Sefer Yeshayahu, chapter 29. "Woe to Ariel, Ariel, the city where David encamped! Add year to year, let the festivals come round." Who is this Ariel that he is speaking about here? Rashi offers one explanation from Targum Yonatan: Ariel means the altar (madbecha). This has a source, for in Sefer Yechezkel it is written "and the Ariel was twelve," the size of the altar was twelve. Why is it called Ariel? It is clearly from the word aryeh, lion. What does an altar have to do with a lion? Chazal explain that the fire which came down from Heaven would crouch like a lion upon the altar. That is why it is called Ariel. Chazal also explain it from the word heichal, the Sanctuary itself. Someone looking at the Heichal from above sees that it is narrow in the back and wide in the front. And this is exactly like a lion. Just as a lion is narrow in the back and wide in the front, so too the Beit HaMikdash appeared.
The Malbim explains that Ariel here is a title for mighty warriors, and also for Yerushalayim. Ariel has several usages. Sometimes we see Ariel as a title for a warrior, sometimes Ariel is one who struck down the lion, correct? So it is a title for the altar, a title for Yerushalayim, and a title for the whole nation. The Malbim says we have seen the term Ariel used in many places. And here the Malbim explains that he is clarifying the meaning of the parable he stated earlier. He said, "He does not plow forever," correct? We explained that the plowing will not last forever, in the end one must sow. So too the troubles will not persist forever, rather they will repent and then the troubles will pass, for the main purpose is to sow within them the seed of faith in Hashem, of serving Hashem, of loving Hashem. So he says, "Woe to Ariel, Ariel." Ariel is Yerushalayim. This Yerushalayim which is important in its own right, and the second Ariel expresses strength and might, it is the strength of Israel, it is the might of Israel. This is both because of their king, that they have a righteous king, "the city where David encamped." This is the city in which David encamped. "Chanah" is from the word encampment. Yes, some confuse it with Kiryat Chanah, as if it were connected to the name Chanah. It is from the word encampment (chaniyah), without the dagesh. "The city where David encamped," the place where King David, who was righteous, encamped.
So such a city, they should have been occupied with fear of Hashem, with serving Hashem. And instead, "Add year to year, let the festivals come round." They add year to year, in plain words they burn up their time. They add nothing in the service of Hashem. Another year and another year and another year. And what did you do in that time? What did you add in that time? What did you gain in that time? Nothing. "Add year to year, let the festivals come round." The festivals go round, meaning another holiday arrives and another festive day. Which festive day? He is speaking about the festive days they invent for themselves. Here a party like this, there a celebration like that, here... "Let the festivals come round," they go on cycling around. The Malbim explains what "nokeif" means. Nokeif has several meanings. There is nokeif from the word for cutting, like "as when one beats an olive tree" (nokeif zayit). It is also connected to the term "nogeif," correct? And there is nokeif from the word heikef, to surround. So when one wants to describe, for example, cutting down a tree, they would "beat" it - what does that mean? It means removing the branches all around it. For it is both a term of surrounding and a term of nokeif, both a term of cutting off and separating those superfluous branches. Here he explains it regarding the cycle of days of feasting. Their days and festivals were "add year to year," another year and another year, and days of feasting, from feast to feast, but what did you add? What spirituality did you gain?
"Then I will distress Ariel, and there shall be mourning and moaning, and she shall be to Me like Ariel." But Hashem says regarding this that the sufferings came, as we explained earlier, that "He does not plow forever." This plowing was intended: "Then I will distress Ariel." "Distress" here means anguish of the soul. "And there shall be mourning," the goal is mourning and moaning. What is "mourning and moaning"? To lament, to groan, that is the meaning of "mourning and moaning." That they should have it, that they groan. From what will they groan? From the magnitude of their troubles, and they will groan in repentance over the deeds that brought these troubles upon them. That is the goal of "I will distress Ariel." To merely distress Ariel? To merely cause Yerushalayim to have pain and anguish? That is not a goal in itself. Just as the plowing is not a goal in itself, but the purpose is to sow. And then there will be mourning and moaning, she will lament over her sins, over the evil of her deeds, "and she shall be to Me like Ariel." Then she will be as she is fitting to be, like Ariel. As is truly hoped from her, that she will be like Ariel.
"And I will encamp against you round about, and I will lay siege against you with a mound, and I will raise up fortifications against you." Now he returns to the second parable that he explained about "bread is crushed." We explained that in order to produce bread you have to take the grain and truly grind it. He says: I will encamp around you with My armies, that is, I will send armies to surround Yerushalayim. "And I will lay siege against you," there will be a siege, none going out and none coming in. And after that, "I will raise up fortifications against you" in order to capture the city and seize them. "Kadur" means from the word for a circle, correct? Like something rolling like a ball. Only that here the kaf is a kaf of comparison, correct? Like "dur," "kadur." Or some explain that "dur" means a bonfire (medurah). A bonfire is round. So here too "kadur" means "like a bonfire." But the idea is that it is from a circle, an encirclement in a circle that they surround and besiege Yerushalayim.
And then Yerushalayim will reach the state of "And brought low, you shall speak from the ground, and your speech shall be low out of the dust, and your voice shall be like a ghost's from the ground, and your speech shall whisper out of the dust." And then "brought low," the state of Yerushalayim will be at the lowest. "You shall speak from the ground," as if she speaks from within the earth. "And your speech shall be low out of the dust." And it will be so low that from the dust, as it were, the words are heard. And the "ov" (ghost) - whoever knows, when the ov would speak, in what kind of voice did it speak? It is written in the books that the ov would speak in a human voice as if speaking from within the ground. You hear a voice like an echo, not a clear voice. Muffled. A muffled voice as if someone is speaking beneath the ground. That is how the master of the ov spoke when he raised up some soul through the ov. And this is learned from here, from this very pasuk. "And brought low, you shall speak from the ground, and your speech shall be low out of the dust." Your words will be as if from the dust, "your voice shall be like a ghost's from the ground." Like a ghost that speaks, you hear the dead speaking as if from within the earth. And then it is, as it were, not the speech of a living person, but only from the body of a dead person. That is to say, there will not even be speech, only a chirping like the chirping of a bird. This comes to say that Israel will be in the lowliest state. It comes to say that they will already reach lowliness down to the ground and to the dust, meaning they will as it were lick the dust. And then "brought low" and "low." "Brought low" (v'shafalt), yes, this refers to lowliness in terms of height. Descending from a high level to a low level, that is called "brought low." And "low" (tishach) refers to his stature, that his stature became bent over. And he also adds "you shall speak, your speech," the Malbim says that "saying" (amirah) is weaker than "speaking" (dibur). Speaking is always with force. Like "the lord of the land spoke harshly to us." Speaking is always harsh. How is a leader called? Dabar. Why? For this reason, "one leader for a generation and not two leaders for a generation." He is the leader, he speaks harshly. If he speaks softly then he cannot lead the generation. In contrast, "saying" is always a soft saying. We once spoke about how whenever it is written that someone speaks in his heart, it does not say "and he spoke (vayedaber) in his heart." It always says "and he said (vayomer)." "And Haman said in his heart." "And Esav said in his heart." Always the term "saying." Because a person with himself always speaks softly. With others he speaks harshly, but with himself he always speaks softly. So therefore the term is always "saying." So here the "saying" is weaker. "And brought low, you shall speak from the ground," and afterward "your speech shall be low out of the dust," which shows an even lower descent, at which point you no longer even have the strength to speak but only in the manner of "saying." And in the final stage, "your speech shall whisper out of the dust," at which point there will not even be strength to say, but only chirping sounds will be heard.
"And the multitude of your strangers shall be like fine dust, and the multitude of the tyrants like passing chaff, and it shall be suddenly, in an instant." The Malbim says that dust (avak) is the separation of a composite thing into small parts, that is called dust. And it has an advantage over chaff. First, chaff is the external waste. In contrast, dust - if I wanted to speak about wheat, for example, what would the dust be? If I take the wheat itself and grind it, then there would be dust. But chaff is not the wheat itself, chaff is the external husk. Furthermore, chaff is passing chaff. The wind carries it away easily. And this is what he says. Sancheriv's camp will come, those we spoke about, "and I will encamp against you round about, and I will lay siege against you with a mound," that will be Sancheriv's camp. And Sancheriv's camp are "the multitude of your strangers." They will be around Yerushalayim. But know, they will be like fine dust. All those who will be around, they will be scattered like dust. "And the multitude of the tyrants," the warriors that the king of Ashur and the officers he brought with him who did not die, he says they will be like passing chaff. What happened, after all, to the king of Ashur himself and to his sons? They survived the strike of the angel who struck the camp of Ashur. And how did Sancheriv ultimately die? His sons killed him, correct? Esar Chadon, correct? His sons killed him. There, where did they kill him? While he was bowing to Nisroch his god. He had a god called Nisroch. A piece of wood from Noach's ark. He had an eagle from Noach's ark, which he worshiped. And this very Nisroch, in that very place, his sons killed him. So there were two groups here. There were those who were like fine dust here in this place, and there were those like passing chaff, those who did not die here by Hashem's angel, but were like chaff that was carried to another place. "The tyrants, and it shall be suddenly, in an instant," he says that these too, those who were tyrants, the warriors, those who did not die there by Hashem's angel, he says suddenly, in an instant. In a single moment, suddenly, in an instant, in one night, they will fall. As his sons killed him in his land.
The Malbim explains what the difference is between "suddenly" (pesa) and "in an instant" (pit'om). We always use the expression "and behold, suddenly, in an instant." Seemingly these two words are a redundancy of the same thing. "Pesa" is "pit'om." The thing happened suddenly or it happened instantly, you said the same expression. The Malbim says there is a difference between them. "Pesa" indicates the speed of the action. "If suddenly, without enmity, he pushed him." And "pit'om" indicates the time, that the action follows immediately without preparation. Who understood the explanation? I will explain. The Malbim says: take, for example, something that happened instantly. Now there can be two things here that are "sudden." It can be in terms of time, that we did not expect it and it suddenly happened. It was supposed to be tomorrow or the day after, and it happened now. That is one thing. Now when it comes, the same thing, it could be that it comes slowly. I did not expect it at this time, it came as I said instantly, but it came slowly. On the other hand I could say the opposite. It came at its time, but when it came, it came very fast. These are two different things. Whether the deed itself happened quickly, or whether in terms of time the deed itself happened early, meaning it came early. When I say about a certain thing that it happened quickly, that within a second it happened, that is called "pesa." It could be that it happened on time. It did not happen earlier than usual, it happened on time. But it happened in a single second, that is called "pesa." When I want to say no, it arrived before its time, we did not expect it at all and it arrived, I say it happened "pit'om." Now, if it both arrived before its time and happened very fast, then I say "suddenly, in an instant" (l'peta pit'om). It happened very fast, in a flash, and also in terms of time it was not supposed to arrive now, it was supposed to arrive later, and it arrived now. So I say it happened "pit'om." So "pit'om" means without our being prepared for it. It comes fast without our being prepared for it. But it could be that when it comes, it comes slowly. When I say "pesa" it means not only that it came without our being prepared, but also that when it already came, it came with the greatest speed. And this is what he says here. His death will be "suddenly, in an instant." That is, both in terms of time early, and in terms of the deed in a single moment, and that is called "suddenly, in an instant."
"From Hashem of Hosts she shall be visited, with thunder and with earthquake and a great noise, storm and tempest and the flame of a devouring fire." This decree that will be upon the king of Ashur, as we discussed, that he will come to the gates of Yerushalayim in the time of Chizkiyahu and Hashem's angel will strike them. "From Hashem of Hosts she shall be visited," Hashem will visit this upon him. And now it will be "with thunder and with earthquake." These are the two matters he mentioned before. "Like Mount Peratzim Hashem will arise." Hashem will arise like Mount Peratzim, we explained there what "Mount Peratzim" means, and he says here it will be with earthquake. And there will be a further thing, "like the valley of Givon He will be angry." When we explained, at Givon the stones of elgavish came down upon them from the heavens, thunder from the heavens fought. So here there will be both thunder, which is from above, thunder from the supernal power, and earthquake. What is an earthquake? Whenever one speaks of "raash" it is an earthquake. "Raash" is always an earthquake. Whenever you read in the sources that "at the time of the raash such and such happened," and "at the time of the raash in Tzfat" and so on, all sorts of such expressions, "raash" is always an earthquake. So here there will be both thunder, as if from the heavens He will thunder upon them, and earthquake from the earth beneath He will shake upon them, meaning He will shake the ground beneath them. "And a great noise, storm and tempest." This will not be in secret, it will be with a great noise. And accompanying this will be a storm, with flames of fire, the storm will kindle the flame, as he explained before, "and the Light of Israel shall be for a fire." And there will be a devouring fire that will consume them in the camp of Ashur. Here the Malbim says that in this he alludes to the three camps that Eliyahu HaNavi saw. Yes, it is written that when he went to the wilderness, to the cave where Hashem revealed Himself to Moshe, then Hashem's word was revealed to him there, saying "I have rebuked Israel and they violated Your covenant" and so on, and afterward the Holy One sent him to anoint Elisha. So there it is brought that he saw wind and earthquake and fire. And after that there was a still small voice. So he says here there will be all of this. There will be wind, there will be earthquake, there will be fire. But there will not be a still small voice. Rather, here the difference will be that this will be with a great noise. With a great noise, meaning Hashem will thunder upon them with His voice and subdue them with a mighty and great voice.
"And it shall be like a dream, a vision of the night, the multitude of all the nations that war against Ariel, all who war against her and her siege works and those who distress her." "And it shall be like a dream." Like a person who dreams, and in the morning he wakes, he sees an imagination. It was not reality at all. Especially, the Malbim says, this is a vision of the night. That is, something that comes through the power of imagination, what a person envisions at night, which, beyond having no substance, also makes no impression on the person. A dream, when it is genuine, still leaves some impression, a person rises stirred and amazed. But when the dream is merely a vision, that is, something that comes from imagination, then it makes no impression in the morning either. So he tells you, there will be the entire multitude of all the nations that war against Ariel. That is, those nations that were warring against Ariel, meaning against Yerushalayim, as was said before, "and I will encamp against you round about," and he explained that this means the nations will come to surround, to besiege Yerushalayim. And he told us earlier and says "all who war against her and her siege works," which corresponds to what he said before, "and I will lay siege against you with a mound." Now he says what will be with those "who war against her and her siege works," those who built a siege, besieging all around. "And her siege works" corresponds to what is written "and I will raise up fortifications against you" as we saw earlier. "Those who distress her" corresponds to what was written before, "I will distress Ariel." When Israel needed to be roused, the Holy One said that He would do all of this. And behold, now the nations come, Ashur comes and does all these things, everything that Hashem announced would come to be. What will be the outcome of all this? "And it shall be like when a hungry man dreams, and behold he eats, but he awakens and his soul is empty; and like when a thirsty man dreams, and behold he drinks, but he awakens and behold he is faint and his soul yearns. So shall be the multitude of all the nations that war against Mount Tziyon."
"Like when a hungry man dreams, and behold he eats." When the hungry man dreams and in his dream sees himself eating. For days no food has come to his mouth, but he sees himself eating. "But he awakens and his soul is empty." When he wakes in the morning, his soul is empty. "And like when a thirsty man dreams, and behold he drinks," in the dream he sees himself drinking, though for a long time no drink has come to his mouth. "But he awakens and behold he is faint and his soul yearns." What is the difference between "his soul is empty" and "his soul yearns"? The Malbim explains that people who are famished, people to whom no drink or food has come, will naturally dream that they are eating and drinking. And this is natural because a person dreams from the musings of his heart, from what he is drawn to. But, the Malbim says, there is a difference between the hungry dreamer and the thirsty dreamer. When a person is hungry, then his heat, the natural heat of his body, rises, this is what is called being famished, and then his stomach loses its appetite for food. It so happens, then, that he reaches a state of weakness, of fatigue, but he is no longer hungry for food. And this is also said by those who undertake a fast of six consecutive days without eating or drinking. They say the second day is the hardest. And afterward it already becomes easier. That is to say, a stage arrives when the stomach no longer actually demands food, but the body needs the food. And then what happens is that a person becomes tired, he becomes exhausted, the body did not receive its due. But feelings of hunger are usually at the beginning. In the second stage the feelings of hunger already subside. But what happens in the end? He is in a state of weakness. And this is what he says. "Like when a hungry man dreams, and behold he eats, but he awakens and his soul is empty." What does he see? That his soul is empty. But notice, his soul does not yearn. He does not crave to eat. Because as we explained, when the hungry person is very hungry, he is already in a state where he does not feel hunger. The Malbim defines this: the fever nourishes the body. "Kadachat" is the fever. When a person has a fever, you can see this often in reality, sick people have no appetite. People with a fever have no appetite. The fever nourishes the body. But notice, when it comes to thirst, he says here reality changes. When it comes to thirst, and a person, due to the fever and heat he has, is extremely thirsty, has received no drink, has not drunk for a long time, then when he awakens, first of all he is faint. Like the hungry dreamer we saw who awakens with an empty soul, he too is faint, meaning the body is exhausted. But beyond that, with the thirsty person, the fever does not nourish the body with drink. Notice that the sick are always thirsty. Those with a fever always ask to drink, they always want to drink, they always feel dry. And this is what he says, regarding the thirsty man, "and behold he drinks, but he awakens and behold he is faint and his soul yearns." He truly yearns to drink. The hungry man does not yearn to eat. But the hungry man arose and saw that he received nothing. The thirsty man not only received nothing, but he is even at a deficit, because now his soul yearns, he already craves drink, he saw drink and, as it were, could not reach it, so he yearns for drink.
The Malbim explained this in order to understand the redundancy. For you could have given a parable of a hungry man who rises in the morning and remains hungry. Why do you also bring the thirsty man? He wanted to explain that there is a difference between them. That the hungry man, as we explained, comes out as he went in, and the thirsty man comes out even at a deficit, because now he also received a yearning soul. Why is it important for the navi to give both these parables? Because he actually wants to give them two subjects of comparison. The subjects are the multitude of nations that Ashur brought here who besieged Yerushalayim. This multitude of nations, what happened to them? They returned just as they had come. They were hungry. The king of Ashur said to them, come, here there is food, there is gold, there is silver, there is wealth, come be partners. They came. In the end, after the great blow, they returned just as they had come. Hungry they entered, hungry they departed. His situation did not change for the worse. In contrast, "like when a thirsty man dreams," here he speaks of a person who is thirsty. What does "a person who is thirsty" mean? He speaks of those who expected to receive and came out thirstier than when they arrived. Who are those who came out thirstier than when they arrived? This is Ashur himself. What happened to the whole camp of Ashur? They all died there in Yerushalayim. Correct, Hashem's angel came, 185,000 heads of legions. Ashur himself, what happened to him? He lost his kingship. Sancheriv himself lost the kingship. Correct, Esar Chadon, his sons killed him. So he is in the category of a thirsty man. He thought to quench his thirst and he came out thirstier. This is what he wants to say. Come and see that with him he even came out at a deficit.
"Linger and be astonished, be blinded and blind yourselves; they are drunk but not from wine, they stagger but not from strong drink." Here he speaks of the men of Yehudah who came in the morning and saw the downfall of Sancheriv. They rise in the morning, they see there is a siege, suddenly they see silence. Quiet. The angel of death paid a visit here. "Linger," at first as they approach, at first they linger. They do not rush to approach. Whenever you see such a situation, what do you immediately fear? Perhaps it is an ambush. Perhaps they suddenly went quiet so that we would come and approach and then they would strike us. Like what happened with whom? The three lepers who were outside the city. So therefore at first when they approach, they linger. They do not approach at a run, one approaches slowly, slowly to check that they are truly not being played some trick. After that, when one is closer, they are astonished. They stand astonished, they do not believe what their eyes see. And after that, "be blinded" (hishta'ash'u). "Hishta'ash'u" here is from the same language as what is written regarding Kayin: "and Hashem turned to Hevel and to his offering, but to Kayin and to his offering He did not turn." To "turn" (li'she'ot) to something means to relate to it, to look at it. That is the meaning. To turn toward it. "Be blinded and blind yourselves." At first they turn there, draw back a bit, and turn again. Like one who does not believe, he approaches and draws back, approaches, he cannot grasp the situation here. And then they ask, how is it possible? They see there men all lying like drunkards. "Drunk but not from wine." Like the drunkard who, after a few good gulps, falls like a corpse. So at first they still do not know that Hashem's angel struck them all. So when they approach the camp they see all the corpses there, they say it looks as if people drank, but where are the bottles? They see no cause for it. That is why it astonished them. "Drunk but not from wine," where is the wine here? "They stagger but not from strong drink." And behold, he says, we see them now lying, as it were staggering like a drunkard in his vomit, but they did not drink strong drink. They do not know how it can be that these men, who had here a siege and great danger, how suddenly the whole reality changed.
There is here an additional explanation of the Radak in the name of his father. There are here two more explanations of what "hishta'ash'u v'shou" means. The Radak brings in the name of his father that it refers to the false prophets. The false prophets would deceive the people, they would tell them empty words and the people would believe them. Here "hishta'ash'u" is from the language of "make his ears heavy and shut (hasha) his eyes." What does "hasha" mean? A sealing, smooth. Like in our parashah, "and I am a smooth man," the Targum renders "gever sha'i." Smoothed, closely, correct? Smooth is "sha'i." So according to this, "hishta'ash'u" here means "shut his eyes," "shut his eyes" meaning there is a sealing over the eye, smooth, there is no longer an eye socket there, they sealed his eye, it became a smooth place. So the prophets, the false prophets, "blinded" - they themselves were blinded, "and blind yourselves" - and they also blinded the people. They gave them all sorts of illusions, all sorts of things that have no truth in them. This is according to the Radak. According to the Metzudat David, "hishta'ash'u" here has a third interpretation. "Hishta'ash'u," he says, means engage in crying out, cry out bitterly over your situation, return in repentance. And then "hishta'ash'u" is from what language? From the language of crying out (shav'ah). Cry out (tashv'u) to Hashem. So we have three interpretations of what "hishta'ash'u" written here means.
"For Hashem has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep, and has closed your eyes; the prophets and your heads, the seers, He has covered." Now he begins to argue with the people of his generation who until now did not believe the words of the prophets, that the prophets said there would be troubles, that the prophets said there would be exile. He says: behold, see, Hashem has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep. "Poured" (nasach) is from the language of "to relieve himself," like to pour, correct? To pour a liquid. Yes, "pour wine," correct? "She has filled her mixed drink" and so on. So Hashem poured over you, Hashem poured over you a spirit of deep sleep, as if you are asleep. Meaning immersed in the vanities of the world, in the words of the Rambam that we read before the shofar blasts. "Those who forget the truth in the vanities of the time." How does the Rambam define them? The sleepers. That is how the Rambam defines them. "Awaken, O sleepers, from your slumber." So here too he rebukes them: you have fallen asleep, immersed in the vanities of the world. And through this, "and has closed your eyes." What is the difference between one who is asleep and one who has his eyes closed? The Malbim says, one who is asleep, his eyes are shut weakly. One who closes his eyes does so forcefully. So that is to say, not only did you fall asleep, He as it were also closed your eyes forcefully. "And has closed your eyes, the prophets." But notice, "and has closed your eyes," what is the continuation? "The prophets and your heads, the seers, He has covered." He tells them: how do you think that this same spirit of deep sleep, this same blindness that grips you, how do you think that the prophets too and the seers, who are your leaders, are also covered by a spirit of blindness? Because you are immersed in your blindness and your slumber, you are sure that the prophet too is blind. You are sure that the prophet too does not see, the prophet too does not understand. And now he will prove to them how mistaken they are.
"And the vision of all this has become for you like the words of a sealed book, which they give to one who knows how to read, saying, Read this please, and he says, I cannot, for it is sealed. And the book is given to one who does not know how to read, saying, Read this please, and he says, I do not know how to read." We will explain here two explanations. One explanation of the Radak, which both the Malbim and the Radak explain, is that here "the vision of all" means the prophecy that the Holy One sent. "The vision of His prophets," that is the meaning of "chazut." Here it is from the language of prophecy. The prophets who prophesy to you are like a sealed book for you. If they give it to a person who knows how to read, then he will say, I cannot, it is sealed. What does "sealed" mean? In their times, how did they close a letter, for example? They would fold it properly, and afterward they would place wax on it. Has anyone ever been to a notary? Yes. So there they take such wax, place it on, and set a seal upon it. Whoever would open it already breaks the seal, he cannot do the same thing again. And through this they would know that the letter had been opened. This is called "the sealed book." So if they give it to a person who knows how to read, then he says, I cannot, it is sealed. It is within a seal, it is closed, I cannot read it. Why is that? He says, because he does not want to read. In truth the prophets are conveying prophecy to you. You are not interested in hearing what the prophet says. And therefore you say, open it, it is closed, I cannot read this. If you really wanted to read, you would open it and read. But you are looking for an excuse to get out of it, the Radak says. And therefore the people claim it is a sealed book, "I cannot, for it is sealed." So too your wise men do not want to hear and do not want to understand. "And the book is given to one who does not know how to read," so all the more so one who cannot read at all, he certainly has the claim, I do not know how to read. The one who does know how to read has the claim it is sealed. The one who does not know how to read all the more so, he says even if you open it I do not know how to read.
The Malbim explains this further, and then we will also understand what the navi actually wants to prove to them. The Malbim explains it: he tells them, you are mistaken, as we explained earlier, that you think the Holy One "the prophets and your heads, the seers, He has covered" as well. Just as your eyes are closed, surely the prophet too does not see, surely the prophet too does not understand. So what do you think? You are sure it is like a sealed book. Even the prophet, who indeed knows that Hashem sent him, but the interpretation of the prophecy, the meaning of the words, he does not understand. You think it is a sealed book. To such an extent that even the one who carries the book, the prophet who presents it to you, even he cannot understand it, it is a sealed book, it is not open, he has not read it. And based on this you come and ask: after all, if they give this letter to one who knows how to read - who is called one who knows how to read? That is the prophet himself. You say, bring it to the prophet, even one who knows how to read, and say to him, read this please, tell him, come read what is written here, explain to us what... and he says, I cannot, for it is sealed. That is how you think, as it were, that the prophet says, I cannot open this, it is sealed. What is the meaning of this? The prophets, after all, received their message in riddles. As we explained in the past. Only Moshe Rabbeinu saw through a clear lens. But the prophets saw in riddles. What does "in riddles" mean? Regarding Moshe it is written "in a vision and not in riddles." But regarding the prophets it is indeed in riddles. What does that mean? What do you see? I see a rod of an almond tree. What do you see? I see a boiling pot. He would see some riddle that he needed to decode. Only, we explained in the past that it is never possible for the prophet to err in his decoding. It is never possible for the prophet to err in understanding what was conveyed to him. For if the prophet could err, first, how would this be more than a dream? A dream too you can give several interpretations, and so too a prophecy. In what way is prophecy distinguished from a dream? That prophecy we say is one hundred percent, in contrast to a dream where there is "chaff among the wheat." The greatest proof of this, we spoke about it once, the Rambam I believe mentions it, is the story of the Akeidah. The Holy One tells Avraham, go bind your son. If it were possible to err in the words of the prophet, meaning that the prophet perhaps did not properly understand the word of Hashem, is he going to slaughter his son? Perhaps you did not understand correctly? Perhaps the command conveyed to you was not clear enough? From here we see that the prophet receives the clearest instructions and understands them, and it is not possible for him to err. Rav Dessler says that it is quite possible only if it is the first time in his prophecy, like Shmuel who at first did not know at all that Hashem was calling him, and he ran to Eli each time the word of Hashem began to come to him. Only at the beginning can there be a situation where he errs in his prophecy. Or like Yaakov, "indeed there is God in this place, and I did not know." How did you not know? You are a prophet. Rather, he did not know because it was the beginning of his prophecy. At the beginning of his prophecy there can be a situation where one time he still does not recognize the manner in which Hashem reveals Himself to His prophets. But after he has already recognized this, there is no situation of error. Even though it is conveyed to him in riddles, the interpretation of the matters is placed in his heart so that he knows what was conveyed, so that he knows what the message actually is. But the people do not want to accept the message. So what do they say? Ah, listen, the prophet speaks in riddles, he too does not understand, let him read, he does not understand. He does not know what is written there. He will tell you, I cannot read, it is sealed, I have no permission to open it. So if the prophet, who is supposed to understand, does not understand, "and the book is given to one who does not know how to read, saying, Read this please," so now you take this prophecy from me, give it to one who does not know how to read, we the people, we are common, simple folk, we do not know how to read. You want us to read? To understand? The prophet does not understand what he is saying, so will we understand? This was actually a reason on their part to remove the prophetic message from themselves. That is to say, the prophecy is not binding. Why? The prophet does not even understand what he says, we all the more so. And this is like "there is no man on earth who can declare the king's matter." Does someone remember this? In Daniel. Who said it? About what was it said? In what context? I recommend listening to the recording on Daniel. It is brought there that when it was written on the wall, "Mene, mene, tekel u'farsin," then there he called the sorcerers. And there was also earlier, when he dreamed the dream and did not want to reveal to them what the dream was. You will tell me what I dreamed and also the interpretation. So they said to him, there is no man on earth who can say such a thing. That is how they argued to him. He says this is actually what they claim here. There is no man who understands this prophecy, so what do you want from us? The wise men do not understand, the prophet does not understand, so will we understand?
"And Hashem said: Because this people has drawn near with its mouth and with its lips honored Me, but its heart is far from Me, and their fear of Me has become a commandment of men learned by rote." "Because this people has drawn near," the Malbim says this people thinks that with such claims they are drawing close to Hashem. Why are you drawing near? How? He says, you say that the Holy One speaks to human beings at the level of human beings. What are you saying? You know how I revere and esteem the words of Hashem? Hashem's words are exalted beyond us. They are so wondrous that we cannot understand them, they are very deep. You are demeaning Hashem's prophecy. You say Hashem speaks and everyone understands. What are you saying? On the contrary, know, the words of Hashem are very lofty, we have no grasp of them, they are very deep matters. You think that with this you are drawing close to Hashem. For "this people has drawn near with its mouth and with its lips honored Me," with their saying that Hashem's words are exalted, they think they are exalting Hashem. But the Holy One says, I know what this stems from. "But its heart is far from Me." He truly does not want to fulfill what I say. So because of this he says Hashem's words are exalted. What is this comparable to? It is like when you tell your child, come, I want to explain to you, go to such and such a place, you walk there, take a right turn and I want you to bring me... I did not understand, Abba, I did not understand. No, Abba, it is hard, it is far, Abba, I did not understand, again. No, no, I did not understand. Why did he not understand? Why did he suddenly become obtuse? You have an intelligent child, why? He has no energy to walk. He has no energy. Suddenly he does not understand what you want, suddenly he does not know how to get there, suddenly he is afraid. Yes? Once my daughter came home from kindergarten and said, Abba, I do not like chocolate, I really do not like chocolate. I began to inquire, and it turned out she had received a punishment from the teacher that she would not get chocolate. So she says she does not like chocolate at all, at all. I told her I wanted to bring you chocolate, what, don't you... no, I like chocolate. So a person who does not want something will tell stories. So what do they say? Hashem's words are exalted, who can understand them? Why? In order not to do. In order not to do, so you say I did not understand. So the Holy One says, I know what this stems from, "and its heart is far from Me." Since these people are far from Me, and therefore they are actually not interested in drawing close to Hashem, they say Hashem's words are exalted, they are lofty, they are deep, they cannot be understood. "And their fear of Me has become a commandment of men learned by rote." How does this connect? Wonderfully. Look, after all, if you say that the Holy One's words are exceedingly exalted, then when I come to fulfill a mitzvah, can I understand the mitzvah? I, a lump of clay, can I understand the most exalted words of Hashem? What can I understand? It is not possible at all to understand the mitzvot of Hashem. That is what these people say. So consequently, when you fulfill the mitzvot, why do you do them? By rote. What is "by rote"? This is how my father did it. Why your father? Because his father also did it that way. And why? His father too did it that way. And this is called "a commandment of men learned by rote." Without delving into the mitzvah, without contemplating the mitzvah, without thinking, I am doing this to bring satisfaction to Hashem, and tefillin of the hand opposite the heart, and tefillin of the head opposite the brain, so that I may thereby subjugate the desires whose source is in the heart and the thoughts whose source is in the brain, and so on. There are reasons for the mitzvot. But these people, the moment they say that the Holy One's words are exalted beyond us, that they cannot be attained, then consequently all their fulfillment of the mitzvot is without meaning, for after all it is impossible to understand Hashem. So all that he does is because my father did it, so I continue to do like him. Their service of Hashem is a service that comes from habit, and not as it should be, done to bring satisfaction to Hashem out of an intention to delve into the mitzvot, to understand the words of Hashem. Certainly we must know that the reasons we know are earthly reasons, and the true reasons are in the secret Torah, which are far more exalted reasons. But the very fact that a person says it is impossible to understand, so I fulfill as one who does not understand, means he is actually saying, I do not want to fulfill Hashem's mitzvot, I do it because I have no choice, because my father did it this way, I continue after him.
"Therefore, behold, I will continue to do wonders with this people, wonder upon wonder, and the wisdom of its wise men shall perish and the understanding of its discerning ones shall be hidden." Rashi brings: I will continue to strike this people with a wonder upon wonder. Here it is not to strike but more precisely to say that their heart will be blocked, wonder upon wonder, covering upon covering, sealing upon sealing. For before this we already saw that they were blocked, "Hashem has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep, and has closed your eyes." We saw that they reached a state of blindness. Why? Because they truly do not want to hear. Because they truly do not want to accept. They claim that the mitzvot of Hashem, the words of Hashem, the words of the prophet - even the prophet does not understand what he says, so how can we understand such things? The Holy One says, their punishment will be that there will be an additional sealing upon their heart. What is "wonder upon wonder"? "And the wisdom of its wise men shall perish." Chazal say, what is "the wisdom of its wise men shall perish"? The passing of the righteous, of the sages of Israel, is twice as hard as the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. From where do we know that this is doubly hard, more than the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash? Because it is written regarding all the plagues that are written in Mishneh Torah, "and Hashem will make wondrous your plagues." How many wonders? One. "And Hashem will make wondrous your plagues." Whereas here, where "the wisdom of its wise men shall perish," meaning the passing of the sages, it is "wonder upon wonder." Wonder upon wonder means an exceedingly wondrous plague. So from here you learn that this is double, more difficult than the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. The Malbim explains, just as they say that Hashem's words are wondrous, Hashem's words are covered, Hashem's words are hidden, exalted beyond them, the Holy One says, if so, this is what I will do to you. I will continue to make wondrous and cover from them everything until they grasp nothing. And even the things that are accepted by people through wisdom, through understanding of matters, what people usually do understand, He says this too will be lost from them. "The wisdom of its wise men shall perish." "And the understanding of its discerning ones" - what is the difference between wisdom and understanding? The Malbim explains this many times in Sefer Mishlei. The difference is that wisdom is what a person receives from others. What a person received from his teacher, what a person receives from others. In contrast, understanding is after a person has the wisdom, now he delves deeply into matters, he contemplates them and draws conclusions. That is to say, conclusions about matters regarding which he did not receive. It is not part of the wisdom he received, he draws conclusions from it. And this is called understanding. Understanding is to comprehend one thing from another. So he says, also the wisdom, what they received in the reasons for the mitzvot and everything connected to it, will be lost from them. And not only that, but also the understanding of its discerning ones, this too itself will be hidden from them.
The Malbim explains that in truth they should have understood that when the Holy One speaks with the people, He does not speak according to the capacity of the speaker but according to the capacity of the listener. Just as it is not possible for a teacher who teaches in a Talmud Torah to speak at his own level, but rather he certainly descends to the level of the children, for the level of the children is much lower than his, and if he speaks at his own level then after a week or two they will throw him out of there, because everyone will come out obtuse, no one understands what he is talking about. All the more so, when you want to glorify Hashem, how exalted the Holy One is, how elevated, exceedingly wondrous - correct, all true. But do you think that the Holy One speaks with you according to His exaltedness and His elevation? If He establishes a connection with lumps of clay, with man, then He gives us things that are within our grasp. He does not speak to us with things that are not within our grasp. Just as a teacher establishes a connection with his students and teaches them according to the breadth of their heart and not according to the breadth of his own heart.