Introduction
In this part of Chapter 5 in Hoshea, we move from the general rebuke to a focused call: the prophet sounds the shofar and warns the tribe of Binyamin, who bordered Ephraim and were under its dominion, not to be drawn after the path of the Ten Tribes. In this context, we will examine the explanations of Rashi, Targum Yonatan, Radak, Ibn Ezra, and Rabbeinu Saadia Gaon, and especially the approach of the Malbim, who arranges this entire section as a single continuous address to Binyamin and Yehudah.
"Blow the Shofar in Givah" - Three Interpretive Approaches
תִּקְעוּ שׁוֹפָר בַּגִּבְעָה חֲצֹצְרָה בָּרָמָה הָרִיעוּ בֵּית אָוֶן אַחֲרֶיךָ בִּנְיָמִין׃ - Blow the shofar in Givah, the trumpet in Ramah; sound an alarm at Beit Aven: behind you, Binyamin!
The verse is complex, and we find several interpretations for it. Rashi explains that blowing the shofar comes to warn of the sword of the approaching troops. "Sound an alarm at Beit Aven, behind you" - the troop is advancing behind you, Binyamin. In other words, this is a warning to Binyamin: an army is already in pursuit behind you. As is well known, in those times they would blow the shofar to warn and deter, and through it they would convey announcements to the people: regarding war, a royal gathering, and the like. Just as we saw in the wilderness with the trumpets, where each type of blast conveyed a different message: assembling the camps, encamping, or going to war. Here, the message to Binyamin is that the enemy is already close at hand.
And why specifically "behind you, Binyamin"? Radak explains: because Ephraim has already been conquered. According to this interpretation, this refers to the stage following the exile of the Ten Tribes, and the question is who is next in line. The answer: behind you, Binyamin - the enemy is already waiting to exile you as well.
Targum Yonatan: On the Primal Sin of Demanding a King
Rashi cites Targum Yonatan, who interprets the verses homiletically. His phrasing: "Neviya arimu kolchon kad beshophora" - Prophets, raise your voice like a shofar. "Itnabo di yeiton aleihon amemaya ketulin" - Prophesy that murderous nations will come upon them, "al de'amlichu yat Shaul demigivata" - because they crowned Shaul from Givah. Thus we have: "Blow the shofar in Givah" - announce that nations will come and slaughter you because you crowned Shaul from Givah.
He continues: "Atzuhu kad bachatzotzarta, ameru di yeiton aleihon malchin bemashriyateihon, al dela kabbilu lefitgamei Shmuel demiramata" - Proclaim with a trumpet that kings will come upon them with their armies, because they did not accept the words of Shmuel of Ramah. As we recall, the coronation of Shaul was not pleasing before the Holy One, blessed be He, nor before Shmuel. Shmuel said, "They have rejected me," and the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: They have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me. Ultimately, he anointed Shaul for them, yet the coronation itself was initially not favored, for the request for a king was improper (as we have elaborated elsewhere in Sefer Shmuel, and this is not the place to repeat it). Concerning this it is said: blow the shofar in Givah - because you crowned Shaul in Givah; the trumpet in Ramah - because you did not listen to the words of Shmuel of Ramah.
"Basiu aleihon yevavat avdei karva" - yevavat relates to teruah (a day of sounding the shofar is translated as yom yevava), and avdei karva are the warriors, the soldiers. "Al deshakaru bemeimri" - because they turned away from My word, "ve'istacharu le'ahora mibatar pulchani" - and turned backward away from My worship, "velo felachu kadamai bemikdesha di ve'ara deshivta deBinyamin" - and did not serve before Me in the Beit HaMikdash that is in the land of the tribe of Binyamin. Now ostensibly, the Beit HaMikdash is in the land of Yehudah, but Chazal have already explained that a narrow strip extended into Binyamin's portion, so the site belonged both to Binyamin and to Yehudah. Thus, according to Targum Yonatan, the entire verse speaks of the enemy that will come upon them and of the ancient sin of crowning a king against the will of Hashem.
The Approach of the Malbim: A Warning to Binyamin to Separate from Ephraim
The Malbim places the matter in historical context: the Ten Tribes, based in Shomron, ruled over the kingdom of Yehudah and Binyamin from the time Yoash defeated Amatzyahu king of Yehudah. Moreover, in the time of Pekach ben Remalyahu, the people of Israel fought against the people of Yehudah, subjugating Yehudah beneath them, which took place during the days of Achaz. The territory of Binyamin bordered the territory of the descendants of Yosef - namely Ephraim and Menasheh - and at that time, Binyamin was subject to the rule of Ephraim, who was the sovereign.
According to this, the prophet commands the children of Binyamin to blow the shofar in Givah, which belonged to Binyamin; to sound the trumpet blast in Ramah, which was also Binyamin's; and to sound a blast in Beit Aven, which was likewise in Binyamin's tribal territory, as written in Yehoshua regarding Binyamin's inheritance, "and its outgoings were at the wilderness of Beit Aven." In all these places they are to blast, proclaim, and declare: "Behind you, Binyamin!"
And what does this proclamation mean? Do not follow the kingdom of Ephraim; do not act like the ten tribes. Rather, "Behind you, Binyamin" - tell the entire people to follow the leadership of Binyamin, who is joined to Yehudah, and not Ephraim. This is a call to the tribe of Binyamin, which lived adjacent to Ephraim and was subject to its rule: Do not be drawn after Ephraim; be drawn after Binyamin, who is aligned with Yehudah. And indeed, we see that Binyamin was exiled only in the second exile, when Yehudah was exiled.
"Blow a Shofar" vs. "Sound a Blast on the Trumpet": An Escalating Progression
The Malbim notes a precise distinction between tekiah (a steady blast) and teruah (a wavering, broken blast), and between a shofar and a trumpet. The trumpet is more distinguished than the shofar: trumpets were sounded in the Beit HaMikdash, possessing higher status and a more crafted form. Furthermore, the teruah is more awakening than the tekiah: the tekiah is a plain, sustained note, whereas the teruah is a broken, sobbing sound, which arouses the heart more intensely.
Hence, the Malbim explains, Scripture employs an escalating progression: first "blow" (tiku, which is less urgent than a teruah) "a shofar" (which is less distinguished than a trumpet); and in the next stage, as the situation grows more dire, "a trumpet" (a superior instrument) and "sound a blast" (hari'u, a more piercing sound). All of this is meant to awaken Binyamin to rally behind the leadership of their own tribe rather than that of Ephraim.
"Among the Tribes of Israel I Have Made Known What Is Faithful"
אֶפְרַיִם לְשַׁמָּה תִהְיֶה בְּיוֹם תּוֹכֵחָה בְּשִׁבְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הוֹדַעְתִּי נֶאֱמָנָה׃ - Ephraim shall become desolate on the day of rebuke; among the tribes of Israel I have made known what is faithful.
Here lies the origin of the familiar Hebrew idiom "hoda'ti ne'emanah" (faithfully and reliably proclaimed), which many quote without realizing its source. The Radak explains that this is a rebuke to Ephraim: Ephraim shall be desolate at the time of punishment. And what is the "day of rebuke"? In the Radak's view, this refers to the era when Israel was in the wilderness, when Hashem spoke to them directly and faithfully made known to them: "If you walk in My statutes," "and I will grant peace in the land," "and the earth will yield its produce," "and threshing shall reach for you until the vintage, and the vintage shall reach until the sowing time," "neither shall the sword pass through your land." Since they did not heed this, He will exile them. This is the meaning of "Ephraim shall become desolate" - for on the day of rebuke, when I gave them the Torah, I faithfully informed them that if they stray from the path, they will go into exile.
The Midrash: "God Is Mighty and True, Showing Favoritism Not Even to the Members of His Own Household"
The Radak cites a Midrash: Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Chanina taught that this refers to the day the Holy One, Blessed is He, contended with them in judgment. What does this mean? We find that when the ten tribes were exiled, Yehudah and Binyamin were not exiled. The ten tribes argued that this was unfair, a double standard. They said: Because they are the sons of His royal palace (benei palatin), He did not exile them. In other words, because they live near the Beit HaMikdash He gave them a concession, even though they are no less wicked than us. Why should we be exiled while they are spared? Could there be favoritism here, Heaven forbid?
The answer is: Heaven forbid that there should be favoritism; rather, their measure of guilt had not yet been filled, and as soon as their sins reached that point, they too were exiled. That is to say, it was not the King's palace that protected them, but simply that their measure was not yet full. As explained several times, the kings of Israel were uniformly wicked, whereas among the kings of Yehudah there were also righteous kings, and their decline was slower than that of the ten tribes.
Rabbi Abbahu said: When the ten tribes heard this, they had no reply, and said: "God is mighty, He is true, for He shows no favoritism even to the members of His own household" - Hashem is mighty and Hashem is truth, for even to His own household He shows no partiality. This fulfills what is said, "among the tribes of Israel I have made known what is faithful" - I made known that I am faithful to My word. Thus, when Yehudah and Binyamin are ultimately exiled as well, it will become evident to the tribes of Israel, namely the ten tribes, that there is no double standard with Me, and whoever strays from the path will ultimately be exiled.
The Malbim's Explanation: The Reason for Warning Binyamin
According to the Malbim, this verse is the continuation and the underlying reason for the previous verse. After all, "After you, Binyamin" is an instruction to the people of Binyamin to distance themselves from Ephraim and not follow in their ways, even though Ephraim and the Ten Tribes rule over them, but rather to separate themselves from the kingdom of Ephraim. Now the prophet explains why: because Ephraim shall become desolate. Do you want to be like them? On the day of rebuke, they are destined to go into exile. Therefore, I warn you, Binyamin, not to alter your course and not to stray after the Ten Tribes, for on the day designated by Hashem to rebuke the children of Ephraim - the day of their exile - you will witness their distress but stand aside. If you join them, however, you will be exiled with them. And therefore, "I have made known what is certain" - I hereby faithfully notify you that it is not worthwhile to join Ephraim, but rather to remain separated from them.
In clarifying the terms, the Malbim explains that a "day of rebuke" is like a day of distress and rebuke, the day on which they will be exiled. Yet he offers an additional explanation: "the day of rebuke" can be linked to the previous verse - "Blow the shofar in Givah... on the day of rebuke," where a day of rebuke refers to a fast day. Radak already explained in the name of his father that a fast day is a time when the public gathers together, as the root meaning of tzom (fast) denotes gathering, like tzomet hagidim - the place where many sinews converge, or a road intersection (tzomet) - a place where many roads meet. On the fast day, when the nation assembled, the elder would deliver words of rebuke and stirring exhortation. Thus: blow the shofar in Givah, the trumpet in Ramah, sound the alarm in Beit Aven - when? On the day of rebuke, on the fast day when you gather everyone. And what shall you proclaim? "After you, Binyamin" - turn away from Ephraim and follow after the tribe of Binyamin, for Ephraim shall become desolate.
"The Princes of Yehudah Were Like Those Who Remove a Boundary"
הָיוּ שָׂרֵי יְהוּדָה כְּמַסִּיגֵי גְּבוּל עֲלֵיהֶם אֶשְׁפּוֹךְ כַּמַּיִם עֶבְרָתִי׃ - The princes of Yehudah were like those who move back a boundary; upon them I will pour out My wrath like water.
The Malbim continues along this same line: "Among the tribes of Israel" - concerning them, the Ten Tribes, "I have made known what is certain," for the tribes of Israel had now become "princes of Yehudah," meaning they had become officers and rulers over Yehudah. For we are dealing with a period in which Yehudah and Binyamin were subjugated to the rule of the Ten Tribes. They resemble those who encroach upon a boundary, for the boundary of Yehudah is the boundary of the kingdom of the House of David, and when you come to rule there, you encroach upon the boundary of the Davidic dynasty. Hashem promised David to grant an enduring light to his descendants for all time, that at least one tribe would remain his, and when you rule over them, you are like one who encroaches upon their border. Therefore, "I have made known what is certain" - a faithful and decisive decree: "I will pour out My wrath like water," where evrati denotes My anger, which will be poured out upon them. And as written in Yeshayahu, "Within sixty-five years Ephraim shall be broken from being a people," meaning that Ephraim will be exiled.
What Is "Evrah" and Why "Like Water"?
The Malbim is precise regarding the term evrati. There is a difference between ka'as (anger) and evrah (overflowing wrath): evrah occurs when the punishment strikes even those who are not the primary sinners. The anger overflows and punishes both sinners and non-sinners, like "If fire breaks out and catches in thorns." Why is this called evrah? Because the anger overflows (over) its boundaries: its proper boundary is solely the sinners, and when it consumes those who did not sin as well, it has crossed its boundary.
And so it was here: the primary sinners were the tribe of Ephraim, who constituted the royal house and were the ones who made the calves, whereas the remaining nine tribes were drawn after them and after Yerovam ben Nevat, acting as if enticed or coerced. Nevertheless, the fierce anger directed at the tribe of Ephraim will take the form of evrah, punishing the other tribes as well. This is the meaning of "like water": just as water poured in one place does not remain there but spreads out, so too My overflowing wrath, which is primarily directed against Ephraim that it become desolate, will spread and consume the remaining nine tribes as well, and ultimately all Ten Tribes will be exiled.
The Approach of Rashi and Radak: A Rebuke to the Princes of Yehudah Themselves
Radak, as well as Rashi, explain that the verse is speaking about Yehudah itself, unlike the approach of the Malbim. Here it is worthwhile to note what the Malbim achieved with his explanation: the verses here are difficult, as the prophet speaks first about Binyamin, then about Ephraim, and then again about Yehudah. According to the Malbim, there is no lack of order here at all; rather, all the verses form a single address to Binyamin and Yehudah: "After you, Binyamin" - do not be drawn after Ephraim; "for Ephraim shall become desolate" - this is the reason; "The princes of Yehudah were like those who remove a boundary; upon them I will pour out My wrath like water" - the continuation of that same address, that My fury will be poured out upon them, and therefore distance yourselves from them. The entire discourse is directed toward a single audience. According to the other commentators, however, there is a difficulty, for at times the verse addresses Binyamin, at times Ephraim, and at times Yehudah, making it difficult to understand why Scripture repeatedly shifts from one addressee to another within a single unified passage.
In any event, let us examine how Rashi and Radak explain it. In their view, this is an address to the princes of Yehudah. Radak explains: just as a person encroaches upon his neighbor's boundary, so did they hasten to adopt the ways of their fellow kings in Israel. That is to say, the princes of Yehudah attached themselves to the people of Ephraim - the wicked ones among the Ten Tribes - and adopted their practices, and therefore upon them I will pour out My wrath.
According to its plain meaning, the Radak explains that "those who move a boundary" refers to those who stole fields. However, he raised a difficulty, as did Rashi: if so, why does the verse say "like those who move a boundary" (kemassigei gevul)? If they are indeed boundary-movers, let it say "boundary-movers"! The letter kaf serves as the prefix of comparison, and it applies only to something that is not literally the thing itself, but merely like it. The Radak resolves this: we find similar usage elsewhere in Scripture, such as "Sell to me as this day" (mikhrah khayom), which means literally today, teaching us that the comparative kaf can sometimes be superfluous. Here too, "like those who move a boundary" means actual boundary-movers, and the presence of the kaf does not change the core meaning.
According to this, there is a rebuke here against the princes of Judah who moved their neighbors' boundaries. People had estates adjacent to the princes of Judah, and the princes would encroach upon their borders. Just as a boundary-mover creeps into his neighbor's field and annexes ten meters for himself, so would they take from the weak and add to their own estates. This is similar to what is written in the prophecy of Yechezkel, "And My princes shall no longer wrong My people, to wrong them out of their possession" - teaching that they had a pattern of doing this, defrauding them and seizing their land.
Rabbeinu Saadia Gaon: Encroaching upon the Mitzvot
Rabbeinu Saadia Gaon, as quoted by the Radak, interprets this metaphorically. It does not refer to literal boundary encroachment, but to encroaching upon the boundaries of the mitzvot. The mitzvot are like borders set by Hashem, never to be breached, and when the princes of Judah go and violate the word of Hashem, they are like boundary-movers, who shift the ancient boundaries set by the early generations and violate the curses of the covenant. According to this, the comparative kaf ("like") is well understood, for this is not literal boundary-moving, but something comparable to it.
The Radak's Father: The Judge Who Turns a Blind Eye
The Radak's father explains that the princes themselves did not move boundaries; rather, people came to the princes to complain about neighbors who encroached upon their land. A person would bring a claim before the princes, who also served as judges, saying, "My neighbor moved my boundary," yet the judge turned a blind eye. When a judge ignores such injustice, it is as if he moved the boundary himself. If you steal yourself, you are called a thief; if you enable another to steal and turn a blind eye, you are an accomplice to the thief. This is the meaning of "The princes of Judah were like those who move a boundary" - they saw people encroaching upon their neighbors' borders and stealing their fields, yet they rendered no justice. Therefore, Scripture charges them as though they had a direct hand in the wrongdoing.
Ibn Ezra: Harm Done in Secret
Ibn Ezra explains: they would harm those under their authority, just like people who move boundaries in secret. A boundary-mover acts by night when no one is watching, shifting the fence, so that when you arrive a week later you are unsure - perhaps the fence was further inward, you cannot remember, and you assume this was its place. Everything is done surreptitiously so that you do not detect it. In the same way, they secretly inflicted harm upon those under their jurisdiction, and that is why the princes of Judah were "like those who move a boundary."
"Ephraim is Oppressed, Crushed in Judgment"
עָשׁוּק אֶפְרַיִם רְצוּץ מִשְׁפָּט כִּי הוֹאִיל הָלַךְ אַחֲרֵי־צָו׃ - "Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in judgment, because he willingly walked after man's command."
The Radak explains: Ephraim is oppressed by the nations, who exploited him and crushed him with harsh judgments. According to Ibn Ezra, this refers to the kings of Ephraim, who oppressed and defrauded him. And why did he deserve this? "Because he willingly walked after the command (tsav)." Today we might idiomatically speak of following the "command of fashion" (trends), but the Radak explains differently: they followed the dictates of Yarov'am ben Nevat, walking in the way he commanded them.
And what is the meaning of "because he willingly walked" (ki ho'il halakh)? The Radak explains: he walked of his own free will. For initially they did not follow Yarov'am, and only after some time did they decide to align themselves with the golden calves, so when Ephraim went, it was willingly. He did not merely follow along; he went willingly and consented to the corruption that Yarov'am introduced. And "tsav," the Radak explains, means a decree or commandment (mitzvah), similar to a line or rule; and although it does not explicitly state "the command of Yarov'am," it is the way of Scripture to be concise. Thus, when they refused to walk in the commandments of God, they walked after the command of the wicked king who led them.
The Malbim: A Direct Claim Against Ephraim
Here too, according to the Malbim, the address is to the tribes of Benjamin and Judah, and all the speech is directed to them. He says to them: Know that Ephraim is destined to be plundered, and not merely on account of the general overflowing wrath we discussed, where when wrath bursts its bounds it consumes everything like rushing water. With Ephraim there is a personal indictment, for he caused the public to sin, and therefore he will be "crushed by justice" - they will crush him through justice, not merely through wrath, but through justice and law. For in a time of overflowing wrath a person might say, "I just happened to be there and was punished along with everyone else," but here they address him directly, as he bears responsibility for everything that occurred with Judah and Benjamin. From the standpoint of justice: he initiated the transgression and followed the command of Jeroboam, who was of their tribe; the tribe of Ephraim embraced the calves first and led the multitude into sin, and therefore the claim against them is direct.
"Ho'il" - Consent Following Refusal
The Malbim explains that ho'il denotes beginning, and this expression always reflects an initial reluctance that preceded eventual consent. If I wanted something from the outset, I would say, "I wanted" or "I did it because I wanted to"; but if I initially opposed it and later agreed, the term ho'il applies. Nor is this coincidental, for its root is y-a-l, which belongs to those roots that carry opposite meanings, like leshareshet (to uproot) and lehashrish (to take root), or like keles, which serves both as ridicule and mockery and as praise and exaltation. Here too: al conveys withholding or prevention, while ho'il conveys consent, because it denotes an agreement that comes after reluctance.
The Malbim cites examples: "And Moses consented [vayo'el] to dwell with the man" - initially Moses did not want to stay with him, and only after being urged did he agree. "Be content [ho'el], take two talents" - Naaman offered them to the prophet and Elisha refused, wanting to take nothing, and afterward his attendant Gehazi ran after him and said, "Be content, take," for there had been prior resistance. "Behold now, I have taken it upon myself [ho'alti] to speak to Hashem" - it was fitting that I should not speak, yet in the end I dared. "Moses began [ho'il] to explain this Torah" - initially he did not wish to explain it, thinking he would live long, but once he realized he would not enter the Land and had to depart this world, he consented and explained. So too with Ephraim: at first they did not follow Jeroboam son of Nebat and his calves immediately, and only later did they consent to follow him, and this is the meaning of "for he willingly walked after the command."
"For I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like rot to the House of Judah"
וַאֲנִי כָעָשׁ לְאֶפְרָיִם וְכָרָקָב לְבֵית יְהוּדָה׃ - "For I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like rot to the House of Judah."
"For I am like a moth to Ephraim" - consuming and destroying Ephraim. The key point is that the destruction of Ephraim and Judah is not a natural destruction, but one directed by divine providence, from Hashem and through His will. I destroy them like a moth and like rot, which consume and ruin everything.
The Malbim notes a precise distinction: to Ephraim He is like a moth, and to the House of Judah like rot. What is the difference? A moth is an external agent - a moth arrives from the outside and consumes the garment. Rot is within the object itself, as when fruit rots from within. This is how the verse depicts their destruction: Ephraim, in whose midst Hashem does not dwell - since Ephraim represents the ten tribes - Hashem, as it were, comes to destroy them with full providence from without. But Judah, among whom Hashem is present - for there is the place of the Temple, the land of Judah and Benjamin where the Sanctuary of Hashem stands - Hashem does not come from without to destroy them, but from within. Therefore, the verse hints at this through the term "rot," indicating that the process comes from within, where the Shechinah dwells in the midst of Judah, and from there He will be like rot to the House of Judah.
"And Ephraim saw his sickness" - Seeking Healing in the Wrong Place
וַיַּרְא אֶפְרַיִם אֶת־חׇלְיוֹ וִיהוּדָה אֶת־מְזֹרוֹ וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶפְרַיִם אֶל־אַשּׁוּר וַיִּשְׁלַח אֶל־מֶלֶךְ יָרֵב וְהוּא לֹא יוּכַל לִרְפֹּא לָכֶם וְלֹא־יִגְהֶה מִכֶּם מָזוֹר׃ - "When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah his wound, Ephraim went to Assyria and sent to King Yarev; but he cannot heal you, nor relieve you of your wound."
They failed to understand that everything was guided by divine providence, planned and sent by Hashem because they strayed from the path; instead, they thought they were facing a natural illness. And when there is a natural illness, one seeks natural remedies to cure the illness and recover. As the Ramban writes concerning the verse, "Even in his illness he did not seek Hashem, but turned to the physicians": What do physicians have to do in the house of those who fear Hashem? What does a God-fearing person need with physicians? Now, we do turn to doctors because we are not on such a high level of bitachon (trust in God) that we can rely solely on Hashem's healing; but a person of high bitachon understands that if he has an illness, it comes from Hashem, and the One Who sent the illness is the One Who will send the cure.
This was the indictment against Ephraim: they failed to understand that there was a message from Hashem here, and therefore they did not seek the remedy from the Master of the World by asking how to return to Him; instead, they sought remedies on the material plane. When troubles strike, they send to the king of Assyria to heal the sickness and rescue them. This is what we saw when Menachem ben Gadi sent a thousand talents of silver to Pul, king of Assyria, to strengthen his hold on the kingdom; and Achaz sent him a bribe and a tribute to support him against Pekach ben Remalyahu and Retzin, king of Aram, who were fighting against him. Both turn to outside help and fail to realize that the true address is Hashem. If you have an issue with the Master of the World, the Holy One, Blessed be He, has delivered you into the hands of your enemies.
"His Sickness" versus "His Wound": Internal Illness and External Affliction
Why is "his sickness" (cholyov) stated regarding Ephraim, while regarding Yehudah it says "his wound" (mazoro)? The Malbim explains: sickness (choli) is something that comes from within - bodily weakness, an internal fever, and the like. A wound (mazor), by contrast, is an affliction resulting from a blow received from the outside. And why is such a wound called a mazor? Because herbs and powders were scattered over the wound, as it says, "they have not been pressed out, nor bound up" (lo zoru) - meaning that medicinal powders were not scattered over it. The Malbim brings an additional explanation: because medications were applied to an external ailment, from the expression "and he wrung the fleece" (vayazar et hagizah), which relates to squeezing or pressing, for an external wound develops swelling and pus, and they would press out the pus in order to heal it. In any case, a mazor refers to an external ailment, whereas choli refers to an internal sickness of bodily weakness.
Now the variation in phrasing becomes clear. Ephraim sent to the king of Assyria to help him against internal rebels, making his illness an internal one; therefore, "Ephraim saw his sickness." Yehudah, on the other hand, sent to him to deliver him from kings striking him from without, which was an external affliction; therefore, "and Yehudah [saw] his wound." This is also why it says, "and he sent to King Yarev" - he sent messengers to the king of Assyria to champion his cause against Pekach and Retzin of Aram, who were rising up against him from the outside.
Neither Achieved Their Hope
Neither Ephraim nor Yehudah succeeded in their efforts, and neither achieved their hope. Regarding Ephraim, who went to heal his internal sickness, it says, "yet he could not heal you," as it is written concerning Menachem ben Gadi, "and he did not stay there in the land" - he sent for him to come, but King Pul did not remain there to save them. And regarding Yehudah, who sent to heal his wound, his external ailment, it says, "nor shall he cure you of your wound." See what happened with Achaz: not only did he find no healing, but "he distressed him and strengthened him not." It turns out that everything they did was of no avail, because they did not turn to the proper Address. Instead of turning to Hashem, they turned to outside forces for help.
"Velo Yigeheh" - Extracting the Affliction
"Yigeheh" denotes healing - as in the well-known name of the Geha psychiatric hospital, and the verse "a cheerful heart is good medicine (yeitiv gehah)." Yet the Malbim explains that gehah signifies removal or extraction, as in "Remove (hago) the dross from silver" - extracting the dross mixed with the silver, and as in "he was removed (hugah) from the highway." The verse's intent is that he will not extract the festering discharge from the wound. When you have an external wound containing infected discharge, it requires a mazor - which is squeezing it out or scattering medicinal powders - and gehah is healing by way of extraction, drawing out the harmful affliction and removing it from the body. The enemy will not do this. Indeed, when Ephraim went to Assyria, in the end no benefit came from it.
The Malbim makes another precise observation: regarding Ephraim, it is written that he went himself, and not only to the king but to Assyria as a whole, because they all became vassals to Assyria; therefore, "Ephraim went to Assyria." Regarding Yehudah, however, it is written, "and he sent to King Yarev," because Yehudah did not go to become vassals to him, but merely sent an embassy to the king himself. This is why he is called "King Yarev," for their sole request of him was to fight their fight, without offering to become his subjects or a protectorate under his dominion.
"For I Am Like a Lion to Ephraim, and Like a Young Lion to the House of Yehudah"
כִּי אָנֹכִי כַשַּׁחַל לְאֶפְרַיִם וְכַכְּפִיר לְבֵית יְהוּדָה אֲנִי אֲנִי אֶטְרֹף וְאֵלֵךְ אֶשָּׂא וְאֵין מַצִּיל׃ - "For I am like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the house of Yehudah; I, even I, will tear and go away; I will carry off, and none shall rescue."
Hashem says to them: Your mistake is that you fail to realize that your affliction is not natural, but divinely providential. If so, you should not turn to flesh and blood for healing, but directly to Hashem, Blessed be He.
And what is the parable? The Malbim explains that in works of natural history, in books written by naturalists, it is noted that while a lion is young, it is called a kefir (young lion). At that stage, it does not venture out on hunting expeditions; rather, it sits in its lair and lies in ambush, tearing apart whoever comes near, but not going out to pursue prey. But when it grows older and becomes a shachal, a mature lion, it already has lionesses and must provide for their sustenance; therefore, it ventures outside to hunt prey and bring it back to them.
Regarding this it is said: to Ephraim He is like a shachal, for toward Ephraim, Hashem, as it were, goes out of the Beis HaMikdash to come and strike them, like an older lion leaving its place. But to the House of Judah He is like a kefir, for the House of Judah is right next to the Beis HaMikdash, and Hashem does not uproot from His place; rather, from His covert, from the Beis HaMikdash, He strikes them from there. This parallels what we saw earlier: "And I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like rot to the House of Judah." The rot comes from within, representing the House of Judah where the Shechinah resides in their midst; whereas toward Ephraim, Hashem, as it were, moves out and goes toward them, like a moth whose damage comes from the outside.
"I, even I, will tear and go away" - you go seeking cures from flesh and blood, forgetting that everything is from Me. I am like a shachal and I am like a kefir; this is not a natural occurrence but divine providence, and I am the One Who tears. Regarding Ephraim it says, "I will tear and go away," because the shachal tears its prey and carries it off afar. Regarding Judah, where He preys in His place, in His lair, it says, "I will take away and none shall rescue," and it does not say "and go away," because the act takes place right where He is. And if no one can rescue from My hand, what use is turning to Assyria? Can it rescue you from the hand of Hashem?
"I Will Go and Return to My Place"
אֵלֵךְ אָשׁוּבָה אֶל־מְקוֹמִי עַד אֲשֶׁר־יֶאְשְׁמוּ וּבִקְשׁוּ פָנָי בַּצַּר לָהֶם יְשַׁחֲרֻנְנִי׃ - I will go and return to My place, until they acknowledge their guilt and seek My face; in their distress they will seek Me early.
The Malbim explains: In contrast to what He said, "I will tear and go away," which was said concerning Ephraim - where the Holy One, blessed be He, comes as it were from the outside and carries off the prey - He now says: Not only will I go from Ephraim to Jerusalem, where Hashem returns as it were to His place (and there in Jerusalem, years later when Judah also went into exile, it was the aspect of the kefir preying in its place); rather, "I will return to My place" - do not think that I will merely return from there to the Beis HaMikdash, but I will return to My place in Heaven, and distance Myself from them completely.
"Until they acknowledge their guilt" - until they repent on their own, recognizing their guilt, seeking My face, and returning. And if they do not recognize their guilt, then at least, "in their distress they will seek Me" - many harsh troubles will come upon them, and then they will cry out to Hashem and seek Him from the intensity of the afflictions.
And what is the difference between "and seek My face" and "they will seek Me (yeshacharunani)"? The Malbim explains: Seeking the face (bakashat panim) is done through prayer or a gift, as in, "And David sought the face of Hashem" and "and pray and seek My face." In contrast, one who seeks (meshacher) is someone looking for something that is hidden from him and lost. Furthermore, seeking someone's face is applicable when you can see him, so "and seek My face" applies while the Shechinah is still here; but if not, then "in their distress they will seek Me" - once I have already left them, one can no longer seek My face, for I am not there, and therefore he will have to search, inquire, and look for what is hidden from him. Others explain that the expression "to seek" (leshacher) stems from the word shachar (dawn): when a person desires something intensely, he goes and seeks it at the crack of dawn. Thus, one who desires an audience with the king or a meeting with a minister seeks his presence early (meshacher panav), meaning he goes early in the morning to meet him. It turns out that the term leshacher is also connected to the dawn.
In Summary:
In these verses, the prophet calls upon the tribe of Benjamin, which was under the dominion of Ephraim, to separate from their ways: blow the shofar and sound the trumpet in all the localities of Benjamin, and proclaim, "After you, Benjamin!" and not after Ephraim. The reasoning is simple: "Ephraim shall be desolate on the day of rebuke," and whoever joins them will be exiled with them. Hashem's wrath will pour out like water, spreading from sinful Ephraim to all of the Ten Tribes; yet upon Ephraim itself there is a direct legal claim, for he willingly consented and walked after the decree of Jeroboam, causing the multitude to sin. Their destruction is not a natural accident but divine providence: like a moth from without to Ephraim and rot from within to Judah, like a mature lion venturing out to hunt and a young lion lying in wait in its lair. And because they did not understand this, they turned for healing to the king of Assyria instead of to the Holy One, blessed be He, and were not saved at all. And the conclusion of the matter: "I will go and return to My place" - Hashem withdraws and waits, until they recognize their guilt and seek His face, or until, out of their distress, they search for Him, seek Him out, and return.