Hananya Mishael and Azarya

Found 8 Search results

  1. "Then Shall I Bring Upon the Nations a Clear Language"

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    Why did God choose Avraham? The midrash offers two explanations. The story of the furnace parallels the story of Chanania, Mishael and Azaria, and the story about destroying the idols is taken from Gideon. The two parallels points to a broader connection between Avraham and these characters, and about the sin of Nimrod and The Generation of Disunity (Dor Hapalaga).

  2. Daniel and his Companions in the Court of the King of Babylon

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    Daniel and his three companions go into exile in Babylon at the end of Yehoyakim’s reign. The Babylonian attempt to assimilate them by giving them Babylonian names is confronted by their adherence to a pre-Halakhik decree to abstain from Babylonian food – even if technically permissible. Their challenge is compared to Yoseph’s challenge. While in a foreign land, he fought assimilation by refusing the seduction of Potiphar’s wife. Taking part in food and wine of the gentiles - like in the instance of Ba’al Pe’or or in the instance of Ahashverosh’s party - led to disastrous results. If eating the food was indeed not permissible, the improved health of the four boys might be explained as a spiritual result of their abstention.

  3. The Golden Idol

    Part 1

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    In order to override the conclusion of his dream regarding the transience of the Babylonian kingdom, Nevukhadnetzar constructs a golden idol. He believes that if all bow down to the idol, he will eternalize the Babylonian kingdom. The refusal of only three Jews is thus viewed as a threat to this plan, just as Mordekhai’s refusal to bow to Haman was viewed as a threat. Their refusal to bow to the idol leads them to be cast into the fiery furnace just as Avraham was cast into the furnace of Nimrod many years earlier according to the Sages. The first king of Babylon, Nimrod, and his tower that rose to the heavens, are compared to Nevukhadnetzar, the current king, and his gold idol that rose sixty cubits high.

  4. The Golden Idol (continued)

    Part 2

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    Both in the time of Nimrod and in the time of Nevukhadnetzar, the collective behavior was not an expression of unity, but rather of the tyrannical reign of a single man, who thought for everyone. In both instances the ruler’s plan was successfully challenged by individuals with love and fear of God. Informing to authorities is the type of Lashon Hara that leads to torture and death and is therefore comparable to the three cardinal sins. Three types of miracles exist: a miracle cloaked in nature that remains hidden; a miracle that alters nature – such as the miracle of the three in Nevukhadnetzar’s furnace; and a miracle where God himself intervenes and also defeats the enemy as was the miracle that Avraham merited.

  5. On Kiddush Hashem and Self-Sacrifice - Part 1

    Part 1

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    Hananya, Misha’el and Azariya’s behavior becomes the model for generations to come, of sacrificing one’s life rather than betraying one’s faith in God. If their action was necessary, why were they the only Jews to do so? If it was unnecessary, why was their action justified? Was the golden idol a form of idol worship or a tribute to the king? Does the obligation to give up one’s life in order to sanctify God’s name include an obligation to be tortured?

  6. On Kiddush Ha-Shem and Self-Sacrifice - Part 2

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    Potential solutions for understanding Hananya, Misha’el and Azarya’s actions in contrast with the general behavior of the Jews at their time include: the permissibility as an act of piety to give up one’s life even if no obligation exists; the obligation to give up one’s life if the action is part of a decree to destroy one’s faith even if the action itself is not idol worship; and the obligation of leaders to give up their lives for an action that can be perceived as idol worship. The permissibility to give up one’s life if the idol worship is for the ruler’s honor and not a question of faith as Mordekhai did in the case of Haman is up for debate amongst the Sages both in the book of Daniel, and in the case of Mordekhai.

  7. On Kiddush Hashem and Self-Sacrifice - Part 3

    Part 3

    Rabbi Yaakov Medan

    The question raised by the Midrash ha-Gadol in the name of R. Natan concerning the disagreement between Yehezkel and Hananya, Misha’el, and Azarya is an existential question for all generations. Yehezkel argued that refusing to bow before the idol, Hananya, Misha’el, and Azarya were endangering the existence of Am Yisrael in exile. While it may be permissible for them to endanger themselves and even to give up their lives for Kiddush Hashem, what license did they have to endanger the existence of the entire nation? Is it conceivable that the prohibition of idolatry in the case of three individuals could be more important than the existence of Klal Yisrael?

  8. He Who Answered Hananya, Mishael and Azarya - He Who Answered Daniel

    HaTanakh.com Staff