Benhadad Of Aram, Through His Servant Hazael, Seeks Elisha's Assurance That His Illness Is Not Fatal, But Elisha Discerns Dark Deeds Ahead At The Hands Of Hazael (2 Kings 8:7-15).
This incident presumably occurred during a period of peace between Aram and Israel. On hearing that Elisha had paid a visit to Damascus, Benhadad, the king of Aram, who was in bed through illness, sent to find out from him whether he would live or die. Elisha's reply was that the illness itself was not fatal. But as he looked at Hazael, the kings' messenger, it was revealed to him that through Hazael's hand the king would die, and that Hazael would become king of Aram and would be no friend to Israel. Hazael had as a young man been anointed by Elijah (1 Kings 19:15), although probably not knowing what it was for. That would not, however, make him a friend of Israel. The thought now planted in Hazael's mind he assassinated the king and reigned in his place.
That is one version of events. The full details of what happened are, however, disputed, partly due to the ambiguity of the narrative, in which Elisha does not actually say that Hazael will assassinate the king. But in our view the implication is clearly there, and it ties in with what we learn of his character.
Analysis.
a And Elisha came to Damascus, and Benhadad the king of Aram was ill, and it was told him, saying, “The man of God has come here” (2 Kings 8:7).
b And the king said to Hazael, “Take a present in your hand, and go, meet the man of God, and enquire of YHWH by him, saying, “Will I recover from this illness?” (2 Kings 8:8).
c So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said, “Your son Benhadad king of Aram has sent me to you, saying, “Will I recover from this illness?” (2 Kings 8:9).
d And Elisha said to him, “Go, say to him, You will surely recover. However YHWH has shown me that he will surely die” (2 Kings 8:10).
e And he set his face steadfastly on him, until he was ashamed, and the man of God wept (2 Kings 8:11).
d And Hazael said, “Why are you weeping my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that you will do to the children of Israel. Their strongholds will you set on fire, and their young men will you slay with the sword, and will dash in pieces their little ones, and rip up their women with child” (2 Kings 8:12).
c And Hazael said, “But what is your servant, who is but a dog, that he should do this great thing?” And Elisha answered, “YHWH has shown me that you will be king over Aram” (2 Kings 8:13).
b Then he departed from Elisha, and came to his master, who said to him, “What did Elisha say to you?” And he answered, “He told me that you would surely recover” (2 Kings 8:14).
a And it came about on the morrow, that he took the coverlet, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died, and Hazael reigned instead of him (2 Kings 8:15).
Note that in ‘a' Benhadad the king of Aram was ill, and in the parallel he was dead and Hazael reigned instead of him. In ‘b' Benhadad wanted to know whether his illness would prove fatal, and in the parallel he learned that it would not. In ‘c' Hazael brings Elisha a splendid present from the king, and in the parallel he see himself as but a ‘dead dog'. In ‘d' Elisha sees in his prophetic mind what Hazael will do to the king, and in the parallel he foresees what he will do to Israel. Centrally in ‘e' he fixed his penetrating gaze on Hazael and wept because of what he foresaw.
‘And Elisha came to Damascus, and Benhadad the king of Aram was ill, and it was told him, saying, “The man of God has come here.” '
When Elisha paid a visit to Damascus, presumably during a period of peace, ‘Benhadad the king of Aram was ill'. There is a problem here as to which king is meant. As this was before Hazael became king this could not be Benhadad III, who followed Hazael. On the other hand the Assyrian records seem to suggest that the king prior to Hazael was named Hadad-ezer. That may, however, simply be because the latter was his chosen name, with Ben-hadad being his throne name because all kings of Aram were seen as being ‘the son of Hadad' (compare how in Egypt every Pharaoh was ‘Horus, the son of Osiris', although not many took it as literally as Egypt), or it may be because Hadadezer was followed for a short while by another Benhadad who did not reign long enough to be mentioned in Assyrian records (see note below). This incident therefore almost certainly precedes some of those already described.
We do not know why Elisha came to Damascus. He may have been guided there by YHWH in view of Elijah's previous anointing of Hazael when Hazael was a young man (1 Kings 19:15). It may indeed have been that anointing which was partly responsible for the plans that were seemingly buzzing in Hazael's brain. Elisha may well have had a divine premonition that the time for its fulfilment was ripe, but if so it is not mentioned here. Had Elisha's purpose in Damascus been in response to a plea from the king the present would have been sent previously. Thus his presence in Damascus at this time must have been, from a human point of view, a coincidence.
‘And the king said to Hazael, “Take a present in your hand, and go, meet the man of God, and enquire of YHWH by him, saying, “Will I recover from this illness?” '
The king accordingly sent his courtier Hazael to Elisha with a rich present, in order to enquire of YHWH whether he would recover from his illness. He had good cause to know that Elisha was very much a recipient of the truth from YHWH. Perhaps his own prophets had failed to come up with an answer.
‘So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said, “Your son Benhadad king of Aram has sent me to you, saying, “Will I recover from this illness?”
So Hazael went to meet Elisha taking a magnificent present from the king. We can compare the size of the present which had been intended for Elisha when he was asked to heal Naaman (2 Kings 5:5). There is no good reason for suggesting that it is exaggerated. It was recognised that outstanding ‘prophets' did not come cheap and required large payments for their services (compare Balaam), especially when such important information was required, and the enquirer was a powerful king. The gods in general were seen as greedy. ‘Forty' may have represented ‘a large number'. The camels would be loaded with goods received through trading, possibly obtained from the Damascus street markets. With the gift came the request to learn about whether the king would recover from his illness.
‘He stood before him' as one in the presence of a superior. Great deference was due to such an acknowledged prophet of widespread fame. Note how even the king is described as ‘his son', seeing the prophet as a father figure.
‘And Elisha said to him, “Go, say to him, You will surely live. However, YHWH has shown me that he will surely die.” '
Elisha's reply was twofold. Firstly it indicated that the illness was not life threatening, but secondly it indicated that nevertheless he would die in some other way, something which will shortly be explained. Elisha was replying to the king's question as to whether his illness was a mortal illness, and his official reply was therefore ‘no'. We cannot fault him for leaving it with Hazael to decide whether to tell him that nevertheless he would die in another way.
There is a problem with the MT text here in that the original (the kethib) has ‘you will not live' while the qere has ‘you will surely live'. The original text had no vowels and the original ‘l' could signify ‘lo' (not), but may in fact have been intended as ‘lu' which would remove the negative. MT thus opts for either/or. What follows supports the qere in that his death was not due to his illness, although 2 Kings 8:14 may have been Hazael's lie. Whichever is the correct translation of the text the fact is finally stated that he would die, even if not from his illness.
‘And he set his face steadfastly on him, until he was ashamed, and the man of God wept.'
As the conversation was proceeding Elisha was receiving fresh information from YHWH and he consequently began to stare at Hazael severely to such an extent that Hazael was ashamed (there is no good reason for seeing Elisha as being in a ‘prophetic trance'). This would tie in with the idea that Hazael already had his assassination plans in mind and was feeling guilty. Then Elisha burst into weeping.
‘And Hazael said, “Why are you weeping my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that you will do to the children of Israel. Their strongholds will you set on fire, and their young men will you slay with the sword, and will dash in pieces their little ones, and rip up their women with child.” '
Hazael was not sure what to make of all this and asked Elisha why he was weeping. Note the courteous ‘my lord'. Prophets had to be treated rightly. Elisha's reply was to explain to Hazael what he had seen in his own heart. He had received knowledge from YHWH that in the future Hazael would become an enemy of Israel and would invade and oppress Israel in the cruellest way. The descriptions do not, however, make Hazael out to be particularly cruel. What is described were the normal methods of warfare. But see Amos 1:3-5.
‘And Hazael said, “But what is your servant, who is but a dog, that he should do this great thing?” And Elisha answered, “YHWH has shown me that you will be king over Aram.” '
Hazael sought to convince Elisha that he had no such ideas in mind. He pointed out that he was only a humble servant (‘a dog'), not one who could do great exploits. He may, however, simply have been prevaricating, and may already have had such ideas in his heart. Elisha, however, bluntly declared to him that YHWH had shown him that Hazael would become king of Aram.
‘Then he departed from Elisha, and came to his master, who said to him, “What did Elisha say to you?” And he answered, “He told me that you would surely recover.” '
On Hazael arriving back at court the king asked him what Elijah had said, and keeping his own counsel Hazael merely informed him that Elisha had said that his illness would not prove fatal, and that he would live and not die of his illness.
‘And it came about on the morrow, that he took the blanket, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died, and Hazael reigned instead of him.'
But on the next day he carried into action the plans that he had in mind. Possibly he was moved to act so quickly because he was afraid that Elisha might reveal his plans to the king. So on the next day, while the king was sleeping, he dipped a blanket made of twisted cloth in water, making it breath-proof, and then held it over the king's face until he died. The fact that he then became king instead of the dead king demonstrates that he had previously laid his plans carefully and had ensured that he would have general support. It was not a spur of the moment decision.
(Some have translated as ‘one (someone) took the blanket ---' signifying person or persons unknown, and that is possible, but the general indication of the text is that the one who did so was Hazael who was probably one of the few who could enter the king's bedchamber alone).
Note On The Identification Of Ben-hadad.
The Assyrian records (the annals of Shalmaneser) tell us that ‘Hadadezer --- met his fate' and that ‘Hazael --- the son of a nobody (i.e. a commoner) took the throne.' This indicates that this incident occurred between c. 845 and 841 BC. It does not, however, indicate that Hazael slew Hadadezer, thus it is quite possible that someone succeeded to Hadadezer, taking the name of Benhadad, and was himself shortly afterwards assassinated by Hazael, his reign not being long enough to figure in the Assyrian annals. The coming of a new king to the throne, which was a period when things were disrupted, often led to a coup attempt. Alternately as we have seen Benhadad may have been the throne name of Hadadezer.
Shalmaneser fought again with Hazael and Aram in c. 837 BC, forcing him to pay huge tribute, and there is no further mention of Hazael in the Assyrian records until Adad-nirari III cowed the now ageing Hazael into submission in c. 805-802 BC.
As Elisha foresaw Hazael was a constant aggressor against Israel (2Ki 8:28; 2 Kings 9:15; 2 Kings 10:32; 2Ki 13:3; 2 Kings 13:22; see also Amos 1:3-5), and also against Judah from whom at one stage he stripped all its treasures, being ‘bought off' when he planned to besiege Jerusalem (2 Kings 12:18).