"For pass over to the isles of Kittim, and see; and send to Kedar, and observe well, and see if there has been anything like this. Has a nation changed its gods, though they are no gods? But My people have changed their glory for that which cannot profit." The Holy One, blessed be He, tells them: pass over to the isles of Kittim and see, and send to Kedar and observe well. Why the isles of Kittim and Kedar? Why did He single out these two nations specifically? Chazal say that the people of Kedar worship fire. Apparently the Kedarites were makers of pottery, or dwellers in the tents of Kedar, Ishmaelites, meaning people who lived in the desert. They would worship fire. The Kittim would worship water. And even though the fire worshippers know that water extinguishes fire, well then you see that your god is weak. You worship fire and you see that it is weak. Why do you still not abandon it? Why? Because this is my god. This is the one I serve, and I stay with it. So look at them: even though from the standpoint of reality they see that their god is limited, they cling to it. You, who see that your God is unlimited, how could you abandon the Holy One, blessed be He? This was really the claim against them.
The only thing that seems to require understanding here is why He mentions both Kittim and Kedar. You say the fire worshippers know that water extinguishes fire, so there is a difficulty against the fire worshippers of Kedar: how do you continue to cling to fire, when water extinguishes it? But not against the Kittim, the water worshippers, who would seemingly tell you we are strong, water extinguishes fire. I think we must say that this is two sided. Really, which prevails over which, water or fire? Which prevails over which? It depends which is stronger. If there is a lot of fire, pour on water and it all evaporates. Not only does it evaporate, but when you first pour water the fire actually flares up more because it receives more oxygen. This means that fire can prevail over water, and water can prevail over fire when it is present in greater quantity. So on both sides you see that the god of both the Kittim and of Kedar is limited. Because if your god is fire, a lot of water will extinguish it. If your god is water, a lot of fire will evaporate it. So it turns out that both of them have a weakness. Why do you continue to cling to your deities?
The Malbim explains that the Kittim were close to the Land of Israel, and therefore He says "pass over to the isles of Kittim," here you only need to pass by, this is what is called along the way. In contrast, regarding Kedar, He says "send and observe well." What does "send" mean? Kedar would dwell in the desert. "Woe is me that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar." And if so, they are constantly, this is essentially what we would define as the Bedouin, they constantly change their location. Once he is here and afterward he wanders there, and afterward he goes to another place. It is very easy for them, they simply take a few poles and some cloth and move on. They fold up, continue, and camp in another place. So you see that they change their location without pause. So I would have thought they change their gods too. Therefore He says "send," because they are far, "and observe well," look at them well, that since they change their location, it would have been all the more fitting for them to also change their gods. And when a person moves from place to place it gives him a change not only in geographic physical location, it also gives him a change in his perceptions, in the places he reaches, in his beliefs. They change their location without a problem, but their gods they do not change, they remain clinging to it until the end. Therefore "send to Kedar and observe well and see if there has been anything like this," was there ever anything like this, that they changed and replaced their gods?
"Has a nation changed its gods, though they are no gods? But My people have changed their glory for that which cannot profit." First of all, grammatically, "My people have changed their glory," it should have said "My people have changed My glory for that which cannot profit." And indeed this is one of the eighteen scribal emendations (tikkunei soferim) in Scripture, and Scripture expressed it in a refined manner and did not want to say "My people have changed My glory," so therefore it said "My people have changed their glory." The Malbim here elaborates in explaining, "Has a nation changed its gods, though they are no gods." He says, come look at three things. First, "Has a nation changed its gods," do you see any nation that changed its god? "Changed" means replaced, and one does not exchange it. Have you ever seen a nation replace its god? And not just a nation (am), but a gentile nation (goy). Goy is a lower level than am. And He says: even though they are idol worshippers who are at a low level, gentiles, they do not replace their god. And note, even though he has a clear interest in replacing his god, since his god is no god. He is nothing, you pray to him, you get nothing, he gives nothing, he is not available. So then he has a great interest in replacing his god. So look, this nation did not replace its god, and even if it is a gentile and lowly it did not replace its god, and even if its god is no god, so it has a further interest to replace him with another god, and with all this it remains attached to it. It did not replace its god. So how could it be that Israel was the opposite? For behold "My people have changed," Israel changes their gods. Second, they are "My people." This is not a goy, but "My people," they are chosen, they are more exalted than a goy. And they changed their god "for that which cannot profit." What does this mean? It is quite possible that sometimes a person discards a certain thing for another benefit. And sometimes a person casts off his honor for a benefit. And then even if he suffers disgrace from it, he says, sir, what can I do, I forgo my honor because now I will gain a benefit. As someone once said, when you want to milk a cow you have to bend down. So whoever thinks about his honor will remain thirsty. But whoever does not think about his honor, but says what do I need now, then he knows also how to bend down when needed, because now you have to bend down. A person sometimes disgraces his honor for a benefit. But here what happened? "My people have changed their glory for that which cannot profit." Here Israel disgraced their honor for whose sake? To take for yourself a weak god, a god with no power in him, with no force in him. What is the logic in this?
There is a wonderful parable from the Maggid of Dubno on this verse, "Has a nation changed its gods, though they are no gods? But My people have changed their glory for that which cannot profit." The Maggid of Dubno says: to what is the matter comparable? A parable of a young married scholar who was supported at his father in law's table. And this young man was a great diligent scholar in Torah, but he had no hand and no foot, no dealings whatsoever in matters of commerce and livelihood. And his father in law, who was a great businessman, wanted to introduce him a bit into business matters. So he gave him a large sum of money and told him, go and do some good deal with this, buy some good merchandise, so that you can begin to trade a bit and then you will be able to establish yourself and stand on your own. Well, so it indeed happened. The fellow went, searched, saw that toothpicks were being offered at a bargain price. He bought a whole container of toothpicks. Well, he returns to his father in law's house, who says to him, what did you buy? He says, toothpicks. Oy vavoy, toothpicks. Who needs so many toothpicks? What will they do with toothpicks? Where will you market them? What are you, how many forests are inside this container? Who needs this? What will we do with this? Well, the successful deal of his son in law is stuck there in his warehouses. He told him, go back, go back to the study hall, sit and learn. A year passed, two years passed, and then he says to him, listen, maybe the fellow thought a bit about what he had done, maybe he learned something, who knows. Come again, he gave him a respectable sum of money, told him, go do some good deal, but my dear, no toothpicks. Bring good things, something that can be sold, something you can profit from. Pay attention to what you buy. This was in the month of Elul, a bit before Rosh Hashanah, and this fellow suddenly saw an offer that was hard to refuse. A container of shofars. Shofars, what a thing, top quality, something extraordinary. He bought the whole container, arrives at his father in law and says, this time I bought something that is needed. He says to him, what did you buy? Shofars. How many did you buy? He tells him, a container. Tell me, what are you, in a synagogue one shofar is enough. The shofars, the quantities you bought, this will last until the shofar of Mashiach. What are you, who needs so many shofars? What will we do with this? Well, well, go back, go back to the study hall, go back. You, that's it, a merchant will never come out of you. Well, now he is stuck there, taking up space, a container of shofars, a container of toothpicks, he does not know what to do with it. Well, one day he meets some shrewd merchant, one of those who know how to sell ice to Eskimos. He says to him, do me a favor, I have toothpicks, a whole container of toothpicks, stuck in my throat like a toothpick in the throat, I don't know what to do with it. Do me a favor, take it, exchange it for whatever, the main thing is that I not see these toothpicks here, I, they are toothpicks in my eyes, I cannot look at them. Well, he took them. He met some other merchant, also no less shrewd, and says to him, do me a favor, I have a container of shofars here, I don't know what to do with it, I am stuck with it, I cannot look at it, exchange it for whatever, the main thing is that I not see it here. Well, no problem, don't worry, trust me, it will be fine. After a month the first merchant calls him, the one he handed the toothpicks to, and says, it's incredible, I made a deal for you, you won't believe it, I found, I managed to exchange your toothpicks. He says, what are you saying? What did you exchange them for? He says, for shofars. Oy oy. The other calls him six minutes later and says, we've closed a deal. What? I exchanged your shofars. For what? He says, for toothpicks. Oy oy oy, he received both containers back, and even paid commission and brokerage fees to both sides, and in short, he returned crestfallen and downcast. Well, he kept quiet, told nothing. But the son in law heard about the story somehow. He said to him, ah, ah, you gave it to me, you spoke against me, you said, look what he understands, look, here are your merchants. Merchants, licensed, experts, here look, one went and brought you shofars, the other brought you toothpicks. Here, these are top notch merchants. So what are you complaining about me for? He says, you had better keep quiet. You had better keep quiet. You received money, and with money you can buy anything. But that poor wretch received toothpicks, what will he do with it? He can only exchange it for shofars. The other received shofars, he can only exchange it for toothpicks. What will he do in such a situation? But you received money, with it you can buy anything.
Says the Maggid of Dubno, this is what the Holy One, blessed be He, is saying here, "Has a nation changed its gods, though they are no gods." He says, if you see a gentile changing his gods, what is he exchanging? He is exchanging toothpicks for shofars. This is worth nothing and that is worth nothing. And even so he does not exchange. He is attached to his toothpicks and the other is stuck with his shofars. He does not exchange, he does not exchange, "though they are no gods." "But My people," you took money, you took a god, a living God, and this you exchanged for what? "For that which cannot profit." Against you there is truly a complaint. But them, even if they exchange, what do they exchange for what? They exchange a cow for a donkey. But you took a living God, and for what did you exchange this?
"Be astonished, O heavens, at this, and be horrified, be utterly desolate, says Hashem." "Be astonished, O heavens," Rashi says this is an expression of amazement, they will be astonished. Meaning the heavens will be astonished and amazed. "And be horrified," from the root of storm (sa'ar). "Be utterly desolate." Over what will they storm? And over what will the amazement be? "Be utterly desolate," as if you are being destroyed. Why? Says the Holy One, blessed be He, the Beit HaMikdash is destined to be destroyed. So over this the heavens must be astonished. The Malbim explains that the astonishment is over something wondrous, something amazing. Over what? Over what will be said shortly, "For My people have committed two evils." Over this, "be astonished, O heavens." The heavens will be amazed. "And be horrified, be utterly desolate." Over what will they storm, over what will they be in turmoil, they will also have great grief, over the greatness of the destruction, that Israel was utterly desolate, as He will soon specify.
"For My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken Me, the source of living waters, to hew for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water." "For My people have committed two evils." First, "they have forsaken Me, the source of living waters." They went to hew for themselves broken cisterns. The Metzudat David explains that they went to worship the constellations and the stars, for the constellations and stars have no power of their own, but only what they receive from the upper spiritual influence, from the holy sefirot, which they transmit downward. So you went to hew for yourself cisterns, but these cisterns are broken cisterns. Why is this called cisterns? Because the constellations receive the flow upon themselves, just as a cistern receives water into it. But they do not have the power to hold the influence, but they always send it down below. That is, it is not in their hands, the influence is not in their hands, it is not from their own power. So you went to hew for yourself such a cistern, that this cistern is a broken cistern, that does not have the power to hold the influence and to bestow it upon whomever it wishes, something that cannot hold the water. This is what you went to take for yourself as a god.
The Malbim explains, "For My people have committed two evils." Says the Malbim, if you observe you will see that their folly here is twofold. Their folly, first, in whom they abandoned, second, whom they took in place. And now He will elaborate. In whom they abandoned, their evil is twofold. All of them, "they have forsaken Me." Really, the fact that you forsook the Holy One, blessed be He, "Has a nation changed its gods." Second, they forsook the source of living waters whose waters do not fail. And this itself is a twofold evil. First, they went and took someone, something, whose waters fail, in place of what? In place of a power whose waters do not fail. The Holy One, blessed be He, is a river flowing without ceasing. In contrast, the god to whom you go is a weak god who has no power to profit or to do good. All this is from the standpoint of whom they abandoned. Now let us look from the standpoint of what they took. Here too their evil is twofold. "To hew for themselves cisterns." If you were exchanging an existing thing for another existing thing, an existing thing for an existing thing, then the sin is only, why did you abandon this? What is wrong with going and exchanging it for another? But it can still be understood, this exists and that exists. But if you exchanged an existing thing for a nonexistent thing, an existing thing for a nonexistent thing, He says this is a twofold folly. Because for what did you exchange it? What did you receive in its place? The cisterns they chose, says the Malbim, these are not existing cisterns, but cisterns that need to be hewn. They need to be brought into existence. The Holy One, blessed be He, is a source of living waters, it flows. But what did they go to do? To hew for themselves cisterns. Do you understand? A person has a flowing river, he blocks it up. Why? I am now going to hew a cistern there from which I will get water. In any case, if there were a cistern there already yielding its water, it could somehow still be understood, you block the river because I have a cistern full of water. But you blocked the river in order to hew a cistern that might produce water for you? Where is the logic? This is "to hew for themselves cisterns," there is not even a cistern yet. You are going to exchange something existing for something that does not exist, something that needs to be hewn. Now the additional matter, you go to hew cisterns, and it turned out for you to be broken cisterns that cannot hold the water. After all the alliances and all our efforts, it turned out that this is an alliance that does not endure. You formed alliances that have no benefit in them. For behold in the end "Egypt shall help in vain and to no purpose." And it is written, as the prophet says to them, that it is like a staff that a person grasps in his hand and the thorns of the staff enter his hand. "The staff of this broken reed, Egypt." We relied on them, we leaned on them, and suddenly we discovered that all that remained to us was thorns in the hand. To lean on them was certainly impossible. So behold you see that those cisterns you hewed with great toil and filled with water in time of need, when you came to take the water and enjoy it, suddenly it turned out for you that they cannot hold the water.
Says the Malbim, note, there is a cistern (bor) and there is a well (be'er). The cistern spelled with an alef and spelled with a vav, the Malbim says they are the same. In our verse it is written "cisterns" with an alef and not with a vav. Says the Malbim, cisterns with an alef and cisterns with a vav are one and the same, and we see it sometimes this way and sometimes that way, as it is written "he went down and struck the lion inside the pit" in Shmuel II, where it is written with an alef. "Who will give me water to drink from the well of Beit Lechem," there too it is written with an alef. But says the Malbim, there is indeed a difference between a cistern (bor) with an alef or vav and a well (be'er). A well is already different from the cistern we spoke of. The cistern is of gathered waters, and the well is of flowing waters. As it is written, "Drink water from your own cistern, and running waters from your own well." Meaning, from your well the waters run and flow. So a well is a pit that has water flowing from within it. In contrast, a cistern with a vav or alef means that the waters do not flow from within it, but the waters reach it from another place. Therefore note that whenever Scripture speaks of a well, it will speak of digging or excavating. A well is dug or excavated. In contrast, of a cistern that actually has water in it, it expresses with the term "hew." And what is the difference? The cistern, its water is gathered, the way to hew it is in hard ground or in stones so that the water is not absorbed into it. Not so with flowing waters, where one digs in soft earth, where you do not need hard earth since the waters, as we explained, of themselves flow. Therefore the cistern whose water is gathered, we will always use the term "hew." Also in our case, cistern with an alef or with a vav, it does not matter, the term is hewing, since of itself water does not flow in it. What you put in is what will be. So if some of the water is absorbed, the water is gone. In contrast, the well as we said, regarding the well one can also dig in earth, no hewing is needed, one can also excavate in soft ground, because the waters are constantly flowing and consequently through this they will never run out.
What is the difference between a source of living waters and a cistern? A source of living waters is a spring. A spring is a self flowing source, flowing from beneath the surface of the earth, that is a spring. In contrast, a cistern is a dug pit that is dug in the ground in order to fill it with water. It has no source of its own, it has no spring, it has no self flowing source, but it receives water from outside, and usually in cisterns they would store the water, or rainwater that would arrive would drain into the cisterns. But the cistern is generally not a source, a self flowing source. A self flowing source is already a spring that is located beneath the cistern. But when we speak of cisterns, cisterns means something that does not flow of itself. So you had a spring, a source of living waters, and you went and hewed cisterns whose water in the cisterns, they are broken cisterns that cannot hold the water. Meaning, in any case if the cistern is still sealed, you say there is water. It has filled with water, there is a place to drink from. But if the cistern is a leaking cistern, then even the water that is there now, tomorrow there will no longer be any. Since all that is there is a broken cistern. A broken cistern means that the plaster with which it was coated all around is already cracked, and then the water leaks in and disappears. So you went to hew not just cisterns, but broken cisterns that cannot hold the water. He says if so, what did you exchange for what?
Says the Malbim, and the analogy: the salvation of Hashem is like a spring that flows of itself. It does not need to be hewn, it exists, it flows of itself. And a further matter, the more you draw water from it, the more it will flow. "And you shall draw water with joy from the wells of salvation." The Holy One, blessed be He, is a river flowing without ceasing and always flows more. And the more you take the more it flows, because when you take more, what does this mean? I believe in Hashem, I hope to Hashem. Says Hashem, you believe in Me and hope to Me, I will bestow upon you more. So this is a river that, first, of itself does not cease because it flows, and second, this is a special river that always increases its flow according to consumption. So if so, you abandoned a flowing river. And this river is a source whose waters do not fail. Meaning, it never disappoints, never ceases. In contrast, you went to receive help and assistance from other nations. And this help and assistance resembles a well, for the well requires much hewing. For the well they would make it in rock. And the reason is that they wanted the well to preserve the water, when we hew in rock then the water is not absorbed into the earth. It is hard work to hew the well in rock. So too you, when you went to form alliances, to rely on Egypt, to rely on Assyria, to rely on the other nations to protect you and save you, this is hard work. Because you had to pay them tribute, you had to pay them money so that they would give you some sort of aerial umbrella. So first of all this is like a well, it requires much labor. Second, the well, its waters are not a self source, but you must constantly refill it. So too these nations, after you labored to create the alliances, you must constantly recharge them. More tribute, more bribes, more giving. Third, in the end when you came to drink from these waters, it turned out for you to be broken cisterns that cannot hold the water. After all the alliances and all our efforts, it turned out that this is an alliance that does not endure. You formed alliances that have no benefit in them. For behold in the end "Egypt shall help in vain and to no purpose." And it is written, as the prophet says to them, that it is like a staff that a person grasps in his hand and the thorns of the staff enter his hand. "The staff of this broken reed, Egypt." We relied on them, we leaned on them, and suddenly we discovered that all that remained to us was thorns in the hand. To lean on them was certainly impossible. So behold you see that those cisterns you hewed with great toil and filled with water in time of need, when you came to take the water and enjoy it, suddenly it turned out for you that they cannot hold the water.
"Is Israel a servant? Is he a homeborn slave? Why then has he become plunder?" "Is Israel a servant? Is he a homeborn slave," this is in the language of amazement. What was written above, "we saw as to God, and be horrified, be utterly desolate," He is now describing the greatness of the destruction, that Israel was destroyed. And then He asks, why has Israel become plunder? That is, observe and see that this thing, this punishment, is by Divine providence. It is not something that happened by chance. Therefore He says "Is Israel a servant," and if you observe from the standpoint of the nations that conquered them, on this He says "the young lions roared over him." And besides this He continues, "also the children of Noph and Tachpanches" and so on shall break your crown. And from this He understands that all the evils were caused by our forsaking Hashem. This is the heading, and now we will see the matters within.
Says the Malbim, a person who has a servant, the servitude over his fellow is in one of two ways. One possibility, he bought him. A servant acquired by his money. A person bought a servant, he has dominion over him. He bought the servant, he paid for him, and the servant is now his. The way it was when they would conquer in war, they would take the conquered nation as slaves. So we have here an acquisition, either through money or through conquest. In contrast, there is a possibility of a servant not because I conquered him, but because he is the son of a servant. I conquered a servant, this servant fathered another servant, and the other servant is now my servant. Did you conquer him? What, did you capture him? Did you buy him? No. But since I conquered and acquired the father, his son now automatically becomes my servant. On this He says: it cannot be that Israel would become plunder from the very fact that we acquired them as a servant. Is Israel a servant to those who plundered them? For a person who is homeborn, the master does not have rights over him like a servant purchased with money. A servant purchased with money, you say I paid. I paid, he is mine. Says the Malbim, even those who accepted the law of slavery, regarding a servant purchased with money, opposed it regarding a servant who is an inheritance. That is, as is known, for long periods they opposed this matter of slavery. And until very few years ago, even until a hundred years ago, slavery was still accepted, and as is known in America the war between the North and the South broke out over this matter of slavery. And in philosophy, says the Malbim, even those who accept slavery regarding a servant purchased with money, do not accept it regarding a servant who is an inheritance. That is, he tells you, a servant purchased with money I understand. You bought him, you conquered him. But why should his son be born into a reality of slavery when you have no connection to him? What, did you buy him forever? We know that according to halacha this is indeed so. According to the Torah, a Canaanite slave, "and you shall bequeath them to your children as a possession." So the Torah established, so the Divine wisdom established. And this comes from the standpoint of the curse of Canaan, "cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers." But in any case, the nations grasped and understood that someone is a servant from the fact that you bought him or captured him, this applies to him. What applies to his son, they already accept less that he should be your servant. It turns out then that a person has a claim and right over a servant purchased with money more than a homeborn one. Therefore He says, is Israel a servant? Is Israel a servant purchased with money, that the master would have some claim of established right over us? What, did he buy us? Is Israel a servant? Or at least homeborn? Or do they have even a slight claim over us of a homeborn servant? For we said that regarding a servant acquired with money he has a strong claim. He tells you, they have neither a strong claim over us nor a slight claim of a homeborn servant. For homeborn means one who was born as the son of a servant. It turns out then that they have no claim over us at all to come and conquer us, to come and rule over us.
"The young lions roared over him, they gave forth their voice; and they made his land a desolation, his cities are burned, without inhabitant." What can you say then? What remains to say, says the Malbim, is that he became plunder from the fact that they conquered him. On this He is amazed, "the young lions roared over him, they gave forth their voice." For lions did not come against them but young lions. The young lions (kefirim) are lion cubs, they are young in years. This comes to say in the analogy that those who came against them were a weak kingdom, a lowly kingdom, lacking power. So He says, how did they suddenly succeed in conquering them? "The young lions roared over him." And not only that, they did not bite him, but only roared. They did not devour him, they only, in our words, made noise. "The young lions roared over him," they roared with their voice. Third, young lions came against him, "they gave forth their voice." "The young lions roared, they gave forth their voice." "They gave forth their voice" means the beginning of giving voice, says the Malbim. That is, the roar is already the powerful voice, giving forth voice is much less than that, it is only the beginning of giving voice. I will soon explain the difference. So He says, if so, how could it be that with all this they prevailed over him? And then "they made his land a desolation, his cities are burned, without inhabitant." His cities were burned, meaning from the root of burning, without inhabitant. Says the Malbim that giving forth voice is smaller than a roar. When I want to say what is the opposite of giving forth voice, its opposite is silence. The opposite of giving forth voice is silence. That is, giving forth voice is even any voice at all. In contrast, when we speak of a roar, it is the opposite of giving forth voice quietly. That is, what I want to say, he did not speak quietly, so what do I say? He roared. Do you understand? That is, giving forth voice means he did not stay silent. Roaring means he did not speak quietly. So it turns out that a roar is much more than giving forth voice, because giving forth voice is even any voice at all, that is already giving voice. But a roar is something powerful. On this He says, if so, how could it be that these nations that only began to give forth their voice, so to speak only opened their mouth, and suddenly conquered us? They only began, so to speak, to come and prove themselves, they are lion cubs, they are not strong nations. So how could it be that "the young lions roared over him," and not only that, they also did not strike us but only roared, and already turned our land into a desolation, his cities are burned without inhabitant, with a mere giving forth of voice? All this comes to prove that we were handed into the hands of the nations by Divine providence. This did not happen of itself. Because naturally, how could it be that young nations that have no great power would conquer us?
"Also the children of Noph and Tachpanches shall break your crown." The children of Noph and Tachpanches, Rashi brings that this refers to Egypt. Egypt, which is known by Noph and Tachpanches. For Israel relied on them. We saw that Israel turned to Egypt to ask them for assistance, to be helped by them. And the prophet already rebuked them and told them that Egypt is a staff of a broken reed, that there is nothing to lean on there. Of them He tells you "they shall break your crown." "Yir'ukha" is from the root of "shall break," from the language of "you shall break them with a rod of iron," meaning to break them is to shatter them. And where will they break you? Where will they shatter you? "The crown," they will give you blows to the crown, to your head. These are the children of Noph and Tachpanches to whom you gave a bribe so that they would come to help you, and not only will you not receive help from them, but you will even receive blows to your head from them. Note how this thing will be. It is not by the way of the world, but this thing will be, "Have you not brought this upon yourself, in that you have forsaken Hashem your God, when He led you in the way?" "Have you not brought this upon yourself," if you try to observe, try to understand what is causing us this destruction, what brought us to this? "You have forsaken Hashem your God when He led you in the way." When the Holy One, blessed be He, led you in the way, and essentially He compared Israel to an orphan whose father led him along the way and now he abandoned him and he strays in the wilderness. What happens with him? Whoever comes first to find him acquires him. He has no owner. So too He says, "you have forsaken Hashem your God when He led you in the way." Hashem led you in the way and now you are like an orphan who abandoned his father. Like a person orphaned without a father. And then anyone who wants to seize you can immediately enslave you. Actually there is a difficulty here, it should have said "have you not done this to yourself" in the masculine. Why does He speak here in the feminine? So says the Malbim, since He refers back to the word "this" (zot, feminine). "This" is the cause, "this is what you have done to yourself." What is it? Your forsaking of Hashem, that is what causes you that now all the nations can rule over you.
"And now what have you to do with the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of Shichor? Or what have you to do with the way of Assyria, to drink the waters of the River?" Why do you forsake Me and trust in Egypt, to drink the waters of Shichor? The waters of Shichor, Rashi brings that the intent is by way of hint: have you forgotten that Egypt drowned your males in the Nile, in Shichor? Shichor is the Nile, as it is written, "from the Shichor which is before Egypt." Why do you rebel against Me, for the sake of what? Where, to go into exile? "The way of Assyria, to drink the waters of the River," to go to the Euphrates River where Assyria is found? And therefore, says the Malbim, the Holy One, blessed be He, so to speak argues to them: you yourself caused your fall, so what have you to do with the way of Egypt to ask them for help, when you can obtain your help from the Sanctuary? You can be helped by the Holy One, blessed be He. What will you gain when you turn to the way of Egypt? You want to drink the waters of Shichor? To drink from the waters of the Nile instead of the source of living waters that you forsook, which is the Holy One, blessed be He?
About Egypt. But says the Holy One, blessed be He, why do I need to bring you proof from there, come and I will show you from what you yourself did. "Your own wickedness shall chastise you, and your backslidings shall reprove you; know therefore and see that it is evil and bitter that you have forsaken Hashem your God, and that My fear is not in you, says the Lord, Hashem of hosts." "Your own wickedness shall chastise you, and your backslidings shall reprove you." There is here chastisement, there is here reproof. "Know therefore and see," there is here knowing and there is here seeing. "That it is evil and bitter," there is here evil and there is here bitterness. "That you have forsaken Hashem your God, and that My fear is not in you." So we all already understand that there is here a broad field for the Malbim to answer within. Says the Malbim, there is a difference between chastisement and reproof. Reproof is generally with words. It comes to return him to the good path, so he reproves him so that in the future he will improve his ways. Chastisement is generally with force, either with harsh words, piercing rebuke, or with striking, or with blows. As we say, he chastises him. He chastises him, meaning in order to return him forcefully to the good that the Holy One, blessed be He, intends, so the Holy One, blessed be He, chastises us. And reproof is through speech, which comes to return us to the good path, how? By a good way.
Says the Malbim, one who wants to reprove generally clarifies his matter from the standpoint of the good. It is worthwhile for you to do this, I tell you, you will do it this way and you will succeed, you will have blessing, you will see growth, you will profit and so on. Reproof is always in a good way, that comes to say how good it will be for you in the future if you do properly what I am proposing to you. Note, when we speak of the good or the benefit, it is not in the body of the act but external to it. Meaning, if you do such and such you will profit such and such. That is, it is not the body of the act that benefits you, but the body of the act produces a result. As we might say, a person who works, does the work provide the livelihood? No. Even from a gentile outlook, no, but rather the boss committed that in exchange for such and such hours of work you will receive such and such. That is, the wage is external to the body of the work. When we speak, for example, of a father who reproves his son and tells him do not eat bad food lest you become sick, are we saying that the sickness, that the food itself is sickness? No. Rather the food has certain germs in it that act in the stomach or in the person's body in a certain way and thereby cause an infection that thereby causes sickness. That is, this is called by way of cause and effect. Cause and effect means a certain action that draws along with it and produces from it something else. This is when we speak of reproof.
Says the Malbim, in contrast, the one who chastises, he chastises with whips. As we said, chastisement is mostly striking. Note, the chastisement is not an effect of the sin, not even in the natural way of cause and effect. Rather the chastisement is by the very will of the one chastising. That is, what really is the difference? Note, if I tell you, if you do not listen to my voice you will get a slap, does not listening in the way of cause and effect cause a slap? No. Rather I decided that whoever does not listen will get a slap. In contrast, if I say, you do not listen to my voice, you will eat the spoiled food, you will have a stomachache. This does not depend on my will. Rather this thing is in the way of cause and effect. Eating a spoiled thing causes a stomachache. In contrast, I cannot say that an act, disobeying me, causes a slap. Why? It does not cause a slap. I decided that if you disobey me you will get a slap. This is not in the way of cause and effect. In the way of cause and effect the meaning is that a certain thing derives from another thing. Sickness derives from spoiled food. This is cause and effect. But does disobeying me derive from it a slap? That is not true. When you disobey me I decide to give you a slap. This is not in the way of cause and effect, it is not in the way of action and result. If so, says the Malbim, chastisement is not in the way of cause and effect but it is the will of the one chastising. If you disobey me you will receive chastisement.
Here He tells you, come and see that the chastisements are an effect of our own evil way itself in the way of cause and effect. Even though chastisements in general do not derive in this way, here He says "your own wickedness shall chastise you." Not the whip and rod of one who threatens and says, ah, you disobeyed me, you will get a blow. No. The act you did will strike you. In the way of cause and effect. This is like, if I want to give an example, I do not tell you, if you do such an act you will get a club to the head. And a person, for example, did a certain action, I will give an example, there are those, you know, punching bags, he gave too strong a blow to the punching bag, and the punching bag bounced back and returned a bomb to his head. This is not someone who said you will give a blow and get a blow from me, no, this is cause and effect. The blow you gave created a recoil and returned to you. That is, this is called cause and effect. Your action, your action creates another action, causes some reaction that is what harms you. This is what He says here, "your own wickedness shall chastise you." Chastisement is always not cause and effect, chastisement is a threat, do such and you will get a blow. But here the very thing you did is what returns to you. The very act you did, the very evil you did, is what chastises you.
Reproof, we said, reproof is generally by way of cause and effect. Do not eat spoiled food, it will harm you. Meaning, the spoiled food creates an action in the body that creates a disease that creates harm. This is cause and effect. He says, in contrast, here the reproof is much worse. "And your backslidings shall reprove you." "Your backslidings shall reprove you" means the evil way of itself is what harms you. Not by way of cause and effect, that the action then caused, no. Rather the act itself is what harms. So that is, understand, chastisement is not in cause and effect and by you it is in cause and effect. The chastisements themselves came to you as a direct result of your deed. "And your backslidings," what you were wayward, you strayed from the way, it itself will reprove you. And we elaborated on this in the past, that when it is written, for example, that a person has chastisements, these chastisements are not as a punishment but they are cause and effect. Meaning, if for example we say that a person commits a sin and creates a destroying angel. What does this destroying angel want? To be sustained. From whom does he want to be sustained? From the one who created me. You created me, sustain me. How is he sustained from him? By chastising him, through this he draws vitality from him. And then "a man's folly perverts his way, and his heart rages against Hashem." A person's folly brought him to sin, perverts his way, he does not walk in the straight way, and afterward, Master of the world, why did You bring this upon me? Fool, did I bring it upon you? This is the one you created, he simply approaches you, asks you to sustain him. And the Holy One, blessed be He, in His great mercy says, if I sent upon you this Rottweiler that you created, for a moment you would not survive. But Hashem bears iniquity. "Bears iniquity" means, this destroyer, says Hashem, I will sustain and support him in the meantime until you gain the sense to repent. But in the meantime I bear it. And this is simply a kindness beyond measure or description. For I angered my Creator and committed a sin and created a destroyer, the Holy One, blessed be He, should have told me, it is not enough that you angered Me, you even created a destroyer, and now I have to help you? Says the Holy One, blessed be He, the fact that you created the destroyer against My will and now the destroyer wants to take vitality from you, I will even sustain that destroyer. And what does this thing cause? That he continues to create destroyers. Why? Because he did not get the bomb to the head. Because who continues to sustain the destroyer and feed him? The Holy One, blessed be He. So that perhaps he will repent. It turns out then, see how terrible, Hashem sustains the destroyer and the person creates and continues to create additional destroyers. Why? Because he does not feel that it causes him harm. He does not feel that he is harmed by it. And consequently it turns out that the Holy One, blessed be He, so to speak in quotation marks, harms Himself. But this is His great kindness, blessed be He, since "I do not desire the death of the one who dies, but that he return from his ways and live."
Says the Malbim, according to this it turns out that reproof everywhere comes through an effect, as we said, eat a spoiled thing you will have a stomachache, eat a spoiled thing you will be sick. Here He says, see that the matter is the thing itself, the reproof is, this itself chastised you. And chastisement is always not through cause and effect but I decided to give you a blow because you did, here He says this will indeed come through cause and effect. That is, all the conditions prove to you, this is by Divine providence. This is by Divine providence, there is here someone who wants to speak with you and wants to tell you that your way is a mistaken way. Says the Malbim, reproof acts upon knowledge. That is, there are clear proofs that this thing you are doing is evil. Reproof, I reprove you, I speak with you, I prove and show you that your way is a mistaken way. In contrast, chastisement, this is felt. This is felt, I do not need to show you that your way is incorrect. You see that you are going in a certain way, you get blows. Chastisements you feel them. This is, so to speak, seen. To see does not necessarily mean seeing with the eyes, understand. The Malbim says that seeing applies to all five senses. "See," what is the continuation? "The smell of my son." "See the smell," perhaps you smell a smell? Why "see the smell"? Says the Malbim, seeing applies to all five senses. I see a smell, I see the voice, I see touch, taste and so on. Seeing applies to everything. And if so, then that which comes through seeing, that is, tangible. Tangible. The chastisements are seen. What does "seen" mean? Felt, you feel pain. Reproof in contrast, they tell you, listen, it is not worthwhile for you, evil will come of it. I prove to you intellectually, understand, this way is negative, it leads to a negative place.
Therefore He says now, understand the expression here. He tells her "see and know." Seeing and knowing. What is the difference between them? On this He says, "know that it is evil," and "see that it is bitter." We asked, what is "evil" and "bitter"? What is the redundancy? He says, see that the very fact that you forsook Hashem is evil in itself. To forsake the Holy One, blessed be He, is evil. And bitter, from the standpoint of the punishment. Because the punishment is bitterness, the punishment is pain, it is suffering, it is bitter. Therefore He says, "your own wickedness shall chastise you," and "see," for here you need to see, for I see, I feel, as we said this is a tangible thing. It is in the senses, it is seeing, I see that it is bitter. Corresponding to "your backslidings shall reprove you," corresponding to the reproof, we said reproof is knowledge. I inform you, know that this way is negative, it leads to an evil thing. Therefore it is written "know that it is evil." Know through proofs, through demonstrations, that this way is an evil way.
"And that My fear is not in you." He tells her, that you forsook Hashem is evil and bitter. But My fear in you is not evil and bitter. Meaning, why did you forsake Hashem? Because you said the service of Hashem is hard. The service of Hashem is bitter. The service of Hashem demands effort. And the Holy One, blessed be He, tells her, your forsaking of Hashem is evil and bitter, and My fear is not in you. Not what you fear from Me, what do you fear? The service of Hashem, the supposedly hard demand of Hashem's commandments. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, come and see that your fear of Me is good and sweet and free of all labor, in contrast to the fear of idolatry which is evil and bitter. Says the Malbim, how so? Behold you see that idolatry demanded of a person hard demands, such as offering their children to Molech. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, I never demanded of you such a thing. I never demanded of you to offer your children to Me as a sacrifice. So says the Holy One, blessed be He, "and My fear is not in you," you cannot say that My fear in you was evil and bitter. But everything the idols demanded of you was evil and bitter. "It is evil and bitter that you have forsaken Hashem." So how did you go and forsake Hashem and take something that is evil and bitter to you, when My fear in you, what you claim you fear from Me, is not evil and bitter? So you exchanged something sweet and good for something evil and bitter?