Verse 25. "I have heard what the prophets, who prophesy falsely in My name, have said: I have dreamed, I have dreamed." I have heard what the prophets who fabricate falsehood say, those who claimed that the Holy One, blessed be He, sent them to prophesy. They were speaking lies, for they would say "I have dreamed, I have dreamed." These were the false words they spoke. The meaning is that they would dream empty dreams, and they would come to relate them as if the dream he dreamed were a prophetic dream. This is what he says, "I have dreamed, I have dreamed." The Radak asks, why the repetition? In order to strengthen the matter, so that people would believe him and understand that this was not just an ordinary dream, but a dream with real substance.
"How long? Is it in the heart of the prophets who prophesy falsehood, prophets of the deceit of their own heart?" How long, the Malbim explains, the question is: how long will they exchange the dream for true prophecy? How long will they be so confused as to think that true prophecy is actually the dream they dreamed, thinking that what I dreamed is prophecy? How long will they be so mistaken as to think that what they dreamed is the word of Hashem? He says this is a complete error. There is an enormous difference between prophecy and a dream. Even though, as we said, dreams were generally the medium of prophecy. That is, when the Holy One, blessed be He, speaks with the prophet, He speaks with him through a dream. Only Moshe Rabbeinu could say "mouth to mouth I speak with him, in a vision and not in riddles." But ordinarily, it was by way of a dream. Yet there is an enormous difference, and I also elaborate on this at length in Mishnat HaChalomot, in explaining the difference between a prophetic dream and an ordinary dream. How does a person not become confused and think that he actually had a prophecy? We are not speaking of our own times, in our times there are no prophecies, but so that one would not err and think he had a prophecy in their times, but rather he would know that what he received was only a dream. The simple dream comes through the imaginative faculty, meaning through a person's fantasies. The prophetic dream is a message from Hashem. This is what he says, "Is it in the heart of the prophets who prophesy falsehood?" Do they imagine that there is in their heart a dream that is prophetic? For in a prophetic dream, in the heart of the prophet there was no doubt at all that he was receiving prophecy from Hashem. That is, the prophet never woke up in the morning and asked himself, wait, was that a prophecy just now or was it just an ordinary dream? He never had any doubt about this. And I also bring here one of the strongest proofs cited in the sefarim, that it is truly impossible for the prophet to have had a doubt about this, impossible that the prophet would question whether his dream was a dream or a prophecy. The greatest proof is from the Akeidat Yitzchak. "Take now your son, your only one, whom you love, Yitzchak." All this the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Avraham Avinu in prophecy, in a dream. Avraham Avinu could have gotten up in the morning and said, ah, dreams speak vanity. Bring three people, we will do a hatavat chalom (amelioration of a dream) and move on. You see that Avraham Avinu takes his son to bind him. That is, he goes to slaughter his son. Imagine that you had erred and it was just an ordinary dream. That is, if so, you understand that this thing is utterly impossible. It is utterly impossible for the prophet to err and think that it was... To Avraham it was clear that this was the word of Hashem. It is impossible for the prophet to have a doubt. For if there were any doubt whatsoever, Avraham would not have gone to bind his son on a one in a hundred chance that perhaps it was only a dream. Rather, you clearly understand that to Avraham it was known: this is not just an ordinary dream, this is a prophecy from Hashem. But these people, "How long? Is it in the heart of the prophets who prophesy falsehood, prophets of the deceit of their own heart?" How long will these people continue to fabricate falsehood out of the deceit of their heart? Out of the deception that is in their heart, meaning their heart deceives them.
"Who think to cause My people to forget My name through their dreams, which they tell one another, as their fathers forgot My name for the Baal." They think to cause My people to forget My name. The meaning is: the prophets, the true prophets who speak in My name, you contradict their words. You reject their words. You tell people not to accept them. So what do you accomplish by this? You cause My name to be forgotten by My people. For the true prophets remind the people of My name, telling them Hashem said, Hashem warned, Hashem cautioned. You come and say no, no, this is all nonsense, it is not true. What do you accomplish? You cause My people to forget My name. "Who think to cause My people to forget My name through their dreams, which they tell one another." They would dream dreams and go and tell them to one another, going to say I dreamed such and such and saw such and such, and by this they wish to say, as it were, that the words of the true prophets are false. "As their fathers forgot My name for the Baal." They repeat by this the corruption of their fathers, for their fathers too forgot My name when they went and accepted the words of the prophets of Baal. They would tell them prophecies in the name of Baal, and through this they would forget the name of Hashem. As we saw with Eliyahu on Mount Carmel, where there were four hundred prophets of Baal. And those prophets of Baal would deliver messages to them and tell them prophecies, as it were, in the name of Baal. So just as they would deliver messages in the name of Baal to cause My name to be forgotten, so too the dreamers of dreams come and deliver messages to cause My name to be forgotten, so that people will not believe the true prophets.
"The prophet who has a dream, let him tell the dream, and he who has My word, let him speak My word of truth. What has the straw to do with the wheat? says Hashem." "The prophet who has a dream, let him tell the dream." That is, the prophet comes and says to them, the Holy One, blessed be He, comes and says to them, how do you compare a dream of a person who dreamed something to one who received prophecy from Hashem? "The prophet who has a dream, let him tell the dream." It may well be that in that dream there is some small element of truth.
Nevertheless, He says, know this, "What has the straw to do with the wheat? says Hashem." For a dream includes within it much straw beyond the wheat. The wheat is the grain, the straw is the chaff, the husks, the stalks, that which accompanies the grain itself. So He says to them, what has the straw to do with the wheat? For he who has My word will speak My word of truth. The meaning is: when the prophet receives prophecy from Hashem, there is no straw in it at all. There is no admixture of anything that is not the word of G-d.
By contrast, when a person dreams a dream, it is written "for a dream comes through much matter." One of the characteristics of a dream is that a dream includes within it also idle matters. Therefore it is very complex and difficult to interpret a dream, for in order to interpret a dream you need to know and extract from within it what is the wheat and what is the straw, to know how to sift it. As we saw with Yaakov, the sun and the moon and the stars. Yaakov said it cannot be, for Rachel has died, so where is the moon here? And what did Yaakov, what is written in Chazal? That Yaakov did not know at that moment that there is no dream without idle matters. And this part about the moon was part of the idle matters within the dream. This is one explanation.
A second explanation, that this refers to the maidservants who raised him like a foster mother, like Bilhah, who raised him as his mother, and therefore she is in the category of the moon, since she raised Yosef. In any case, however it may be, we understand that in a dream there is also an addition of idle matters. So your dreams are dreams of vanity. This is not prophecy, for prophecy is one hundred percent truth and righteousness. So the words of the dreamers are like straw. The straw has no benefit, says the Radak, except as food for animals or for labor. But the wheat is the sifted thing, that which we sifted out of that whole mixture, it is the grain, it is food for human beings. So what has the straw to do with the wheat? How do you mix the grain with the straw and make of it one thing? Surely these are two distinct things.
Now pay attention, examine the wording closely. "The prophet who has a dream, let him tell the dream, and he who has My word, let him speak My word." Do you hear? He who has a dream tells it. He who has My word speaks it. What is the difference, asks the Radak, between speaking and telling? The Radak says, one who tells a dream, this is merely a recounting of matters, something he saw in his dream. Like a person who recounts something he heard. There is no portion of the intellect here, but rather this is only imagination, imagination alone. Rashi says "let him tell it" is a term of recounting, like stories. Telling stories, this is the meaning of "telling" here. But "he who has My word," meaning the prophetic dream, this one speaks, this is by the power of the word (davri). The power of "davri" in the holy sefarim refers to the power of the intellect. And he actually speaks something that comes from the intellect, for prophecy is transmitted in a person's intellect. And so it emerges that in his words and in his prophecy there is truth. It is not just stories, but rather he speaks the word of Hashem.
There is an additional difference. To speak (ledaber) is always with force. It is to lead. By contrast, saying (amirah) is soft, telling is something softer. Speech is always with force. Like "one leader (dabar) for a generation, and not two leaders for a generation." "Dabar" in the sense of a leader. The dream comes with force. We will see this further on, that when a person would dream a dream, the dream would cause the person to tremble all over and receive, as it were, a high voltage. The person would suddenly feel some strength and power entering him with tremendous force. His own strength would weaken. We see that with Shaul, even the garments upon him became heavy for him, he would strip off his garments from the great intensity of the power of the divine speech. Therefore this is called speech, since speech is with force, that which leads him, as I said it is from the term "dabar," therefore it is called "davri." By contrast, one who dreamed a dream, this is a recounting of matters. Recounting, just stories. Therefore there is no excitement in the dream, therefore there is no state in which the body loses its senses, but rather it is a reality that passes over the body like an ordinary story.
Yonatan translated, the Radak brings, just as there is a difference, I translate for you, between straw and wheat, so there is a difference between the wicked and the righteous. That is, how do you mix together and receive utterances from the wicked and not from the prophets who are the true prophets, who are the righteous? Chazal say, what has straw to do with the wheat? What is the relevance of wheat and straw to a dream? Rabbi Yochanan said, just as it is impossible for wheat without straw, so it is impossible for a dream without idle matters. In fact there is much elaboration on this, I wrote an entire chapter on this in Mishnat HaChalomot about this matter that a dream includes within it idle matters, whether this is always true, whether it is true also regarding dreams of truth or whether it is true only regarding ordinary dreams, and several more details regarding this matter of idle matters in a dream. We will not dwell on this now, whoever wishes may look there. The Malbim explains according to the same line he said earlier, that the prophet never errs. The prophet always knows whether what I received is a dream or whether I received a message from Hashem. The prophet never errs.
By the way, since we have already mentioned it, I will note, indeed in the sefer they raise a difficulty on this, the commentators, for you see for example with Shmuel that he returned several times to Eli in order to ask him, did you call me? Here you see that he did not know, what is this, he did not recognize prophecy. He did not know that this was a prophecy from Hashem. How do you say that the prophet always knows what prophecy is? Here you see that he did not know. So it is written in the sefarim that indeed there is a difference between one who is still a student in prophecy and one who is a prophet. This was the first revelation to Shmuel, the first time Hashem spoke with him. Therefore Hashem did not want to alarm him, and called him in the voice of Eli, like one calling from afar, until he was no longer alarmed and then He already spoke with him. But ordinarily, after the prophet is already accustomed to prophecy, then there is no situation in which he becomes confused and thinks that perhaps the dream I dreamed is actually perhaps a prophecy. There is no such error.
So the Malbim says this too is what is written here. For the prophet says to them, does not the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, and he who has My word speaks My word of truth. The meaning is: if he knows that he has a dream, then the prophet will say I dreamed a dream. By contrast, if he knows that he has My word, he will not mix dreams with My word. And through this he will speak words of truth. He has no error to think that the words of the dream are perhaps words of prophecy. And here he explains that there are three markers and differences to distinguish between the dream and the prophecy. First, as we saw just now, he who has My word will speak My word of truth alone. When it is the word of Hashem, it is only truth. There is no admixture of falsehood there. This is the first distinction.
"Is not My word like fire, says Hashem, and like a hammer that shatters rock?" Rashi says, they should not have erred and likened dreams by saying that they are prophecy. For the word of prophecy, when it comes into the mouth of the prophet, it comes with strength, like a burning fire, as we explained. The prophet feels a burning fire in his bones. As it is written in Yirmiyahu, "and it was in my heart like a burning fire." As it is written in Yechezkel, "and the hand of Hashem was strong upon me." So if so, how do you confuse prophecy with a dream? "My word is like fire, says Hashem, like a hammer that shatters rock." One who receives prophecy is the hammer, he does not err, he is not confused about this. The Radak explains, "Is not My word," the Radak says, the things that the dreaming people say, these are idle matters. For you see that they say peace, peace, and there is no peace. They sell you illusions. But My word is like fire, says Hashem, meaning the prophecy that I transmitted that there will be war and there will be exile and there will be troubles, this is like fire that will burn everything that exists in reality. So it emerges that the Radak explains that here we are no longer speaking about the nature of the dream as Rashi explains, but rather here we are speaking about the calamity that will come upon them as a result of their not accepting the words of prophecy. Since they do not accept the words of prophecy, then "My word is like fire, says Hashem, like a hammer that shatters rock," meaning the calamity will come with great force. Like a hammer that shatters rock, nothing will stand against it to nullify it, for what I said and transmitted, says Hashem, will ultimately be fulfilled.
The Malbim also follows the line of Rashi, and as we saw above the Malbim says there are three characteristics that distinguish prophecy from dreams. And the first characteristic we saw is that prophecy is clear truth without any admixture of idle matters. The second characteristic, "My word is like fire, says Hashem." Just as fire burns and spreads light in the darkness, so too a person who receives prophecy has an enormous light upon his soul. The light of G-d is upon him. "The flame of G-d" in the power of the soul, the light of the soul illuminates and it has rays. The meaning is there are rays shining and illuminating in his soul. We cannot explain this as though we have experienced it, but the prophet feels the meaning of an enormous light in his soul. And the third thing, which is easier for us to understand, "like a hammer that shatters rock." Just as a hammer takes a rock and shatters it into pieces, so too prophecy shatters the body and its powers are nullified and "his knees knock one against the other." The meaning is: a person who receives prophecy enters a state of trembling. "His knees knock one against the other," these knees are the knees, and they knock against each other, when he wishes to say that his legs tremble, then "his knees knock one against the other." So if so, the word of Hashem has no error in it. He cannot think that perhaps, perhaps this was a prophecy. If this were a prophecy then you would need to, do you know what they would call the prophet? They call him a madman. Why would they call him a madman? Because, may the Merciful One save us, he was like a person with epilepsy. He would fall to the ground, his senses in turmoil, losing all his powers and beginning to tremble. Since there entered into him, as I said earlier, some tremendous voltage, that the divine power makes his entire body tremble. So one who would see him would think this is surely some deranged person, this is surely some person who suffers from falling sickness or something of the sort. Look at what happened to him. So as we mentioned regarding Shaul, that Shaul stripped off all his garments due to the heavy burden of the prophecy. So that in practice one cannot confuse prophecy with a dream. For if you were seeing a prophecy, you would feel a hammer shattering rock, and then you would know that this is truly a prophecy and not a dream.
By the way, the Tosafot in tractate Shabbat 88 say, "like a hammer that shatters rock," they explain that the meaning is like a rock that shatters the hammer. Like "stones worn away by water." Yes? And like a hammer that the rock shatters. "And like a hammer that shatters rock." And if you explain and ask, and by the way there is a necessity in the Gemara to explain in this way, yes, I will not enter now into why. But in any case if you ask, is it not more logical that a hammer shatters a rock than that a rock shatters the hammer, you say like a hammer that the rock shatters. The answer is that here we are speaking of a rock of sanpirinon, that a rock of sanpirinon is like a diamond or a strong stone, that when you strike, the iron would break. It was not the rock that would break but the iron that would break. And this is what is written here, like the hammer that the rock is able to shatter.
"Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who steal My words each one from his fellow." Hashem says therefore behold, I am against the prophets, meaning I promise to destroy them, those false prophets. "Behold, I send My wrath," Yonatan translated this. "Behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who steal My words each one from his fellow." Afterward He says, "Behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who take their tongues and declare a declaration." Afterward, "Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams, says Hashem, and tell them and lead My people astray with their falsehoods and their recklessness, and I did not send them nor command them, and they profit not this people at all, says Hashem." Three times, "Behold, I am against the prophets." The Radak explains that this was delivered against three kinds of prophets that existed in their times, false prophets who would perform sophisticated acts so that the people would believe in their false prophecy.
The first category, these were prophets who would hear the words of the true prophets. What would the true prophets prophesy against the nations? Like Yirmiyahu who would prophesy against the nations, the burden of Damascus and other prophecies against the nations, and they would go and say to the people, thus says Hashem to Damascus, thus says Hashem to Ammon. He heard from the prophet what the prophet said, and goes and delivers it as if it were his own prophecy, as if he had received it. Yirmiyahu would say it in his house, would say it to his students, and they would go and announce it to the people as if they had received this prophecy. About this He says "Behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who steal My words each one from his fellow." Who steal My words each one from his fellow, he heard from the prophet and steals his words and comes as if to say that this prophecy is his own prophecy. Chazal say this is said about one who prophesies what was not said to him, pay attention, it was not said to him but it is implied from it that it was indeed said to his fellow. And the Gemara brings an example. An example that needs to be understood. The Gemara says, such as Chananiah ben Azur, for Yirmiyah was standing in the upper market and said thus says Hashem of Hosts, behold I shatter the bow of Eilam, the first of their might. Pay attention, they would mainly use prophecies against the nations. For a prophecy against the nation, he has no problem repeating it. But when he would want to counterfeit the prophet's words, meaning to imitate the prophet's words and spread his words as prophecy about the people of Israel, he could not. For the prophet says about the people of Israel things that are not good. And they are exactly the opposite, their goal is to tell the people of Israel good things. So if I want to imitate the prophet so that they will believe me, I can imitate him only in his words about the nations, for that is truly received with a blessing. Calamity upon the nations, the people were willing to hear. But to come and say what the prophet said regarding the people of Israel, so what, shall I come and tell them that the prophet Yirmiyah, shall I come and tell them a prophecy that the people of Israel will be exiled? On the contrary, I want to tell them that they will not be exiled. So what would they do? They would use the prophecies that the prophets would prophesy about the nations, which are bad prophecies, as if I received it and it is being fulfilled, and then now believe me what I say now, good prophecies regarding the people of Israel. So what did he do? Yirmiyahu said in the upper market, thus says Hashem of Hosts, behold I shatter the bow of Eilam, the first of their might. Chananiah ben Azur drew a kal vachomer (a fortiori argument) on his own. The meaning is he learned a kal vachomer on his own. And if Eilam, which only came to help the Chaldeans, the Holy One, blessed be He, said behold I shatter the bow of Eilam, then the Chaldeans themselves, all the more so that Hashem will shatter their bow. Chananiah ben Azur came to the lower market and said I received a prophecy. What is the prophecy? Thus says Hashem, the G-d of Israel, saying I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. He tells me, I received a prophecy from Hashem that Hashem broke the Chaldeans, the Babylonians. I received a prophecy from Hashem. So what emerges is that he stole this prophecy from Yirmiyah. The Gemara asks, what are you saying to me, that he prophesies a prophecy that was not said to him but was said to his fellow, like this prophecy? But it was not said to his fellow either, for Yirmiyah too did not speak about the Chaldeans. Yirmiyah spoke about Eilam. And only Chananiah ben Azur drew a kal vachomer on his own and said if Eilam as helpers has its bow shattered, then Babylon as the initiators, all the more so that its bow will be shattered. But in any case no such prophecy was delivered. How do you say that he took it from someone else? The Gemara says, since a kal vachomer has been given, it is considered as if it was stated. The Gemara says that a person may derive a kal vachomer on his own. A gezeirah shavah, for example, only if he received it from his teacher. But a kal vachomer a person may derive on his own. So the Gemara says, since a kal vachomer has been given, permission has been given to a person to derive a kal vachomer on his own, so Chananiah ben Azur is as if he heard explicitly from the words of Yirmiyah the prophet that Hashem will shatter the yoke of the bow of the Chaldeans. So this is the first "behold I am." "Behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who steal My words each one from his fellow." He goes and hears from the true prophet and spreads it as if it were his own prophecy.
The second category, this is the following verse. "Behold, I am against the prophets, says Hashem, who take their tongues and declare a declaration." Here we are speaking, there were among them prophets who were masters of pure speech, sweet of lips. About them it is written "who take their tongues and declare a declaration." They would speak to them words of peace in the name of Hashem, they would show them a pleasant face in order to persuade them to accept their prophecy. What is called rhetoricians. People whose craft this was, the craft of speech. About this Chazal say one who prophesies what he did not hear. These prophets did not go and make copies of Yirmiyah. So why should they believe you? Since their tongue is pure and their lips are elevated and their speech is pleasant, so people would hear them and say listen, this sounds like a prophet. As if he makes an impression that he knows what he is talking about. It, it makes a genuine impression. So through this they would also speak false words that they never heard at all. They are not stealers. Rather, "the prophets, says Hashem, who take their tongues and declare a declaration." They declare declarations, and this declaration would make a genuine impression and people would accept it. The Malbim explains in the section explaining the words, that "declaration" (ne'um) means an ordered and arranged statement. The meaning is a precise thing that is delivered in an exact form. Those who are accustomed to these speeches, what are they called in the language of Chazal? Declaimers (na'amanim). Do you hear? We call it today "declaimers" (no'amim). But in the language of Chazal they are called na'amanim. "He removes speech from the trusted ones (ne'emanim)." Who are the na'amanim? Those who declaim declarations. And from this comes "the declaration of transgression to the wicked." And mostly the declaration comes upon the words of the prophets. So this is what he says, these are people who take their tongues, meaning they have a habit in their tongue to declaim a declaration. They speak pure and pleasant speech, and would tell them, showing them a pleasant face, as it were, that only good will come to them.
The third category, this is the part of the verse afterward in verse 32. These are people who would prophesy false dreams. They dream dreams and come and say that their dreams are prophecy, and deliver this prophecy to the people, as it were, in the name of Hashem. This is the last category. "Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams, says Hashem, and tell them and lead My people astray with their falsehoods," etc. The Radak explains what "who take their tongues" is. The Malbim explained that it is from the term "habit of the tongue." But by contrast the Radak explains that "take their tongues" is like "they smooth their tongues." What is this actually? Like keves/kesev (lamb), kahal/lahak (assembly), simlah/salmah (garment), and so on. So "who take their tongues" is like "who smooth their tongues," like "they seduced with the abundance of their learning (likchah)." The meaning is "with the smoothness of her lips she leads him away." With the sweetness of lips. So "who take their tongues," they smooth with their tongue, meaning they have a smooth tongue by which they know how to persuade people to believe what they say and to make an impression that their prophecy is from Hashem.
"Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams, says Hashem, and tell them and lead My people astray with their falsehoods and their recklessness, and I did not send them nor command them, and they profit not this people at all, says Hashem." "Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams, says Hashem," and lead My people astray with them. All three groups that we have now enumerated, He tells you, behold Creator, I did not send them. I did not appoint them as emissaries to the people. Second, nor did I command them. You already said I did not send them, what is nor did I command them? Nor did I command them means I did not speak with them even as a command for themselves. Even apart from a mission to the people, but as a command for themselves. And apart from this, what they, and from the fact that they prophesy words of falsehood, at least there might have been some benefit in it, but they profit not this people at all, says Hashem. That is, fine, you come to fabricate something but at least say something that has benefit in it. That is, a person could invent a story, I don't know what, tell about some seance he had in order to strengthen the public. Fine, so I say, what he did is an improper act, since Judaism is truth, and truth is marketed with truth. Truth does not need, one does not need to tell lies in order to market one's wares. But Judaism is truth, we do not need to invent stories. But a person came and invented some story, some seance that took place, revelation of souls, I don't know what, Garden of Eden, Gehinnom, and so on, and managed to sweep people along in order to bring them closer to Judaism. You know, there was once some preacher who told the public, he began to give a sermon, so he told the public that he asked the Rav whether it is permitted to tell a story that did not happen, yes? Whether it is permitted to tell fabricated stories in order to bring people to repentance? He says, I asked the Rav whether this thing is possible? And the Rav told me that this thing is possible. And this is the first story. [laughter from the audience] Do you hear? So in practice the way of Judaism is not to market itself by the power of falsehood. Now pay attention, now a person here who lied, for example a person now comes and lied, told about some seance and Garden of Eden, Gehinnom, all well and good, apart from a lie I cannot say that he caused great damage. Since on the contrary, he even brought people closer to repentance. Now if a person does the same thing in order to bring them to idolatry, then this is a double crime. You both lied, told about something that did not happen, and second, through this you also degraded the people. The first at least benefited somewhere. Perhaps someone was even strengthened by it. With the second you even weakened. This is what is written here. He says it is not enough that I did not send them nor command them, at least they would say things that have benefit in them, but they profit not this people at all, says Hashem. The opposite is true, he even leads the people astray against the way of Hashem, leads him astray from the correct and upright path.
Recklessness (pachzutam), what is written here "with their falsehoods and their recklessness," the Radak explains, recklessness is lightness. Like "reckless as water, you shall not have the excellence." The meaning is he does his deeds lightly, without settling upon the matter, without contemplation and without thought. So in their lightness of mind they perform their action. Like "empty and reckless ones." This is the opposite of the deliberate person, this is the reckless person who does his deeds in a moment without contemplating.
"And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, asks you, saying, what is the burden of Hashem? Then you shall say to them: You are the burden, and I will cast you off, says Hashem." In the following verses we will see that there is a reference to a certain manner in which the people would turn to the prophet, and this manner of address would express mockery and derision of his prophecy. And this mockery they would express in the words "what is the burden (masa) of Hashem?" Masa, mem, sin, aleph. And we will explain according to the commentators now where here is actually the flaw of this expression. Rashi explains, "what is the burden of Hashem," a term of laughter. Because his prophecy is a burden to them. That is, what, what has Hashem loaded upon us today? Tell us what, what burden do we now have? What is the burden of Hashem? They relate, as it were, to the prophecy of Hashem as some heavy burden that they must carry on their backs. The Malbim explains that the prophecies were called by the term "masa." Like the burden of Damascus, the burden of Ammon, and so on. Masa. Masa means a prophecy that the prophet would carry. And the people would say what is the burden of Hashem, they meant to say that masa is from the term "mashal" (parable). That is, as it were, you the prophet come telling parables, like telling stories. What, what story is there today? What, what did Hashem tell you today? What story did He tell you? Yirmiyah never prophesied with a prophecy of masa. That is, we do not find such an expression in the prophecy of Yirmiyah. For the prophecies of Yirmiyah were about the destruction. And about the destruction he did not use masa and figurative language. About the destruction he used only prophecies that describe in precise form what will be. When I speak of a prophecy that is masa and figurative language, then I can speak of a boiling pot that I see, I can speak of all kinds of prophecies in which there is thus a bottle and various other things. What is this? This is a parable. This is masa. With Yirmiyahu there is no masa. There are no parables. Yirmiyahu speaks about destruction as it is. He describes harsh things and he describes the destruction without any embellishment. The generation, when they would come to the prophet, would ask him in a manner of scoffing, what is the burden of Hashem? And when they would, the meaning is what, what parable did he tell this time? And likewise when they would recount the words of the prophet one to another, they would turn the words of the prophet, as it were, into a parable. As if the prophet told a story, the prophet told some saying, some figurative expression. This is what Hashem says, "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, asks you, saying, what is the burden of Hashem? Then you shall say to them: You are the burden, and I will cast you off, says Hashem." What will be the answer? So Rashi explains, the answer is, you shall say to them: You are the burden, you are a burden upon the Holy One, blessed be He. You ask, as it were, according to Rashi the explanation is, what, what has Hashem loaded upon us? What is He laying upon us? What burden is He bringing upon us? What burden? You are the burden. You are a heavy load upon the Holy One, blessed be He. And when a person has a heavy load upon him, what does he do? He unloads it. And I will cast you off, says Hashem. So this burden Hashem is about to cast off. Hashem is about to unload from Himself this heavy burden. So this is an answer against the mockery that you mock, saying this is a heavy burden, you are a heavy burden, as it were, upon the Holy One, blessed be He.
The Malbim explains, when the people ask you what is the burden, as we explained that the meaning is in their scoffing, and the answer will be, then you shall say to them: You are the burden, and I will cast you off, says Hashem. So first of all the Malbim says that their intention in the mockery was an additional intention. The Malbim says, as it were, that prophecy, when Hashem delivers it into the hand of the prophet, is a burden to Hashem. As it were, there is upon Hashem some burden that He needs to unload. This is "what is the burden." This is a burden to Hashem. And then he says, against this, tell them, and I will cast you off, says Hashem. This burden Hashem will unload. "And the prophet, and the priest, and the people who shall say the burden of Hashem, I will punish that man and his house." And likewise if they say one to another, they express themselves in this formulation "the burden of Hashem," that is, of all the prophecy they make a parable and figurative expression, then "I will punish that man," the meaning is Hashem says he will receive his punishment.
"Thus shall you say each one to his fellow and each one to his brother: What has Hashem answered? And what has Hashem spoken?" Not "what is the burden of Hashem," but rather the formulation will be "what has Hashem answered and what has Hashem spoken." What is the difference between answered and spoken? The Malbim explains that when the prophet asks, Hashem would answer. And when Hashem turns to him first, then Hashem speaks. So you shall ask what has Hashem answered to the words of the prophet, to the prophet's question, and what has Hashem spoken when He began the speech. "And the burden of Hashem you shall no longer mention, for the burden shall be to each man his own word, for you have perverted the words of the living G-d, Hashem of Hosts, our G-d." "And the burden of Hashem you shall no longer mention." You shall no longer mention on your tongues the expression "burden." So according to the Malbim the meaning is you shall no longer mention parable and figurative expression. You shall no longer regard the words of the prophet as parable and figurative expression. "For the burden shall be to each man his own word." The meaning is: when a man, his own word, when a person wishes to speak his utterances, meaning ordinary words, then he wishes to make them fitting, he wishes to bring them in a more distinctive form, so he speaks in the language of burden and figurative expression. This is what he says, "for the burden shall be to each man his own word." When a person wishes to say his word, he will speak with burden and figurative expression. But you have perverted the words of the living G-d, Hashem of Hosts, our G-d. You took the words of the living G-d and turn them into what? Into parable and figurative expression. You change the words of Hashem of Hosts, the living G-d, into parable and figurative expression.
The Metzudat David explains that the burden, "for the burden shall be to each man his own word," he explains that the words of prophecy are like a burden upon the prophet. We have already spoken about this several times in the past, that when Hashem would speak with the prophet, then the prophecy was like a burning fire within him. As it is written "and I said I will not speak any more in His name, and it was in my heart like a burning fire, I was weary of holding it in," so says Yirmiyahu in chapter 20. The meaning is that the prophecy is a tremendous force sitting, as it were, within him, that he feels a need and necessity to say it. He feels a need and necessity to release the matters. That is, the words of prophecy are like a burden upon the heart of the prophet, that he must unload it and say it. And if so, you have perverted, but you pervert My words, so that the word "burden" is as if for the listeners. Do you hear? The words of prophecy are like a burden upon the heart of the prophet, that he must unload it and say it. From this aspect it is a burden. But what do you say? It is a burden upon us. It is a burden upon us, as it were, your words are heavy upon us. It is, it is as if several tons that sit upon us, your prophecies. He says, the prophecy indeed, "for the burden shall be to each man his own word." According to the Metzudat David the meaning is: the prophet who speaks, for him it is truly a burden. But not for you, you have perverted the words of the living G-d, what is a burden for the prophet, to define it as a burden for you.
"Thus shall you say to the prophet: What has Hashem answered you, and what has Hashem spoken?" Even if you wish to ask the prophet himself, that is, if he is now prophesying at present and cannot conceal it, even so do not mention the term "burden." Rather thus shall you say to the prophet: What has Hashem answered you, and what has Hashem spoken? That is, according to the Metzudat David we have here a wonderful explanation, why the repetition. Here in verse 35, "Thus shall you say each one to his fellow and each one to his brother: What has Hashem answered and what has Hashem spoken?" Why again in verse 37, "Thus shall you say to the prophet: What has Hashem answered you and what has Hashem spoken?" So the Malbim also explains this way, and this is the plain sense of the verse, to understand the difference, why it was necessary to repeat. But seemingly if He already ruled it out from the start, why would I think that to the prophet I may indeed say this? And all the more so, if to a fellow I may not say it, all the more so that to the prophet I would not say it. According to the words of the Metzudot this is wonderfully understood. For according to the words of the Metzudat David, actually with the prophet it is indeed a burden. With the prophet it is a burden, something he must unload. When you turn to the prophet, you too should not use the word "burden," even in relation to him. Even though in relation to him it is a burden, so shall I say what is the burden of Hashem? Not for me, for you. The expression "burden" is a repugnant expression, since it was an expression for what they would say about themselves, for us it is a burden. So do not use this expression even when you turn to the prophet. "And if the burden of Hashem you shall say, therefore thus says Hashem: Because you say this word, the burden of Hashem, and I sent to you saying, do not say the burden of Hashem." "And if the burden of Hashem you shall say," first of all there is here a unique verse of which there are three others like it in Scripture, as the Minchat Shai notes here, there are four verses in Scripture in which the name of Hashem appears four times. "If the burden of Hashem you shall say, thus says Hashem, the burden of Hashem, and I sent to you saying, do not say the burden of Hashem." Four times the name of Hashem appears. There are four such verses in all of Tanach. "And if the burden of Hashem you shall say," that is, even though you do not change the words of the prophet but only say "the burden of Hashem," you will be punished for this very speech. For the very utterance "the burden of Hashem." "And I sent to you," and therefore I send to you and warn you even before the punishment, do not say the burden of Hashem. That is, after I have already warned you, then it is clear here that if you continue in this way it is only with the intent to scoff, that the speech is, as it were, like a burden, meaning like a parable, or like the second explanation that the Malbim explained, that it is like a burden upon the Holy One, blessed be He, there is upon Him as if some burden that He needs to unload. May the Merciful One save us. So since this is so, for this you shall surely be punished. "Therefore, behold, I will surely forget you, and I will cast you off, and the city that I gave to you and to your fathers, from before Me." "Therefore, behold, I will surely forget you." What is "I will forget you (nashiti) surely"? So Rashi explains that "nashiti" is from the term gid hanasheh (the sciatic nerve). Like "and their might was withered (nashtah)." What is this? A thing that jumps and shifts from place to place. Nasheh, meaning that the nerve withered, moved from its place. This is one explanation. The Radak explains that "nashiti" is like "I forgot." Like "the Rock that bore you, you forgot (teshi)," yes, like "the abyss of forgetting (nashiyah)," where they speak about forgetting. And by the way they explain that this is the difference between male (zachar) and women (nashim), since the man is a male (zachar), his role is to remember (lizkor) the Torah. Women (nashim) is from the term forgetting, since she does not have the male's command to remember the Torah. So "behold, I will surely forget you," that is I command, the "behold I am," the Radak explains, indicates the swiftness of the action. Every place where it is written "behold I am," the meaning is with alacrity. With alacrity I am ready and prepared to bring evil upon you, and I will surely forget you. The Radak says, why the doubling? The rule is that every place where he doubles the infinitive and writes it again at the end, this comes to strengthen the action. If it is written "I will forget you," then I forgot. "I will surely forget you," the meaning is I will forget with full force. With full intensity, strengthening of the action. So just as you forget My words and the signs that I perform through the prophets and you scorn them, you despise the words of prophecy, so too I will forget you. And even though I acquired you and made a covenant with you, the Radak says, this covenant I will forget, and why? For you first nullified that covenant with the mockery with which you mock the prophets. "Behold, I will surely forget you, and I will cast you off, and the city that I gave to you." "And I will cast you off," the meaning is I will abandon you, and from the city I will remove the Divine Presence. What is written "venatashti" (and I will cast off), like "venatashti" with a tet, so it is "venatashti" with a tet. Yes? There are times when they interchange, like ta'ah and ta'ah. Ta'ah with a tet and ta'ah with a tav. Yes? Only we usually explain the ta'ah with a tet as straying in some matter, and ta'ah with a tav as an error in the way. But in any case you see that both are of the matter of error. So too "natashti" with a tav and "natashti" with a tet, its meaning is a term of abandonment. So "behold, I will surely forget you, and I will cast you off, and the city that I gave to you," also the city that I gave to you I will exile you from it, I will remove My Divine Presence from it and exile you from it from before Me. The Malbim explains, "and I will surely forget you," I will forget you, and I will cast you off so that you will not be a burden upon Me. And this is actually a continuation of what we said earlier. Since you speak "what is the burden of Hashem," meaning what is heavy upon Hashem that He must tell us a prophecy, ah, you speak about Hashem having a burden? The burden is you. I will cast you off so that you will not be a burden to Me. And he explains what is written "nashiti," that we explain it either from the term transfer from place to place or from the term forgetting, these are two explanations that we have already seen. Rashi explained transfer from place to place, jumping and shifting, gid hanasheh. The Radak explained it is from the term forgetting. But he explains a third explanation, which is expressed more in the Targum, for the Targum says "nashiti," "I will utterly abandon you (artash yatkhon mirtash)." What is the meaning of "artash you"? Its meaning is destruction, I will destroy you, yes? So from what term is this? He explains that it is from the term devastation (sho'ah). So we have from the term gid hanasheh, which is movement from place to place, we have from the term nashiyah, which is forgetting, and we have from the term sho'ah, "and I will surely forget you," the meaning is I will bring upon you devastation, I will artash you, the meaning is I will bring destruction. "And I will place upon you eternal reproach and eternal disgrace that shall not be forgotten." And upon you I will bring eternal reproach, what is eternal reproach? The meaning is that the reproach, your disgrace, your exile in the hand of the Chaldeans, will be for a long period of time. It is not meant to say "eternal" as forever, but rather the meaning is that this thing will be for a long time, like "and he shall serve him forever (le'olam)," which we explain as 50 years, no, it does not mean that it is forever. So here too when it is written "eternal reproach," the meaning is that this reproach will be for a great length of time, there will be this disgrace when you will be captives in the hand of the enemies, so this is eternal reproach and eternal disgrace that shall not be forgotten. And the reason, the Malbim says, is that this is measure for measure. You intended to reproach the prophet and to disgrace the words of prophecy, that the words of prophecy are parables, that the words of prophecy are a burden, as we explained a burden upon Hashem, you intended to disgrace, and therefore your punishment is measure for measure, upon you will be eternal reproach and eternal disgrace. What is not understood, the Malbim asks, is that he should have placed the disgrace before the reproach. Since the reproach is greater than the disgrace. And usually the Malbim explains that disgrace (klimah) is from oneself, and reproach (cherpah) is what others reproach him with. And to always be reproached by others is a much greater disgrace than a person merely feeling his shame from himself alone. Only he explains that reproach is because of something, and disgrace is even without any reason. So this is what he explains. He tells you "and I will place upon you eternal reproach," they will reproach you, and this is called relatively lighter. And why? Since the reproaches are because of some thing. The meaning is you did something improper, so they will reproach you for it. We are still somehow willing to absorb reproaches that are for something we deserve. But disgraces, he says disgrace is even without a reason. He disgraces you even without there being some justification here. He says reproach is even not in his presence, disgrace is only in his presence. So therefore it is understood why reproach and beyond that disgraces. For always when one comes to speak of a trouble, one never says a great trouble and afterward a small one. It always goes and adds, this is the manner of the speaker. When a person wishes to say about a bad thing that will happen, he says they will fall thus and even thus and these too will fall, it always goes and adds. So here we must find the explanation how reproach, which is sharper, goes and is less than disgraces, for disgraces appears after it. So he says yes, since the disgrace is in his presence, then this is even sharper than reproach which is not in his presence. And the reproach is because of a reason, and the disgrace is even without a reason, this is even sharper than the reproach in this sense, that they will disgrace us even without reason and justification. And this will be disgrace and reproach that shall not be forgotten.