Marta, Wife of Cohen Gadol: Wealth is Not the End-All

🖨 Print

“The tender and delicate woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for fastidiousness…”¹ The Talmud discusses how this line in Devarim is referring not to a general woman amongst the Jewish people, rather, one particular person. The Seige of Jerusalem, brought about by the Romans, began in the west at the Third Wall, north of the Jaffa Gate. As historians describe, casualties of the war piled up, while down the Holy Temple’s steps poured a river of blood. This day of destruction, however, continues to be mourned by our people on Tisha Ba’av, as well as a number of tragedies which befall the Jews on this day throughout history. “And truly, the very view itself was a melancholy thing; for those places which were adorned with trees and pleasant gardens, were now desolate in every way, and its trees were all cut down…”

The aforementioned woman, among many, who experienced the horrors of Jerusalem being attacked was Marta, the daughter of Boethus. From her, we will learn a great, and humbling lesson about taking pleasure in this world, but not placing our full faith and focus on Olam Hazeh, or life on earth. Let’s delve into the life of Marta, alluded to twice in the Torah, and whose wealthy status many would envy, yet had a great effect on her tragic end.

Marta came from a controversial sect of Jews in the Second Temple Era. Avot of Rabbi Natan explains the stark difference between the following schools of thought during that time: The Pharisees believed that life on earth was preparatory for the World to Come, while the Boethusians did not. The Boethusians, from whom Marta descends, did not adhere to the ideas of an immortal soul, the resurrection of the dead, nor an after-life. Antigonus of Sokho (student of Shimon haTzadik, who is frequently quoted in Pirkei Avot), taught his disciples, including Boethus, “Be not like the servants who serve their masters for the sake of the wages, but be rather like those who serve without thought of receiving wages”². Antigonus’ pupils interpreted this to mean that one’s service of G-d not be in pursuit of reward in an after-life, rather, service is reward in itself. From this foundational belief, the sects of Sadducees and Boethusian were created.

Marta, having come from the family of Boethusians, adhered to the belief that one’s focus should be on Olam Hazeh, or life on earth. While the Pharisees were accused of depriving themselves and living lowly lives, albeit with focus on reward in the World to Come, Marta and her family lived amongst exquisite wealth and materialism. They used silver and golden vessels all their lives, and insisted the Pharisees led unnecessarily hard lives on earth, yet would have “nothing to show for it” in the World to Come³. Due to her family’s lifestyle, Marta became known as one of the richest women in Jerusalem prior to the destruction of the Second Temple.

Marta’s wealth, however, turned against her in two ways. For one, when her husband became the Cohen Gadol, or High Priest, she was accused of bribery. It was known that Marta was a widow, which brought into question her ability to marry a Cohen at all⁴. The Mishnah clarifies that if a man and widowed woman are betrothed for marriage before he is appointed to high priest, the marriage is permitted⁵. Despite this understanding, Marta was accused of bribing the king to secure her husband’s position as Cohen Gadol, or high priest, for it was known she came from tremendous wealth. Although it was never proven whether or not she used bribery, Marta’s integrity was questioned and her character degraded – all because she was wealthy.

With Marta’s socioeconomic status in mind, it is interesting to note the next place in Tanach she is alluded to. In Yechezkel, the seventh book of prophets, there is a reference to Marta’s way of life, presented in a tone of caution: “They will cast their silver into the streets, and their gold will be repugnant; their silver and their gold will not be able to save them on the day of the Lord’s wrath; they will not sate their souls…”⁶ There are two opinions held of how Marta died. One refers to this passage: While walking down the street, desperately seeking food during the attack on Jerusalem, she found figs and began to eat them. The fruit belonged to Rabbi Zadok, who in the merit of Jerusalem for not being besieged, fasted for 40 years. When he needed a bit of strength, he would merely suck the juice from the figs, and toss the rest out. It’s said that Marta could sense the rabbi’s sickness in the figs, and upon eating “his sickness”, fell ill. Just before she died, Marta brought out all her gold and silver and cast them into the street, saying, “What is the good of this to me?”

As previously mentioned, Marta was also referenced in Devarim, which described her tenderness. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai explains the following encounter as applying to the biblical verse: Marta sent her servant out to bring her some fine flour, but it had sold out. The servant returns to Marta (numerous times), and is instructed each time to, at that point, seek any flour he can find. Still, there is no flour. Desperate, a shoeless Marta ventured herself in search of anything to eat. On route, she stepped in dung, and immediately died. According to Rashi, because of her delicate nature, she was so disgusted by herself that she died. Hence the verse, “the tender and delicate woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for fastidiousness…” explains that, overcome with hunger as Jerusalem was being disgraced and desolated, she lost all sense of dignity. One can take pity on Marta, for her upbringing instilled desire and afforded her lavious pleasures in life, but when seeking a basic necessity (entirely beneath her status), disgrace killed her.

The following idea in Chassidut explains our deeply individual challenges: Before our neshamot, or souls, are sent to earth, G-d shows us what our lives will be. We must agree to all of the hardships, pain, and tragedies, with the knowledge that it’s for our ultimate good. Only upon agreeing to one’s specific and highly-personalized life is a soul sent to fulfill its G-d given mission. With this knowledge, as well as knowing that all G-d does is for the good, we can be more resilient and accepting of hardships. One can examine Marta’s upbringing and the values of her family, and see how it disabled her. She was taught to value the luxuries of life on earth, and only this life. Her family placed material possessions, silver, and gold, above confidence in one’s portion in the next world.
As Tehillim comforts us, “G-d will redeem my soul from the power of the grave, for He shall take me forever. Fear not when a man becomes rich, when the honor of his house increases, for he will not take anything in his death; his glory will not descend after him”⁷ Judaism does not condone aestheticism, entirely. Rather, we are told that life on Earth is a corridor, or preparation, for Olam Haba, the World to Come. With this in mind, we can enjoy earthly pleasures, as well as accept inevitable hardships. Unlike Marta’s family, though, we must remember that this is not the only world, as it’s taught, “All Israel has a share in the World to Come, as it is said: ‘And your people are all righteous, they shall inherit the land forever; they are the branch of My planting, My handiwork, in which to take pride.’”⁸

Devarim 28:56 ↩︎
Pirket Avot 1:3 ↩︎
Avot of Rabbi Natan 5:2 ↩︎
Vayikra 21:14 ↩︎
Yevamot 59a. 1-59b. ↩︎
Yechezkel 7:19 ↩︎
Tehillim 49:16-18 ↩︎
Mishnah, Sanhedrin 90a ↩︎