Chapter 58 is a continuation of David HaMelech's rebuke toward those who surrounded Shaul and slandered David before him, those hypocrites and flatterers who turned the king's heart against him. In the portion before us, David addresses the question of where a liar originates, compares slanderers to a serpent that bites without deriving any pleasure, and finally prays that the Holy One, blessed be He, break their instruments of destruction.
זֹרוּ רְשָׁעִים מֵרָחֶם תָּעוּ מִבֶּטֶן דֹּבְרֵי כָזָב׃ - The wicked are estranged from the womb; speakers of falsehood go astray from birth.
Rashi explains "zoru" as being related to zarim (strangers): from their mother's womb they become estranged from the Holy One, blessed be He. How is such a thing possible already from the mother's womb? Rashi explains: in the manner of Esav, who, while still in his mother's womb, would struggle to emerge whenever she passed a house of idol worship. In addition, "zoru" also carries the meaning of winnowing and scattering - from that very point, they are scattered and driven away.
The Gemara cites this verse regarding the pregnant woman who craved forbidden food on Yom Kippur; they whispered to her that today is Yom Kippur, but she was not influenced by the whisper and was compelled to eat. From her came Shabtai, the hoarder of produce, an evil man, and regarding him it was said: "The wicked are estranged from the womb." In contrast, another woman who was whispered to, and whose craving subsided as a result of the whisper - from her came Rabbi Yochanan, and regarding him it was said: "Before I formed you in the belly I knew you," for his greatness was already discernible from the womb.
The holy Alshich explains that David HaMelech is saying here: Until now, I spoke about the silence - why did you not tell Shaul that he ought to be grateful to me for sparing his life and not killing him when I had opportunities, instead of continuing to pursue me? Now I come to address something even graver: that they further mocked and claimed, "Why is David making up stories? The corner of the cloak was not cut off by his hand at all; it was torn by a thornbush, and he merely found it and is now fabricating tales!"
And why is this called "speakers of falsehood" - perhaps that is what they genuinely believed? The Alshich says: That is impossible, for the difference between the clean cut of a knife or shears and the ragged tear of a brier (a thornbush, as in "like the crackling of nettles [sirah]") is clearly discernible to the eye. A tear from a thorn is plainly jagged and destructive, whereas a cut with shears or a sharp knife is visibly a deliberate, calculated cut that does not occur on its own. It turns out, then, that when they claimed, "It was torn by a thorn," they were not mistaken; rather, they deliberately fabricated a tale knowing full well that they were lying. These are "speakers of falsehood."
Over this David wondered: Where does such falsehood stem from? How does it happen that a person is so callous of heart as to speak outright lies? If you say that there are traits a person inherits by nature from his father, from the disposition of his conception in the womb - to this David replies that this is untenable. For regarding matters of immorality, one could indeed say that the child inherited this from his father's actions, as it is of that very nature: a union conducted without holiness engenders flaws of unholiness in the son, and the offspring reflects the spirit of the union. As the prophet Hoshea said, "They have betrayed Hashem, for they have fathered alien children" - in what did they betray Him? In the very union that took place through promiscuity or in an improper manner, and therefore "they have fathered alien children." But how could a child be born with a defect in justice and honesty, so as to become a speaker of falsehood? The father's unfaithfulness in his union does not relate to this trait, and whatever impropriety the father committed does not create a deceitful child.
Therefore, says the Alshich, "The wicked are estranged from the womb" - this I understand, for wickedness is generally a defect in sanctity, and they became estranged in their deeds from the womb. But "speakers of falsehood go astray from birth" - that they should become liars on account of the womb? That is astonishing. From where does such a speaker of falsehood emerge? It cannot possibly stem from the womb.
The Malbim explains that those hypocrites and flatterers, who come to flatter Shaul in order to find favor in his eyes and feed him tales, are worse than openly wicked people. Why? Because the wicked "are estranged from the womb" - and the Malbim explains "from the womb" to mean from after the womb; from birth onward they turned to wickedness. It is not as we explained until now, that it meant from inside the womb itself, but rather after birth. Whereas "speakers of falsehood go astray from the belly" - these went astray already in their mother's womb, even before they were born.
The meaning of this is that wickedness is not natural to man, but acquired. Human nature tends toward justice, and wickedness comes to a person later on through bad friends, neighbors, teachers, and the like - and this is the danger of bad company, which causes more damage than anything else. A young child naturally has faith, and talks to the Holy One, Blessed be He, even if he is far from religious life, even if he is secular: "My God, I wanted You to know about a dream I had tonight in bed." Where does this go? When he grows a bit, he begins to acquire corrupted viewpoints, to acquire desires, to acquire wickedness - and then he acts wickedly.
However, with masters of falsehood, this trait is ingrained within them. It is astonishing, and one can see this even in children: there is a child in whom you see from a young age that he is a chronic liar; deceit is his nature. This does not mean that one cannot address it or educate him - there are ways to do so - but with falsehood, you do not find people saying, "He lied, so I lie too." In matters of wickedness and immorality, a person learns from others: just as that person steals, he steals; just as that person acts immorally, he acts immorally. But being an honest person or a liar generally stems from human nature. One can see a single family where all the children were raised the exact same way, yet one of them has a propensity to lie: about everything, whether there is a need or no need, with a reason or without a reason, he will always say things that are untrue. Two people were in the exact same place and witnessed the same incident, and suddenly he adds details that never occurred. Why? It is in his nature. And from where does this nature come? "From the womb" - while the fetus was still in its mother's womb, this already became second nature to him, and he was born with it from there.
חֲמַת לָמוֹ כִּדְמוּת חֲמַת נָחָשׁ כְּמוֹ פֶתֶן חֵרֵשׁ יַאְטֵם אָזְנוֹ׃ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִשְׁמַע לְקוֹל מְלַחֲשִׁים חוֹבֵר חֲבָרִים מְחֻכָּם׃ - Their venom is like the venom of a serpent; like a deaf cobra that stops its ear, which will not heed the voice of charmers, or the most skillful caster of spells.
"Chamat" denotes something burning, a burning wrath (cheimah). And what is the wrath of a snake? It is its venom. They, too, possess venom, and they kill people with their venom just as a snake kills and harms with its venom. "Like a deaf cobra" - they are like the peten, a type of snake, which is deaf.
What is this deafness? Rashi explains: as a snake grows old, it becomes deaf in one ear, and when it does not wish to hear, it plugs the other ear with dust, pressing it against the ground. And what does it refuse to hear? "Which will not heed the voice of charmers." In those days, when people wanted to neutralize a snake, their practice was to bring a snake charmer who knew how to whisper a certain charm to the snake, thereby immobilizing it so it would not harm anyone. When describing a dangerous snake against which no countermeasure works, Scripture says, "which will not heed the voice of charmers" - even if you bring a snake charmer, it does not hear: one ear is already deaf, and the other is sealed with dust. In such a state, the snake is exceedingly dangerous, for there is no one who can subdue it.
"A caster of spells, however skillful" - the person whispering the charm was called a chover, which is why it says chover chavarim. And no matter how wise and expert he may be in his craft and his charms, the snake will not hear.
Here is an interesting fact: most snakes are deaf, and perhaps all of them. Sometimes people shout and make noise to scare a snake away, but the snake does not hear at all - "like a deaf cobra that stops its ear." You might ask: if so, how does an Indian snake charmer play a flute to a snake in a basket, causing it to rise and sway? The answer is that this is not due to the sound of the flute, but due to its motion: the snake sees the flute swaying back and forth, and rises in response. A snake's eyesight is keen. Moreover, when a snake attacks, it is primarily when it senses movement - and not only through sight, but it also detects motion with its tongue. With its tongue it smells and senses vibrations; it functions as its compass. When a person moves, the snake detects him, but if a person remains frozen in place, the snake does not notice him at all and treats him like a wall or a boulder. Therefore, when facing a snake, the most crucial thing is to stand completely still; the moment you move, the snake interprets it as an attack, which can be extremely dangerous.
Radak notes the precise nuance of the word kidmut ("in the likeness of"): their wickedness is recognizable on their faces. At times you see an angry person and it looks as though fire is shooting from him, "for a fire has flared in My wrath" - he becomes completely inflamed, turning red with fury as though steam were rising from him. This is "kidmut": look at their countenance, and you will see that they discharge venom from their mouths and faces when enraged, like a snake spitting venom.
Incidentally, it is written in the holy books that one is forbidden to look at an angry person, because at that moment the Sitra Achra (the forces of impurity) dominates him, and anyone looking at him can be harmed. This runs contrary to human instinct: when someone flies into a rage and loses control, everyone stares, waiting to see what he will do next. In truth, one must do the exact opposite - this is where guarding one's eyes is essential: turn your back and do not look at him, realizing that gazing at such a sight is toxic and spiritually damaging.
Radak continues: having compared them to a snake, he compared them to the harshest of the species, the most dangerous of all snakes, which is the deaf cobra. And why is it so dangerous? Because any other snake can be controlled through charming, but here no charm will help, because it stops up its ear.
The holy Alshich connects this to what Chazal expounded on the verse in Koheles: "If the snake bites without a charm, there is no advantage to the master of the tongue" (as discussed at length in the study of Sefer Koheles). They say to the snake: A lion claws and eats, a wolf tears its prey and eats, but you - what pleasure do you derive? Every predatory animal acts in order to eat. A person or a doe can walk right past a lion and he will not harm them at all, because he is sated. Only when he is hungry does he claw and eat, and he does not "snack" - if he is not hungry, he does not attack. The snake, however, sometimes strikes and moves on; occasionally it strikes to eat, but often that is not the case - it strikes and goes on its way, not for food at all. What pleasure do you derive?
And how does the snake reply? Instead of raising difficulties against me, go ask the master of the tongue - "and there is no advantage to the master of the tongue." It is the exact same thing: a person speaks lashon hara, but what pleasure does he derive? What did you gain?
The underlying idea, as the Baalei Mussar explain, is that any situation where you want to stand taller than your fellow can be achieved in two ways. One is to climb onto a table; then you are tall and he remains low. The second is to place your hand on his head and push him down; once again, you are taller. And what is the difference? In the first way, I actually became tall in reality, acquiring a virtue; in the second, I remained the exact same height, only I brought him low. In the same way, a person can gain superiority over his fellow in two ways: by acquiring true merit - being a person of truth, performing mitzvos, drawing close to Hashem, learning Torah - and then one has acquired intrinsic substance and is naturally elevated above everyone else. But there is another, easier path, since the first is difficult, long, and demanding: "Who is he? He is worth nothing," "Who is that one? Don't get me started on what I know about him," and so on with a third - and automatically I have lowered everyone, leaving you to figure out on your own who the real man is here. Notice: I do not need to invest anything in myself; the only investment is to bring down the other person. And that is precisely the snake: "there is no advantage to the master of the tongue" - he gained no superior merit of his own; he merely degraded others.
Based on this, David HaMelech says: "Their venom is like the venom of a serpent" - what pleasure do they get? When Avner tells Shaul that the robe was torn on a thorn, what did you gain by that? You caused immense harm to David and stoked the flames - Shaul had already calmed down, and you poured fuel on the fire. And if you say that this fuel is good and brings you benefit, what benefit did you receive? Did you become king? Were you appointed to a higher rank than what you already had, commander of Shaul's army? Will you reign after Shaul as a result? What did you get out of this? This is precisely David's argument: just as the snake strikes, degrades others, and kills with no benefit to itself, so too with you - you bit without any pleasure, you earned no points with Shaul, and you did not become his successor.
David adds: if only they were like an ordinary snake, for one can still manage with snakes, since a snake responds to a charmer's whisper. But they are worse than a snake, for they are "like a deaf cobra that stops its ear, which will not listen to the voice of charmers" - they cannot be influenced. I have no way of creating a reality in which Avner will accept the truth from me, and there is no charm that can extinguish the blaze he ignites.
The Malbim explains that the snake bites man without deriving any pleasure, and where does this stem from? From the ancient enmity: "And I will put enmity between you and man... he will strike your head, and you will strike his heel." The snake is afraid, and a moment before you crush its head, it pre-empts you by striking your heel. In this way, David HaMelech depicts the venom of slanderers: they fear lest I do them harm, so they anticipate the blow with venom before the blow, rushing to bite and speak lashon hara about me, and that is their bite.
However, David says, an ordinary snake heeds a charm and does not harm. What is the meaning of the charm? The Malbim explains allegorically: it is as if the charmer says to the snake, "Do not fear man; man is not coming to pursue you. If you do not seek out man, man will not seek you out - for people do not go into the fields looking for snakes just to step on them." Thus, a snake can be rationally persuaded not to fear man, and consequently it will not rush to strike him.
Accordingly, David HaMelech says, it would have been fitting for them to heed a charm as well: after all, I demonstrated it to them by cutting the corner of the robe, and I demonstrated it to them with the water jug and the spear - all of these were a form of charm, saying to them: See that David seeks no harm against you, just as one tells a snake that man seeks no harm against it. Here, everything is explained and shown to you - yet even so, they are "like a deaf cobra that stops its ear and will not heed the voice of charmers," even when a "skillful caster of charms" whispers to them. And what is a "skillful caster of charms"? Not just anyone, but the leading expert in his field, who comes to charm the snake - yet with a cobra, this does not work. David says: I brought the very best proof; is there any stronger evidence than the cutting of the corner of the robe, which clearly shows a deliberate cut, or the episode of the water jug and the spear, which speak for themselves? There is a skillful charmer here, offering the most compelling arguments - yet they stop up their ears against receiving the charm.
אֱלֹהִים הֲרָס שִׁנֵּימוֹ בְּפִימוֹ מַלְתְּעוֹת כְּפִירִים נְתֹץ ה'׃ - O God, break their teeth in their mouth; shatter the molars of the young lions, Hashem.
The Radak explains that since David HaMelech previously stated, "their teeth are spears and arrows" (chapter 57, verse 5), comparing the enemies' teeth to spears and arrows, he now asks the Holy One, Blessed be He, to uproot them: "Break their teeth in their mouth" - those very teeth that are like spears and arrows, destroy them in their mouth, so that through their evil speech they will not harm me nor prevail over me.
Malte'ot are the coarse teeth, the molars. "Shatter the molars of the young lions, Hashem" - even those, which are like the molars of young lions (for they tear their prey like young lions), break them, and may the Holy One, Blessed be He, shatter the molars of the young lions.
The Malbim explains that David compares their lashon hara to teeth: just as a beast seizes prey with its incisors and crushes (meaning grinds) the prey with its molars - for the front teeth seize and the molars grind - so David asks that Hashem break their front teeth so they cannot grasp prey and will not seize me; and if I am already in their mouth, may He shatter their molars so they cannot grind me down and destroy me. The Malbim adds that in Lashon HaKodesh, harisah (breaking) denotes tearing down a complete structure and dismantling it from its joined state, whereas netitzah (shattering) means smashing that which is already broken and crumbling it into small pieces and fragments.
On the words "Break their teeth in their mouth," the Maharitz Dushinsky cites the Gemara in Arachin (15b), which teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, placed two walls around the tongue - a wall of teeth and a wall of lips - so that the tongue would not emerge and speak lashon hara. David HaMelech says: Master of the Universe, here I see that the barrier has failed; the teeth did not stop them, and they continue speaking lashon hara against me. If so, it is not an effective barrier, and therefore, "Break their teeth in their mouth" - for them, teeth are superfluous, since they no longer function as a barrier.
Notice that the verse begins, "O God (Elohim), break their teeth," and concludes, "shatter... Hashem." Why mention that this should be done through both the name Elohim and the name of Hashem? The name Elohim always indicates strict justice (Din), while the four-letter Name represents the attribute of mercy (Rachamim). Yet there are times when we see that even from the attribute of mercy, the Holy One, Blessed be He, brings about something that appears harmful, as in "And Hashem rained upon Sodom" - it does not say "and Elohim rained," but "and Hashem."
The reason is that when the attribute of mercy agrees with the attribute of justice to bring punishment, it is a sign that the retribution is undeniably deserved. Sometimes, from the perspective of mercy, it would be fitting to show compassion, but the attribute of justice prevails, and punishment follows. However, when both the name Elohim and the Name of Hashem are mentioned, it means their punishment is so clear and justified that even the attribute of mercy demands that judgment be executed against them. Furthermore, often judgment itself stems from mercy: a surgeon operates on a person out of mercy; one might say they are causing him pain, but in truth, it is mercy, for they operate out of compassion to grant him life. Thus, even the attribute of mercy demands retribution against them and calls for the fulfillment of David HaMelech's plea; therefore, the verse says, "O God (Elohim), break their teeth," followed by "shatter... Hashem."
In these verses, David HaMelech reveals the true nature of the slanderers surrounding Shaul: wickedness is acquired through poor company and bad upbringing, coming to a person after birth, but deceit is ingrained in a person from the womb; therefore, speakers of falsehood are worse than the wicked. They are like a serpent that injects venom without deriving any personal benefit - for "what advantage is there to the master of the tongue," who gains nothing for himself but merely degrades his fellow - and they are even worse than the serpent, since a serpent heeds the charmer, whereas they stop up their ears even to the clearest evidence David presented to them. Therefore, David prays that the Holy One, Blessed be He, break their teeth and shatter their molars, and that both the attribute of justice and the attribute of mercy concur in this judgment.