Introduction to the Chapter
Chapter 59 is a direct continuation of the previous chapter. In the previous chapter, the complaint arose: Why do we cry out and the Holy One, blessed be He, does not answer? Why do we pray and He does not save? The chapter before us comes to answer this question - and to detail, one by one, the iniquities that form the barrier between us and our Father in Heaven. The prophet begins by refuting two erroneous assumptions, continues with an itemized account of sins between man and God and between man and his fellow, and reaches a sharp critique of the foundations of heresy and its offshoots.
Neither a Shortened Hand nor a Heavy Ear
הֵן לֹא־קָצְרָה יַד־יְהֹוָה מֵהוֹשִׁיעַ וְלֹא־כָבְדָה אׇזְנוֹ מִשְּׁמוֹעַ׃ - Behold, the hand of Hashem is not too short to save, nor is His ear too heavy to hear.
The fact that you have not been saved until now is not due to any limitation in the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He. The Malbim explains that there are two distinct claims here. "His hand is too short" means a lack of ability: perhaps the Holy One, blessed be He, is unable to save us. "His ear is too heavy to hear" means that Hashem is able, but He no longer watches over us, no longer turns His gaze toward us. And if He does not oversee us, many troubles can come, and as it were, Hashem does not hear us; He remains distant and does not wish to know of our distress. Regarding both of these assumptions, the prophet declares: neither is true.
Your Iniquities Have Separated
כִּי אִם־עֲוֺנֹתֵיכֶם הָיוּ מַבְדִּלִים בֵּינֵכֶם לְבֵין אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְחַטֹּאותֵיכֶם הִסְתִּירוּ פָנִים מִכֶּם מִשְּׁמוֹעַ׃ - But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He does not hear.
The prophet says: Let me give you the true explanation of the matter. It is neither a shortened hand nor a heavy ear; rather, your iniquities constitute a barrier, like separating partitions - as we say on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, partitions that separate between us and Hashem, may He be blessed.
It is the Malbim's regular approach to explain that avon (iniquity) refers to heresy, related to ivut (distortion) - a distortion of the intellect. A person distorts his intellect to pursue falsehood and futility. In contrast, chet (sin) is not necessarily related to heresy, but to being led astray by desires. Thus, chet expresses more of an inadvertent lapse: a person is pulled after his desires, after physical and material matters, and through this he becomes estranged from Hashem.
With this, the precision of the language becomes clear. An avon, which is heresy, acts as a "separator" - heresy is a dividing wall, a barrier between us and Hashem, may He be blessed. And this separation is bilateral: on your part, you deny Him and do not wish to accept faith in Hashem; and on Hashem's part, He certainly does not deliver someone who denies Him. Therefore, the verse specifically states here: "between you and your God" - from both sides.
Regarding sins (chata'ot), however, the verse only says "have hidden His face from you," and not "between you and your God." Why? Because in committing a sin, you do not deny Hashem; you continue to believe in Him and are merely drawn after the desires of your heart. It cannot be said that you are hiding your face from Hashem, but it can indeed be said that Hashem hides His face from you. Therefore: "have hidden His face from you, so that He does not hear."
The Malbim further adds that the clauses correspond directly to one another. Corresponding to the claim "Hashem's hand is not too short," the answer comes: "your iniquities have separated" - there is a separating wall, and as it were, Hashem cannot save. And corresponding to the claim "nor is His ear too heavy to hear," which implied that He hears but not well, comes the answer of the concealment of the divine countenance (hester panim). Concealment of the face is not a wall; He senses your presence, but does not intervene to save. A wall signifies, as it were, total departure, whereas concealment of the face corresponds to "His ear is too heavy to hear." You do not need to cry louder to be heard; rather, there is a concealment of the face, and this concealment stems from your sins, from following the desires of your heart.
The Maharsha in Sanhedrin (65a) adds an explanation based on the teachings of the Chachmei HaEmet (the Kabbalists): through every human deed, a spiritual entity is created according to that action, whether good or evil. And the angels of destruction that stem from your iniquities - they were separating between you and preventing the Ruach HaKodesh from resting upon you. That is, it is not merely that you commit a sin and as a consequence I hide My face; rather, the iniquity itself conceals. The sin creates a destructive angel, and the moment you create it, it stands between you and Hashem, may He be blessed. This is the literal meaning of "your iniquities have separated": not an act of retribution, but the destructive angel you created stands in the middle, and the Holy One, blessed be He, says: I have no possibility of connection with you.
For Your Palms Are Defiled with Blood
כִּי כַפֵּיכֶם נְגֹאֲלוּ בַדָּם וְאֶצְבְּעוֹתֵיכֶם בֶּעָוֺן שִׂפְתוֹתֵיכֶם דִּבְּרוּ־שֶׁקֶר לְשׁוֹנְכֶם עַוְלָה תֶהְגֶּה׃ - For your palms are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken falsehood, your tongue mutters injustice.
Here the prophet begins to enumerate the sins themselves. "For your palms are defiled with blood" - you shed innocent blood. Rashi and Radak explain that nego'alu ("defiled") is an expression of filth and soiling, as in "defiled bread" (lechem mego'al), meaning contaminated bread. And what is "and your fingers with iniquity"? Radak cites two possibilities: either that a person points an accusing finger at another, or even more severely - that one strikes another with a fist, and the fist is formed from the fingers. "Your lips have spoken falsehood" and "your tongue mutters injustice" address the sins of the mouth.
The Malbim explains that two categories of sins are addressed here. The first part concerns interpersonal matters: "your palms are defiled with blood" - the entire hand is defiled with bloodshed. Then the prophet descends to the fingers; moving from the hand to the fingers indicates a progression from the general to the specific, as the fingers are the individual parts of the hand. Initially, the entire hand is defiled with blood, and subsequently the detailed actions and final execution of deeds are done with iniquity. This speaks of intentional sin, of a brazen transgressor who commits his deeds with utter contempt.
From here the prophet turns to sins between man and God: "your lips have spoken falsehood" - corrupted beliefs and false doctrines. And not only do you do this externally, as mere lip service, but also "your tongue mutters injustice." The Malbim explains in several places, particularly in Sefer Mishlei, that there is a distinction between safah (lip) and lashon (tongue): safah always refers to external speech, while lashon refers to internal speech. Therefore, lashon is consistently associated with terms of meditation and thought, for it refers to what a person articulates within himself. The lips are external, while the tongue is internal.
Hence, there are two flaws. The first is external speech - "your lips have spoken falsehood." A situation may exist where a person internally knows the truth yet speaks lies; this is less severe, as there remains a chance that he will eventually regret it and improve his ways. But if a person not only speaks falsehood but also believes the lie he utters, what chance is there that he will correct himself? The chances are slim, since he is thoroughly convinced of the falsehood. Therefore, the prophet says: do not think that at least inwardly you know the truth - "your tongue mutters injustice," for internally you also contemplate this in your heart. There is no hope for rectification here.
None Calls Out with Justice
אֵין־קֹרֵא בְצֶדֶק וְאֵין נִשְׁפָּט בֶּאֱמוּנָה בָּטוֹחַ עַל־תֹּהוּ וְדַבֶּר־שָׁוְא הָרוֹ עָמָל וְהוֹלֵיד אָוֶן׃ - None calls out with justice, and none pleads with integrity; they rely on emptiness and speak vanity, they conceive mischief and bring forth iniquity.
Radak explains: "None calls out with justice" - there is no one who rebukes his fellow and tells him to act justly. That is, if there is sin and wrongdoing yet someone still offers rebuke, there is still hope for repentance. But here, there is not even anyone to stand up and cry out: Gentlemen, there must be justice!
Targum Yonatan states something here that is a piercing rebuke for each and every one of us: "Leit dimtzalei vekshot" - there is no one who prays in truth. A person's prayer is mere lip service; because he is so rushed and pressured, the prayer is uttered only from the lips. Most terrible of all is: "With their mouth and with their lips they honor Me, while their heart is far from Me." Yet it is stated: "Hashem is near to all who call upon Him" - and what is the condition? "To all who call upon Him in truth." The entire essence lies in truth.
One of the Gedolei Yisrael once remarked: A person prays for many matters, but there is one matter for which he prays with all his heart - livelihood. Regrettably, it is specifically for livelihood that we pray with our whole heart; but regarding the coming of Mashiach, the salvation of Hashem, the eradication of the wanton from the earth, the destruction of the workers of wickedness, and that the Holy One, blessed be He, reign as King over all the earth - there our prayer lacks true wholeheartedness.
A man once came before one of the great Torah leaders of Israel, poured out his troubles, and asked: "Rebbe, when will Moshiach finally come?" The Rebbe replied: "I am sorry to disappoint you, but the Moshiach you are waiting for will never come, and the Moshiach who will arrive is one you never expected." The man was astonished: "But I am always waiting for him! The Rebbe's words are an enigma to me." The Rebbe explained: "Moshiach is coming to reveal the light of Hashem in the world; he is not coming to resolve your bank overdraft. And if that is what you are waiting for, that is not the Moshiach who will arrive. The one who comes will not be thinking about fulfilling your personal agenda; he will come to reveal Hashem's light in the world and teach understanding to those who have strayed. Is that what you were waiting for? Is that what you prayed for?"
Concerning this, the masters of Mussar ask: "Why has the son of Yishai not come, neither yesterday nor today?" People have been praying for Moshiach for thousands of years - so why does he not come? Because our prayers are directed toward bread. We ask for a livelihood, and therefore we demand the son of Yishai; we ask for economic hardships to be lifted, and therefore we want Moshiach. The demands are for bread, not for the son of Yishai. This is the meaning of "No one calls in righteousness" - "There is none who prays in truth."
"And no one pleads with integrity" - because the judge perverts justice. "They trust in emptiness and speak vanity" - a person speaks deceitfully to his fellow, saying one thing with his mouth while feeling another in his heart. And what does he rely on when he permits himself to speak this way? On emptiness: he leans on something completely unreliable, assuming that his friend will never realize he is misleading and deceiving him. This is an empty confidence, a trust based on vanity.
"They conceive mischief and give birth to iniquity" - the Radak explains that conception represents the concept and the thought, the initial stages of bringing something into actuality, while birth is the deed itself, the actual execution. First one plans, and then one executes. And with you, even the planning itself is mischief (amal) - and amal always connotes falsehood, as in "those who write iniquitous decrees." It is therefore no wonder that the outcome is iniquity and falsehood, actions of evil and corruption.
The Metzudas David delves deeper into this: sometimes a person commits a wrongful act, and when asked why he did it, he replies that he acted without thinking. That is less severe than someone who responds: "Yes, he deserved it; he had it coming." When someone commits evil by design, it indicates malice of the heart. When one acts poorly on impulse, it can be chalked up to temporary irrationality and an unreasoned reaction (though there are those for whom "temporary irrationality" is a permanent condition, which is its own problem). But with you, says the prophet, "they conceive mischief" - first they carefully plot the deception and falsehood, and then "give birth to iniquity," carrying the act out into practice. This is far worse, for all your evil is premeditated, never accidental.
The Malbim adds that after describing all these injustices, there is an additional problem: there is no one who offers rebuke. "In righteousness" pertains to matters between man and his fellow; "and no one pleads with integrity" pertains to matters between us and the Omnipresent. There is no one to offer rebuke even for transgressions committed against Hashem, blessed be He.
Two Classes of Heretics
Regarding the words "They trust in emptiness and speak vanity," the Malbim explains that among heretics there are two classes. He is referring to the heretics of old, heretics of stature, who came with arguments, logic, and premises (the heretics of our day are on the level of reality television). The first class is the one that bases itself on nothing: Why are you a heretic? "Just because; I simply don't believe, that's all." They have no evidence, no proofs, and no arguments. It is very difficult to argue with such people - when someone presents a reasoned argument, one can engage in a debate, but when he says, "Leave me alone, I just feel like it," there is little to discuss. About them it is said, "They trust in emptiness and speak vanity": they speak words of vanity and trust in sheer emptiness, for had you brought an argument, your confidence would have had something to lean on; but without an argument, what are you trusting in?
The second class corresponds to "They conceive mischief and give birth to iniquity" - the philosophizing sect, the philosophers. We hardly encounter such thinkers today, but anyone who examines the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim or Rabbeinu Bachya in Sha'ar HaYichud, seeing how extensively they contend with philosophical thought, will realize that seven hundred to a thousand years ago this perspective held great sway, and there was a pressing need to confront its claims. These thinkers come to present proofs based on premises, but the premises are flawed, and from them they draw flawed analogies, comparisons, and conclusions.
For example, philosophical reasoning operates in this way: there are axioms, and from them, through logic and deduction, one arrives at conclusions. Suppose an axiom: all matter is formed from other matter; nothing in creation comes into being ex nihilo, out of absolute nothingness. Correspondingly, there is also no total destruction in the world: when something is consumed, it transforms into something else - if you take wood and burn it, it turns into energy. This is what is known today as the law of conservation of mass and the law of conservation of energy. From this, the philosophers immediately argue: if everything is created from some preceding force, from what was the Master of the Universe created? This is an inherently heretical question, and the deduction itself is fundamentally flawed - for from where do you derive your premise? From the physical world. But the Master of the Universe is entirely beyond the physical world, belonging to the realm of the spiritual, and what holds true in the physical world is completely inapplicable to spiritual reality. Here is an example of someone who starts with a premise and draws a false logical conclusion. Regarding this it is said, "They conceive mischief and give birth to iniquity": they posit flawed premises and spawn corrupt deductions, giving birth to falsehood.
Viper Eggs and Spider Webs
בֵּיצֵי צִפְעוֹנִי בִּקֵּעוּ וְקוּרֵי עַכָּבִישׁ יֶאֱרֹגוּ הָאֹכֵל מִבֵּיצֵיהֶם יָמוּת וְהַזּוּרֶה תִּבָּקַע אֶפְעֶה׃ - They hatch viper's eggs and weave a spider's web; he who eats of their eggs dies, and if one is crushed, a viper hatches out.
A tzif'oni (viper) is a type of venomous snake, and their deeds are evil and vile like the deeds of vipers and venomous serpents. Regarding "spider's webs" (kurei akavish), Rashi cites Menachem's explanation that kurei is related to korot (beams), for the spider weaves its threads among the beams of a building; thus they are called kurei akavish, the webs woven by the spider.
And what is the meaning of "vehazureh"? Targum Yonatan renders it meshachnan, meaning warming (related to sakhana in Arabic, hot, which is also the root of chamin, and "utehi lo sochenet" - meaning warming him - as well as the root of shechin [boils], where the skin is feverish and inflamed). That is, whoever warms the viper's eggs causes the shell to crack and the snake to emerge. How does zoreh connect with warming? Rashi explains that zoreh is related to wringing and squeezing, as in "vayazar et hagizah" regarding Gideon, where he squeezed the fleece to extract what was absorbed within it. Warming an egg is also an action akin to squeezing: the fleece is squeezed through forceful pressure, while the egg is "squeezed" through heat, releasing the hatchling from within. And an ef'eh is also a species of venomous snake. Thus, their deeds are corrupt and breed further corruption.
Radak elaborates: the prophet compares their thoughts and deeds to viper's eggs, which give birth to venomous snakes - meaning, your thoughts are evil and your deeds are evil. Furthermore, "they hatch viper's eggs" (beitzei tzif'oni bak'u) does not refer to the people hatching them, but to the vipers themselves: the vipers are the ones who break through the egg from the inside to emerge, just as a chick hatches from its egg. The snake lays eggs, and the viper emerges from within. So too, they harbor wicked thoughts internally until they bring them into action, like a viper breaking out of its egg.
"And weave spider's webs" - the webs woven by a spider have no durability; they are easily torn. Likewise, they weave constructs that have no standing: they invent stories and devise schemes, all rooted in falsehood, which cannot endure over time, and their deeds will bring them no benefit. It is worth noting that spider silk is considered the strongest natural fiber in the world, and science has yet to engineer a fiber stronger than it; the reason we tear it so easily is merely because it is extremely thin. Yet because it is so easy for man to tear, the prophet compared their ideas to something woven of spider webs: you build foundations and construct things that are effortlessly torn and shattered, because everything is built upon a lie.
"He who eats of their eggs will die" - one who consumes the eggs of a viper dies, for the viper contains lethal venom, and being among the most dangerous of serpents, whoever eats its eggs ingests its poison. "Vehazureh" - according to Radak, refers to one who merely steps on the eggs, from the idea of scattering (pizur), as in "she forgets that a foot may crush them" (regel tezureha); a person walking and kicking with his feet scatters them. Thus: one who eats from the eggs dies, and even one who does not eat, but merely steps on an egg, causes it to hatch, and a viper emerges to bite and kill him. So it is with these men of falsehood whose every deed is deceitful: anyone who comes into contact with them is harmed, just like someone who has dealings with a snake.
Premises and Deductions - The Malbim's Explanation
The Malbim continues along the theme he introduced: that this entire passage addresses the philosophers who distort sound thinking. The conclusions and deductions of these philosophical concepts, which originate in falsehood, are the viper's eggs. The premises they use to arrive at these conclusions are the spider's webs. When a person joins one theory to another and premise to premise, ultimately constructing an entire fallacy built entirely upon flawed premises, the result is like a spider's web: it is not a durable fabric, but something that disintegrates the moment you touch it.
And why specifically spider's webs? Not only because of their fragility. From where does a spider produce its silk? From within itself, from its own body. When a person presents an argument and builds it upon a foundation, he might say: "We both agree on this premise, it is obvious." But if he fabricated the very premise himself, how can anyone accept his argument? For instance, if the premise is the law of gravity - that anything released in midair will fall - that is an established reality that no one disputes; at least the foundation is sound. But if, to serve your argument, you assume an unproven premise, that is far worse. The former at least reasoned incorrectly from a solid foundation, whereas here, the very foundation was fabricated out of thin air. Such are the philosophers: they make futile claims, invent premises, build elaborate structures upon them, and on that basis market a finished philosophy as if it were truth, when in reality the foundations themselves are nothing more than the product of their imagination.
From here the verse continues: corresponding to "they hatch viper's eggs," it states, "he who eats of their eggs will die" - whoever adopts their conclusions, which are heresy, contrary to faith in Hashem, contrary to the existence of the Creator, claiming the eternity of the universe and the like, brings death upon himself. And corresponding to the spider's webs, it says, "and that which is crushed hatches into a viper": this refers to one who does not eat the eggs himself, but merely warms them or broods over them until hatchlings emerge - meaning one who does not adopt the heretical conclusions in practice, but adopts their premises. He embraces the very foundations upon which the heretics built their conclusions. The prophet warns him: know that in the end, an ef'eh will hatch, yielding deadly conclusions. Heretical premises inevitably produce heretical deductions. You cannot claim, "I do not follow their ways" - the moment you adopt their premises, you risk arriving at their conclusions. What you must do is leave them alone, never employing or dabbling in heretical thought.
Consider what was written concerning the Rambam, who rejected the reality of demons (shedim), necromancy (doresh el hametim), and consulting ghosts (ba'al ov), writing that these were mere vanities with no substance, which people foolishly believed in. The Vilna Gaon (Gra) wrote very sharp words about this: "And accursed philosophy misled him with its great seductiveness." Philosophy possesses a powerful allure; it is the wayward woman spoken of frequently in Sefer Mishlei, wisdom that seduces man with its eloquent words. The Rambam, as it were, was drawn after premises established by philosophers and heretics - after Aristotle, whom the Rambam held in great esteem, writing that he was just one level below prophecy. While heaven forbid that the Rambam followed their heretical conclusions, he did accept their premises in certain areas, and consequently did not believe in the existence of demons. The Gra asks: do we not have explicit Gemaras, Midrashim, and countless passages in Chazal concerning demons and the halachot pertaining to them, as well as necromancy and the account of the medium of Ein Dor in Tanach? How could one say these things do not exist in reality?
Rav Ratzabi has noted that although Yemenite Jews followed the halachic rulings of the Rambam, we never accepted the Rambam's philosophical views on matters of hashkafah (theology) - he writes this unequivocally. This is in sharp contrast to various modern innovators who have emerged in this generation styling themselves as "Rambamists," for whom everything begins and ends with the Rambam; one may present an established halachah or tradition, yet they recognize only the Rambam. This is a profound error, for in many matters the Halachah does not follow the Rambam, and even the Yemenite community, as Rav Ratzabi explains, did not rule like the Rambam exclusively, but merely followed his customs in many matters, while explicitly rejecting his philosophical views on hashkafah. Heaven forbid that we should utter such criticism of the Rambam on our own; rather, we have the precedent of the Gra's words showing how premises borrowed from those distant from Judaism can lead to error, even when one rejects their ultimate conclusions and adopts only their premises. This is the meaning of "and that which is crushed hatches into a viper": whoever merely touches this, taking the egg and warming it - that is, utilizing the premises alone - will thereby cause a viper to hatch, risking a descent into heresy.
Their Webs Shall Not Become a Garment
קוּרֵיהֶם לֹא־יִהְיוּ לְבֶגֶד וְלֹא יִתְכַּסּוּ בְּמַעֲשֵׂיהֶם מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם מַעֲשֵׂי־אָוֶן וּפֹעַל חָמָס בְּכַפֵּיהֶם׃ - Their webs will not become a garment, nor will they cover themselves with their deeds; their deeds are deeds of iniquity, and an act of violence is in their hands.
The webs are so frail that nothing substantial can be woven from them to make a garment. Ultimately, when they seek to cover themselves with their deeds - their deeds are falsehood, and consequently they will not be able to cover themselves with them. In simple terms: all the arguments you put forward will not protect you on a day of calamity. When misfortune arrives, your deeds will not shield you.
Until this point, the prophet spoke of heresy directed against the Omnipresent (bein adam laMakom). The end of the verse shifts to sins between man and his fellow (bein adam l'chavero): "Their deeds are deeds of iniquity, and an act of violence is in their hands." Do not say: true, they are heretics in their beliefs, but when it comes to interpersonal relations - what fine, pleasant people they are!
A story was recently told of a Torah-observant Jew who worked alongside an Argentinean school security guard. The guard said to him: "I want to go back to Argentina." He asked him: "Why?" He replied: "There, people are so human. Over there, there is no such thing as walking past someone without saying hello, good morning, how are you. Here, I stand at the school entrance, someone walks past me and asks: Tell me, where is the third-grade classroom? I answer him, 'Over there,' and he dashes off. No hello, no thank you. I really dislike this behavior; I want to go back to Argentina."
The observant Jew said to him: "Tell me, if a terrorist were to show up here, if there were an attack, Heaven forbid, and something happened - what would happen where you come from? Everyone flees, nobody gives you a second glance, everyone thinks only of himself. But all those people here, whose manners toward you might seem a bit rough or lacking refinement - he would die for you, he would risk his life for you, he would enter danger to save you. You are a Jew, and he will run to help you. Whereas the gentile - you could die, what does he care about you?"
One hears endlessly of such incidents. There was a horrifying, shocking picture that circulated around the world from abroad: a man fell onto the sunken tracks of a subway. You can hear the train approaching from the distance, and the man screams, trying to climb up and slipping, trying again and slipping, crying out to be saved. And the cameras show fifteen people standing there, and not one moves a muscle; they all just watch, and some even pull out their phones to record. And the man is screaming. And the end was very grim indeed. So they are polite and pleasant - that is all well and good. Let us see what happens when something happens to you, whether anyone will step forward to help.
This is what the Malbim explains: Do not say that perhaps they arrived at falsehood in philosophy, but in interpersonal relationships they are humane, caring so deeply and feeling the pain of their fellow man - that surely in their character traits they possess some virtue. Says the prophet: No. "Their deeds are deeds of iniquity, and an act of violence is in their hands" - a person would swallow his fellow alive. And if he does not do so, it is merely out of etiquette, and etiquette is purely external. Consider how polite the Germans were: please, thank you, excuse me. And we all know where that led. And what sensitivity they displayed toward dogs, truly touching; Goebbels reportedly had a dog named "Mensch" - a person, a human being. That was the dog's name. And these were the people who sent human beings to the gas chambers like flies. Thus, it is not merely heresy: what they actually carry out is an act of violence. And if one wishes to argue that perhaps they are merely heretics while remaining decent people in interpersonal matters - absolutely not, not in the least.
In summary:
The prophet begins by negating two claims: it is neither a shortened hand nor a heavy ear; rather, our iniquities form the dividing wall and our sins cause the concealment of the Divine countenance. The iniquity (avon), which is heresy and distortion of the intellect, creates a barrier from both sides, while the sin (chet), which is succumbing to physical desire, causes Hashem to hide His face. According to the Maharsha, the iniquity itself creates a destructive angel that stands as a partition between us and the Holy One, blessed be He. From there, the prophet enumerates the sins: bloodshed and the specific acts of iniquity carried out by the hands and fingers, falsehood on the lips and injustice in the inner tongue, to the point where there is no longer any prospect of rectification. There is no one who rebukes and no one who prays sincerely, there is neither justice nor truth, and the evil is carried out with premeditation: "They conceive mischief and bring forth iniquity." Two classes of heretics are depicted here - those who trust in vanity without any argument, and those who construct imaginary premises that spawn flawed conclusions. Their offspring are viper's eggs and their premises are spider webs spun from their own mouths; one who consumes the conclusions will die, and one who merely touches the premises will hatch a viper. Finally: their webs will not avail them to cover themselves on the day of calamity, and one must not delude himself into thinking that their heresy is confined to matters between man and the Omnipresent - "their deeds are deeds of iniquity, and an act of violence is in their hands."