Mas’at (משאת) Moses, the servant of the Lord. This refers to the money from the shekels—the half-shekels that all the Israelites would give once a year, as it says in the Torah, “When tissa (תשא; =you take a census of) the Israelite people” (Exod 30:12). That it why the text calls it a mas’et—akin to: “When tissa.” In Kings, the text makes reference to three kinds of kesef (=[donations of] money; 2 Kgs 12:5): kesef ‘over, as it says, “Everyone who is ‘over ‘al ha-pequdim (=entered into the records)” (Exod 30:13); “kesef a man pays as the value of persons,” which refers to someone who says “I pledge my value” or “I pledge so-and-so’s value”; and “any kesef that a man should decide,” which refers to one who donates for the upkeep of the Temple.

And the congregation, to Israel. [The latter part of the verse] means: the money of Moses, the servant of the Lord, and of the congregation, which Moses commanded to Israel to bring to the Tent of Testimony in the wilderness (Exod 30:16).

For Athaliah ha-mirsha‘at (=the wicked). Ha-mirsha‘at—the mem with a ḥireq—is an adjective, similar to he-‘arim ha-mivdalot (=the marked-off cities; Jos 16:9).

Her sons had violated the House of God. This means: She and her sons had violated the house of God, and that is why it needed reinforcement and repair. “Her sons” refers to sons she had by another man, and not by the king.

And had also used kol the sacred things of the House of the Lord for the Baals. For had [Athaliah’s sons] not removed the sacred things from the House of the Lord for the Baals, they would have sufficed to repair the Temple. But because they did use them for the Baals, it was necessary to collect money from all Israel. Athaliah and her sons did not remove all the sacred things of the House of the Lord, only most of them. That is why the text says kol, which is to be understood as “most of,” as in “kol the bounty of his master” (Gen 24:10). The proof that some of the sacred things of the House of the Lord remained is that in the book of Kings, when Hazael initiates a battle on Jerusalem, it says, “King Joash of Judah took all the objects that had been consecrated by Jehoshaphat, Jehoram …” (2 Kgs 12:19). But Joash did not want to spend that remnant for the work, so that the treasury of the Lord would not be left empty. Had Athaliah and her sons not violated the Temple, it would still have been standing, because from the time the Temple was built until Joash repaired it, only one hundred and fifty-five years had passed, and a strong building like that would have stood far longer had they not violated it.

Aron eḥad.[This means]: aron ish eḥad (=someone’s box). Vayya‘asu means that they fixed it up so that the money could be placed in it, as it says in Kings, “and bored a hole in its lid” (2 Kgs 12:10).

Vi‘aru (=and they would empty) the box. This is akin to “vatte‘ar (=and she emptied) her jar” (Gen 24:20).

And the work found good health (‘arukhah). This is metaphorical. The same is true for: “that healing (‘arukhah) had come to the walls of Jerusalem” (Neh 4:1), and for: “and he healed (vayrappei) the damaged altar of the Lord” (1 Kgs 18:30).

[The remaining silver] was made into utensils for the House of the Lord—service vessels. But in Kings it says, “However, no silver vessels were made at the House of the Lord …” (2 Kgs 12:14)! Our Sages, of blessed memory (b. Ketubot 106b), note the discrepancy between these verses, and they explain that one refers to a situaion where the amount that they raised yielded a surplus, and the other to situation where it did not. That is the point when the text says, “When they had finished, they brought to the king and Jehoiada….” For prior to the completion of the work they did not make vessels, as it says in Kings, “because they gave it to the workers” (2 Kgs 12:15). But once the work was done—as it says here, “and they restored the House of God to its original form and reinforced it, and when they had finished …” (vv. 13–14)—they made what was left into service vessels.

And ha-‘alot and spoons. Some explain that this is akin to ‘eli, which is a pestle—as in: “together with the grain, with the ‘eli” (Prov 27:22)—and that they were made to grind the spices for the incense. But in my opinion this is a small utensil used to draw water from the hin, for libations. We find [a reference to] it in a rabbinic source (b. Eruvin 53b): “When speaking cleverly, the maidservants in the house of Rabbi would say to him: ‘The ‘alat is banging on the jar.’” That is, the small vessel with which they would draw wine from the jar was called an ‘alat, and they would tell him that the ‘alat was hitting the bottom of the vessel, meaning that there was no wine in the jar. They also say (b. Sabbath 119a): “He found a jewel in it, and he sold it for thirteen ‘alita of dinars.” That is, he sold it for thirteen vessels—of this small type called an *‘alat—*filled with dinars. In the singular it is called an ‘alat or an ‘alah, and in the plural ‘alot.

And [the officers of Judah] bowed to the king, at which point the king listened to them. They bowed to him and persuaded him with their words, saying, among other things, that they would obey any command of his, and that he too should listen to them and worship asherah trees like all the nations. So at that point the king listened to them, and they left the service of the Temple and worshiped idols. But in a midrashic source [it says] (cf. Tanḥuma [Buber] Va’era 16): “‘And they bowed’ to him—that is, they made him into a god. They said to him: It says, ‘any outsider who encroaches shall be put to death’ (Num 18:7), and you were in the Temple for six years (2 Chr 22:12) and are still alive! Because a wondrous thing has been witnessed concerning you, you are worthy of our worshiping you as a god.”

And [the Arameans] wiped out all the officers of the people (sarei ha-‘am), me-‘am. The king, the officers of Judah, and a large army went out to do battle with them, and the Aramean army wiped out all the officers of the people (sarei ha-‘am), and some of the people (u-min ha-‘am) they wiped out also.

Because of the murder of the sons of Jehoiada the priest. Perhaps when [the people] killed Zechariah (vv. 21–22) they also killed the rest of Jehoiada’s sons. Alternatively, Jehoiada had no sons then except for Zechariah, because the rest of his sons—to whom the text alludes when it says “and he fathered sons and daughters” (v. 3)—had already died. So the only one of Jehoiada’s sons left was Zechariah—whom they killed—and it says “because of the murder of the sons of Jehoiada” in the same sense as “The sons of Dan: Hushim” (Gen 46:23).

And his sons yirev (ירב) ha-massa concerning him. The spelling is ורב (ve-rov; =and the large amount of)—which is a noun, as in ve-rov banav (=and his large number of sons; Esth 5:11)—meaning rov ha-massa (=the large amount of prophecy) that the prophets prophesied concerning him, as it says, “He sent prophets among them” (v. 19). But it is read yirev, a variation of yirbeh (=will abound): it is a future-tense form appearing in place of a past-tense form. What it means is: “the prophecies that abounded concerning him.” “His sons” refers to Joash. [The verse] means: A record of his sons and of how massa—that is, prophecy—abounded concerning him, and an account of his repair of the foundation of the House of God, are all written down in the midrash of the kings. We have already explained why it is called a midrash (2 Chr 13:22).