5 min read

The Night Solomon Slept with the Temple Keys

On the night Solomon dedicated the Temple, his new wife danced eighty dances in the streets while he slept with the Temple keys beneath his head.

Curated by Arthur · Told by Maggid ·
Table of Contents
  1. Two Processions, One City, One Night
  2. The Keys Under His Pillow
  3. A World That Could Be Unchosen
  4. The Flaw Built Into the Foundation

Seven years of cedar and hammered gold, and the night it was finished, Solomon arranged two celebrations.

The first was for the House of God. The ark had been carried up through the gates of Jerusalem, the cloud of divine presence so thick that the priests could not stand to perform their duties (1 Kings 8:10-11). The Holy of Holies sealed its darkness around the cherubim and their golden wings. The building was complete, consecrated, ready. Whatever else Solomon had done or would do, he had finished this.

The second celebration was for his new wife. Pharaoh's daughter had come from Egypt as the seal of a treaty, and Solomon had married her, and on the night of their marriage she danced. Not one kind of dance. Eighty kinds of dances, each one different from the last, spinning through the halls while the city outside still rang with hymns to God. Solomon watched until he could not keep his eyes open. He fell asleep with the keys to the Temple tucked under his pillow.

Two Processions, One City, One Night

God looked down at Jerusalem and saw both processions moving at once. Two drums. Two sets of singers. Two circles of fire in the same city, one burning at the newly consecrated altar and one burning in the courtyard where the daughter of Egypt was still dancing. The question that hung over the city that night was almost more bewildered than angry: which one of these was God supposed to celebrate?

The answer was neither, separately, because they could not be separated. Solomon had done both at the same time, in the same city, on the same night. The Temple dedication and the foreign wedding had fused into one occasion, and the fusion was the problem. Not the marriage by itself. Not the Temple by itself. The mixing of the two, as if one could dedicate a house to God and at the same moment celebrate an alliance with Egypt with equal fervor, as if both required the same night and the same joy.

The Keys Under His Pillow

Solomon slept until four hours past sunrise. He had the keys. The gates of the Temple could not open until he woke and handed them to the priests. So on the morning after the Temple's first night, the House of God stood locked. The priests waited outside. The daughter of Egypt had danced her eightieth dance, and the king lay sleeping with the instrument of access beneath his head.

Jeremiah would put it plainly later: from the day Jerusalem was built, God said, it had been a cause of divine wrath (Jeremiah 32:31). The rabbis who read that verse alongside the story of Solomon's wedding night understood why the wrath began at the founding. The city was barely consecrated before its builder split his attention. The complaint was not about stone and mortar. It was about that night, those two drums, those eighty dances, and a man who could not choose between them.

A World That Could Be Unchosen

There is an older tradition about the nature of the world itself: that God had built other worlds before this one and found them lacking. Each time, God looked at what had been made and decided it did not please. God discarded each one. Then came this world. This one was kept. The implication runs cold: what has been chosen can be unchosen. The world we inhabit was not inevitable. It was selected, and the selection was not permanent by necessity.

Solomon's own book carries the trace of this danger. He wrote that laughter is confounded, that joy achieves nothing unless it is grounded in something real (Ecclesiastes 2:2). The king who wrote that sentence had arranged, on the very night of the Temple's completion, a celebration of confounded joy. Eighty kinds of dancing and a sleeping king with keys beneath his pillow. The rabbi who read Solomon's condemnation of laughter connected it to exactly this kind of joy, pleasure untethered from the thing it was supposed to honor, celebration that does not know what it is for.

The Flaw Built Into the Foundation

The Temple stood for close to four centuries after that night. Stone by stone, service by service, the building held. But something had been written into its first night that could not be unwritten. The city had been consecrated and divided in the same breath, and the God who had discarded worlds before finding one worth keeping had stood over Jerusalem and nearly made a different choice.

Barely, the tradition says. Apparently this one was still worth keeping.

Solomon slept. The daughter of Egypt danced her eightieth dance. The priests waited at the locked gates. And the keys lay under the head of the man who had built God a house and then, in the first hours of its existence, given the night to something else.


← All myths

From the tradition

Sources

3 sources

The texts this telling draws on, in full. Open a card to read inline, or expand it for a wider, quieter read.

Vayikra Rabbah 12:5Vayikra Rabbah

Vayikra Rabbah turns to Marriage of Solomon.

That night, there were two dances, two celebrations intertwined. One for the Temple, a beacon of holiness, and the other for the Pharaoh’s daughter. And, HaKadosh Baruch Hu, The Holy One, blessed be He, was essentially like, "Which one of these am I supposed to be happy about?"

The stakes? The story suggests that in that moment, God considered destroying Jerusalem! As it says in (Jeremiah 32:31), "For this city has been a cause of My wrath [api] and of My anger from the day that they built it until this day, to remove it from My presence." Rabbi Hillel bar Hileni cleverly points out that the Hebrew word api, "my wrath," can also mean "my nose," likening God's reaction to wrinkling one's nose at a foul odor.

Can you imagine? The weight of that moment!

Rabbi Honya adds that Pharaoh’s daughter danced eighty kinds of dances that night. Solomon, exhausted or perhaps a bit too merry, slept until four hours into the day, the keys to the Temple still under his head. Now, normally, the daily morning offering was sacrificed at the very beginning of the morning (as we see in Tamid chapter 3). But on this particular day, because Solomon overslept, it was offered several hours late.

Talk about a royal screw-up!

Someone had to say something. The text offers two possibilities. Some say it was Solomon's mother who entered and rebuked him. Others say it was Yerovam ben Nevat. How could Yerovam, a commoner, dare to rebuke a king? Rabbi Hagai, citing Rabbi Yitzchak, explains that Yerovam gathered a thousand men from his tribe and, with their support, confronted Solomon. As (Hosea 13:1) says, "As Ephraim spoke there was trembling [retet]." The numerical value of retet is one thousand, subtly hinting that Yerovam's words caused Solomon to tremble.

But HaKadosh Baruch Hu, The Holy One, wasn’t thrilled with Yerovam's audacity either! God essentially said, "Who are you to rebuke a prince in Israel? I'll give you a taste of his authority, and you won't be able to handle it." And, the text says, as soon as Yerovam became king, "he became guilty through the Baal and he died" (Hosea 13:1), because he introduced idolatry.

But let's go back to Solomon's mother. The Rabbis suggest she was the one who really gave him a piece of her mind. She took her shoes and started slapping him, saying, "What, my son [beri], and what, son of my womb?" (Proverbs 31:2). Rabbi Hoshaya points out that it doesn't say "beni" (my son), but "beri." This alludes to the commands and prohibitions of the Torah, which is called bar (clear), as in "Yearn for bar" ((Psalms 2:1)2), because all its matters are barim (clear).

She continues, reminding him of his father’s many wives and the vows they made to bring sacrifices if they bore Solomon. "Now, I have stood and my offerings are with me, and you are sleeping?" A powerful moment, filled with a mother's love and concern. She quotes (Proverbs 31:3), "Do not give your strength to women, or your ways to that which destroys kings." She reminds him that licentiousness led to the Flood and the destruction of a generation.

The passage continues, quoting more of Proverbs 31, emphasizing the importance of kings staying sober and mindful of God's word. Rabbi Yochanan states that kingdom isn't given to those who stray from God, but to those who follow His word. Wine can lead to forgetting what's legislated, even the 248 limbs of the human body!

Rabbi Hanina bar Pappa sums it up poignantly: God says, "I had a great House, and I destroyed it only due to wine." The Rabbis add that the two sons of Aaron died because they entered intoxicated with wine.

But the story doesn’t end on a down note. The Holy One says that while wine causes trouble in this world, in the future, it will bring joy. As (Joel 4:18) says, "It will be on that day the mountains will drip with wine."

So, what can we take away from this incredible story? It's a reminder that even the wisest among us are fallible. That moments of celebration can be fraught with danger. And that the consequences of our actions, even seemingly small ones, can be enormous. But also, it offers a glimmer of hope, a promise that even the things that cause us trouble now can, in the future, be transformed into sources of joy. It's a complex, layered story that invites us to reflect on the balance between celebration and responsibility, pleasure and mindfulness, in our own lives.

Full source
Kohelet Rabbah 11:1Kohelet Rabbah

The ancient rabbis, in Kohelet Rabbah, that treasure trove of commentary on Ecclesiastes, dive deep into this verse. Rabbi Tanhuma suggests a simple, elegant idea: the world came into being precisely when it was meant to. Not a moment sooner, not a moment later. It was created at its appointed time.

Rabbi Abbahu takes it a step further. He proposes something truly: that God created and destroyed worlds repeatedly, until finally arriving at this one. "These please Me and those did not please Me," God declared, according to Rabbi Abbahu. This concept, by the way, resonates with ideas we find elsewhere in Jewish mystical thought, like in the Kabbalah. Rabbi Elazar adds that this idea opens a depth of understanding.

It’s a radical thought, isn't it? That our world, with all its beauty and imperfections, is the result of a divine selection process.

The text then raises a fascinating point about who is qualified to make certain pronouncements. It asks: Who can truly appreciate the beauty of the world? Someone who has never experienced hardship? Someone who has never known wealth?

The rabbis suggest that it's Solomon, renowned for his wisdom and his opulence, who is best suited to declare that God made "everything beautiful in its time." Why him? Because he experienced the full spectrum of life. As it is written, "Solomon’s provision for one day was thirty kor of choice flour…" (1 Kings 5:2).

Similarly, the text argues that only someone who has possessed great wealth can truly understand its vanity. Thus, Solomon, of whom it is written: “The king made the silver in Jerusalem as stones…” (1 (Kings 10:2)7), is qualified to say "Vanity of vanities." He saw the world and what would ultimately occur.

The same logic applies to Nebuchadnezzar's declaration in (Daniel 4:32), "All residents of the earth are considered as nothing." It carries more weight coming from a powerful king who ruled over the entire world. As it is stated: “I have given him all the beasts of the field, as well” (Jeremiah 28:14) to serve him.

And consider Yitro, Moses' father-in-law. When he proclaims, "Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods" (Exodus 18:11), it's particularly significant because he had explored every form of idol worship. As Rabbi Yishmael taught: Reuel, who is Yitro, did not leave any form of idol worship in the world that he did not seek and serve. His eventual recognition of God's supremacy is therefore all the more profound.

Finally, only Moses, who selflessly led the Israelites and took nothing for himself – "I have not taken one donkey from them" (Numbers 16:15) – had the moral authority to rebuke them.

What can we learn from all this? Perhaps it's that true understanding comes from experience, from confronting both the good and the bad. It's not enough to simply observe the world from a distance. We must engage with it, wrestle with its complexities, and ultimately, strive to see the beauty in its time.

And maybe, just maybe, we can also find a little bit of ourselves in these ancient figures – Solomon, Nebuchadnezzar, Yitro, and Moses – each striving to make sense of their world and their place in it.

Full source
Kohelet Rabbah 2:1Kohelet Rabbah

The book of Ecclesiastes, or Kohelet as it's known in Hebrew, wrestles with this very idea. "Of laughter, I said it is confounded; and of joy, what does it accomplish?" (Ecclesiastes 2:2). This verse, as explored in Kohelet Rabbah, a collection of rabbinic interpretations on Ecclesiastes, isn't just about a general disapproval of mirth. It digs deeper. It questions the source and the purpose of our joy.

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, in Kohelet Rabbah, offers one interpretation: "How confounded is the laughter of the nations of the world in their circuses and theaters." Is he simply being a killjoy? Perhaps. But consider the context. Is the joy derived from genuine connection, from shared meaning, or is it a fleeting, superficial distraction? Why, he asks, would a Torah scholar even enter such places?

The Rabbah doesn't stop there. It takes the question of inappropriate laughter into much darker territory: divine judgment. "How confounded is the laughter that the attribute of justice laughed at the generation of the flood." Wait, the attribute of justice laughed? What's that about?

The passage goes on to paint a picture of the pre-flood generation, seemingly blessed beyond measure. As the book of Job describes (21:9-13), "Their houses are peaceful, without fear… Their descendants are well placed before them… His bull breeds and does not fail… They send out their young like a flock… They sing to the timbrel and harp… They spend their days in prosperity." Sounds idyllic. A true golden age.

But there's a sinister undercurrent. "They said to God: Depart from us" (Job 21:14). They revelled in their prosperity while rejecting the source of it. As the verse continues, "What is the Almighty that we should serve Him?" (Job 21:15). In their arrogance, they believed they were the architects of their own success, that they had no need for God. And that, according to the Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary), is where the "attribute of justice" laughed – a chilling, mocking laugh at their hubris. The Holy One, blessed be He, responded, "By your lives, I will obliterate you from the world." And that's precisely what happened: "He obliterated all existence" (Genesis 7:23).

The Kohelet Rabbah draws a parallel with the people of Sodom. Again, they were blessed with abundance, "A land from which bread emerges… a place whose stones are sapphires… a path that birds of prey do not know…" (Job 28:5-7). Yet, their hearts were twisted. They enacted cruel laws against hospitality, seeking to isolate themselves from outsiders, as it is written: “He breached a shaft from the residents, forgotten from all passersby” (Job 28:4). They sought to ensure that outsiders would not pass through their territory. And so, the Holy One, blessed be He, declared, "By your life, I will eliminate your memory from the world," and rained fire and brimstone upon them (Genesis 19:24).

So, what are we to make of all this? Is laughter inherently bad? Of course not! But the Kohelet Rabbah challenges us to examine the context of our joy. Is it rooted in genuine connection, in gratitude, in humility? Or is it a fleeting distraction, a superficial mask for a deeper emptiness or, worse, a dangerous arrogance? True joy, the kind that endures, must be grounded in something more profound than mere fleeting pleasure. It must be connected to a sense of purpose, of meaning, and of responsibility to something greater than ourselves. Otherwise, we risk echoing the tragic laughter of those who ultimately lost everything.

Full source