Sefer Hoshea, Chapter 13: "כְּדַבֵּ֤ר אֶפְרַ֙יִם֙ רְתֵ֔ת נָשָׂ֥א ה֖וּא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיֶּאְשַׁ֥ם בַּבַּ֖עַל וַיָּמֹֽת - When Ephraim spoke trembling, he was exalted in Israel; but he became guilty through the Baal, and he died" (Hoshea 13:1). According to the Malbim, our chapter is a direct continuation of the previous one. Above, we saw: "Ephraim provoked bitter anger, and his blood shall be cast upon him, and his master shall return his reproach to him" (Hoshea 12:15). As we explained, "Ephraim provoked bitter anger" means that after they themselves slaughtered the house of Yerovam and the house of Achav for worshipping the Baal, how could they themselves turn around and worship the Baal? "His master shall return [his reproach] to him" means that the murdered king comes, as it were, with a grievance against them: You killed me, and then went and did the very same thing? It turns out, then, that you shed my blood in vain! With that, Chapter 12 concluded.
Now he continues and says: "When Ephraim spoke trembling, he was exalted in Israel; but he became guilty through the Baal, and he died." The Malbim explains that this, too, is part of "his reproach which his master shall return to him." The slain king also returns these words and says: While Ephraim - meaning the king, as Ephraim was the tribe from which royalty in Shomron stemmed - spoke to worship the calves, it stemmed merely from "retet" (trembling), meaning from fear and hesitation. What was he afraid of? "He was exalted in Israel" - he was afraid for his position of royalty. After all, what was the reason Yerovam worshipped the calf? Why did he construct the calves? Because the kingdom had split: there was Yehudah and there was Ephraim. Ephraim encompassed ten tribes and he was their king, while Yehudah comprised Yehudah and Binyamin. Since the Beit HaMikdash was solely in the territory of Yehudah and Binyamin, if they were to allow the people to ascend to the Beit HaMikdash to celebrate the festivals, there was concern that they would see him standing while the king of Yehudah from the Davidic dynasty, Rechavam son of Shlomo, was sitting - for only kings of the Davidic dynasty were permitted to sit in the Temple Courtyard (Azarah). They would say: He is the true king, and I am merely a fiction! Consequently, they might rebel against me and accept his kingship. Furthermore, since the Beit HaMikdash is in his domain, there is a strong likelihood that he will draw the hearts of the people toward himself. Therefore, Yerovam said: We do not need the Beit HaMikdash; we have a new service - the calves. He went and made calves for himself. It follows, then, that "when Ephraim spoke trembling" - that is, when Ephraim spoke to establish the worship of the calves, it was out of trembling and fear. Fear of what? "He was exalted in Israel" - because he feared for his exalted position; he feared that the people would return to the kingdom of Yehudah, and therefore he instructed them to worship idols.
Yet despite all this, even though he did it out of trembling and fear, "he became guilty through the Baal, and he died." You see that this cost him dearly; Hakadosh Baruch Hu decreed that no name or remnant would remain of the house of Yerovam. This matter became his guilt, and the people put him to death. Let us read the next verse: "וְעַתָּ֗ה יוֹסִ֙פוּ֙ לַחֲטֹ֔א וַיַּעֲשׂ֧וּ לָהֶ֣ם מַסֵּכָ֗ה מִכַּסְפָּ֧ם כִּתְבוּנָ֛ם עֲצַבִּ֖ים מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה חָרָשִׁ֣ים כֻּלֹּ֑ה לָהֶם֙ הֵ֣ם אֹמְרִ֔ים זֹבְחֵ֣י אָדָ֔ם עֲגָלִ֖ים יִשָּׁקֽוּן - And now they continue to sin, and have made for themselves a molten image from their silver according to their understanding, idols, the work of craftsmen, all of it; of them they say: Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves" (Hoshea 13:2).
The Malbim explains: Now, after you murdered the king on account of this matter, "and he died," as we said, how can you continue to sin? Indeed, your sin is now far greater than the king's while he was still alive. For when the king was alive, what could one do? The king coerced people into idolatry; the king issued an edict to worship idols. But now, he says, you do it of your own accord! "And now they have made for themselves a molten image from their silver according to their understanding." That is, until now idolatry was instituted by the king; now, "they make for themselves" - they make idols on their own. The molten image was not previously made from their own silver, but from the king's silver; now they make it from their own money. The molten image was not previously made from their own intellect and understanding, but now they make it "according to their understanding" - based on their own conception. Thus, their sin is now vastly greater: back then, they worshipped idols out of fear of the king, but today they have become self-motivated.
Notice that all of this is what the slain king says to them, as it were: You went and murdered me, and look, you yourselves arose and made yourselves a molten image! "Idols" - what are idols? He describes this whole thing as "the work of craftsmen, all of it," crafted with the skill of artisans and thinkers, to the point that they seemingly have a mouth to speak. Then, as it were, through this personification, the idol itself rebukes them! The idols themselves speak and say to the people who come to kiss them: "Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves?" They say to them: You who slaughtered a human being, who murdered the king because he worshipped idols, who killed Yerovam and Achav because they were attached to Baal - you, "slaughterers of men," will yourselves kiss the calves? After all, when you come to kiss the calves, it turns out that you are murderers of men; you stand guilty as murderers! For the entire pretext for which you killed him was: "Woe, he is an idolater!" But if you yourselves subsequently went and worshipped idols, then your slaying of him proves to have been vile murder, not driven by zealousness against idolatry. If so, the calves argue - the idol itself argues: "Shall the slaughterers of men kiss the calves?" You killed a human being, and you yourselves kiss the calves and worship them? It turns out that you slaughtered a person in vain. All of this is the claim that the slain king lodges against the people who killed him, rebuking them: How could you murder me over this issue, when you subsequently corrupted yourselves far worse?
Thus far we have explained the Malbim. I would like to return to the beginning of the first verse and examine Rashi's explanation. Rashi explains "when Ephraim spoke trembling" in an entirely different manner. Here, the verse refers to the rebuke that Yerovam ben Nevat delivered to Shlomo. As we know, Shlomo built the Millo, and Yerovam ben Nevat came to rebuke him. When he spoke against him, he spoke harsh words with trembling. Why with trembling, with "retet"? Because Shlomo was a great king, and it was no simple matter to speak against him, let alone to rebuke him. "When Ephraim spoke trembling" - when Yerovam, who was from the tribe of Ephraim, spoke harsh words against Shlomo with trembling, "he was exalted in Israel." Through this, he merited to be elevated and to receive the kingdom; everyone viewed him as an influential, powerful figure who was even capable of standing up and rebuking King Shlomo. "But he became guilty through the Baal, and he died" - afterward, he himself turned to idolatry, and consequently lost the monarchy and died; the house of Yerovam was cut off, and the house of Achav was cut off.
Radak explains "when Ephraim spoke trembling": Initially, before Ephraim sinned, dread of him fell upon all the surrounding nations. That is, they were considered an important, formidable nation. Whoever spoke of Ephraim was gripped by trembling; they would tremble. This corresponds to what was said of Ephraim - that he was exalted and great among the tribes of Israel, and his offspring would fill the nations. "He was exalted in Israel" - he raised his head in Israel. Thus, initially, merely mentioning Ephraim caused trembling, and he was a prince and great leader in Israel. Yet despite all this, "he became guilty through the Baal, and he died." Afterward, when he became guilty through the Baal, he was struck down before his enemies, "and he died" - it was considered as if he had died. We see, therefore, three completely different approaches to explaining this verse. As we have mentioned more than once - and we will see this often in this chapter - when a verse is cryptic, commentaries multiply, each heading in a different direction. When a verse is explicit and clear, there is not much need for interpretation, as the simple meaning lies right on the surface. But when the verse is cryptic - "when Ephraim spoke trembling," what does that mean? It is an obscure phrase. Therefore, Rashi applies it to Yerovam speaking against Shlomo; Radak applies it to anyone speaking of Ephraim trembling because Ephraim was high and exalted; while the Malbim explains that when Ephraim - Yerovam - instituted calf worship, he did so out of fear of losing the kingdom. See how one verse takes on several facets. There are additional explanations as well, but since we study primarily with Rashi, Radak, and the Malbim, we will suffice with these.
"And now they continue to sin, and have made for themselves a molten image from their silver according to their understanding, idols." Rashi explains: "And now" - the house of Yehu, who saw all of this, saw that despite how Yerovam spoke against Shlomo and became a prince, he worshipped idols and lost everything. How, then, can you, the house of Yehu, continue to sin? "And have made for themselves a molten image from their silver according to their understanding (kitvunam), idols." Rashi explains "kitvunam" as "according to their pattern" (kitavnitam). Earlier we saw it in the sense of according to their understanding, but Rashi takes it in the direction of form or pattern: they had a specific mold or form, according to which they cast the molten image. Regarding this, he says: "Of them they say: Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves." Rashi cites a Gemara in Sanhedrin stating that the priests of Molech would tell the people of Israel to slaughter their children to idolatry - to sacrifice their children to Molech, as is well known. Afterward, they would say: Whoever merits to sacrifice his son to it shall merit to kiss the calf, for he has offered it a cherished gift. That is: "Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves." Whoever is willing to slaughter a human being, to slaughter his son, will merit the great privilege of kissing the calf; whoever is not will not merit this privilege.
Radak explains: "And now they continue to sin." Now, when Yerovam reigned, they sinned even more. Why? Because initially, when they worshipped in the days of the Judges, they worshipped the Baalim, but notice that this was in an ebb and flow (ratzo va-shov). A Judge would arise, bring them back in repentance, and the land would be tranquil for forty years, and so on. It was a recurring cycle. But now, by contrast, "they continue to sin" - they have completely uprooted the service of Hashem. They prohibited ascending to Yerushalayim, prohibited ascending to the Beit HaMikdash, and set up the calves as a replacement, proclaiming: "These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt." Thus they added to their sin, for previously sin was fluctuating, but now they became entrenched in it. "And have made for themselves a molten image from their silver." Why "from their silver"? asks Radak. After all, the calf was made of gold! Why does it say "from their silver"? It means that each individual gave of his own money (silver) to purchase gold in order to fashion the calf. "According to their understanding, idols" - "kitvunam," says Radak, either means according to what they contemplated regarding its form and agreed upon to fashion the calf, or, as Targum Yonatan translates, "according to their pattern," like Rashi explained. These are the two explanations we have already seen. "The work of craftsmen, all of it" - meaning, there is nothing spiritual in it whatsoever; it is entirely the product of a carpenter or a metalsmith. It is completely corporeal, as it says, "there is no spirit within it." "Of them they say" - on their behalf, the priests of Baal say to the people who come to offer human sacrifices: Whoever wishes to sacrifice to the calf, "let them kiss the calves." That is, the service of the calf is not complete until one kisses it as well; it is not enough to sacrifice to it, but one must also kiss it, as it is written, "and every mouth that has not kissed it" (I Kings 19:18). We see that it was their custom to kiss idols.
Let us mention here a well-known story regarding the verse "Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves." It is related that the Maggid of Kelm was invited to deliver a sermon at Yeshivat Chachmei Lublin. He spoke there about Germany - this was about ten years before the Holocaust. He said: Know that in that place, people will yet be slaughtered like calves. That is, without any conscience, just as one takes a calf or a chicken to the slaughterhouse without pangs of conscience, so people will be slaughtered like calves. They said to him: "Honored Rav, what are you saying? Germany is an enlightened, cultured country, the cradle of civilization; how can the Rav speak like this?" He replied: "I know only one thing - I know a verse. And the verse says: 'Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves.' A person capable of reaching such a distortion as to kiss a calf will have no qualms about slaughtering a human being." That is to say, his moral distortion is so severe that if he can elevate a calf to the level of a human being and kiss it, he will be capable of degrading a human being to the level of a calf and slaughtering him. They asked him: "What is the Rav referring to?" He told them that he had seen a German woman pick up her dog and kiss it. He said that a nation capable of such behavior - which was not uncommon there - will produce people capable of slaughtering human beings. As is well known, one of the Nazi commanders had a dog he named "Mensch," which he would set upon Jews. He called a dog "Mensch" - and a "mensch" means a human being! He was able to elevate an animal, a dog, to the rank of a man, and so had no hesitation in throwing Jews to the dog to be devoured, demoting a Jew beneath an animal, beneath a dog. When a person's outlook is distorted, he can reach dreadful perversions. And incidentally, this is something we have elaborated on in the past. It is not our main subject so I will not dwell on it, but one can observe this among the leftist movements in our country today. One might have judged them favorably, thinking they are people full of compassion: they cannot bear to see even a Palestinian suffer, and it touches their heart. One might view them as full of mercy toward every creature. Yet during the Disengagement (Hitnatkut), they opened shelters to take in dogs that had been abandoned by settlers who had nowhere to take them. When asked, "Wait, but there are human beings here with no one to take them in!", they replied, "That's their own fault for choosing to live there." You understand? "Let the slaughterers of men kiss the calves." Whoever can kiss a dog or a calf and elevate it to human status - "adopt a dog" - will refuse to embrace a settler, because to him a settler is worse than a mere zoological specimen. Let him be cast out in the winter, in the summer, who cares about him? Another professor, Arnon, once said that the Palestinians should aim their missiles at the settlements, saying it is bad that they fire into sovereign Israel and causes damage, so let them aim at the settlements! You see, to him, their blood was already fair game; if he could, he would have provided the coordinates. When a person's thinking is distorted, he is capable of treating an enemy or a terrorist with humanitarian compassion and mercy, and this inevitably comes at the expense of Torah-observant Jews, right-wingers, Charedim, his own brothers. You can hear them use the harshest epithets against observant Jews, settlers, and the right wing - horrific statements. You ask yourself: Is this an enlightened leftist? Uri Avnery once said, "They should be burned together with their beards." Truly full of compassion! Heaven forbid toward Hezbollah - with them one must negotiate and see where we failed, but Charedim should be burned with their beards! In short, this is systematic: when one's perspective is warped, there is no partial distortion; the corruption is absolute.
Verse 3: "לָכֵ֗ן יִֽהְי֞וּ כַּעֲנַן־בֹּ֙קֶר֙ וְכַטַּל֙ מַשְׁכִּ֣ים הֹלֵ֔ךְ כְּמֹ֕ץ יְסֹעֵ֖ר מִגֹּ֑רֶן וּכְעָשָׁ֖ן מֵאֲרֻבָּֽה - Therefore they shall be like the morning cloud and like the dew that vanishes early, like chaff driven by a whirlwind from the threshing floor, and like smoke from a lattice" (Hoshea 13:3). "Therefore they shall be like the morning cloud" - Hashem withholds good and blessing from them. They are compared to a morning cloud: the cloud brings rains of blessing, but then dissipates and disappears. So too, "like the dew that vanishes early" - even if there is dew and in the early morning you received a bit of moisture, it does not last long, but departs with the morning sun. Moreover, He will bring actual harm upon them and exile them. On this he says: "like chaff driven by a whirlwind from the threshing floor." At first they will be like chaff, the husk of the wheat, which a tempest sweeps away from the threshing floor while the grain remains. That is, initially the chaff will be exiled - the chaff being the wicked - while the good remain. Afterward, they will be "like smoke from a lattice" - just as smoke from a chimney or lattice sweeps away everything, so too they will be exiled completely. So explains the Malbim.
"וְאָנֹכִ֛י יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וֵאלֹהִ֤ים זוּלָתִי֙ לֹ֣א תֵדָ֔ע וּמוֹשִׁ֥יעַ אַ֖יִן בִּלְתִּֽי - Yet I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt, and you shall know no god but Me, and there is no savior besides Me" (Hoshea 13:4). "Yet I am the Lord your God" - Rashi comments: You had no right to rebel against Me. They deserve destruction, for since I am the Lord your God from the time I took you out of Egypt, you accepted Me as God, so what was appropriate? "You shall know no god but Me." It was fitting that you worship no god besides Me, since "there is no savior besides Me." Whom will you go worship? Who can save you other than Me?
The Malbim explains: This is addressed to what we saw earlier, where they claimed that Hakadosh Baruch Hu does not supervise them directly. They claimed that when they left Egypt, Moshe Rabbeinu led them - meaning they were guided through an intermediary. Therefore they argued: What is wrong with the calves? Today, too, we are guided through an intermediary! Just as Moshe took us out of Egypt back then, and "by a prophet Hashem brought Israel up from Egypt," so now we have set up the calves in place of the prophet to be the conduits of divine bounty. To this Hakadosh Baruch Hu now responds: "Yet I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt" - I took you out from there without any intermediary. And then, "you shall know no god but Me" - there was no other god there besides Me, no second deity. "And there is no savior besides Me" - no messenger was sent from Me to save you; rather, I saved you Myself, without any intermediary. "I, and not an angel; I, and not a seraph; I, and not an emissary - I Myself!" How then can you claim that I redeemed you through another power? We have already noted that in the Pesach Haggadah, the name of Moshe does not appear. The reason is precisely this: to emphasize that redemption came solely from Him, blessed be He, so that one should not say it occurred through other agents. "Yet I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt, and you shall know no god but Me, and there is no savior besides Me."
"אֲנִ֥י יְדַעְתִּ֖יךָ בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר בְּאֶ֖רֶץ תַּלְאֻבֽוֹת - I knew you in the wilderness, in the land of drought" (Hoshea 13:5). In the wilderness as well, after I took you out of Egypt, "I knew you." The concept of "knowing" always implies connection, as in "And Adam knew Chavah his wife" - an expression of intimate bond. "I knew you" means with full providence, providing for all your needs in a "land of drought (tala'uvot)" - a reality in which you could not have survived except through constant miracles, such as the miracle of the well, the pillar of cloud that accompanied them, and the manna that accompanied them. "I knew you in the wilderness" - I accompanied you intimately in a land of drought. What does "tala'uvot" mean? Rashi says it has no counterpart. What does it mean that a word has no counterpart (ein lo dimyon)? As we have explained, whenever one seeks to understand a word in Tanach, one looks for its "brother" in Scripture. The way to understand Scripture is by finding a parallel. For instance, if one does not know the meaning of a rare word, and sees elsewhere a verse combining it with a familiar term, one deduces the connection. This is done through a concordance - opening a concordance and finding verses where this word or its derivation appears, from which its meaning here can be understood. The great difficulty is interpreting words that have no brother, no companion, or no counterpart in Scripture. When there is no comparable word from which to draw an analogy, one must break the word down and examine its root. One commentator might say it resembles one root, another that it resembles a different root, resulting in differing interpretations. Let us take "tala'uvot" as an example: since it has no parallel in Scripture, we must break it down. Rashi says it means a mound (tel) where everything good is craved (avin) but cannot be found. "Tala'uvot" is composed of two concepts: "tel" (a mound or place) and "avah" (to desire or crave). "Avah" is with an alef or a vav, as in "Hashem will not desire (yoveh) to pardon him," or "evyon" (a destitute person), so called because he craves everything. So there is the element of craving. On the other hand, how does "tel" fit in? Rashi connects them: a place where all good things are craved, yet nothing is found - namely, the wilderness. "I knew you in the wilderness, in a land of tala'uvot." Furthermore, Scripture often repeats an idea in different words. While the Malbim notes that Scripture never repeats identically but always adds a distinct nuance, it nevertheless provides direction: since this relates to the wilderness, "eretz tala'uvot" relates to the desert, where one craves food, water, clothing, and anything else, but finds nothing. That is the explanation of "tala'uvot," and through this we also see the commentators' method in explaining difficult biblical terms.
"כְּמַרְעִיתָם֙ וַיִּשְׂבָּ֔עוּ שָׂבְע֖וּ וַיָּ֣רָם לִבָּ֑ם עַל־כֵּ֖ן שְׁכֵחֽוּנִי - When they were fed, they were satisfied; they were satisfied and their heart was haughty; therefore they have forgotten Me" (Hoshea 13:6). "When they were fed" - after I brought them from the wilderness into an inhabited land, to the Holy Land, they found pasture and were satisfied. Through their satiety, "Yeshurun grew fat and kicked." "They were satisfied and their heart was haughty" - their heart became conceited, as it is written, "and your heart will become haughty, and you will forget the Lord your God." "Therefore they have forgotten Me" - because of the haughtiness of their hearts, they forgot Hashem.
"וָאֱהִ֥י לָהֶ֖ם כְּמוֹ־שָׁ֑חַל כְּנָמֵ֖ר עַל־דֶּ֥רֶךְ אָשֽׁוּר - Therefore I will be to them like a lion; like a leopard I will watch by the way" (Hoshea 13:7). "Therefore I will be to them like a lion" - they forgot God's kindness and denied Hashem's goodness, says the Malbim; but notice: the misfortune that befell them they attributed to Hashem! Hakadosh Baruch Hu appeared to them like a predatory beast - like a lion (shachal), a leopard, a bear, or a lioness (lavi). We have mentioned this phenomenon before: when they experienced good, they attributed it to Baal, to the calves, to idolatry; but when things went badly, they claimed it was from Hashem. People sometimes speak this way today as well: when something good happens, someone says, "There was Siyata Dishmaya (Heavenly assistance) here" - meaning, I did the work, and Hashem helped a bit. But when something bad happens, he says, "It's all from Heaven, all from Heaven!" The misfortunes are placed entirely on Heaven, while he takes no responsibility; yet for the good, it was merely "assistance" to his own efforts. In the Prophets, however, the opposite is written: "Your own wickedness shall chastise you" (Yirmeyahu 2:19) - the evil that punishes you is the evil you yourself committed. "From the mouth of the Most High there does not come forth evil and good" (Eichah 3:38); rather, everything stems from man's own actions. At any rate, they forgot God's goodness, says the Malbim, and "I appeared to them like a lion, like a leopard, like a bear, and like a lioness." Why does the prophet highlight these four? Notice: shachal (lion) and namer (leopard) are in verse 7: "Therefore I will be to them like a lion; like a leopard I will watch by the way." Then in verse 8: "אֶפְגְּשֵׁם֙ כְּדֹ֣ב שַׁכּ֔וּל וְאֶקְרַ֖ע סְג֣וֹר לִבָּ֑ם וְאֹכְלֵ֥ם שָׁם֙ כְּלָבִ֔יא חַיַּ֥ת הַשָּׂדֶ֖ה תְּבַקְּעֵֽם - I will meet them like a bear bereaved of her cubs, and will rend the caul of their heart, and there I will devour them like a lion; the wild beast shall tear them" (Hoshea 13:8). Why did he use these four metaphors? The Malbim explains that they correspond to the four kingdoms that devastated them: The lion (shachal) corresponds to the kingdom of Babylon and Assyria; Daniel initially saw Babylon as a lion. The leopard corresponds to the kingdom of Greece; "like a leopard I will watch by the way" - it came along the way of the Land of Israel, not exiling them from their land but encroaching upon it: "a leopard watches over their cities." Afterward: "I will meet them like a bear bereaved of her cubs, and will rend the caul of their heart, and there I will devour them like a lion; the wild beast shall tear them." "Like a bear bereaved" corresponds to the second beast Daniel saw, "resembling a bear," which is the kingdom of Media/Persia; "and will rend the caul of their heart" took place in the days of Haman, when they opened their hearts and repented. "And there I will devour them like a lion" refers to the exile of Edom (Rome), the fourth beast, of which it is written, "it devoured and crushed, and stamped the residue with its feet" - that is, it devoured and pulverized everything, treading down whatever remained, leaving nothing. The Malbim explains: These kingdoms were the ones who afflicted them. Yet despite this, they imagined that I was the one devouring them. Hakadosh Baruch Hu says: They are mistaken! "The wild beast shall tear them" - meaning, I merely hid My face from them, and the wild beasts tore them because they abandoned the path of Hashem. It is not Hakadosh Baruch Hu who brings harm; Hakadosh Baruch Hu brings only good. If evil befalls you, it is because you abandoned Hashem and hid your face from Him, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu hid His face from you; and once He hides His face, all those troubles ensue on their own as a consequence of the evils you committed. To say that this came directly from Me, says Hakadosh Baruch Hu, is a complete distortion of reality.
The Malbim notes that there is a progression here: first, "Therefore I will be to them like a lion; like a leopard I will watch by the way; I will meet them like a bear bereaved of her cubs, and will rend the caul of their heart; there I will devour them like a lion; the wild beast shall tear them." Initially, it lurks by the path, observing from afar, and only afterward "I will meet them." Notice: "al derech ashur" is an expression of seeing (watching). As Rashi notes, whenever Ashur refers to the country of Assyria, the shin has a dagesh (אַשּׁוּר). Here it is written without a dagesh (אָשׁוּר). When "ashur" is without a dagesh, it means "I will gaze / I will watch," as in "I see him (ashurenu), but not now; I behold him, but not nigh" (Bemidbar 24:17), or "banot tza'adah alei shur" (Bereshit 49:22), referring to a high wall from which one gazes into the distance. Thus "ashur" means "I will watch." First, it is like a leopard watching by the way, waiting and ambushing along the road. The next stage is: "I will meet them like a bear bereaved of her cubs" - confronting them directly. Then: "there I will devour them" - devouring them right there in the cities like a lion. Then it divides the prey among the lionesses, and "the wild beast shall tear them" refers to the other beasts among whom the food is shared.
What is a "dov shakhol" (a bear bereaved of her cubs)? Rashi explains that "shakhol" here is an adjective of action, like "chanun ve-rachum" (gracious and merciful). What does "shakhol" mean? Like "shokeil" or "meshakeil" - one that deprives others of children (bereaving them), as in "there shall not be a bereaving (meshakeilah) or barren woman in your land." According to this, it does not mean the bear itself is bereaved, but rather that the bear slaughters their children; it is a bereaving bear. Radak, however, explains it according to its simple meaning, as we use the phrase today: when a bear's cubs have been killed, it is a bereaved bear, which is exceptionally dangerous.
It is capable of killing and causing horrific carnage. Thus He says: I will meet them like a bereaved bear - bitter of soul, swiftly destroying any person or animal it encounters. Radak asks: Why specifically a bereaved bear? Would not a bereaved leopard or a bereaved lion be even more ferocious? Radak explains: It is said that when a bear gives birth, the offspring is born like shapeless lumps of flesh, completely encased in a very thick placenta. The mother bear licks the placenta, biting it away little by little so as not to harm the cub, laboring with great exertion until all the casing is removed and the cub emerges. Because she exerted so much effort for it, she is far more bitter-hearted if it is killed. Therefore, a bear is far more enraged when its cub is killed because of the immense toil invested in it, which is why the verse specifically invokes the image of a bereaved bear.
"שִֽׁחֶתְךָ֥ יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל כִּֽי־בִ֥י בְעֶזְרֶֽךָ - You have destroyed yourself, O Israel, for in Me is your help" (Hoshea 13:9). "You have destroyed yourself, O Israel" - the Malbim explains: That which you are destroyed by the beasts of the field - as we saw above, like a leopard watching by the way, like a bereaved bear, like a lion, with the wild beast tearing them - and you claim, "Behold, Hashem is doing evil to us," Hashem replies to them: It is not I who am doing this; "You have destroyed yourself, O Israel!" It is your own corrupt ways that have destroyed you, bringing these evils upon you. "For in Me is your help" - what does this mean? As for your thinking that this reality of destruction comes from Me, saying "Hashem has harmed me," Hakadosh Baruch Hu says: Do you know why you think so? Because until now I was good to you; until now I was "in your help" - I bestowed bounty upon you. Therefore, the moment I merely withdraw My favor, all the troubles immediately rush in. And what do you then say? "Hashem has done me harm!" It is not that I actively harmed you; it is that until now I showed you goodness, and at a certain point I ceased doing so. Hakadosh Baruch Hu says: The misfortune has come entirely on your account. Whatever goodness you experienced until now was because I acted to benefit you: "You have destroyed yourself, O Israel," whereas what was good until now was "for in Me was your help." Since I no longer intend to sustain that help, destruction inevitably follows - through your own fault.