Chapter 28 in Divrei HaYamim II is devoted entirely to the reign of Achaz son of Yosam, one of the wickedest kings to arise in the House of Yehudah. The chapter opens with a description of his sins, continues with the series of defeats and blows that struck him from every direction, and concludes with his death and the ascension of his righteous son, Chizkiyahu, in his stead. We will follow the order of the pesukim, guided by the commentaries of the Malbim, the holy Alshich, and other commentators.
בֶּן־עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה אָחָז בְּמׇלְכוֹ וְשֵׁשׁ־עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה מָלַךְ בִּירוּשָׁלָ͏ִם וְלֹא־עָשָׂה הַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינֵי ה' כְּדָוִיד אָבִיו׃ - Achaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Yerushalayim; and he did not do what was right in the eyes of Hashem, like David his father.
Achaz ascended the throne at the age of twenty and reigned for sixteen years in Yerushalayim. This king, as we will see shortly, acted with extreme wickedness - yet Scripture settles for the mild phrasing, "and he did not do what was right in the eyes of Hashem, like David his father." This is deeply astonishing: seemingly, Scripture lets him off easily. We will return to this difficulty later on, with the words of the holy Alshich.
וַיֵּלֶךְ בְּדַרְכֵי מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגַם מַסֵּכוֹת עָשָׂה לַבְּעָלִים׃ - And he walked in the ways of the kings of Yisrael, and he even made molten images for the Ba'alim.
"And he walked in the ways of the kings of Yisrael" - we have already explained that the kings of Yisrael were all wicked, whereas the kings of Yehudah included both wicked and righteous rulers. Therefore, when Scripture wishes to convey that a king acted wickedly, it states that he walked in the ways of the kings of Yisrael. "Maseichos" (molten images) refers to cast metal, as in the Targum's rendering of "Do not make for yourselves molten gods" - gods of metal. That is, he crafted molten idols of cast metal for the worship of the Ba'al.
וְהוּא הִקְטִיר בְּגֵיא בֶן־הִנֹּם וַיַּבְעֵר אֶת־בָּנָיו בָּאֵשׁ כְּתֹעֲבוֹת הַגּוֹיִם אֲשֶׁר הֹרִישׁ ה' מִפְּנֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - And he burned incense in the Valley of Ben-Hinnom, and burned his sons in fire, according to the abominations of the nations whom Hashem had dispossessed before the children of Yisrael.
The wicked king compounded his sins: he burned incense in the Valley of Ben-Hinnom and burned his sons in fire. This was the worship of the Molech, in which they would make two bonfires and pass the child between them, and sometimes the child would be consumed by the flames. Naturally, the child would scream and shriek, so they would beat on drums to drown out his cries - hence this site of worship was called "Topheth," after the drums (tupim). In their eyes, passing one's son to the Molech was considered the supreme sacrifice.
Chazal note a change in wording: in Sefer Melachim it is written, "and he passed his son through the fire," whereas here it says, "and he burned his sons in fire." Was it one son or two? Chazal explain: he passed two of his sons, but his mother had anointed Chizkiyahu with the blood of a salamander. The salamander is a creature formed from an oven heated continuously for seven years, endowed with the ability to endure extremely high temperatures, and anyone who smears his body with its blood becomes fireproof. Therefore, specifically concerning Chizkiyahu it says "and he burned" (vayav'er): he merely kindled fire against him, but the fire had no power over him - it began to burn slightly and ultimately went out, leaving him unharmed. Regarding the other son, however, it is stated in Melachim, "and he also passed his son through the fire" - a total, fatal passing.
וַיְזַבֵּחַ וַיְקַטֵּר בַּבָּמוֹת וְעַל־הַגְּבָעוֹת וְתַחַת כׇּל־עֵץ רַעֲנָן׃ - And he sacrificed and burned incense on the high places, and on the hills, and under every leafy tree.
וַיִּתְּנֵהוּ ה' אֱלֹהָיו בְּיַד מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם וַיַּכּוּ־בוֹ וַיִּשְׁבּוּ מִמֶּנּוּ שִׁבְיָה גְדוֹלָה וַיָּבִיאוּ דַּרְמָשֶׂק וְגַם בְּיַד־מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל נִתָּן וַיַּךְ־בּוֹ מַכָּה גְדוֹלָה׃ - Wherefore Hashem his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Aram; and they struck him and carried away a great multitude of captives from him, and brought them to Darmesek. He was also delivered into the hand of the king of Yisrael, who struck him with a great blow.
Part of his abominations: he sacrificed and burned incense on the high places, on the hills, and under every leafy tree. As a consequence, "Hashem his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Aram" - the Arameans struck him, took a vast number of captives from him, and brought them to Damascus (Darmesek). He was also delivered into the hand of the king of Yisrael, as he was at war with the kingdom of Shomron, who dealt him a crushing defeat.
Resolving the Contradiction with Melachim and Yeshayahu
The Malbim notes: In Melachim it is written, "Then Rezin and Pekah came up to Jerusalem to wage war... but they could not prevail in battle" (II Melachim 16:5), and in Yeshayahu, "and he could not wage war against it" (Yeshayahu 7:1) - implying that they failed to conquer it. Yet here it says that they struck him and defeated him! The Malbim resolves this: There it refers to when each came individually - Rezin on his own, and the king of Israel on his own - which is why it says "could not" in the singular, because neither could overcome Judah alone. Afterward, however, when Aram and Ephraim joined forces against Judah, they were indeed able to overcome them. This was also the background for Achaz sending to the king of Assyria for aid. In any event, even though they did not capture Jerusalem itself, they wreaked slaughter and ruin throughout the hills of Judah - and that is what is described here.
וַיַּהֲרֹג פֶּקַח בֶּן־רְמַלְיָהוּ בִּיהוּדָה מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים אֶלֶף בְּיוֹם אֶחָד הַכֹּל בְּנֵי־חָיִל בְּעׇזְבָם אֶת־ה' אֱלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתָם׃ - "For Pekah son of Remaliah slew in Judah one hundred and twenty thousand in one day, all valiant men, because they had forsaken the Lord, God of their fathers."
This verse is staggering to comprehend: one hundred and twenty thousand dead in a single day. For comparison, all the fallen in all of Israel's wars since the founding of the state until today are estimated at around twenty-five thousand, including victims of terror, may Hashem protect us. Yet here - one hundred and twenty thousand in one day! The verse immediately provides the reason: "because they had forsaken the Lord, God of their fathers." The punishment came for abandoning Hashem. The accountability demanded of Judah was greater, for Judah had been devoted to Hashem for entire eras, and so the standard held against them was far more exacting.
The Malbim explains: The verse enumerates their defeat in three aspects. First, that he killed one hundred and twenty thousand of their warriors because they had forsaken Hashem. Second, that a warrior of Ephraim slew the king's son and the chief ministers of the realm. Third, that they took two hundred thousand of them captive as male and female slaves.
וַיַּהֲרֹג זִכְרִי גִּבּוֹר אֶפְרַיִם אֶת־מַעֲשֵׂיָהוּ בֶּן־הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאֶת־עַזְרִיקָם נְגִיד הַבָּיִת וְאֶת־אֶלְקָנָה מִשְׁנֵה הַמֶּלֶךְ׃ - "And Zichri, a warrior of Ephraim, slew Maaseiah the king's son, and Azrikam the governor of the palace, and Elkanah who was second to the king."
Here the verse shows that the defeat struck the very foundations of the leadership: Maaseiah the king's son, Azrikam the governor of the palace, and Elkanah the second to the king - the central figures in Achaz's government - were all struck down.
וַיִּשְׁבּוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֲחֵיהֶם מָאתַיִם אֶלֶף נָשִׁים בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת וְגַם־שָׁלָל רָב בָּזְזוּ מֵהֶם וַיָּבִיאוּ אֶת־הַשָּׁלָל לְשֹׁמְרוֹן׃ - "And the children of Israel carried away captive of their brethren two hundred thousand women, sons, and daughters, and also took away much spoil from them, and brought the spoil to Samaria."
This is the third defeat: two hundred thousand women, as well as sons and daughters - meaning young boys and girls. In addition, they looted vast spoil from them and brought it to Samaria. The Israelites of Samaria taking captive their own brethren, the Israelites of Judah.
וְשָׁם הָיָה נָבִיא לַה' עֹדֵד שְׁמוֹ וַיֵּצֵא לִפְנֵי הַצָּבָא הַבָּא לְשֹׁמְרוֹן וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם הִנֵּה בַּחֲמַת ה' אֱלֹהֵי־אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם עַל־יְהוּדָה נְתָנָם בְּיֶדְכֶם וַתַּהַרְגוּ־בָם בְּזַעַף עַד לַשָּׁמַיִם הִגִּיעַ׃ - "And a prophet of the Lord was there, whose name was Oded; and he went out before the host that came to Samaria, and said to them: 'Behold, because the Lord, God of your fathers, was furious with Judah, He delivered them into your hand, and you have slain them with a rage that reaches up to heaven.'"
"And he went out before the host" - he went out to confront the army returning to Samaria. And he says to them: Do not think for a moment that this victory came because of your merit. You, the people of Samaria, are great sinners - why should you be deserving that the people of Judah, who are relatively better than you, should fall into your hands? It was nothing other than "because the Lord, God of your fathers, was furious with Judah" - a Providential retribution, orchestrated by the hand of Hashem, and not by your own might.
Metzudat David explains: by adding "and you slaughtered among them with a rage that reached the heavens," he hinted that they had already received their punishment. You executed judgment upon them, killing one hundred and twenty thousand of them - they have already paid the price.
And the Malbim adds a subtle distinction regarding the nature of punishments: when divine wrath is bent on destruction, the Holy One, blessed be He, delivers Israel into the hands of malicious, cruel enemies in order to destroy them, Heaven forbid. But when the anger is tempered with mercy, He delivers them into the hands of their brethren - for by nature, a brother has compassion on his brother. This is what he meant by "the Lord, God of your fathers, delivered them into your hand": we and they share one father, and He delivered them into your hands so that you would have mercy on them. Yet you did not act like brothers - "and you slaughtered among them with rage." You did not kill as agents of Providence, conquering while showing mercy, but out of personal fury against them and not in fulfillment of God's command; not in the measure of punishment God intended, but with a rage so great that their cry reached the heavens, and yet you had no pity on them.
וְעַתָּה בְּנֵי־יְהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלַ͏ִם אַתֶּם אֹמְרִים לִכְבֹּשׁ לַעֲבָדִים וְלִשְׁפָחוֹת לָכֶם הֲלֹא רַק־אַתֶּם עִמָּכֶם אֲשָׁמוֹת לַה' אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃ - "And now you intend to subjugate the people of Judah and Jerusalem as male and female slaves for yourselves; are there not, with you alone, guilts against the Lord your God?"
Meaning: do you, the people of Shomron, want to subjugate the children of Judah and Jerusalem as male and female slaves? Metzudat David notes: since they have already received more than enough punishment, it is unfitting to heap punishment upon punishment and furthermore subjugate them as slaves and maidservants.
And the Malbim adds: God did not send you, nor did He intend for you to hold them as slaves, which violates the Torah. After all, when someone acquires a Hebrew servant, he works for six years, and one who kidnaps and enslaves someone certainly incurs severe punishment. There are halachot governing how a person is sold as a servant, and going out to capture your fellow Jew in battle and take him as a slave is certainly not among them. Furthermore: "Are there not, with you alone, guilts against the Lord your God?" - Judah's sin has already been atoned for; they received their punishment through the death of one hundred and twenty thousand and through captivity. But as for you, your guilts still stand and have not been atoned for. How can you, the guilty party, come and enslave someone who has already paid the price and whose sins have been expiated? This poses a tremendous danger, and the tables will inevitably turn on you, exacting a heavy price.
וְעַתָּה שְׁמָעוּנִי וְהָשִׁיבוּ הַשִּׁבְיָה אֲשֶׁר שְׁבִיתֶם מֵאֲחֵיכֶם כִּי חֲרוֹן אַף־ה' עֲלֵיכֶם׃ - "And now, listen to me and return the captives whom you captured from your brethren, for the fierce wrath of the Lord is upon you."
If you do not return the captives, the fierce wrath of the Lord will be upon you, for you are the guilty ones, whereas they, having already received atonement, stand vindicated before you.
וַיָּקֻמוּ אֲנָשִׁים מֵרָאשֵׁי בְנֵי־אֶפְרַיִם עֲזַרְיָהוּ בֶן־יְהוֹחָנָן בֶּרֶכְיָהוּ בֶן־מְשִׁלֵּמוֹת וִיחִזְקִיָּהוּ בֶּן־שַׁלֻּם וַעֲמָשָׂא בֶּן־חַדְלָי עַל־הַבָּאִים מִן־הַצָּבָא׃ - "Then some men from among the leaders of the children of Ephraim - Azaryahu son of Yehochanan, Berechyahu son of Meshillemot, Yechizkiyahu son of Shallum, and Amasa son of Chadlai - stood up against those coming from the army."
"Against those coming from the army" - they confronted them to awaken them in accordance with the words of the prophet.
וַיֹּאמְרוּ לָהֶם לֹא־תָבִיאוּ אֶת־הַשִּׁבְיָה הֵנָּה כִּי לְאַשְׁמַת ה' עָלֵינוּ אַתֶּם אֹמְרִים לְהֹסִיף עַל־חַטֹּאתֵנוּ וְעַל־אַשְׁמָתֵנוּ כִּי־רַבָּה אַשְׁמָה לָנוּ וַחֲרוֹן אָף עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - "And they said to them, 'You shall not bring the captives here, for to bring guilt before the Lord upon us, you intend to add to our sins and to our guilt; for great is our guilt, and fierce anger is upon Israel.'"
The Malbim explains: you have already heard from the prophet that we bear guilt before the Lord. We, the people of Shomron, have been wicked from of old, and our sins stand against us for retribution - and you come to add sins upon our sins? "To add to our sins" - thereby increasing the number of offenses; "and to our guilt" - thereby increasing the measure of punishment due to us. And even though they understood that striking their brethren had been on a mission from God, as the people of Judah deserved punishment and the Holy One, blessed be He, brought upon them the deeds of Shomron as retribution, one must still realize that while the Holy One, blessed be He, delivers them into your hand to strike them, He will subsequently exact retribution from you.
The prime example of this is Nero Caesar: "The Holy One, blessed be He, wishes to destroy His House, and to wipe His hands on that man" - the Holy One, blessed be He, wishes to destroy His Temple and then wipe His hands on that person, exacting retribution from the one who destroyed it. Here, too: the reason He made you agents to strike down your brothers was to punish you afterward, for you too are laden with guilt. This is the meaning of "for our guilt is great, and there is fierce wrath against Israel" - since our guilt is great and there is fierce wrath against us, Hashem is using us to exact retribution from the people of Judah, and afterward that fierce wrath will turn against us.
וַיַּעֲזֹב הֶחָלוּץ אֶת־הַשִּׁבְיָה וְאֶת־הַבִּזָּה לִפְנֵי הַשָּׂרִים וְכׇל־הַקָּהָל׃ - "So the armed men left the captives and the spoil before the officers and all the congregation."
Here we see that the Jewish conscience was truly still active. Even after all they had done, after slaughtering one hundred and twenty thousand and taking captives - they understood and were awakened. Consider what this meant: captives represented enormous wealth, tremendous human capital - a person taking slaves and maidservants for himself. It was a massive concession. And even so, "the armed men left" - the *chalutz* refers to the armed men who went out to battle - they left everything before the officers, saying to them: Do with this whatever is good in your eyes. "The captives" refers to the people; "the spoil" refers to the property.
וַיָּקֻמוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר־נִקְּבוּ בְשֵׁמוֹת וַיַּחֲזִיקוּ בַשִּׁבְיָה וְכׇל־מַעֲרֻמֵּיהֶם הִלְבִּישׁוּ מִן־הַשָּׁלָל וַיַּלְבִּשֻׁם וַיַּנְעִלוּם וַיַּאֲכִלוּם וַיַּשְׁקוּם וַיְסֻכוּם וַיְנַהֲלוּם בַּחֲמֹרִים לְכׇל־כּוֹשֵׁל וַיְבִיאוּם יְרֵחוֹ עִיר־הַתְּמָרִים אֵצֶל אֲחֵיהֶם וַיָּשׁוּבוּ שֹׁמְרוֹן׃ - "And the men who were mentioned by name rose up and took the captives, and with the spoil clothed all who were naked among them; they clothed them and gave them shoes, fed them and gave them drink, anointed them, and carried all the feeble of them on donkeys, and brought them to Jericho, the city of palm trees, unto their brethren; then they returned to Samaria."
Here the verse shows the extraordinary piety with which they treated them following the rebuke of Oded the prophet. Those men designated by name - Azaryahu ben Yehochanan and his colleagues, the heads of Ephraim - took hold of the captives and tended to them: clothing them, providing them with footwear, feeding them, giving them drink, and anointing them. Furthermore, "and carried all the feeble of them on donkeys" - they did not tell them to walk home on foot; anyone who found it difficult to walk was mounted on a donkey. And they brought them to Jericho, the city of palm trees, to their brethren, and returned to Samaria.
The holy Alshich addresses the great difficulty with which we opened: how could the verse say, "and he did not do that which was right in the eyes of Hashem his God, like David his father"? In his words: How much must a person's heart grieve, and even more, the heart leaps in astonishment - how can this be, after everything written in the subsequent verses: "he walked in the ways of the kings of Israel," "he also made his sons pass through fire according to the abominations of the nations," "and he sacrificed and burnt incense on the high places and on the hills and under every leafy tree"? How could it say, "he did not do that which was right in the eyes of Hashem his God, like David his father," which implies that he did what was good, just not quite to the level of David his father?! Did he not act wickedly and provoke Hashem according to the abominations of the nations whom Hashem abhorred? What is the meaning of this lenient, gentle phrasing - that he simply was not as righteous as his father?
Moreover, the verse even associates His divinity with him: in the Book of Kings it says, "and he did not do that which was right in the eyes of Hashem his God." How could he be called "Hashem his God" after all these abominations, when he took foreign gods for idol worship, and even handed his son Chizkiyahu over to the idolatrous priests to burn him in idol worship - as Chazal teach - were it not that Hashem was with him and his mother anointed him with the blood of a salamander so that he was not burned?
The Alshich explains: The text is describing the beginning of Achaz's decline. Initially, there was only a subtle deviation - "he did not do that which was right in the eyes of Hashem his God, like David his father" - for at first he conducted himself properly, and from there he went from bad to worse, compounding his wickedness until he reached the terrible evils described later on. The prophet condenses an entire lifespan into three or four verses, but know that it did not happen overnight. Some commentators suggested the opposite approach, but in any case, this is how the Alshich resolves the difficulty.
The Alshich adds: "Yet all this only answers one difficulty" - meaning, all that I have resolved answers only the first question, but another difficulty remains, which is the very contradiction noted by the Malbim. In Kings it says, "Then Retzin king of Aram and Pekach came up... and besieged Achaz, but could not overcome him in war," whereas here it says, "and they struck him and carried away a great captive multitude... and he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel, who struck him with a great slaughter... and Pekach ben Remalyahu killed." There they failed, while here they succeeded and conquered!
The Malbim resolved this, as mentioned, by explaining that neither could succeed alone, but when Aram and Israel joined forces, they succeeded. The Alshich, however, resolves it differently: "and could not overcome him in war" means that they failed to capture the city, which was their plan; but striking blows against them - they certainly struck them. According to this, there is no contradiction at all: here they "could" - strike them down; and there they "could not" - conquer the city.
The Alshich brings a "swift witness" to this - a witness that provides conclusive proof - from Yeshayahu: "And it came to pass in the days of Achaz... Retzin king of Aram and Pekach the son of Remalyahu went up toward Jerusalem to wage war against it, but could not prevail against it." Note the precise wording: "against it" - not "against them." Against them they could prevail; but "against it," to capture Jerusalem, they did not succeed. And that was their plan, as they said: "Let us go up against Judah and harass it, and let us breach it for ourselves, and set up a king in its midst" - this plan was not realized, and that is the meaning of "could not prevail." But as for striking Israel - they struck and killed among them.
The Alshich asks further: Why does the narrative in the Book of Melachim conceal the wicked deeds of Achaz rather than elaborating upon them as it does here in Divrei HaYamim? He answers that in Melachim, Scripture likely protected the honor surrounding him both before and after: his father Yosam is mentioned before him and his son Chizkiyahu after him, and it did not wish to recount his wickedness lest it cast, so to speak, a familial blemish upon his father and his son; therefore, it obscured his evil deeds. If so, why in Divrei HaYamim, where Yosam and Chizkiyahu are also mentioned, does Scripture reveal what it concealed there? The Alshich explains: In Divrei HaYamim nothing is omitted, for that is the very meaning of "Divrei HaYamim" - the chronicles of the times, straightforwardly, where whatever took place must be recounted. There, however, it was under no obligation to record everything; whatever it is not bound to say it omits, relying on the reader to understand matters from the places where they are detailed - and in this manner it preserved the honor of Yosam and Chizkiyahu.
בָּעֵת הַהִיא שָׁלַח הַמֶּלֶךְ אָחָז עַל־מַלְכֵי אַשּׁוּר לַעְזֹר לוֹ׃ - At that time, King Achaz sent to the kings of Ashur to help him.
At the very time the king of Yisrael was waging war against him, Achaz sent word to the kings of Ashur to come and assist him against his adversaries. The Malbim explains: I have already explained that this occurred when Aram and Ephraim joined forces, at which point he suffered defeat - for when each attacked separately, he was able to withstand them. We have already learned in Yeshayahu chapter 7 that Yeshayahu prophesied to him and said, "Do not fear them." However, Achaz was a wicked king and did not heed the prophet, sending instead to the king of Ashur to come to his aid.
וְעוֹד אֲדוֹמִים בָּאוּ וַיַּכּוּ בִיהוּדָה וַיִּשְׁבּוּ־שֶׁבִי׃ - For the Edomites had again come and struck Yehudah, and carried away captives.
On top of everything, the Edomites attacked as well. As we recall, the Edomites had for long periods been subjugated under Judean rule and paid tribute; now, once blows began raining down upon Yehudah, the Edomites joined in the assault as well.
וּפְלִשְׁתִּים פָּשְׁטוּ בְּעָרֵי הַשְּׁפֵלָה וְהַנֶּגֶב לִיהוּדָה וַיִּלְכְּדוּ אֶת־בֵּית־שֶׁמֶשׁ וְאֶת־אַיָּלוֹן וְאֶת־הַגְּדֵרוֹת וְאֶת־שׂוֹכוֹ וּבְנוֹתֶיהָ וְאֶת־תִּמְנָה וּבְנוֹתֶיהָ וְאֶת־גִּמְזוֹ וְאֶת־בְּנֹתֶיהָ וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם׃ - And the Pelishtim raided the cities of the Lowland and the Negev of Yehudah, and captured Beit Shemesh, Ayalon, Gederos, Socho and its satellite towns, Timnah and its satellite towns, and Gimzo and its satellite towns; and they settled there.
And whenever there is an opening, the Pelishtim are always on the scene. They never missed an opportunity to strike Yisrael - like a fly that you chase away and it immediately returns, a truly endless saga. Seeing that Yehudah had weakened, they raided the cities of the Lowland and the Negev, capturing Beit Shemesh, Ayalon, Gederos, Socho, Timnah - the very Timnah of "the vineyards of Timnah" - and Gimzo. "And its daughters" always means, as the Targum renders it, its villages: the towns and hamlets surrounding it, the satellite settlements of a central city. Likewise, "let the daughters of Yehudah rejoice" refers not to literal daughters, but to the towns surrounding Yehudah.
The Malbim notes: Aram lay to the east, in front; the Pelishtim were to the west, along the coast - where they still are today - to the rear; Edom was to the south of Yehudah; and Ephraim was to the north. Thus, looking at the map, enemies besieged him from all four winds. When he sent to the king of Ashur, and Ashur exiled Aram and exiled part of the Ten Tribes, removing the adversaries from the north and east, other enemies arose from the south and the west: the Edomites came, and the Pelishtim raided. Do not imagine that you solved your problems through the king of Ashur; the prophet warned you in advance not to turn to him for help. And if you ask: Why did the king of Ashur not save him from these enemies as well, seeing that he had been paid? He would answer: You paid only for the first ones, not for these; this requires an additional payment. Like a contractor who says: flooring, yes, but that does not include baseboards, nor does it include grouting. And you wonder why the initial price was so cheap, because it included almost nothing! Here too, what the king of Ashur did was merely the first course; extras require separate payment.
The Alshich adds: The Pelishtim were subdued in the days of Uziyahu, and the Edomites were subdued in the days of Amatziyahu - yet now they raise their heads. Why? Because Hashem brought Yehudah low, for they had corrupted their deeds, and therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, brought these enemies upon them. Mentioning "and Gimzo and its satellite towns," it is cited that Nachum Ish Gamzu hailed from the city of Gimzo, and that was his original designation, Ish Gimzo; however, because he was accustomed to saying constantly "gam zo letovah" (this too is for the best), they called him "Nachum Ish Gam Zu," after his signature phrase.
כִּי־הִכְנִיעַ ה' אֶת־יְהוּדָה בַּעֲבוּר אָחָז מֶלֶךְ־יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי הִפְרִיעַ בִּיהוּדָה וּמָעוֹל מַעַל בַּה'׃ - For Hashem brought Yehudah low on account of Achaz king of Yisrael, for he brought about unrestraint in Yehudah and dealt treacherously against Hashem.
"Hifria" (brought about unrestraint) is related to "for they were unrestrained (farua), for Aharon had cast off their restraint (fera'o), to their shame before their adversaries" (Shemos 32:25), an expression of uncovering and exposure, as in "and he shall uncover (u'fara) the woman's head" (Bamidbar 5:18) - that is, exposing her hair. Until now, Yehudah had enjoyed a kind of protective canopy shielding and defending them; but once Achaz acted wickedly - and Scripture refers to him here as "king of Yisrael" because he walked in the ways of the wicked kings of Yisrael - he caused Yehudah to become exposed and defenseless, and the enemies came and struck them down. "And dealt treacherously against Hashem" - he himself was unfaithful to Hashem.
וַיָּבֹא עָלָיו תִּלְּגַת פִּלְנְאֶסֶר מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וַיָּצַר לוֹ וְלֹא חֲזָקוֹ׃ - And Tilgath-Pilneser, king of Assyria, came against him and distressed him, and did not strengthen him.
כִּי־חָלַק אָחָז אֶת־בֵּית ה' וְאֶת־בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַשָּׂרִים וַיִּתֵּן לְמֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וְלֹא לְעֶזְרָה לוֹ׃ - For Achaz stripped the House of Hashem and the palace of the king and the princes, and gave it to the king of Assyria, yet it was of no help to him.
He sent messengers to him to come and help him, as it says, "And he sent messengers to Tiglath-Pileser." By the way, sometimes he is called "Tiglath" and sometimes "Tilgath." We find this with other names as well: Damesek and Darmesek, Nevuchadnetzar and Nevuchadretzar - once with a nun and once with a reish.
Radak explains: "And distressed him, and did not strengthen him" - not only did the king of Assyria not strengthen him, but he also came and distressed him. Apparently, he saw that Achaz was in a position of weakness: if he is sending me silver and gold in such a state to help him, if I come and conquer him I will gain far more! Therefore, instead of helping, he advanced against him and pressured him. This is the meaning of "yet it was of no help to him": on the one hand he did not strengthen him, and on the other hand, the bribe given to him was useless, for in the end the king of Assyria came himself and distressed him.
The Malbim explains: "And distressed him" - this is what Scripture describes with, "For Achaz stripped the House of Hashem and the palace of the king and the princes." Initially he sent him silver from the House of Hashem and from the king's treasures. Afterwards, when the king of Assyria arrived in his land, Achaz was forced to strip the House of Hashem itself - removing the gold plating in the Sanctuary and the plating of the royal palace and giving it to the king of Assyria. One might have thought that on account of this he would be saved from him; regarding this the verse says, "and did not strengthen him, and it was of no help to him" - he did not help him against the enemies who had breached his country, nor did he assist him in any way.
Metzudas David explains "for Achaz divided [chalak] the House of Hashem" - that he divided the treasures in the House of Hashem and gave one portion to the king of Assyria, from the language of division; and despite all this, "yet it was of no help to him" - it did not assist him at all.
The commentary attributed to Rashi asks: It is written in Melachim, "And the king of Assyria went up against Damascus, and took it, and exiled its people to Kir, and put Retzin to death" - so seemingly there was help here, since Retzin was fighting Achaz! He answers: it was not sufficient help to truly strengthen him and return to him the cities that had been taken from him. That is, although he struck Retzin, to make up the loss and restore the cities captured from him - this he did not do.
וּבְעֵת הָצֵר לוֹ וַיּוֹסֶף לִמְעוֹל בַּה' הוּא הַמֶּלֶךְ אָחָז׃ - And in the time of his distress, he acted even more treacherously against Hashem, this same King Achaz.
וַיִּזְבַּח לֵאלֹהֵי דַרְמֶשֶׂק הַמַּכִּים בּוֹ וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֱלֹהֵי מַלְכֵי־אֲרָם הֵם מַעְזְרִים אֹתָם לָהֶם אֲזַבֵּחַ וְיַעְזְרוּנִי וְהֵם הָיוּ־לוֹ לְהַכְשִׁילוֹ וּלְכׇל־יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - For he sacrificed to the gods of Damascus that smote him, saying: "Because the gods of the kings of Aram help them, I will sacrifice to them so that they may help me." But they became the ruin of him and of all Israel.
"That smote him" does not refer to the gods, but rather to the people of Damascus: he sacrificed to the gods of Damascus, whose people had struck him. This was his foolish reasoning: they struck me, which is a sign that their gods helped them; if their gods helped them, then these deities possess real power; and if they have power, I will worship them so they will be on my side.
In the Book of Melachim, it is mentioned that when he went to Damascus to meet Tiglath-Pileser, he saw an altar there and commanded that one be fashioned according to its design for the Temple of Hashem. He abolished the copper altar - which was the stone altar - and cut up the vessels of the House of Hashem. This was because he had already begun from the outset to sacrifice to the gods of Aram, and after Assyria exiled Aram to Kir, he thought: "I worshipped the gods of Aram, and as a result Assyria came and exiled them, and the king of Assyria came to help me - meaning it is worthwhile to worship the gods of Aram." Although this seems baffling - for he saw that Aram suffered defeat, so why worship their gods? - this was his distorted calculation. Consequently, he set aside the altar of Hashem in favor of the special altar for the gods of Aram that he erected in the Mikdash. "And they became the ruin of him and of all Israel" - he began by nullifying the copper altar and concluded with all the vessels, which he also chopped up and stripped of their silver and gold, and this was the cause of his downfall.
וַיֶּאֱסֹף אָחָז אֶת־כְּלֵי בֵית־הָאֱלֹהִים וַיְקַצֵּץ אֶת־כְּלֵי בֵית־הָאֱלֹהִים וַיִּסְגֹּר אֶת־דַּלְתוֹת בֵּית־ה' וַיַּעַשׂ לוֹ מִזְבְּחוֹת בְּכׇל־פִּנָּה בִּירוּשָׁלָ͏ִם׃ - And Achaz gathered the vessels of the House of God and cut into pieces the vessels of the House of God, and he shut the doors of the House of Hashem, and made for himself altars in every corner of Jerusalem.
"And cut into pieces" - he peeled and scraped the gold off them; from all the vessels that were overlaid with gold, he stripped off their gold. "And he shut the doors of the House of Hashem" - he closed the doors so that the kohanim would not be able to come and serve in the Beit HaMikdash, but only at the altars he had built in every corner of Jerusalem. Later on, we see how Chizkiyahu opens the doors of the House of Hashem, for his father had shut them. And Chazal noted that he was called Achaz because he seized (achaz) and locked the doors of the study halls, and seized and locked the doors of the House of Hashem.
וּבְכׇל־עִיר וָעִיר לִיהוּדָה עָשָׂה בָמוֹת לְקַטֵּר לֵאלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים וַיַּכְעֵס אֶת־ה' אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתָיו׃ - And in every single city of Judah he made high places to burn incense to other gods, and provoked Hashem, the God of his fathers.
וְיֶתֶר דְּבָרָיו וְכׇל־דְּרָכָיו הָרִאשֹׁנִים וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים הִנָּם כְּתוּבִים עַל־סֵפֶר מַלְכֵי־יְהוּדָה וְיִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - Now the rest of his acts and all his ways, the first and the last, behold, they are written in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel.
Here there is room to make a precise inference in the manner of the holy Alshich: "The first and the last." As noted previously, whenever the text says "the first and the last," it implies that he shifted course at a certain point - he had earlier deeds and later deeds. This aligns closely with the words of the Alshich, that at the beginning of his path he did not act with excessive wickedness, but walked in the ways of Hashem his God, though not like David his father - these are the first; and later came the last, when he multiplied wickedness to an extreme degree, as seen in the subsequent verses. Thus, the words of the Alshich find support from this verse.
וַיִּשְׁכַּב אָחָז עִם־אֲבֹתָיו וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בָעִיר בִּירוּשָׁלַ͏ִם כִּי לֹא הֱבִיאֻהוּ לְקִבְרֵי מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּמְלֹךְ יְחִזְקִיָּהוּ בְנוֹ תַּחְתָּיו׃ - And Achaz slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city, in Jerusalem, for they did not bring him to the tombs of the kings of Israel; and Chizkiyahu his son reigned in his place.
The verse emphasizes "in the city, in Jerusalem" - and not in the tombs of the kings of Israel, since righteous kings were buried there and they did not want such a wicked king to enter their presence. They buried him in Jerusalem, adjacent to the royal tombs, but not inside them. Plainly, this was carried out by his righteous son Chizkiyahu - he is the one about whom it is said that he dragged his father's bones on a rope bed, and we see that he had the strength to lead the kingdom and conduct himself properly even in relation to his father, and it was he who decided that his burial would not be in the tombs of the kings.
Chapter 28 depicts Achaz, who began with a subtle deviation - "he did not do what was right in the eyes of Hashem like David his father" - and deteriorated all the way to Molech worship, locking the doors of the House of Hashem, and erecting altars in every corner. Correspondingly, defeats struck him from all four directions: Aram, Ephraim, Edom, and the Pelishtim, culminating in 120,000 slain in a single day and 200,000 captives. Oded's prophecy taught the people of Samaria that victory did not come about through their own merit but through Hashem's wrath, and that the agent utilized to strike others will ultimately be held accountable himself - and by its power, they treated the captives with extraordinary piety and returned them to their brethren. Yet Achaz, who sought help from the king of Assyria rather than from the Holy One, blessed be He, found that this help turned into distress, and the wealth he gave was of no avail: "yet it did not help him." Thus his reign concludes with a burial outside the tombs of the kings, and from within this darkness rises his son Chizkiyahu, whom we will examine in the next chapter.