she is a woman and women are exempt from the commandment of sukkah. He said to them: Did she not have seven sons who were all disciples of the sages, and all dwelt in that sukkah? (Sukkah 1:1)

Whereas the rabbis invalidate the evidence based on women’s exemption from upholding the mitzvah, Rabbi Judah does not dismiss her observance but shifts the argument to highlight her piety in mothering seven sons^[16]

The reference here to Helena having seven sons is reminiscent of the story of Hannah and her seven sons. This story appears in two different versions, one in the Apocrypha II Maccabees 6:12-17 and one in the Talmud Gittin 57b, each with a different historical setting but a similar story line.

During the persecution of the Jews in Syria at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (d. 163 B.C.E.), the seven sons of Hannah were commanded by the king to bow down to him and proclaim him as God. Each son refused, and each in turn was executed in front of their mother, Hannah. When the last son was executed, the pain was unbearable and she committed suicide. The Babylonian Talmud in Gittin 57b sets the story in the time of “Caesar,” that is, at the time of the destruction of the second temple in 70 C.E.

In both versions, Hannah has become a symbol of religious martyrdom, teaching her sons to keep their faith, even at the risk of execution. The fact that in our story Helena is mentioned as having seven sons may very well be to symbolize her devotion in raising righteous, God fearing sons. who are themselves Torah scholars.  Although the details of this mishnah may not be corroborated by other historical documents, the tone of the mishnah is clear, with regard to Helena’s piety and that of her family.  

Helena’s Gift to the Temple

Helena’s piety, which went far beyond the letter of the law, was also demonstrated through her gifts. The Mishnah recounts her donations of gold vessels to the Temple.

King Monbaz made all the handles of the vessels of the Day of Atonement of gold. Helena, his mother, made a golden chandelier to hang over the entrance to the sanctuary.

(Yoma 3:10)

The concept of Temple vessels is philosophically problematic. The notion of royal vessels belonging to the King of Kings is primitive and anthropomorphic. Does the Master of the Universe need a set of tableware? The Rabbis grappled with the question:

What was the purpose of all of the holy vessels? The Jewish people said to the Holy One Blessed Be He: Master of the Universe, the kings of the nations have a palace, a table, a candelabrum, incense burners…these are appurtenances of kingship. Every king needs them, and You are our King, our Savior, our Redeemer; shouldn’t You have these royal paraphernalia so that the entire world will know that You are king? He said to them, My sons, you are flesh and blood and so you have need of all this, but I have not need since I do not eat or drink, I need no light as my servants attest, since the sun and the moon illuminate the world and I shine my light upon them. I shall watch over you well in the merit of your fathers.                                           

(Tanhuma Tizaveh 7)

Why then were there temple vessels which could cause such a philosophical misconception among Jews and gentiles alike? The answer lies in the fact that man was created in the image of God. God’s role as a creator is reflected in the creativity of man.

In Genesis, six days of creation were followed by the creation of the day of rest, the Sabbath. In the Book of Exodus we learn of six other days that were followed by a special seventh day:

The Presence of the Lord abode on Mount Sinai, and the cloud hid it for six days. On the seventh day, He called to Moses from the midst of the cloud…’Tell the Israelite people to bring Me gifts; you shall accept gifts for Me from every person whose heart so moves him. And these are the gifts that you shall accept from them: gold, silver, and copper; blue, purple…And let them make Me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them.’                       

(Exodus 24:15-16, 25:1-9)

On the seventh day, Moses was instructed regarding the construction of the Sanctuary and its vessels. The parallel is so striking that the Rabbis determined that the kinds of labor prohibited on the Sabbath were all those acts necessary for the construction and furnishing of the Sanctuary in the desert. Man’s royal privilege to create, to pursue aesthetic perfection and technical virtuosity, found expression in the crafting of the sacred vessels for use in God’s sanctuaries. The vessels themselves were a form of offering. They were not merely receptacles for libations and sacrificial offering; they were inherently holy, having been consecrated to God by man, as an expression of his divine spark – his tzelem elohim – and as a form of thanksgiving.

A Golden Chandelier

Why Helena chose to donate a chandelier at the entrance of the sanctuary is unclear. But it reflects the sentiment expressed in the verse, “Your word is a lamp to my feet, a light for my path” (Ps. 119:105). The Rabbis elucidate:

If the verse employs the term ‘lamp’ then why use the term ‘light’? As soon as I begin to explore words of Torah a multitude of gates open before me. Therefore, it says ‘lamp’ and then ‘light’. Torah is a lamp unto my feet which shines additional light unto my path.”               

(Pesikata Rabbati 8)

Helena certainly used Torah and mitzvoth to illuminate her path and that of her people. Her divine spark inspired her contribution of the golden lamp in the Holy sanctuary. It brought warmth and Divine love into sacred space. This idea finds expression in the following midrash:

“You shall further instruct the Israelites to bring you pure olive oil for lighting; for kindling lamps regularly” (Ex. 27:20). Israel said, “Master of the Universe, in Your light we shall see light and you are commanding us to kindle lamps for you? R. Yitzhak said, “It can be likened unto a house full of lights, the master of the house says to his servant light candles in the courtyard.” He (the servant) says,  ‘The entire house is lit up and you are commanding that I light candles?’ He  (the master) said, ‘Light for the servants, so that the candles will illuminate their way.’ So too…God said, ‘I do not need the light of mortals. However, I commanded you so that you should experience my love for you’ …and the Holy One Blessed be He said to Israel, “And if you light candles before me I will light from the great light in the future. As it says: “For the Lord shall be your light everlasting, Your God shall be your glory.” (Isaiah 60:19)

   (Tanhuma Tizaveh 4)

The Almighty does not need Temple vessels; however, His eternal love of the Jewish people is reflected in them.

SOTAH – The Case of the Suspected Adulteress

The Golden Plaque

King Monobaz made all the handles of the vessels of the Day of Atonement of gold. Helena, his mother, made a golden chandelier to hang over the entrance to the sanctuary. She also made a golden plaque inscribed with the Torah portion of Sotah – the case of the suspected adulteress wife.

 (Yoma 3:10)

In addition to the golden chandelier, Queen Helena also contributed another curious golden object – a plaque inscribed with the Torah portion of Sotah^[17]

The biblical passage of Sotah appears in Numbers 5: 11-31:

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them:
If any man’s wife has gone astray and broken faith with him in that a man has had carnal relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she keeps secret the fact that she has defiled herself without being forced, and there is no witness against her—but a fit of jealousy comes over him and he is wrought up about the wife who has defiled herself; or if a fit of jealousy comes over one and he is wrought up about his wife although she has not defiled herself—the man shall bring his wife to the priest. And he shall bring as an offering for her one-tenth of an ephah of barley flour. No oil shall be poured upon it and no frankincense shall be laid on it, for it is a meal offering of jealously, a meal offering of remembrance which recalls wrongdoing.

The priest shall bring her forward and have her stand before the Lord. The priest shall take sacral water in an earthen vessel and, taking some of the earth that is on the floor of the Tabernacle, the priest shall put it into the water. After he has made the woman stand before the Lord, the priest shall bare the woman’s head and place upon her hands the meal offering of remembrance, which is a meal offering of jealousy. And in the priest’s hands shall be the water of bitterness that induces the spell. The priest shall adjure the woman, saying to her, “If no man has lain with you, if you have not gone astray in defilement while married to your husband, be immune to harm from this water of bitterness that induces the spell. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and have defiled yourself, if a man other than your husband has had carnal relations with you”—here the priest shall administer the curse of adjuration to the woman, as the priest goes on to say to the woman—“may the Lord make you a curse and an imprecation among your people, as the Lord causes your thigh to sag and your belly to distend, may this water that induces the spell enter your body, causing the belly to distend and the thigh to sag.” And the woman shall say, “Amen, amen!”

The priest shall put these curses down in writing and rub it off into the water of bitterness. He is to make the woman drink the water of bitterness that induces the spell, so that the spell-inducing water may enter into her to bring on bitterness. Then the priest shall take from the woman’s hand the meal offering of jealousy, elevate the meal offering before the Lord, and present it on the altar. The priest shall scoop out of the meal offering a token part of it and turn it into smoke on the altar. Last, he shall make the woman drink the water.
Once he has made her drink the water—if she has defiled herself by breaking faith with her husband, the spell-inducing water shall enter into her to bring on bitterness, so that her belly shall distend and her thigh shall sag; and the woman shall become a curse among her people. But if the woman has not defied herself and is pure, she shall be unharmed and able to retain seed.

This is the ritual in cases of jealousy, when a woman goes astray while married to her husband and defiles herself, or when a fit of jealousy comes over a man and he is wrought up over his wife: the woman shall be made to stand before the Lord and the priest shall carry out all this ritual with her. The man shall be clear of guilt; but that woman shall suffer for her guilt.

– the case of the suspected adulteress wife.

Jacob Milgrom explains the ritual of Sotah as follows:

An irate husband suspects that his wife has been unfaithful. Having no proof, his only recourse is to bring her to the sanctuary where she undergoes an ordeal. The priest makes her drink a potion consisting of sacred water to which dust from the sanctuary floor and a parchment containing a curse have been added. The curse spells out the consequences. If she is guilty, her genital area will distend and she will no longer be able to conceive. If however, the water has no effect on her, she is declared innocent and she will be blessed with seed. 

(NJPS Bible commentary Numbers 5:11 pg 37)

The Judicial Ordeal

The biblical description of the judicial ordeal of Sotah seems primitive and heartless. It is also totally discriminatory against women. In its Ancient Near Eastern setting it is nothing more than a veritable water ordeal. However when contrasted^[18]

Jacob Milgrom in NJPS Bible commentary, Numbers 5:11, pg 37, compares:

In the Ancient Near East the water ordeal provides the punishment as an integral part of the test in which the victim was thrown into the river. If guilty, he sank; if innocent, he floated… By contrast, if an ordeal only convicted the suspect, then he would be executed by the court together with his family.

The code of Hammurabi provides salient contrast for what was done to the suspected adulteress in Mesopotamia:

131. If a man’s wife was accused by her husband, but she was not caught while laying with another man, she shall make an oath by the god and return home.

132. If a finger has been pointed at a man’s wife because of another man, but she has not been caught laying with that other man, she shall leap into the River for the sake of her husband.

(Code of Hammurabi, paragraphs 131-132, in James Pritchard, ANET, p. 171)

Our text stands in close relationship to a river ordeal since it, too, provides that the punishment is built into the ordeal. However, the punishment differs: The guilty woman does not die but becomes sterile. Another important distinction between the customs of the Ancient Near East and the Bible is that in the Bible, rumor originating in the community was inadmissible, only the husband could press charges. with the Ancient Near Eastern counterpart it takes on a significantly different tone. Jacob Milgrom explains that while our text stands in close relationship to a river ordeal since it, too, provides a punishment which is built into the ordeal, there is a significant difference between them, since the punishment differs: The guilty woman does not die but becomes sterile.

A Peculiar Gift!

It is this biblical text that Helena chose to engrave on a golden plaque and hang in the Temple. One wonders why Helena chose to make this contribution. There are those that argue^[19]

See Tal Ilan, Integrating Women into Second Temple History, Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999, pg. 138-140.

On the topic of women donating to the Temple see: Bernadette Brooten, Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue, (Brown:1982), pg. 157-65.

Miriam Peskowitz, “Spinning tales” in Silberstein and Cohn, The Other in Jewish thought and History, 1994. p 119-20. that it reflects her political and religious inclination and a debate that was brewing in Israel as to whether or not this practice should be discontinued. Helena was a staunch supporter of continuing the ritual and hence put her money where her mouth was. The Rabbis note:

When there was a proliferation of adulterers in Israel they discontinued^[20]Tannaitic sources attest that the ordeal for the suspected adultress was suspended by Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, who lived at the time of the destruction of the Second Temple (for the sources see: Mishnah Eduyot 5:6, Babylonian Talmud Berachot 19a, Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 18a). the practice of Sotah (the bitter waters) since it says, “The man shall be clear of guilt; but that woman shall suffer for her guilt.” (Num 5:31) When the husband is guilt free – the water checks his wife; if he is not guilt free the water does not check his wife.

(B. Sotah 47b)                                                  

Milgrom explains that the Mishnah Sotah^[21]Mishnah Sotah 9:9 ascribes the suspension to the rampant increase of male adulterers; that is, it became ludicrous to put only women through the ordeal. Tosefta Sotah^[22]Toseftah Sotah 14:2 gives a more plausible reason: Adultery was practiced in the open, thus removing the very legal grounds for the ordeal—it was no longer a clandestine, unapprehended act. Clearly, the threat of the ordeal was no longer a deterrent.

Alternatively, Helena may have put up the Sotah plaque simply to facilitate the implementation of the ritual. The Bible states:

The priest shall put these curses down in writing and rub it off into the water of bitterness.                      

(Numbers 5:23)

Hanging the plaque made it readily accessible for the priest- a veritable instruction manual.  Another possibility is that she implemented another rabbinic dictate,^[23]Toseftah Sotah 2:1 which stipulates that verses containing the imprecation were to be inscribed on a golden tablet hung on the Temple wall so that it was visible from the court:

Its purpose was to obviate the need to bring in a Torah scroll in order to copy out the appropriate verses. Despite the evidence of these facilities and of cases of the ordeal, the many restrictions imposed by the rabbis for its administration render it likely that it was a rare occurrence.

(Milgrom ad loc)                   

Modesty and High Fidelity

However, coming from Helena this gift, like her others may deeply reflect the exalted virtues of our Queen and her striving for the moral high ground.

The institution of Sotah is most unusual in Torah terms. The rabbinic amplification moves the ritual to an entirely different theological register. In so doing it raises the standard of modesty^[24]

For an interesting contemporary take on the value of modesty in today’s society see:

Wendy Shalit, A Return to Modesty-Discovering the Lost Virtue, (Touchstone: New York), 2000. required of women to an all time high. A wife must be beyond reproach. It also creates a standard of marital fidelity and family purity that is absolute rather than relative—everything must be open, honest and above-board.

Factoring God into Daily Life

Sotah is one of the few^[25]

There are two incidents in which in order to ascertain innocence beyond a shadow of a doubt, a divinely orchestrated ritual is introduced. One is Sotah, as described here, and the other is the case of the Eglah Arufah- the special procedure to be followed when a person is killed by an unknown murderer and his body is found in a field. This ritual underscores the responsibility of the community and its leaders not only for what they do but also for what they might have prevented from being done.

Both these rituals clearly indicate the utmost importance of establishing moral impeccability. Torah rituals where in order to establish the innocence or guilt of the wife and resolve family discord, God steps in and takes an active role. We are told:

The priest shall put these curses down in writing and rub it off into the water of bitterness that induces the spell, so that the spell-inducing water may enter into her to bring on bitterness.

(Num 5:23)

The rabbis explain that God’s name is written and dissolved in the bitter waters.

They declare that the Almighty is willing to have His Holy name written in sanctity erased in the bitter water in order to bring peace between man and wife. We, in turn, must do everything to uphold the fabric of married life to save marriage from dissolution.  They proceed to tell a fascinating story about a great sage named Rabbi Meir and a suspected adultress:

“And he shall rub it off into the water.” R. Zechariah, the son-in-law of R. Levi, related the following incident:

R. Meir used to preach regularly in the syngogue every Sabbath eve. A certain woman was present who made it a habit to listen to him. On one occasion he preached to a late hour. She went away and when about to enter her home she found the lights out. Her husband asked her: ‘Where have you been?’ She told him: ‘I have been listening to the teachings.’ Said he to her: ‘This woman [you] will not enter the house unless she goes and spits in the face of the preacher.’

R. Meir saw it all by means of the Holy Spirit. He pretended therefore to be suffering from pain in the eyes, and announced: ‘If there is any woman skilled in whispering charms for the eyes, let her come and whisper.’

Her neighbors said to her: ‘This is your opportunity to go back home! Pretend you are a charmer and spit into his eyes.’ When she came to him he said to her: ‘Are you skilled in whispering charms for the eyes?’ Being overawed by his presence she answered in the negative. He said to her: ‘Nevertheless, spit into this one seven times and it will get better.’ After she had spat he said to her: ‘Go and tell your husband: “You bade me do it only once; see, I have spat seven times!”’

His disciples said to him: ‘Master! Are the words of the Torah to be treated with such contempt as this? Had you told us, would we not have sent and fetched the man and given him a flogging on the bench and forced him to become reconciled with his wife?’ Said he to them: ‘The dignity of Meir ought not to be greater than that of his Divine Master. If in the case of the Holy Name, inscribed in sanctity, Scripture orders that it is to be blotted out in the water, in order to bring about peace between a man and his wife, shall not the dignity of Meir be of still less account? 

(Midrash Rabah, Numbers 9:20)

His and Hers

Whereas Sotah seems one-sided, holding the wife exclusively accountable for marital infidelity, the Talmud,^[26]Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sotah, 47b. and later Nachmanides,^[27]

Nachmanides, the great Spanish halachist, exegete and kabbalist, explains how the ritual would also protect the wife, in his commentary of Numbers 5:21:

Why does the verse say: “The man shall be clear of guilt”? When the man is clear of guilt, they check the wife, but if the man is not clear of guilt, the waters do not test the wife. And what does it mean to be clear? That he did not sleep with her since he suspected that she had betrayed him. And there are those who explain, that if the husband had performed any forbidden coitus during the course of his life then the waters do not test her. And the conclusion of the law is that even if his sons and daughters were committing adultery and he did not reprimand them- the waters did not test the wife. And the rule is: The ritual [of Sotah] should be a standard of honor and tribute to the people of Israel. balance the equation. If, and only if, the husband is totally beyond reproach do the waters take effect upon his wife. According to Nachmanides, this ordeal is one of the only cases in biblical law where a judicial decision depends upon a miracle. In his words, “It was designed as a miracle and a tribute to the people of Israel.” 

Helena’s Choice — Compassion

An entire tractate of Mishna, entitled Sotah, describes the ordeal of Sotah in vivid detail. We are told that the woman was brought by her husband to the local court in his city where testimony was heard. From there she was escorted by two scholars and brought to the high court of seventy elders in the Temple in Jerusalem. The judges threaten her and frighten her into confessing rather than drinking the bitter waters. They say: “Our daughter, excessive wine brings about excessive frivolity, and much foolishness, and much bad company. Do not allow His holy name to be erased in the water. They say to her: “Our daughter, many before you have fallen prey to their desires, and been swept away by their lust. Great people have fallen”. And they tell her the stories of Judah and Tamar, and Reuben and his father’s concubine, Amnon and his sister Tamar, in order to make it easier for her to confess…

Even this episode gives us a sense of the compassion the halacha^[28]Halakha is often translated as “Jewish Law”, although a more literal translation might be “the path” or “the way of walking.” The word is derived from the Hebrew root halach that means to go or to walk.
It refers to the collective body of Jewish religious law, but it is not only pure law but also a way of life. Judaism classically draws no distinction in its laws between religious and ostensibly non-religious life. Hence, Halakha guides not only religious practices and beliefs, but rather is a comprehensive guide to all aspects of human life, both corporeal and spiritual. Its laws, guidelines, and opinions cover a vast range of situations and principles, what are better ways for a Jew to live, when commandments conflict how one may choose correctly, what is implicit and understood but not stated explicitly in the Bible, and what has been deduced by implication though not visible on the surface. felt toward this wayward woman. The Rabbis hoped that by telling her Bible stories they would be able to restore her perspective. How charming that Helena, herself a woman who had done teshuvah (returned from one way of life to another), was no doubt deeply moved^[29]

Another fascinating midrashic example of Bible stories serving as a catalyst to transport the listener to the spiritual high ground is found in Midrash Sechel Tov, Exodus 3:13, where Moses, in his initial encounter with God at the burning bush, recalls a story he had heard from his parents as a child, the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel:

“The Lord of your fathers has sent me to you” and they said to me: “What is His name?” For the elders had a tradition passed down from their fathers, as it is written: “I am God who took you out of Ur Kasdim”. But Moses did not know this, since he was not present amongst the elders. Therefore, Moses said to Him: “And if they ask me ‘What is His name’, what shall I say to them?” And why did Moses think to say such a thing? This is what he thought: The angel wrestled with Jacob our Father, and when he was about to take leave, Jacob asked “What is your name?” (Genesis 32:28), and I am speaking with the Divine Presence, all the more so.

This demonstrates the power of Bible stories to transport the listener to a deeper spiritual consciousness, similar to the method used by the sages to impact upon the Sotah. by these Bible stories. Perhaps she was touched to a point of implementing a ritual to help young women in trouble, walk the straight and narrow.

Helena was completely dedicated to family values. She was integrally tied to her family. She and her sons began and continued to travel on their spiritual odyssey together. She maintained her ties with them even when they were separated geographically. She helped many a family of widows and orphans. And even through the gift of a golden Sotah plaque to the Temple she strove to uphold the values of family purity.

Helena whose entire persona was one of compassion was even able to find compassion in the ritual of Sotah.

Feeding the Hungry

Far more significant than any material object donated to the Temple in Jerusalem, Helena and her family reached out to aid widows, orphans and strangers. It was not simply that they gave – it was how they gave — with all their hearts.

According to Josephus,^[30]

Josephus serves as a major source of information about Queen Helena and her royal family. Josephus makes mention of Helena’s conversion in Antiquities of the Jews 20:17-96.

For further reading see: Lawrence H. Shiffman, “The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources”, in Josephus, Judaism and Christianity, ed. Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata, (Detroit, 1987) pp. 293-312. Helena travels to Jerusalem to worship at the Temple and discovers upon her arrival that the people are suffering from a famine. She orders provisions to be imported and informs Izates, who likewise sends relief from Adiabene.  Helena’s journey constitutes a direct continuation of the story of the conversion, since she wanted to fulfill the obligation of the proselyte and offer a sacrifice in the Temple. Izates’ help during the famine in Palestine, certainly a historical fact, is described here in order to prove his adherence to the commandments and (perhaps even more important) the support of the House of Adiabene for the Jews of Palestine. ^[31]Schiffman p 296

Helena’s Spiritual Journey

“Know from whence you came, to where you are going, and before Whom you shall give an accounting.”                                                            

(Avot 3:1)

The very act of feeding the destitute is noble,^[32]

A modern woman who personifies the values that Helena stood for and acted upon, is Emma Lazarus who is best known for “The New Colossus”, a sonnet written in 1883; the final lines of which are engraved on a bronze plaque in the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. Lazarus was the fourth of seven children of Moshe Lazarus and Esther Nathan, Portuguese Sephardic Jews whose families had been settled in New York since the colonial period. Emma wrote her own poems and edited many adaptations of German poems. She began to be more interested in her Jewish ancestry after reading the George Eliot novel, Daniel Deronda, and as she heard of the Russian pogroms in the early 1880s. During the winter of 1882 Eastern European Ashkenazi Jews immigrated in destitute multitudes to New York. Lazarus taught technical education to help them become self-supporting. She is also known as an important forerunner of the Zionist movement.

The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

—Emma Lazarus, 1883

One could sum up the contribution of these two great women, Helena the Queen and Emma Lazarus, by saying that through their charity and lovingkindness, they truly enabled others to attain life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. however consider from whence Helena came. She was the Queen of Adiabene and she had come from afar.

Indeed, only the farsighted venture out on difficult spiritual journeys. A midrash^[33]Vayikra Rabbah 14:2 explains the beautiful custom of calling all converts to Judaism “son of Abraham,” “daughter of Abraham” (as when they are called to the Torah). R. Nathan quotes a verse from the book of Job (36:3): “I shall proclaim my knowledge to those who come from a distance (le- merahok) – and explains: “Those who have come near from afar are considered to be [the children] of Abraham, who came from afar”. We then expect R. Nathan to make reference to Abraham’s coming from Ur of the Chaldees, or the like. Instead, he quotes our verse: “He lifted his eyes and saw the place from afar” (Gen 22:2).

Clearly, the idea underlying this midrash is that both Abraham and those who have chosen to join his descendants through the ages, possess a gift of clairvoyance that enables them to transcend the here and now, and focus on eternity.

This idea is also echoed by Jeremiah, who proclaims: “The Lord revealed Himself to me from afar, with eternal love”  (Jer.  31:3)—true revelation comes from afar, born of perspective and nurtured by love.

Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself:

Helena was from Adiabene, but she had come from afar in so many profound ways. She arrived in Jerusalem, as Queen Helena, but also as a stranger, a widow, a convert and a foreigner. She could have satisfied herself with building her palace, settling in, and living a comfortable life but that was not the case; she looked out for others.

The task was not a simple one. She came to Israel and found insufficient provisions. She not only sent word to Adiabene, she imported produce from Egypt and Cyprus. Again, her actions went far beyond the letter of the law.  Helena, in this case as well, upheld the majestic spirit of Torah through the triumph of her own spirit.

The Stranger, the Widow, the Orphan

The Torah formulates the treatment of the destitute, the widow, the orphan and strangers as follows:

For the Lord your God is God supreme and Lord supreme, the great, the mighty and the awesome God. Who shows no favor and takes no bribe, but upholds the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and befriends the stranger, providing him with food and clothing. You too must befriend the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.

(Deuteronomy, 10:17-19)

The vulnerability of the widow is evidenced by the fact that there are explicit Torah ordinances prohibiting her mistreatment. The Torah is well aware of the widow’s plight and builds in social conventions to help provide for her. Any natural disaster affecting the agricultural yield would impact directly on the widow’s support system.

When you reap the harvest in your field and overlook a sheaf in the field, do not turn back to get it; it shall go to the stranger, the fatherless and the widow—in order that the Lord your God may bless you in all your undertakings.                              

(Deuteronomy 24:19)

Helena herself was a stranger, a widow, and her children were orphaned. Although she may never have known hunger, every word of the Torah resonated for her with extraordinary sensitivity.

Click the button for more information on another benevolent widow in biblical narrative:

Through her compassion she brought blessing to others and was herself blessed with the blessing of God.

Monobaz’s Lovingkindness

In the Rabbinic source it is Monobaz the King who is the key player in this drama. Irrespective of this detail, it is clear that Helena and her sons were paradigms of Zedakah and loving-kindness.

As opposed to Josephus’ historical account, the Rabbis add a poignant dimension that allows us to peer into the recesses of Monabaz’s soul and understand his actions from a deeply spiritual perspective.

Monobaz the King squandered all his money. His relatives sent to him and said, “Your fathers added to their wealth and the wealth of their forefathers and you squandered it.”

He said to them, “My forefathers amassed wealth in this earth and I amassed in the heavens”, as it says: ‘Truth springs up from the earth; justice (zedek) looks down from heaven’ (Ps 85:12)

“My forefathers amassed treasures that do not bear fruit and I amassed treasures that bear fruit”, as it says, ‘Hails the just man (zadik), for he shall fare well; He shall eat the fruit of his works.’ (Isaiah 3:10)

“My forefathers amassed wealth in a place where others have control, I amassed wealth where no hand has control”, as it says, ‘Zedakah and justice are the base of Your throne; loving-kindness and faithfulness stand before You.’ (Ps 89:15)

“My forefathers amassed wealth but I amassed souls”, as it says ‘The fruit of the righteous (zadik) is a tree of life; and he who gathers souls is wise.’ (Mishle 11:30)

“My forefathers amassed for others but I amassed for myself” as it says, ‘And bless you and it will be to your zedakah before the Lord your God.’ (Dt 24:13)

“My forefathers amassed in this world but I amassed in this world and the next world”, as it says ‘Wealth is of no avail on the day of wrath, But zedakah saves from death.’ (Proverbs 11:4)

Zedakah and loving kindness are equated with all of the mitzvoth of the Torah. Zedakah is given to the living, loving kindness to the living and the deceased. Zedakah is administered to the poor, loving kindness to the poor and the wealthy, Zedakah is with one’s money but loving-kindness with ones money and one’s self. R. Yochanan Bar Marei in the name of R. Yochanan said, ‘We do not know which is more desirable zedakah or loving-kindness. But it says, “But the Lord’s loving-kindness is for all eternity toward those who fear Him, and His beneficence is for the children’s children.” (Ps. 103:17). Indicating that loving-kindness is greater than Zedakah.”

(Jerusalem Talmud, Peah 4:18)

A Noble Testimony

What could be a more noble testimony to these values than the actions of Helena and her royal family? It was they who brought to life the immortal words of the prophet Isaiah:

Share your bread with the hungry,                           
and take the wretched poor into your home;
When you see the naked clothe him,
and do not ignore your own kin.
Then shall the light burst forth like the dawn
And your healing spring up quickly.
May your righteousness (zidkecha) go before you,
and the glory of God embrace you.
Then you shall call out and He will answer
You shall implore and He will say, ‘Here I am’.

(Isaiah 58:7-8)

Helena and her sons serve as role models of majesty and mercy, of zedakah and loving-kindness inspiring us to this very day.