Psalm 2 opens with the question: "Why do the nations rage?" Before examining the meaning of the psalm, let us consider its placement. Radak explains that this psalm is designated as the second psalm, as found in all accurate manuscripts, and in the counting it is recorded as the second. Nevertheless, some of our Sages in Berachot (daf 9) state that "Ashrei ha'ish" (Psalm 1) and "Lamah ragshu goyim" (Psalm 2) are actually a single psalm. The Gemara there explains that every passage that was especially dear to David, he began with *ashrei* ("praiseworthy") and concluded with *ashrei*; here, he opened with "Ashrei ha'ish" and concluded with "Ashrei kol chosei vo" ("Praiseworthy are all who take refuge in Him") - which is the conclusion of Chapter 2. This implies that the Gemara views Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 as one combined psalm. Practically, however, as Radak writes, in all authoritative texts this marks the start of a distinct psalm, and it is counted as the second; therefore, it is regarded as Chapter 2.
To whom does the psalm refer? Rashi notes that our Sages expounded this matter as referring to the King Messiah: "Why do nations rage and peoples plot in vain?" when the Messiah arrives. However, Rashi himself suggests that it is more likely a psalm reflecting upon the events of David's own life: "And the Philistines heard that Israel had anointed David as king over them, and the Philistines gathered their camps" - they gathered to wage war against David, and in the end they fell into his hands. Concerning them David declares: Why do nations rage, why did they all assemble to wage war?
The Malbim links this psalm to the preceding chapter. There we saw the contrast between the righteous and the wicked: the righteous flourishes like a palm tree, while the wicked are like chaff driven by the wind. We saw that the wicked have no ultimate endurance, and that the only hope for the wicked is when they serve as a "guardian of the grain" - the grain represents the substance, while the chaff is the outer husk protecting it. But chaff without grain is blown away by the wind; it has no weight, it is insubstantial, and the wind scatters it. Regarding this, David comes and asks: Why do the nations rage to rebel against King David, the anointed of Hashem, and against Israel His people? After all, their only endurance lies in serving Hashem and serving David, His king - that alone guarantees their existence.
לָמָּה רָגְשׁוּ גוֹיִם וּלְאֻמִּים יֶהְגּוּ רִיק׃ - Why do nations gather in tumult, and peoples meditate in vain?
What is the difference between *ragshu* ("rage" or "gather in tumult") and *yehgu* ("meditate" or "plot"), and between *goyim* ("nations") and *le'umim* ("peoples")? The Malbim explains on several occasions that there is a fundamental distinction between *goyim* and *le'umim*. A *goy* is an aggregate of people, a general population, whether or not they share a unifying religion. By contrast, *le'umim* refers to those who are unified under a single religion. For example, Iran could be described as a *le'om* because they are united under Islam. America, on the other hand, would be termed a *goy*, since many religions exist there, and even though Christianity may be the predominant faith, it is nonetheless classified as a *goy*. Similarly, less cohesive populations are called *goyim*.
The Malbim explains that the conspiracy forged against David operated on two fronts. One front was resistance to his political rule, not wishing for him to govern them. The second front was resistance to religious authority, meaning resistance to the mitzvot. This is the meaning of "against Hashem and against His anointed": "Against Hashem" - because they refused to accept the Seven Noahide Mitzvot, as David obligated them to keep Hashem's commandments; "and against His anointed" - because they refused to accept David's sovereign rule. They sought to cast off both the civil yoke and the religious yoke accompanying David's kingdom. Therefore, they approach both as *goyim* and as *le'umim*. The *le'om* acts on the religious front, which is why it says of them *yehgu rik* ("they meditate in vain") - for *higiyon* denotes the calculated thoughts they conceived to undermine religion. The *goyim*, by contrast, are primarily concerned with political sovereignty, and so of them it says *ragshu* ("they gather in tumult") - emotion and clamor are attributed to them. They are less sophisticated and less profound; whereas the religious ideologues, who already possess a structured way of worshipping what they perceive as deity, are thinkers who formulate plans and strategies to throw off the yoke.
יִתְיַצְּבוּ מַלְכֵי אֶרֶץ וְרוֹזְנִים נוֹסְדוּ יָחַד עַל ה' וְעַל מְשִׁיחוֹ׃ - The kings of the earth take their stand, and rulers conspire together, against Hashem and against His anointed.
The Malbim explains that sometimes a king rebels against another monarch - as Tzidkiyahu rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar - and the people follow his lead. At other times, a rebellion begins in reverse: it starts with the populace, the people rebel against the ruler who dominates them, and the king is drawn after them and joins the conspiracy. This dynamic applies when both a nation and its king are subjugated to a foreign ruler. For instance, in the case of Tzidkiyahu, who was subjugated to Nebuchadnezzar, it could have been a situation where the populace grew weary of Nebuchadnezzar's dominion and initiated a revolt, with Tzidkiyahu following along; in reality, it was the reverse - Tzidkiyahu initiated the rebellion and the people followed. Thus, there are two possibilities for where a rebellion originates. Here, Scripture indicates that this uprising emerged from both directions simultaneously: "Why do nations rage" - from the common people, and "the kings of the earth take their stand, and rulers..." - from the leadership. Both the kings and rulers rebel, and the populace itself refuses to accept David's kingship.
And what is the meaning of "conspire together" (*nosdu yachad*)? The Malbim explains that the *roznim* ("rulers") are the counselors of state who advise the king on religious matters; therefore, Scripture uses the word *nosdu*, related to *sod* (secret counsel), meaning they took counsel in confidence. "Conspire together" indicates that they held secret deliberations on how to wage war. And the rebellion is twofold: "against Hashem" - in that they refuse to accept His religion, "and against His anointed" - in that they refuse to accept David's reign.
נְנַתְּקָה אֶת מוֹסְרוֹתֵימוֹ וְנַשְׁלִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ עֲבֹתֵימוֹ׃ - "Let us snap their bands and cast away their cords from us."
What is the difference between bands (mosrot) and cords (avotot)? The Malbim explains that avotot are stronger than mosrot, as their names imply: mosrot are the simple bindings used to tie an animal (from the root asar, to bind), while avotot are thick, braided ropes, as Chazal teach: a braided cord consists of no fewer than three strands wound together. Thus, avotot are considerably stronger. Flimsier bands can be snapped and torn, but thick braided cords cannot easily be broken; therefore, those must be cast off from the neck. This is the meaning of "Let us snap their bands and cast away their cords from us": the cords that are too strong for us to snap, we will cast off our necks entirely.
The deeper meaning is that they seek to cast off their yoke in both respects. In matters of religion: the mitzvot that have no apparent rationale, the chukim (statutes) which they feel they can argue against, correspond to the weaker "bands," which they intend to snap; whereas the rational mitzvot (mishpatim), which are stronger because intellect compels them and their reasons are clear, they will simply cast behind their backs - "and cast away their cords from us." And in matters of subjugation, since they refused to remain subjects of David, they resolved to throw off his yoke and rid themselves of King David's authority by violating the covenant and the oath through which they had obligated themselves to observe his commands.
יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׂחָק אֲדֹנָי יִלְעַג לָמוֹ׃ - "He Who sits in heaven laughs; the Lord derides them."
The Malbim explains that to understand these verses properly, one must read them as follows: "Why do nations gather... the kings of the earth take their stand, and rulers conspire together" - and despite all this, "He Who sits in heaven laughs"? King David is asking: Why? Why do nations gather, why do kings of the earth take their stand and rulers conspire together against Hashem and against His anointed, while He Who sits in heaven laughs, doing nothing to stop them and exacting no retribution from them? This concludes the question. Here begins the answer: "The Lord derides them" - this laughter is not benevolence; it is sheer derision.
What is the deeper idea here? Scripture says, "Better is anger than laughter" (Kohelet 7:3) - better is the anger that the Holy One, blessed be He, directs at the righteous in this world than the laughter He directs toward the wicked. For on a simple level, laughter toward the wicked appears as though God is smiling upon them, giving the impression that all goes well for them here. Yet the anger Hashem directs toward the righteous is far better for them than the radiant, smiling countenance He appears to show the wicked.
The Malbim adds a fascinating psychological insight: laughter is unique among all attributes. In all other traits, the state of the initiator and the recipient correspond. When one acts toward another, both align: when one is angry and exacting toward another, the recipient's face also falls and he receives punishment; when one acts mercifully, the other is comforted; when one gladdens another, both share in the joy. But when someone laughs at another, the one laughing is pleased and cheerful, while the target of the laughter feels humiliated and downcast, shamed by the mockery. There is no symmetry between the initiator and the recipient.
The Malbim uses this to illustrate the success of the wicked. One might say: Look, Hashem is smiling upon the wicked! True, but one forgets that with laughter, the experience of the actor and the recipient are polar opposites. Hashem seems to smile upon them, but for them it is actually shame and disgrace. Their measure of guilt is steadily filling, and when the blow finally lands, it will be devastating, for the Holy One, blessed be He, preserves their full reckoning for the World of Truth. A prime example is Haman: Hashem seemingly smiled upon him and shone His face toward him, elevating him higher and higher until he became viceroy to the king. As Chazal expound on the verse, "He elevates nations and destroys them" (Iyov 12:23) - Hashem raises a person high specifically to bring about his destruction. If something falls from a low height, the impact is minimal; raise it extremely high, and the crash is shattering. That is why the anger Hashem shows the righteous is better than the laughter He shows the wicked: Hashem laughs, but the wicked will soon weep. It may seem that all is well with him, but Hashem will suddenly magnify his punishment once his measure is full, as it is written: "Your mother shall be utterly ashamed... behold, the end of the nations shall be a wilderness, a parched land, and a desert" (Yirmeyahu 50:12) - in the end their true shame is revealed, for nothing remains of them but desolation.
Notice, too, the precise use of Divine Names in the verse. At first it says, "He Who sits in heaven," which implies concealment: Hashem remains hidden, secluded in heaven. This is the premise of the question: the Holy One, blessed be He, seems hidden from us, while the wicked prosper and God seemingly smiles upon them. The answer follows: "The Lord (Adonai) derides them" - using the name of Mastership (Adnut). If "He Who sits in heaven" represented concealment, Scripture comes to tell us: know that in the end, this is Divine mockery. The Holy One, blessed be He, holds them in derision, which is an expression of His sovereignty. When Hashem reveals His absolute mastery over the world, it will become evident that this laughter was never for their benefit, but for their downfall, and this derision will lead directly to their ruin.
אָז יְדַבֵּר אֵלֵימוֹ בְאַפּוֹ וּבַחֲרוֹנוֹ יְבַהֲלֵמוֹ׃ - Then He will speak to them in His wrath, and terrify them in His fury.
The Radak explains: When He hears the arrogant words of the nations - how the nations rage and the peoples meditate emptiness - He will speak to them in His wrath and terrify them in His fury. And what is this speech? Through the fury and the wrath - through this He expresses what He wishes to say to them. Do not imagine that there will be some separate verbal speech here. This is comparable to someone who is provoked by another and says, "I will deal with him (literally, 'I will speak to him')" - and how did he speak? He struck him with a slap; that was the speech. One is not encouraging violence, Heaven forbid, but rather it is like what we find regarding the rock, where Hashem told Moshe to speak to the rock. Many commentators explain that Moshe's sin was not in striking it, for to a human being one speaks, whereas a rock one strikes, and his sin was something else entirely - "Listen now, you rebels," and other factors. At any rate, we see that there is speech expressed in a different language. Others explain that "yedabber" is related to *dever* (pestilence), as in "and destroyed (*vattedabber*) all the royal seed," meaning that Hashem will strike them with pestilence in His wrath.
"Eleimo" (to them) - similar to *eilei ha'aretz* (the mighty of the land), the powerful, for the root *el* denotes strength. And the Malbim explains: "Then" (*Az*) - when you witness the fierce wrath with which Hashem punishes them, then He will, as it were, speak to them, as we will see in the next verse. *Charon* denotes the flare of anger and its tangible effect; when *charon af* is written, it signifies an action that leaves an unmistakable mark, as in "And Hashem's anger burned against them, and He departed" - and what happened? She was stricken with tzara'at. When anger (*af*) is mentioned, it brings a tangible consequence.
וַאֲנִי נָסַכְתִּי מַלְכִּי עַל צִיּוֹן הַר קָדְשִׁי׃ - But as for Me, I have anointed My king upon Zion, My holy mountain.
What is this speech? Hashem says to them: You gather tumultuously to rise and rebel against David? You wish to cast off the yoke of the House of David? At that very time - "As for Me, I have anointed My king." *Nasachti* denotes elevation, like *nesichei Sichon* (the princes of Sichon), and also refers to pouring (*nesichah*) the anointing oil upon the head of one appointed as king. That is to say: precisely through your rebellion against him, it will become manifest that David's anointing is from Me, to rule over Zion, My holy mountain.
אֲסַפְּרָה אֶל חֹק ה' אָמַר אֵלַי בְּנִי אַתָּה אֲנִי הַיּוֹם יְלִדְתִּיךָ׃ - I will tell of the decree: Hashem said to me, "You are My son; today I have begotten you."
The Malbim explains: Just as there are constitutions and statutes for governing a state, so too are there laws and customs governing relations between nations. The term *dat* here does not mean religion in the sense of observing mitzvot, but rather the civil laws by which a country is governed, as well as global, universal conventions observed among states. The Malbim noted this when we studied the narrative of Yiftach and the war waged against him, explaining that there is an international law that a nation or king may not invade the borders of another nation without sufficient justification. That is, a king cannot wage war against another nation without a justified casus belli; he cannot simply do so on a whim. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, he aroused the entire world against him. Granted, in that instance it troubled them because Kuwait possessed oil, which added a few cents to the average American's weekly fuel fill-up, but generally speaking, nations object when one country attacks and conquers another. Not always, of course: when Israel is the one under attack, they are usually indifferent, but when we do something that appears to infringe upon someone else's sovereignty, the Security Council convenes immediately and condemnations are promptly issued. Thus, they too violate the ethical rules of conduct between nations. At any rate, we see from here that laws and established rules exist among nations as well.
King David says: But as for me, when I go forth to conquer nations and shake kingdoms, "I will tell of the decree (*asapperah el chok*)" - I relate the law and statute given to me by Hashem. The Malbim explains that *el* here functions like *et*: "I will recount the decree." This means that by recounting these matters, I establish them as binding law, like the laws of nations. And who is the Lawgiver? The Holy One, blessed be He, and the law was given to me by Him. For "the earth and all it contains belongs to Hashem"; at His will He gave it to them, and at His will He took it from them and gave it to us, as we maintain regarding our rights to the Land, and in the words of Chazal so that the nations not say, "You are robbers, for you conquered the lands of the seven nations" - for the Holy One, blessed be He, created the earth and gave it to whomever was upright in His eyes.
And what is this decree? "Hashem said to me, 'You are My son; today I have begotten you.'" The Holy One, blessed be He, says: Now that the nations come and gather tumultuously to rebel against David - I have begotten you and granted you dominion over all; I have given you sovereign authority over everything you conquer, like a son who manages his father's estate. And this is the meaning of "As for Me, I have anointed My king" - the Holy One, blessed be He, anointed me as king and gave me the authority to act, and that very action I take stems from the decree of Hashem. Therefore, you have no legitimate claim against me as to why I go out to battle against you: at His will He gave it to you, and when the time arrived, He took it from you and gave it to us.
Incidentally, if it has already been said, "You are My son," what is the need to add, "today I have begotten you"? After all, if someone is a son, he was already fathered. The Malbim explains this in several places where we find similar expressions, such as "and she bore... and he became her son," or "your father who begot you," "your mother who bore you." For often a father and mother act merely as guardians - they did not give birth to the child, but merely raised him as foster parents. Therefore, Scripture comes to teach: here, I am not a father to an adopted son; rather, "today I have begotten you" in the most essential sense - representing an intrinsic, absolute bond between us and the Holy One, blessed be He.
שְׁאַל מִמֶּנִּי וְאֶתְּנָה גוֹיִם נַחֲלָתֶךָ וַאֲחֻזָּתְךָ אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ׃ - Ask of Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, and the ends of the earth your possession.
Hashem says: Ask whatever you wish; just ask and request, and I will give you the nations and their lands as an inheritance, like a son inheriting his father's estate. And not just as an inheritance, but also "and the ends of the earth your possession." What is the difference between an inheritance (nachalah) and a possession (achuzah)? The Malbim explains: An achuzah is that which a person actually holds in his grasp, whereas a nachalah is what he has inherited by right. You might inherit an estate in Australia, but it is not an achuzah - you are not there and you do not physically hold the property, even if it is legally registered in your name. Here David says: Not only did the Holy One, blessed be He, give it to me as an inheritance, but also as an achuzah - it is directly under my hand, for I hold and conquer even unto the ends of the earth, even in distant places. Just as we find with David, who conquered parts of Syria and incorporated them as part of Eretz Yisrael. Here, then, is one decree the Holy One, blessed be He, granted me as a son: He gave me an inheritance, and this inheritance will also become an actual possession, even in the far reaches that are the ends of the earth.
תְּרֹעֵם בְּשֵׁבֶט בַּרְזֶל כִּכְלִי יוֹצֵר תְּנַפְּצֵם׃ - You shall break them with an iron rod; like a potter's vessel you shall shatter them.
The Holy One, blessed be He, says to me regarding the nations: "You shall break them (tero'em) with an iron rod." What is the difference between breaking (lero'ea) and shattering (lenapetz)? The Malbim explains: Lero'ea means to make something shaky or unstable (ra'u'a) - the object was strong, and I cracked it and destabilized it. If I subsequently take a hammer and smash it into small pieces, that is called tenaptzem (you shall shatter them), which is always the stage that follows tero'em.
From here we also understand the general concept of ra (bad or damaged). Thus we find in the words of Chazal regarding the month of Av that rei'a mazlei, which does not mean that its fortune is inherently "bad" - for strictly speaking there is no inherently good or bad fortune - but rather that its fortune is unstable (ra'u'a). When fortune is strong, Chazal say bari mazlei, meaning firm and powerful; and when fortune is weakened, it is unstable (ra'u'a) - something one cannot lean upon, for if you try to lean on it, you will fall.
This also sheds light on the word rei'im (friends or companions). On the surface, this is astonishing: ra (broken or bad) and rea (a friend) share the exact same root letters! How can it be that in the Holy Tongue, two concepts so essentially different stem from the very same root? As we explained, ra fundamentally derives from lero'ea, meaning not something intrinsically negative, but rather to weaken or fracture. Therefore, when a person wishes to attain the status of rei'im ahuvim (beloved companions), to bond with someone in a truly exclusive and profound connection - whether in forming a bond with a true, loyal friend, or in marriage, which is the ultimate bond - he must loosen and weaken (lero'ea) his other friendships and ties. I cannot be your best friend while simultaneously being his best friend and another's best friend; if so, I am not truly your best friend. Nor can a husband be married to a wife who is the center of his world while maintaining equal focus on this woman and that person and that interest. If a husband tells his wife every evening that he is going out with friends, at some point she will tell him: "Do not come back; stay with your friends." When a person marries, he understands that he must loosen other friendships, and through that, the bond at home becomes strong and enduring.
It emerges that all true companionship (re'ut) inherently involves hitro'a'ut - loosening and weakening other bonds - and through this, an absolute connection is formed with one's true friend. This is also the nature of our connection to the Holy One, blessed be He: in order to bond with Him, one must loosen all other attachments. At the highest levels, a person holds no attachment to physical materialism, but solely to Hashem, blessed be He; and at foundational levels, he must not serve idols, even through association (shituf), but remain devoted solely to Hashem, blessed be He. For to connect truly to one entity always means loosening other ties.
The psalm opens with wonder at the rebellion of the nations against Hashem and His anointed - a dual rebellion against the yoke of religion and the yoke of monarchy, an uprising stemming both from the agitated populace and from the kings and rulers conspiring together. They seek to snap the light bonds and cast off the heavy cords, and David asks: Why does the One Who sits in heaven laugh and not exact retribution immediately? The answer is that this laughter is derision, for in derision the actor rejoices while the target is shamed and disgraced - "He makes nations great, and destroys them," and the temporary success of the wicked is merely preparation for their downfall. "Yet I have consecrated My king" - their very rebellion reveals that David's anointing is from Hashem, and this is the decree that David recounts: "You are My son," a bond akin to an actual father and son. By virtue of this bond, "Ask of Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance" - both an inheritance and an actual possession unto the ends of the earth; "You shall break them with an iron rod" at first, and "like a potter's vessel you shall shatter them" in the end. And from the root of tero'em we learned a profound principle: all genuine companionship (re'ut) requires the loosening (hitro'a'ut) of outside ties, and the same holds true for our devotion to Hashem, blessed be He.