Introduction: Rebuke for Barring the Pilgrimage
Chapter 5 of Hoshea opens with a sharp rebuke directed at three parties: the kohanim, the House of Israel, and the royal house. The chapter's primary focus here is the sin of preventing the pilgrimage to Jerusalem - the priests of the golden calves who incited the people, the kings who stationed checkpoints along the roads, and the people who were enticed and followed after them. We will follow the order of the pesukim and examine the explanations of the Malbim, Rashi, Radak, Ibn Ezra, and Chazal.
Pasuk 1: "For the Judgment Applies to You"
שִׁמְעוּ־זֹאת הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַקְשִׁיבוּ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵית הַמֶּלֶךְ הַאֲזִינוּ כִּי לָכֶם הַמִּשְׁפָּט כִּי־פַח הֱיִיתֶם לְמִצְפָּה וְרֶשֶׁת פְּרוּשָׂה עַל־תָּבוֹר׃ - Hear this, O kohanim, and attend, House of Israel, and give ear, O house of the king, for the judgment applies to you; for you have been a snare at Mitzpah, and a net spread out upon Tavor.
The Malbim explains: "The kohanim" mentioned here are not the priests of Hashem, but rather the priests of Baal and the golden calves. They incited the people not to go up to Jerusalem, but instead to remain in their places and worship the Baalim and the calves. The House of Israel was enticed and accepted their words, and the royal house listened to the priests as well - they were the ones who stationed guards along the roads, those blockades mentioned previously, with orders to execute anyone who nevertheless insisted on going on pilgrimage. Therefore, the prophet says, "For the judgment applies to you" - Hashem's judgment will come because of you, for you are the instigators. If there are judgments and strict decrees, if there are afflictions and exiles, the judgment is yours, for you brought about all this evil.
"For you have been a snare at Mitzpah, and a net spread out upon Tavor" - Mitzpah and Tavor were two mountains through which travelers would pass on their way up to Jerusalem. Guards are always posted at mountain passes, where the road runs. At Mitzpah, where the pass was narrow, they set a snare - and a snare, the Malbim explains, is a device to trap a specific target, like a bird trap. But Mount Tavor was an open, expansive area where a snare is ineffective, so there they spread a net all around. It need not be taken literally as an actual net; it is a metaphor - because the area was wide, it was as if they cast a net before the pilgrims' feet to prevent them from passing. And you, the royal house, are both the snare and the net, for all of this was carried out under your command.
Hearing, Listening, and Attending - The Order of Culpability
The Malbim draws attention to the distinct verbs used in the verse: shimu ("hear") to the priests, hakshivu ("attend") to the House of Israel, and ha'azinu ("give ear") to the royal house. What is the distinction between hearing (shemi'ah), listening (ha'azanah), and attending (hakashavah)? The Malbim explains in several places that the progression is as follows: first one attends (hakashavah) from afar; next one inclines an ear (ha'azanah), desiring to hear what is being discussed; and finally one hears (shemi'ah), which represents complete focus and absorption. Hearing is also an expression of internalizing and understanding with the heart, as in the phrase, "Give Your servant an understanding heart" (literally, "a hearing heart"). Therefore, toward the primary subject the verse employs the term shemi'ah, toward the intermediate subject ha'azanah, and toward the peripheral subject hakashavah. These biblical terms do not necessarily align with how we use these words colloquially today, but this is the precise terminology of the verses.
According to this, the pasuk is well understood: the main instigators, who led the people to despise the pilgrimage to Jerusalem, were the idolatrous priests - and to them it is said, "Hear this, O kohanim," as the prophecy is primarily directed at them. The royal house is the intermediate group: on the one hand, they were themselves swayed by the priests and acted on their advice, yet on the other hand, they were the ones who posted guards and forcibly prevented the people from traveling, so they cannot be deemed merely secondary - hence, "give ear." As for the House of Israel, who were seduced by the priests on one side and barred by the king's force on the other, there is less cause to address them directly, so it says "attend," like listening from a distance. For the primary accountability lies with the priests, followed by the royal house, and lastly the House of Israel.
Pasuk 2: "And in Slaughter They Have Gone Deep in Waywardness"
וְשַׁחֲטָה שֵׂטִים הֶעְמִיקוּ וַאֲנִי מוּסָר לְכֻלָּם׃ - And with slaughter they who stray have gone deep, but I will chastise them all.
Rashi explains that veshachatah is an expression of drawing out, as in zahav shachut - ductile gold that is drawn out and beaten thin. And setim is from the root for straying, deviating from the straight path. Thus, they deepened the extent of their deviation: their straying was not an isolated or localized lapse; rather, it was prolonged, growing ever deeper and further entrenched.
Our Sages say: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "I said that anyone who does not make the festival pilgrimage violates a positive commandment (aseh), yet they decreed that anyone who makes the pilgrimage shall be killed - thus they have gone deeper than Me." That is to say, had the Holy One, blessed be He, said that whoever does not make the pilgrimage is executed, and they had decreed that whoever does make the pilgrimage is executed, they would have made their laws equivalent to Hashem's law. But see how they were far more severe than He: one who does not make the pilgrimage merely violates a positive commandment, which is relatively the lightest category of transgression - above it is a negative commandment, and above that are execution by the court and karet (spiritual excision). Thus Hashem stated the lightest level of obligation. Yet they did not say that whoever comes to the calves fulfills a positive commandment of the Ba'al; rather, they decreed that whoever insists on making the pilgrimage to Jerusalem shall be killed. It turns out that whoever listens to the voice of Hashem is put to death - "they have gone deeper than Me." And "va'ani musar lekhulam" ("and I am chastisement to them all"), according to Rashi, is the word of Hashem: because they acted this way, I will chastise them all.
The Malbim explains differently: People saw that there were guards and roadblocks and that it was impossible to travel via the main road, so they would deviate from the path and walk through the valleys, in places where there were no guards. And whoever was caught - they would slaughter him. According to this, "ve-shachatah" (and slaughter) is understood literally: Whom did they slaughter? Those who "satim he'emiku" - those who deviated from the main road and went deep into the valleys. And who is held accountable for this above all? The royal house, who actively enforced the words of the priests, commanding that these people be slaughtered and murdered.
And "va'ani musar lekhulam" according to the Malbim: I knew that they would not accept mussar, that they would not be willing to receive the reproof I speak to them; nevertheless, I was appointed to be a man of reproof, the one who stands and rebukes in the gate. I know that my rebuke will not be effective right now, but this is my role and I am fulfilling it. And where is it expressed that his reproof will not avail? In the very next verse.
Verse 3: "I have known Ephraim"
אֲנִי יָדַעְתִּי אֶפְרַיִם וְיִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא־נִכְחַד מִמֶּנִּי כִּי עַתָּה הִזְנֵיתָ אֶפְרַיִם נִטְמָא יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - "I have known Ephraim, and Israel is not hidden from Me; for now, O Ephraim, you have played the harlot, and Israel is defiled."
The Malbim explains: "I have known Ephraim, and Israel is not hidden from Me" - I know their nature and character, and I know that right now the rebuke I speak to them will not enter their hearts. And the reason: "for now, O Ephraim, you have played the harlot" - Ephraim represents the royal house, the kingdom of Samaria, and you incite the people to stray after the calves, and through this "Israel is defiled," meaning that the collective of Israel has been defiled by those abominations of impurity that you established for them through idol worship.
The Malbim notes precision in the two expressions, "I have known" and "is not hidden from Me," showing that one adds to the other: A person can know something in general, yet certain particulars remain hidden from him; but here it says "I have known, and it is not hidden from Me" - there is nothing whatsoever that escapes Me. Usually, we know the primary matter, but we do not delve into the numerous details and they remain hidden from us. Hashem says: "I have known Ephraim" - Ephraim is the monarchy, the focal point, which I know; and do not say that the collective of Israel, who make up the multitude of details, is hidden from Me - rather, "and Israel is not hidden from Me," even the countless details of the people of Israel are not hidden from Me, and I know all their deeds. Consequently, I know that their deeds will not permit them to return to their God, for a spirit of harlotry is within them. I am a man of reproof even though I know my rebuke will not avail right now, but this is the mission for which I was sent, and I fulfill it.
The Paradox of Hoshea the Son of Elah
Rashi explains "for now, O Ephraim, you have played the harlot" in a different way: Until the reign of Hoshea the son of Elah, the people would blame their corruption on their kings. The kings had prevented them from ascending to Jerusalem, and whenever a claim was brought against them, they would say: What would you have me do? They blocked the borders, and it is impossible for me to go up. They had an excuse and a justification. But when Hoshea the son of Elah took the throne, he opened the borders, abolishing the roadblocks and guards - and now an accusation arose: There are no guards, so why do you not go up?
A paradox emerges here: Precisely when a decent king arose - one cannot call him a tzaddik, for he was not righteous, but decent, granting what we would call today religious freedom: if you wish to go up to Jerusalem, go up; if you wish to come to the calves in Beit El, come - seemingly there was room to judge them favorably and defer the catastrophe, yet the exact opposite occurred, and this very development became the catalyst that brought their end closer. Why? Because as long as there were border guards, the people had an excuse: There is nothing we can do, they will not let us make the pilgrimage. But now that the checkpoints were removed, the people still did not go up. True, one could argue in their defense that they had already grown accustomed over hundreds of years not to ascend, so why would they suddenly go up now? Yet at any rate, the indictment stands, for there was no longer anyone holding them back. If you do not go up, it stems purely from the wickedness of your heart. This is what is meant by "for now, O Ephraim, you have played the harlot, and Israel is defiled": now, when the roadblocks have been removed and it is possible to make the pilgrimage, it is clear that you willfully choose to stray after the Ba'alim, and not because you were coerced.
Why the Ten Tribes Are Called "Ephraim"
Radak explains that "I have known Ephraim" refers to Yarov'am ben Nevat, who was from the tribe of Ephraim, and was the one who made the calves and initiated the entire downfall. Even though this refers to an earlier king who did not live in the era under discussion - Yarov'am was the first king of Israel - because he initiated the corruption and was from the tribe of Ephraim, Scripture says "you have played the harlot, O Ephraim." And what is meant by "and Israel is not hidden from Me"? Even though Yarov'am was the chief instigator of the sin, he also consulted with the leaders of Israel, as it is written, "Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold," and their role and complicity were not hidden from Hashem. "You have played the harlot, O Ephraim" - this is Yarov'am; "and Israel is defiled" - these are the princes who supported his hand in establishing the calves, through which all of Israel became defiled by idolatry.
We should note that "Ephraim" is an expression for Israel in general, as distinct from Judah. The kingdom divided in the days of Rehoboam, after the death of Solomon, between Rehoboam and Jeroboam: Rehoboam continued the Kingdom of Judah - and when we say Judah, it means Judah and Benjamin - while the Ten Tribes were ruled by Jeroboam the son of Nebat. At a certain point, Jeroboam began worshiping the golden calves (as discussed in the series on Melachim), and from then on, all the kings of the Ten Tribes were wicked and practiced idolatry. Therefore, the Ten Tribes were exiled first and did not return. There is a dispute whether they will return at the coming of the Mashiach, and we believe they will. In any case, the wicked Kingdom of Israel, Samaria, Ahab and all the kings with him, are called Ephraim.
Why is the entire nation called Ephraim, when Ephraim is only one part of the whole, and they could just as well have been called Manasseh or Reuben? The Radak explains that because the first king came from Ephraim, all the subsequent kings and the entire community of Israel comprising the Ten Tribes are referred to by the name of Ephraim. The Ibn Ezra offers another reason: Jacob said regarding Ephraim and Manasseh, "and let my name be named in them," so the people of Israel were named after them; and since Ephraim was the more prominent of the two and was mentioned first, the prophet mentions Ephraim as the primary one. Indeed, there are many verses in which the entirety of Israel is called Ephraim.
The Ibn Ezra offers an additional explanation, which he considers the most accurate: when our ancestors entered the land of Canaan, Judah took its territory in the south, and the House of Joseph - the entire tribe of Ephraim and half the tribe of Manasseh - in the north. It turns out that the first places settled were those of Ephraim, and that area later became the dwelling place of the Ten Tribes; therefore, the entire collective was named after the first ones who settled there. This is similar to people initially settling in one city, and eventually the entire land is named after it. This is why the verse mentions "Judah" and "Ephraim": with Judah too, Benjamin is not mentioned, because initially Judah stood on its territory in the south. From this we find expressions like "Is Ephraim my dear son?", "There is no king in Israel," and various other expressions related to Ephraim, where the term Ephraim recurs repeatedly as the name for the Ten Tribes.
Verse 4: Their Deeds Will Not Allow Them
לֹא יִתְּנוּ מַעַלְלֵיהֶם לָשׁוּב אֶל־אֱלֹהֵיהֶם כִּי רוּחַ זְנוּנִים בְּקִרְבָּם וְאֶת־יְהֹוָה לֹא יָדָעוּ׃ - Their deeds will not allow them to return to their God, for a spirit of harlotry is within them, and they have not known Hashem.
Rashi and Malbim explain that "their deeds will not allow them" means they will not abandon their wicked ways. How do we know that "יתנו" (literally "give") can denote abandonment or leaving? Rashi cites: "gave forth its fragrance" (natan reicho) - which Chazal interpret as having relinquished its good fragrance. This is to our credit, for Scripture could have said, "my spikenard gave off a foul odor," but the Gemara explains that the Holy One, blessed be He, used a refined expression toward us: "gave forth its fragrance." Similarly, "and He did not allow him (velo netano) to do me harm" means He did not let him harm me; and likewise, "and Sihon did not allow" (velo natan Sichon). Here too, "their deeds will not allow them" means they will not let go of their evil ways. The Targum translates it as lo yishbok, which denotes leaving or forsaking.
Malbim adds a grammatical rule: whenever the verb "נתן" (to give) appears in the negative followed by an infinitive, its translation is always yishbok, meaning to allow or let go. Here, it does not say "their deeds will not give," but rather "will not allow their deeds," followed by the infinitive "to return" (lashuv); hence its meaning is to permit or leave. This can be understood in two ways: either their evil deeds will not permit them to return to their God, or they themselves will not abandon their evil deeds and corrupt ways, but rather continue to cling to them.
Thus, my rebuke will not avail and will not convince them, for two reasons. First, "for a spirit of harlotry is within them" - they are filled with the spirit of heresy, lust, idolatry, and immorality. Second, "and they have not known Hashem" - they have already become entrenched in sin; this is a second, third, and fourth generation, not a generation that saw the service of Hashem among their ancestors, but one corrupted over many years. Therefore, at this time, I know that they will not turn back from their corrupt deeds, and the chastisement with which I rebuke them will not be effective. Nevertheless, a time will come when they will accept the rebuke and these words will make an impact.
Verse 5: And the Pride of Israel Shall Be Humbled to His Face
וְעָנָה גְאוֹן־יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּפָנָיו וְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶפְרַיִם יִכָּשְׁלוּ בַּעֲוֺנָם כָּשַׁל גַּם־יְהוּדָה עִמָּם׃ - And the pride of Israel shall be humbled to his face; and Israel and Ephraim shall stumble in their iniquity; Judah also has stumbled with them.
Malbim explains that ve'ana is an expression of submission (hachna'ah), as Targum Yonatan translates, and similar to "How long will you refuse to humble yourself (le'anot) before Me?" When the pride of Israel is humbled before Him - that is, when they realize they are suffering afflictions for their evil deeds, and then, when Israel and Ephraim stumble and fall - they will understand that this is the very rebuke I gave them back then, following the admonitions with which I rebuked them. Judah will also stumble with them, and only then will they accept the rebuke. As for the words "Judah also has stumbled with them" - as we will see later, Judah at that time was subject to the rule of the Kingdom of Israel; there was a period when the officers and government of Israel ruled over Judah as well, and it is to that era that the prophet refers.
Rashi cites another explanation in the name of Dunash ben Labrat, that this relates to testimony (edut), as in "You shall not bear false witness (lo ta'aneh) against your neighbor" and "my leanness rising up testifies (ya'aneh) against my face." According to this, "and the pride of Israel shall testify to his face" means that his own pride will bear witness against him to punish him. It is like a person who stubbornly clings to something out of pride and falls on account of his stubbornness. Who punished him? Your own pride punished you, for because you obstinately refused to yield, you ultimately suffered harm.
To illustrate with an example: There was a story in a certain place where a highway needed to be paved, and several houses stood in the way. The authorities compensated the homeowners in order to widen the road; some held out and perhaps received a little more. But there was one homeowner who remained stubborn: while everyone received, say, one million shekels, he demanded four million, no less. Why? Because they needed his land, they could only pave the highway right there, and had no other choice. He held out stubbornly, refusing to budge. In the end, what did they do? They routed the highway around him - the road bypassed his house entirely. Today, that person cannot sell his house even for half a million shekels, since he has a highway right outside his window. This illustrates "the pride of Israel shall be humbled to his face": sometimes a person's pride is what punishes him. You thought you would get more, you insisted you would not concede - and in the end you will not even get a million, for who is going to buy a house that sits right on a highway, with its windows facing a major thoroughfare?
Examining the grammatical nuance, the Malbim notes: there is a difference between yikashelu (they shall stumble) and kashal (stumbled). Kashal in the simple conjugation (kal) implies that the weakness is intrinsic, whereas yikashel in the heavier conjugation (nif'al) implies that intrinsically he is not weak, but rather he stumbles through the influence of others. Concerning Ephraim it says, "they shall stumble (yikashelu) in their iniquity" - for they were powerful, yet they would nevertheless be brought down; whereas concerning Yehudah it says, "Yehudah also has stumbled (kashal) with them," for Yehudah suffered from an intrinsic weakness at that time, being subservient to the kingdom of Ephraim, and this term reflects that vulnerability.
Pasuk 6: "With their flocks and with their herds they shall go to seek Hashem"
בְּצֹאנָם וּבִבְקָרָם יֵלְכוּ לְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת־יְהֹוָה וְלֹא יִמְצָאוּ חָלַץ מֵהֶם׃ - With their flocks and with their herds they shall go to seek Hashem, but they shall not find Him; He has withdrawn from them.
Rashi explains: they will go with sacrifices to seek Hashem and offer them to Him, but "they shall not find Him" - the Holy One, blessed be He, will not answer them. Why? "For He has withdrawn (chalatz) from them," similar to removing a shoe (chalitzat hana'al), as in "the house of him whose shoe was removed" (beit chalutz hana'al) - lachlotz connotes slipping away and removing oneself. The Holy One, blessed be He, has, as it were, slipped away from them, leaving them and departing. Do not think that the door is always open and that you can simply bring a sacrifice and have it accepted with favor, for a stage will arrive when you go with your flocks and herds only to discover that Hashem is no longer there.
The Radak explains that this verse speaks of the tribe of Yehudah, who would return to the service of Hashem in the Beit HaMikdash during the reign of Yoshiyahu. Yoshiyahu eradicated all idolatry, the people returned to serve Hashem, and they celebrated Pesach, as recounted in Melachim II (23:22): "For such a Pesach had not been performed from the days of the judges who judged Israel, nor throughout all the days of the kings of Israel and the kings of Yehudah." Thus, a stage arrived when the nation indeed drew close, took flocks and herds to offer sacrifices, and underwent a process of purification - yet despite all this, "they shall not find Him," because He had already "withdrawn from them," as the decree had already been sealed. Once the verdict is sealed, subsequent actions cannot overturn what was determined, as it states there: "However, Hashem did not turn back from the fury of His great wrath that burned against Yehudah," and it says, "Yehudah as well will I remove from before My presence, just as I removed Israel." In simple terms: it was too late. "Chalatz" - He separated and departed from them.
The Malbim explains that this verse connects to what we saw earlier: the prophet rebuked them for setting up border guards to prevent the pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and then said, "Ephraim has engaged in harlotry, Israel is defiled," for when the road was finally opened and they could go, why did they not go? And now, when the guards are gone, "with their flocks and with their herds they shall go to seek Hashem" - they can go seek Hashem in Jerusalem and bring along flocks and cattle to sacrifice before Him; but at that point it will no longer avail, because He has withdrawn from them, for Hashem has already departed from them.
The Malbim adds with greater depth: the essence of a sacrifice - as he elaborated in his commentary on the verse "Does Hashem delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of Hashem?" - is that the burnt-offering and peace-offering are merely a vehicle to bring you close to Hashem, not an end in themselves. Therefore, if one wishes to bring a sacrifice but does not want to fulfill Hashem's will, it does not work, and the sacrifice will not be accepted with favor, since it is only an instrument for drawing near. What pleasure does Hashem have in burnt-offerings and sacrifices if one does not heed His voice and does not nullify oneself before the will of Hashem, blessed be He? This is why it says here, "they shall not find Him" - why? For Hashem is not found merely in His Temple; His dwelling is within the heart of the nation and within their soul, when they sanctify themselves and follow His commandments. But once He has withdrawn from them - when "in my heart I shall build a sanctuary" is absent, and Hashem is no longer present within - the sacrifice no longer has any value. And again, let us emphasize: it is not that Hashem abandoned man, but that man abandoned Him; when Hashem is not in one's heart, it means one pays no heed to Hashem and does not direct one's deeds according to His will. Consequently, "He has withdrawn from them" - and if Hashem is not in your heart, the sacrifice is of no further use and cannot atone.
Pasuk 7: "They have betrayed Hashem"
בַּיהֹוָה בָּגָדוּ כִּי־בָנִים זָרִים יָלָדוּ עַתָּה יֹאכְלֵם חֹדֶשׁ אֶת־חֶלְקֵיהֶם׃ - They have betrayed Hashem, for they have begotten alien children; now a new moon shall devour them with their portions.
As noted several times, when a verse is not easily understood on its literal level, we find numerous explanations for it, with each commentator seeking to explain the verse according to his approach.
The Radak explains "they have betrayed Hashem" in its literal sense: they intermarried with idolaters, which is betrayal of Hashem. We have already seen that this is the consistent metaphor - just as an unfaithful wife betrays her husband, so Kelal Yisrael betray Hashem and chase after the Ba'alim. Furthermore, Hashem commanded them not to serve idols, because through idolatry one draws close to the nations and intermarries with them, "for he will turn away your son from following Me" - meaning your son will already be a priest of idolatry. This is much like what we see with women who move to Arab villages, whose son and grandson end up in the mosque. This was very common in those days: the moment an Israelite woman married a gentile, the child was raised in idolatry like the gentile. Thus, they betrayed Hashem and worshiped idols, and subsequently "they have begotten alien children."
Targum Yonatan translates: "They were false to the word of Hashem; behold, children from the daughters of the nations are theirs" - meaning that "they have dealt treacherously against Hashem" by rebelling against Hashem's commandment, for Hashem said, "You shall not intermarry with them," yet they fathered children from gentile women. Radak brings another explanation: "they have borne alien children" - they followed the practices of the idolaters, so this is a metaphorical expression regarding birth, meaning not that they physically fathered children, but that they conducted themselves according to the customs of the nations, as it is written: "and they slap hands with the children of foreigners."
And what is the meaning of "now a month shall devour them with their portions," which seems entirely cryptic? Radak explains that soon a month will arrive in which the enemy will consume them and their portions. And what is this month? The month of Tammuz, in which the city was breached, and the month of Av, in which the city was destroyed - the month designated for calamity. And "their portions" refers to their fields, as in "the portion of the field," meaning the fields, vineyards, houses, and everything else. Another explanation: "a month" means that it will devour them within a month, that is, in a brief moment and in a short span of time, rather than taking years; as it is written, "I destroyed the three shepherds in one month" - for to express something done quickly, Scripture says it occurred in one month. And according to Targum Yonatan, as Radak cites, "chodesh" is like "month by month," similar to "day by day," meaning that it will devour them continuously: "Now the nations shall come upon them month after month" - month after month it will devour them steadily.
The Malbim explains that here the prophet is describing how the destruction of the dynasty of Yehu would unfold, as we saw in the first chapter of Sefer Hoshea: "and I will visit the blood of Yizre'el upon the house of Yehu." This occurred when Zecharyah son of Yerovam reigned for six months, and Shallum son of Yavesh conspired against him and struck him down before the people; and that Shallum son of Yavesh reigned a full month in Shomron, only one month. Regarding this it was said, "they have dealt treacherously against Hashem, for they have borne alien children" - this refers to Zecharyah, who was estranged in his deeds from the Omnipresent; "now a month shall devour them" - this is Shallum son of Yavesh, who reigned for a month, and he is the one who would devour and put an end to their portions, having wiped out the entire house of Yehu, while his own reign lasted only a single month.
In summary:
In this part of the chapter, the prophet directs his rebuke toward three groups: the instigating calf-priests - to whom he says "Hear," for the primary judgment rests upon them; the royal house that set the snare and the net on Mitzpah and Tavor and slaughtered the defectors in the valleys - to whom he says "Give ear"; and the seduced populace - to whom he says "Pay attention." Hashem announces that He knows Ephraim and every detail of Israel, and that at this time the prophet's rebuke will be of no avail, for a spirit of harlotry is within them and they do not know Hashem - particularly after Hoshea son of Elah reopened the roads and it was revealed that their failure to make the pilgrimage was not due to coercion, but malice of heart. Yet a day will come when the pride of Israel will be brought low, and when they and Yehudah with them stumble, they will realize that the afflictions are the fulfillment of the rebuke. Then, when they go with their flocks and herds to seek Hashem - they will not find Him, for the sacrifice is not an end in itself but an instrument, and Hashem dwells in the heart of the nation and not merely in a house of stone; and once He has withdrawn from them, all that remains is the calamity that will come in a single month and wipe out the wicked kingdom.