Chapter 22 of Divrei HaYamim II recounts the brief reign of Ahaziah the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, his death at the hands of Jehu son of Nimshi alongside the house of Ahab, and the darkest moment in the history of the House of David: Athaliah destroys all the royal offspring, and only one infant, Joash, is saved and hidden in the Beit HaMikdash for six years. The chapter is filled with difficulties in the pesukim, and in each of them the Malbim shows how the verses complement one another rather than contradict.
וַיַּמְלִיכוּ יוֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלַ͏ִם אֶת־אֲחַזְיָהוּ בְנוֹ הַקָּטֹן תַּחְתָּיו כִּי כׇל־הָרִאשֹׁנִים הָרַג הַגְּדוּד הַבָּא בָעַרְבִים לַמַּחֲנֶה וַיִּמְלֹךְ אֲחַזְיָהוּ בֶן־יְהוֹרָם מֶלֶךְ יְהוּדָה׃ - And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah, his youngest son, king in his stead, for the raiding band that came with the Arabs to the camp had slain all the older sons; so Ahaziah the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, reigned.
In the previous chapter, we saw that Jehoram died an unnatural death: "Hashem stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines and of the Arabs who were near the Cushites," and as a result, Hashem struck his bowels with an incurable disease. Now the inhabitants of Jerusalem crown his son. And if you ask: Why specifically the youngest son, when normally the eldest is crowned? To this the verse answers: "For the raiding band had slain all the older sons" - that Arab raiding band had killed Jehoram's sons, leaving only Ahaziah, his youngest son.
"The raiding band that came with [ba'arvim] the Arabs" - the Metzudat Tzion explains that the letter bet here functions like a mem, as in "and that which remains of [babasar uvallachem] the flesh and of the bread," which means from the flesh and from the bread. That is to say: the raiding band that came from the Arabs.
בֶּן־אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה אֲחַזְיָהוּ בְמׇלְכוֹ וְשָׁנָה אַחַת מָלַךְ בִּירוּשָׁלָ͏ִם וְשֵׁם אִמּוֹ עֲתַלְיָהוּ בַּת־עׇמְרִי׃ - Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Athaliah, the granddaughter of Omri.
This is an extremely difficult verse. As the Malbim puts it, this is entirely impossible: all the days of his father Jehoram were only forty years, so how could it be that upon the death of a forty-year-old father, his son is forty-two? Furthermore, in the Book of Melachim it is written: "Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king," which makes sense: the father died at forty, and the twenty-two-year-old son arose to reign.
Chazal in Seder Olam and in the Tosefta explained that forty-two is not counted from the time of his birth, as a person's lifespan is normally counted, but rather from the reign of Omri - since it was decreed that he would perish along with the seed of Omri, his years are counted from there; but he himself was twenty-two years old. The Malbim notes that this is the path of Derash, whereas he always prefers an approach closer to the Peshat of the text.
To resolve this, the Malbim introduces another contradiction: in the Book of Melachim, one verse states, "In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab did Ahaziah reign," while another verse states, "In the eleventh year of Joram did Ahaziah reign." Was it the eleventh or twelfth year? The resolution: as soon as Jehoram fell severely ill, they crowned Ahaziah during his father's lifetime - a sort of declaration of incapacitation, whereby the son stepped in to reign in his father's stead. That was in the eleventh year of Joram son of Ahab. In the following year, when his father died, they crowned him a second time - in the twelfth year. Thus, there were two stages: reigning during his father's lifetime, and reigning after his death; hence the difference between eleven and twelve.
Based on this, the Malbim introduces an innovative reading: the two verses are connected to one another. "So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, reigned, at forty" - who was forty? Jehoram king of Judah, who died at the age of forty. And this was the time when Ahaziah reigned during his father's lifetime, when the illness took hold of him. Afterwards: "and two years did Ahaziah reign, and one year he reigned in Jerusalem" - on one hand he reigned two years, including the year during his father's lifetime; but if you count only the years he reigned alone, it was only one year.
However, as we noted, this is a novel interpretation, for it joins one verse to the next and somewhat takes things out of context: in our text it says "forty-two years old" as a continuous phrase, while this interpretation places a pause after "forty." Many commentators write that any interpretation that does not align with the cantillation notes (the teamim) should not be accepted; the teamim punctuate the verse and instruct us how to read it, and one should not join two verses that the text has separated.
Therefore, the Malbim adds another explanation, which he calls "more plausible": it is the style of the text that the last word of the preceding verse carries over to the following verse, as in "and his brothers, and Zechar, and Mikloth begot" - meaning "and his brothers, and Zechar, and Mikloth; and Mikloth begot," as though the word were written twice. The Rashbam wrote similarly regarding "and Lotan's sister was Timna." So too here: "Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned" - Jehoram king of Judah was forty years old, as though "Jehoram king of Judah" were written twice. In that case, there is no need to override the dividing pause, for it is as if the phrase is repeated in the next verse.
גַּם־הוּא הָלַךְ בְּדַרְכֵי בֵּית אַחְאָב כִּי אִמּוֹ הָיְתָה יוֹעַצְתּוֹ לְהַרְשִׁיעַ׃ וַיַּעַשׂ הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי יְהֹוָה כְּבֵית אַחְאָב כִּי־הֵמָּה הָיוּ־לוֹ יוֹעֲצִים אַחֲרֵי מוֹת אָבִיו לְמַשְׁחִית לוֹ׃ - He also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab, for his mother was his counselor to act wickedly. And he did evil in the sight of the Lord, like the house of Ahab, for they were his counselors after the death of his father, to his destruction.
The verse relates not only the deed but also the cause: his mother was his counselor to act wickedly, and after his father's death he had counselors who brought about his destruction. We see how heavily he leaned on advisors - a phenomenon that certainly did not begin in our generation.
The Malbim explains the repetition: in his personal, private conduct, he walked in the ways of the house of Ahab due to his mother's counsel; whereas in his public leadership, his conduct as king, he followed the advice of his father's counselors who were from the house of Ahab, and they counseled him to his destruction.
גַּם בַּעֲצָתָם הָלַךְ וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶת־יְהוֹרָם בֶּן־אַחְאָב מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל לַמִּלְחָמָה עַל־חֲזָאֵל מֶלֶךְ־אֲרָם בְּרָמוֹת גִּלְעָד וַיַּכּוּ הָרַמִּים אֶת־יוֹרָם׃ - He also walked according to their counsel, and went with Jehoram the son of Ahab king of Israel to war against Hazael king of Aram at Ramoth-gilead; and the Arameans wounded Joram.
"And he went with [et] Jehoram" - "et" here has the meaning of "with," as in "with Jacob [et Yaakov], each man and his household came." We should remember that there were two kings named Jehoram: Jehoram son of Ahab in the kingdom of Israel, and Jehoram king of Judah, the father of Ahaziah. Here the verse relates that the son of Jehoram king of Judah went with Jehoram son of Ahab king of Israel to battle against Hazael king of Aram.
"HaRamim" - the commentary attributed to Rashi explains that this refers to the Arameans (Aramim), with the letter aleph omitted. There are many examples of an omitted aleph, such as "to Amasa say [timru instead of tomru]," and the Radak cites "for out of the house of prisoners [haSurim instead of haAsurim] he came forth to reign." On the other hand, an aleph is sometimes added, as in "Ethan the Ezrahite [haEzrachi]," who was a Zarhite from the family of Zerah, and as Job said, "and my declaration [ve'achvati] in your ears" instead of vechavyati, from the root of expressing an opinion.
The Malbim notes the foolishness of this act: he should have learned from his grandfather Jehoshaphat, who regretted going to war against Aram with Ahab, from which nothing but harm resulted - yet he repeats his grandfather's mistake and allies himself with Jehoram to fight Aram. Furthermore, even after the Arameans wounded Joram, Ahaziah should have hastened to return home, but instead of rushing back, he went down to visit him in Jezreel.
In this connection: the text sometimes writes Jehoram and sometimes Joram, sometimes Yeshaya and sometimes Yeshayahu, and so on in many places. The Radak already taught us that all these are variations of the same person's name - just as a person might be called Yaakov, Yanky, Kobi, and the like, and it is all his name.
וַיָּשׇׁב לְהִתְרַפֵּא בְיִזְרְעֶאל כִּי הַמַּכִּים אֲשֶׁר הִכֻּהוּ בָרָמָה בְּהִלָּחֲמוֹ אֶת־חֲזָהאֵל מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם וַעֲזַרְיָהוּ בֶן־יְהוֹרָם מֶלֶךְ יְהוּדָה יָרַד לִרְאוֹת אֶת־יְהוֹרָם בֶּן־אַחְאָב בְּיִזְרְעֶאל כִּי־חֹלֶה הוּא׃ - And he returned to be healed in Jezreel because of the wounds that they had inflicted upon him at Ramah, when he fought against Hazael king of Aram. And Azaryahu son of Yehoram, king of Judah, went down to see Yehoram son of Achav in Jezreel, because he was ill.
"And Azaryahu son of Yehoram" - who is this? After all, until now we called him Achazyahu. The Malbim explains: he had two names. And the Metzudas David adds that he was also called Yehoachaz, making three names altogether: Yehoachaz, Achazyahu, and Azaryahu. Therefore, do not be surprised when you see one person referred to by multiple names.
The Malbim adds: In Melachim II it says "min hamakim" (from the wounds), and Ezra explains why he did not stay to heal in Ramah - because the Aramean attackers were still there, and one cannot recover in a place where the enemy is present; therefore, he went to heal in Jezreel.
וּמֵאֱלֹהִים הָיְתָה תְּבוּסַת אֲחַזְיָהוּ לָבוֹא אֶל־יוֹרָם וּבְבֹאוֹ יָצָא עִם־יְהוֹרָם אֶל־יֵהוּא בֶן־נִמְשִׁי אֲשֶׁר מְשָׁחוֹ יְהֹוָה לְהַכְרִית אֶת־בֵּית אַחְאָב׃ - And the downfall of Achazyahu was from God, through his coming to Yoram; and upon his arrival, he went out with Yehoram to Yehu son of Nimshi, whom Hashem had anointed to cut off the house of Achav.
"Tevusah" (downfall) - the Radak explains that this denotes turmoil, as in "a day of trouble and of trampling (mevusah)": from Hashem came turmoil and ruin upon Achazyahu, prompting him to come to Yoram and fall with him. The Metzudas David explains that it denotes trampling, related to "levoses" (to trample down). This is also the meaning of "k'feger muvas" (like a trampled corpse) - today people use the word "muvas" to mean defeated, but originally it meant being trampled upon and crushed underfoot, like a trampled corpse.
And why does the verse emphasize that his downfall with Yoram was from God? The Malbim explains: in order to link this to the house of Achav, since Achazyahu's mother was of the house of Achav - stemming from that marriage alliance Yehoshaphat made with the house of Achav. This was part of the decree for the destruction of the house of Achav: whoever attaches himself to the house of Achav is destined to suffer harm and perish alongside it.
וַיְהִי כְּהִשָּׁפֵט יֵהוּא עִם־בֵּית אַחְאָב וַיִּמְצָא אֶת־שָׂרֵי יְהוּדָה וּבְנֵי אֲחֵי אֲחַזְיָהוּ מְשָׁרְתִים לַאֲחַזְיָהוּ וַיַּהַרְגֵם׃ - And it came to pass, when Yehu was executing judgment upon the house of Achav, that he found the princes of Judah and the sons of the brothers of Achazyahu, who served Achazyahu, and he killed them.
At that very time when Achazyahu went down to visit the ill Yoram, Yehu son of Nimshi arrived - having been anointed king and dispatched to exact retribution from the house of Achav according to the word of Hashem, as we learned at length in the Book of Melachim - and he killed them all. Consequently, when he went to execute the ailing Yoram, he encountered Achazyahu and his men as well, seizing the opportunity: two birds with one stone.
Notice that it does not say "the brothers of Achazyahu," but rather "the sons of the brothers of Achazyahu," since his brothers had already been killed in the days of their father Yehoram - as the commentary attributed to Rashi explained on verse 1, that for this reason Achazyahu, the youngest, became king. The Radak cites that this is what is stated in Melachim: "And Yehu found the brothers of Achazyahu, and said, 'Who are you?' And they said, 'We are the brothers of Achazyahu, and we have come down to greet the children of the king and the children of the queen mother'" - meaning his nephews, who were traveling on Achazyahu's mission to assist the children of the king of Israel.
וַיְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת־אֲחַזְיָהוּ וַיִּלְכְּדֻהוּ וְהוּא מִתְחַבֵּא בְשֹׁמְרוֹן וַיְבִאֻהוּ אֶל־יֵהוּא וַיְמִיתֻהוּ וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ כִּי אָמְרוּ בֶּן־יְהוֹשָׁפָט הוּא אֲשֶׁר־דָּרַשׁ אֶת־יְהֹוָה בְּכׇל־לְבָבוֹ וְאֵין לְבֵית אֲחַזְיָהוּ לַעְצֹר כֹּחַ לְמַמְלָכָה׃ - And he sought Achazyahu, and they caught him while he was hiding in Shomron, and they brought him to Yehu, and put him to death, and buried him; for they said, 'He is the grandson of Yehoshaphat, who sought Hashem with all his heart.' And the house of Achazyahu had no one left with the strength to rule the kingdom.
The Malbim addresses the difference between this account and Sefer Melachim, where it says: "And Achazyahu the king of Yehudah saw this, and he fled by the way of the garden house. And Yehu pursued him and said, 'Strike him also in the chariot at the ascent of Gur, which is by Yivleam.' And he fled to Megiddo and died there. And his servants conveyed him in a chariot to Yerushalayim, and buried him in his sepulcher with his fathers in the City of David." There he died in Megiddo, whereas here it implies he was caught in Shomron.
The Malbim explains that there is no contradiction, but rather harmonization: what is written here, "and they caught him while he was hiding in Shomron," explains what is written there, that Yehu pursued him - meaning he fled to Shomron to hide, and Yehu pursued him there, and on the way killed the nephews of Achazyahu (which is the previous verse). In the meantime, Achazyahu fled from Shomron, and they struck him in his chariot at the ascent of Gur, which is by Yivleam, adjacent to Megiddo - since Yivleam and Megiddo are adjacent to one another in the territory of Menasheh - and there in Megiddo they captured him, and Yehu put him to death and permitted his burial. This is the Malbim's regular approach: the verses complement one another; what was omitted in Melachim, Ezra comes and details, and what was already stated there, Ezra sees no need to repeat. The task is to synthesize them and see how the accounts complete each other without any contradiction.
"And the house of Achazyahu had no one left with the strength to rule the kingdom" - "la'atzor" (to restrain) means to reign, as in "This one shall rule (ya'atzor) over My people"; the one who restrains the people is the one who prevents them from doing whatever they please. And no one remained who possessed the strength to assume kingship: Achazyahu himself was dead, his brothers had already died earlier, and his nephews were killed in verse 8 by Yehu. There was no one of stature left to reign.
וַעֲתַלְיָהוּ אֵם אֲחַזְיָהוּ רָאֲתָה כִּי מֵת בְּנָהּ וַתָּקׇם וַתְּדַבֵּר אֶת־כׇּל־זֶרַע הַמַּמְלָכָה לְבֵית יְהוּדָה׃ - And Atalyahu the mother of Achazyahu saw that her son was dead, and she arose and exterminated all the royal seed of the house of Yehudah.
The governmental vacuum is what led to this verse. Atalyahu, the mother of the slain king, saw that there was no successor to the dynasty, and she arose. "Vattedaber" - this is not the language of speech (dibur), but rather of plague (dever) and extermination (hadbarah), as if it were written that she eradicated (vatadbir) all the royal seed, meaning she slaughtered them all. In Sefer Melachim, the text uses "vatt'abed" (and she destroyed).
The commentary attributed to Rashi cites that concerning this generation, David HaMelech said, "For the Conductor, on the Sheminith [the eighth]" (Tehillim 12): he saw through Ruach HaKodesh that in the eighth generation, all his descendants would be killed by Atalyahu. For if one counts the dynasty: David, Shlomo... through Achazyahu the son of Yehoram the son of Yehoshaphat - that is eight generations. David prayed that a remnant and memory of his offspring would survive, and this is "Save, Hashem, for the devout man ceases" - the lineage of the chassid has come to an end, Heaven forbid; therefore, he prayed concerning the eighth, that in the eighth generation there would not be total destruction to the House of David, Chas VeShalom.
And why does Melachim say "vatt'abed" while here it says "vattedaber"? The Malbim explains: Ezra comes to specify that the method of their execution was through dever (pestilence) and deadly poison, rather than by the sword.
וַתִּקַּח יְהוֹשַׁבְעַת בַּת־הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת־יוֹאָשׁ בֶּן־אֲחַזְיָהוּ וַתִּגְנֹב אֹתוֹ מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי־הַמֶּלֶךְ הַמּוּמָתִים וַתִּתֵּן אֹתוֹ וְאֶת־מֵינִקְתּוֹ בַּחֲדַר הַמִּטּוֹת וַתַּסְתִּירֵהוּ יְהוֹשַׁבְעַת בַּת־הַמֶּלֶךְ יְהוֹרָם אֵשֶׁת יְהוֹיָדָע הַכֹּהֵן כִּי הִיא הָיְתָה אֲחוֹת אֲחַזְיָהוּ מִפְּנֵי עֲתַלְיָהוּ וְלֹא הֱמִיתָתְהוּ׃ - And Yehoshavat the king's daughter took Yoash the son of Achazyahu, and stole him away from among the king's sons who were being slain, and put him and his nurse into the bedchamber; and Yehoshavat, daughter of King Yehoram, wife of Yehoyada the Kohen - for she was the sister of Achazyahu - hid him from Atalyahu, and she did not put him to death.
Here we see the continuity of the House of David - through the survival of Yoash son of Achazyahu. Yehoshevat, wife of Yehoyada the Kohen, took Yoash who was still an infant, stole him away from the place where the king's sons were being slain, and placed him and his nurse in the bedroom. She was the daughter of Yehoram and therefore the sister of Achazyahu, and she concealed him from Athaliah, so that Athaliah was unable to put him to death.
And what is "the bedroom" (chadar hamittot)? The commentary attributed to Rashi cites the Targum, "in the chamber of the sleeping quarters" - in the Temple courtyard, in the place where the Kohanim slept, the quarters with the beds.
Here it is worth noting: the commentary attributed to Rashi writes, "And Rabbenu Shlomo of blessed memory explained" - meaning that he himself cites Rashi, an explicit proof that this is not Rashi. This is a point we have emphasized several times: we do not possess Rashi's commentary on Divrei HaYamim. Anyone well-versed in Rashi's style recognizes immediately that this is not his phrasing - the lengthiness and level of detail, and certain expressions that Rashi never uses; just as anyone who studies Rashbam immediately recognizes that it is not Rashi. At one stage, printers came across a commentary, assumed it was Rashi's, and the name stuck from then on - but it is nothing other than "attributed to Rashi."
And from where can we bring Rashi's own commentary? From the parallel chapters in the Book of Melachim (Kings). There Rashi explains that the bedroom refers to the upper chamber above the Kodesh HaKodashim (Holy of Holies). This is what is meant by "He was with her hidden in the House of Hashem" - they hid him in the House of Hashem; and about this David said, "For He will conceal me in His shelter" (Psalms 27:5), in the place where Hashem shelters him, the resting place of the Shechinah. And why is it called the "bedroom"? Based on the verse, "He shall lodge between my breasts" (Shir HaShirim 1:13) - the bedroom is the place of intimate union, and here it is the place where the Holy One, blessed be He, and His Shechinah unite with Israel. When we pray, we pray toward the Beit HaMikdash, toward the Holy of Holies, between the two Keruvim entwined with one another, for there is the gate of heaven and the bond between the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Jewish people.
Radak explains that the bedroom was the actual bedroom of Yehoyada and his wife Yehoshevat, and not the sleeping quarters of the Kohanim as suggested by the commentary attributed to Rashi.
In connection with this, the Midrash relates: One of the reasons Yoash later strayed and corrupted his ways after the passing of his master Yehoyada was that people flattered him, saying: The Kohen Gadol enters the Holy of Holies only once a year, and if he is unworthy, he is immediately dragged out dead by a chain for burial, yet you stayed there for seven years! In other words: You must be divine, you possess godlike powers, surely you are an angel! When people tell a person such things over and over again, it has an effect. This is what ultimately brought him to act against the Divine will - the very Divine will that had rescued him and made him king against all odds.
The Malbim offers a fourth interpretation of the "bedroom": the place where those slain by poison lay - they were lying on their beds, and because they were slain upon their beds, the place was called by this name. Ezra the Scribe intends to convey that the place where he was hidden in the Beit HaMikdash was also called the bedroom - commemorating the event, for he was rescued from the bedroom of slaughter, and the chamber where they laid him down to sleep was likewise referred to by this name.
וַיְהִי אִתָּם בְּבֵית הָאֱלֹהִים מִתְחַבֵּא שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים וַעֲתַלְיָה מֹלֶכֶת עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ - "And he was with them hidden in the House of God for six years, while Athaliah reigned over the land."
Yoash stayed with Yehoshevat and her husband Yehoyada the Kohen in the House of God for six years. Yehoyada was the Kohen Gadol and resided constantly in the Beit HaMikdash, so he was able to conceal him there without anyone knowing. In the next chapter, we will see how and through what stages he brought him out to rise and take the throne.
Chapter 22 leads us from the short and wicked reign of Achazyahu - who followed the counsel of his mother and the advisors of the house of Achav, was drawn into war alongside Yoram son of Achav, and met his death at the hands of Yehu - all the way to the dark moment when Athaliah destroyed all the royal offspring. The Malbim resolves the apparent contradictions in numbers and locations, demonstrating that the verses do not disagree but rather complement one another. Above all, what emerges is the miraculous survival of the House of David: one infant, Yoash, was stolen away from among the slain and hidden for six years in the House of Hashem - fulfilling David's prayer, "For the conductor, on the Sheminit," that his dynasty never be cut off; and alongside this, a warning that the very child rescued through grace would later forget who saved him, after people flattered him and told him he was an angel.