"Righteousness will be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his waist." The Malbim says that here Yeshayahu describes how righteousness and faithfulness will not be some external acquisition of his, but rather like a girdle. What is a girdle? A girdle is a belt. Just as the belt clings to the loins and to the waist, the meaning is that these will be part of him, as it were, part of his very body. Righteousness and faithfulness will be attached to him and will never separate from him under any circumstances.
Now, righteousness he compares to the girdle of his waist, which is the belt worn over the garments. Why? Because righteousness is a matter between a person and his fellow. Matters between a person and his fellow are visible to all. People can see whether you are upright in your dealings with others or not. They can see your conduct toward your fellow. So the righteousness with which he will conduct himself toward his fellow will be the girdle of his waist, revealed and visible to all, just as the girdle on the waist is revealed and visible to all. Faithfulness, by contrast, which is a matter between a person and God, he compares to the girdle of his loins. "His loins," says the Malbim, is the girdle that is worn inside, beneath the garments. That is called the girdle of the loins. He brings proofs for this from various pesukim. For example, it is written "his sword fastened upon his loins," meaning the outer part; the girdle of the loins is the more inner part. "Every man with his hands on his loins like a woman in labor": the woman who places her hands on her loins refers to the inner part. Or "your son who will come forth from your loins" refers to the inner part, not the outer region. Faithfulness will be the girdle of his loins. Why does he compare faithfulness to the more inner girdle, the one beneath the garments? He brings a wonderful teaching in the name of the Chovot Halevavot in the Gate of Service: it is a condition of the complete believer that his inner self be greater than his outer self. Would that we merited to reach the level where our inside matches our outside. That we hope to attain; we are still far from it. But the complete believer, it says, is far greater inside than his exterior shows. When you look at him from the outside he appears to you at a certain level, but if you dig within, you will see the heights he has reached, you will see what greatness he possesses, so that what you see on the outside is as nothing compared to what he conceals. He reveals a handbreadth and covers two thousand. This is a condition of the complete believer: that his faith and his inner self are so holy, far beyond what he projects on the outside. And this is what I once told you: they say someone once asked, I believe it was Rav Elyashiv, where are the hidden tzaddikim today? After all, there are thirty six hidden tzaddikim in every generation. In the past there could be a Motel the wagon driver and a Yankel the water drawer, and suddenly after his passing they would find in his home sacks of Kabbalistic writings and all sorts of things, and it would turn out he was a giant of a man of whom no one knew. He was a wagon driver reviewing the entire Shas and astonishing in his genius. Such things happened in the past. Where is this today? Are there really such people today, the shoemaker or the construction worker, who are on such levels of hidden tzaddikim? So he answered them: No, today there are no such hidden tzaddikim. Today, he told them, the revealed tzaddikim are also hidden tzaddikim. And why? Because when you see him, you recognize his greatness and you imagine that you truly know him. But if you knew what he conceals, you would understand that you do not know even the tiniest fraction of this man. So he is revealed, but he is also hidden. Because what you see is only the outer part. His inner self is far greater. And this is what is written here, "faithfulness the girdle of his loins." Faithfulness, which is the part between a person and God, will be the girdle of his loins. It will be the inner, hidden part, which will be far greater than the outer part.
What greatness he possesses, which he conceals from you. What a genuine servant of God he is, which you do not see and do not recognize. Had you known it, it says, you would stand in awe. So it emerges that the revealed tzaddik appears to you at a certain level, but know that he still conceals within him a far more hidden tzaddik whom he does not reveal to others. His inner service of God, which he does not broadcast outward, is far, far higher than you could imagine. This is what he says: "Righteousness will be the girdle of his waist," the outer girdle, visible to all, that is the realm between a person and his fellow. "And faithfulness," which is between a person and God, will be the girdle of his loins, inner and hidden, so that however much you may know about the Mashiach, you will not truly know his real spiritual power; it will still remain hidden from you.
"The wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid; the calf, the young lion, and the fatling together, and a little child will lead them." He describes for us what will be in that period. "The wolf will dwell with the lamb": even the wolf, or the leopard, which is the fiercest of animals, will not do harm. It will even lie down with the kid, and the kid is the weakest of animals, a nursing young one, the smallest and weakest of the animals; it will lie down together with it and not harm it. And there will be no novelty in this, as if to say "look, it did not harm it." It says "the calf, the young lion, and the fatling together": just as the large ox walks today with the small oxen, with the little calves, and no one sees this and wonders why a large ox should trample the little calves. So too the situation will be that the calf will be with the young lion, the calves will walk together with the lions, and "a little child will lead them." And who will lead them, who will guide them? A little child will lead them. A child will take them and not be afraid or fearful of them.
You know, there was once a zoo that made some kind of display of the messianic era, "the wolf will dwell with the lamb." They put a wolf and a lamb together in one cage and wrote "the wolf will dwell with the lamb." People came, saw it, and were genuinely impressed. Someone there says to the zoo manager, "Tell me, what is the method, how do you...?" He tells him: every day we simply replace the lamb. It eats it, and afterward we need to bring a new one. Yes.
Now, the Radak here dwells on an interesting matter. The Radak says that in the messianic era the natures of the beasts and animals will change, pay attention, and revert to what they were at the beginning of creation and in Noach's ark. Did you know that the lion, in the past, ate grass? Listen to an interesting matter that someone who does not contemplate it never notices, but one who contemplates it will realize it is simple logic. From where do we have proof that the lions ate grass, that all the predatory animals ate grass and vegetables? He says: consider, Noach has just left the ark. When Noach leaves the ark, there are no animals at all in the world. What is there? The pairs that he brought into the ark, and the sevens with which he had to bring offerings, nothing more. He asks: what did all the animals eat? All the predatory animals, what did they have to eat? He says: without any doubt, at the first stage they ate grass. Or even within Noach's ark, all the predatory animals were inside for a full year. What did they eat for a full year? If you say they ate the other animals, that is impossible, because animals did not procreate in the ark, there was no reproduction of animals there, so there was only what Noach had brought in. And if there was only what Noach brought in, and the predatory animals needed to eat it, that species would have gone extinct. Certainly, then, you must say that when Noach brought in food for the animals, which was fruits and vegetables, you must certainly say that this was the food of the predatory animals as well. The Radak says: perhaps this is why he was commanded to bring in seven pairs of the pure animals, so that they would have food. But it is very difficult to say this, because how long could those seven pairs of pure animals last? For all the predatory animals in the ark, how long could that last? A month? It could not last long, and therefore we must certainly conclude, as the Radak concludes, that in the beginning the predatory animals ate grass.
And this is what he says: know that in the messianic era their nature will change and revert to what it was at the beginning of creation, that the predatory animals will not devour the animals that are with them but will return to eating grass, as we will see in the next pasuk: "The cow and the bear will graze, their young will lie down together, and the lion, like the ox, will eat straw." They will return to eating grass as it was in the beginning.
But the Radak brings an additional explanation. Some commentators say that all of this is a parable. The wolf, the leopard, the bear, and the lion are a parable for the wicked who oppress and rob the weak, just as predatory animals, as it were, devour the weak animals beneath them. And the lamb, the cow, the calf, and the kid are the parable for the humble of the land, whom the Radak explained in the earlier pesukim to be trampled underfoot by the tyrants. And it tells you that in the future, in the messianic era, there will be peace in the land, they will not harm one another, and behold you will see such a situation where even the leopard, the lion, and the young lion, which are the fearsome animals, meaning the mighty ones, alluding to the strong men who crush the weak, will not harm them.
But the Radak says this interpretation is problematic. And why? Because in the pasuk that follows it says "they will not do harm or destroy in all My holy mountain." What is "in all My holy mountain"? That is the Land of Israel. Whereas what you are saying, that there will be peace and the strong wicked will not harm the weak, he says this will be throughout the whole world, not only in the Holy Land, for it is written "they will beat their swords into plowshares, their spears into pruning hooks." By the way, whoever remembers, there was once part of the arms reduction agreement between the United States and Russia, an agreement to destroy missiles, ballistic missiles. And then what they made from them, it was a precious material, titanium, and they used this metal for all sorts of things, among them pens; there are all kinds of luxury titanium pens made from the material of those missiles. So someone once remarked about this that the prophecy was fulfilled in them, "they will beat their swords into pens," "leitim" from the word for pen. From swords they made pens. But there the word is "le'itim," from the word "et" (plowshare), "and their spears into pruning hooks; nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore," and "the war bow will be cut off." Regarding the Mashiach it is written "he will speak peace to the nations." So how can you tell me that only in My holy mountain they will not do harm or destroy, only in My holy mountain there will be no war, only in My holy mountain the strong will not harm the weak? The Radak says it is hard to accept this, since throughout the whole world there will be no wars.
And therefore the Radak says: the correct explanation is that the nature of the beasts will not change, and they will continue to eat meat as before, but what the Holy One, blessed be He, promises is that the wild beasts will not do harm throughout the entire Land of Israel, "they will not do harm or destroy in all My holy mountain." And why? "For the land will be filled with the knowledge of God," since everyone will be good and keep the way of God. For when does a wild beast prevail over a person? When he strays from the path, when he does not do the will of God. The Gemara says that no wild beast prevails over a person until he appears to it like an animal. Awesome and fearsome. If a lion devoured a person, that means the lion saw a donkey here, it did not see a person here. Because if it truly saw a person here, then "the name of God is called upon you and they will fear you": that is, the animal should naturally fear, the beast fears man. And if it nevertheless harms him, that means it did not see a person here. There were many episodes with the great ones of Israel who were in a lions' den and no lion harmed them, like Daniel and his companions. He says: since the land is filled with the knowledge of God, a beast will not be able to harm you, because everyone will be a God fearing person, a great person, and this is what is promised to them: "I will remove the wild beast from the land." Even if a wild beast passes through the land, it will not do harm. So in summary, according to the Radak, what is written here that they will not do harm means their nature of eating meat will remain. What then will be the change in them? The change will be that they will not devour or harm; there will be no situation where a person leaves his flock and a lion devours it, or a person goes out and a wolf attacks him, and the like.
"The cow and the bear will graze, their young will lie down together, and the lion, like the ox, will eat straw." And if you ask, what will the predatory animals eat? Here he tells you, the Malbim says, the bear will graze in the meadow, it will not need to hunt prey. And their young too will grow up together, the young will not quarrel among themselves, "Mommy did this for me," "Mommy took this from me." The young of the cow and the bear will graze together as though they were one kind. Now you might say, well, a bear is not much of a wonder, because it is known that even today the bear also eats other things; a bear is not only a predator, a bear also eats fruit, a bear also eats honey. He says: even more than that, "and the lion, like the ox, will eat straw." Even the lion, whose entire food now is only meat, in the future will eat straw. So according to the Malbim this is literal, the lion's nature will change. But according to what we saw earlier from the Radak, the meaning here is essentially as a parable; he does not mean to tell you literally that the lion will begin eating straw, but rather it is a parable that the lion, as he explained earlier, will not hunt. What then will it eat? It will eat only if there is carrion; if there is some carcass, the lion will eat it, but to go and hunt and kill people's animals, and all the more so to kill people, that will not happen, since everyone will be righteous.
An additional explanation the Radak gives here is that these matters can also be explained as a parable. The lion, the bear, and the snake, says the Radak, are a parable for the wicked nations. And he explains: the cow and the bear, "they will graze." What is the meaning of "they will graze"? They will not engage in pursuit for the sake of killing, but only graze. "Graze" means they will engage only in the service of God, they will not engage in the vanities of the world. And this is the continuation, "for the land will be filled with the knowledge of God." By the way, there is an interesting comment of the Radak here that is not entirely clear to me. The Radak says that "dov" (bear), where it is written here "the cow and the bear will graze," the Radak says "dov" here is the female. As it is written "two she bears came out." And just as "cow" is the female as opposed to the ox, so too "dov" here is the female. "The cow and the bear will graze together, their young will lie down together." The cow, who is the mother, and the bear, who is the mother, together their young will lie down. What is not clear to me according to the Radak is: who then is the father? If the "dov" is the mother, then how is the father called, what is his name?
"The nursing child will play over the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child will put his hand over the viper's den." He continues and says: even the snake, over which we have a curse ever since the sin of Adam, "I will place enmity between you and her," despite all this, "the nursing child will play over the hole of the cobra." Not only will the snake not go and deliberately do harm, but also "the weaned child will put his hand over the viper's den." What is "me'orat tzif'oni" (the viper's den)? The Malbim explains that "me'orat" is from the word "orah," light. Regarding the viper's den, the venom of a snake, as is known, burns. It burns, and this is like what we see with the "saraf" snake and the scorpion: the "saraf" is called "saraf" (burner) because its venom burns. Whoever knows, the snake's bite indeed burns; it causes the body to heat up, like a burning. So a thing that burns is also a thing that gives light, so he says the venom of the snake, what will remain of it will only be the light, but burning it will no longer do. And this is what he says, "and over the viper's den," its venom will contain only light, without any aspect of burning. A "tzif'oni" (viper) is a more severe creature than a snake; the viper is more severe than a snake. And he adds: "and over the viper's den," even there "the weaned child will put his hand." What is "gamul" (weaned)? "Yonek" is one who nurses. "Gamul" is already older, as in "like a weaned child upon his mother"; the "gamul" is one who has already been weaned from nursing. So you might have thought, "the nursing child will play over the hole of the cobra," the nursing child played at the hole where the cobra, the snake, is located, because the nursing child, what can he do, he is still nursing, he does not understand, he has no sense, so he puts his hand into the snake's hole. It tells you: no, know that "over the viper's den," the weaned child, who already has sense, who has already been weaned from milk, this is not really an infant, he is already weaned, he already understands, he "will put his hand" over the viper's den. What is "hadah"? From what root is "hadah"? The Malbim says "hadah" is from the word "hed" (echo). When a person speaks to the mountains, he receives an echo. What is an echo? An echo is the returning sound. So "his hand hadah" means he will place his hand and it will return again; he will bring his hand and withdraw it without fear, again and again, he will place his hand and withdraw it without any fear. [Voice from the audience: Does a viper have hands?] The Radak brings here the Targum Yonatan. The Targum Yonatan, how does it translate "me'orat tzif'oni"? "The sight of the eyeballs of the deadly serpent." "Me'orat tzif'oni" means, as it were, from the expression of "the light of his eyes" (his eyesight). The sight of the eyeballs of the deadly serpent: "chivi" means snake, "churman" is the viper, meaning the most dangerous snake. So now, this snake, the Radak says, explaining the Targum Yonatan, when it is inside its hole, the child sees from within the eyes of the snake. The eyes of the snake, similar to a cat's eyes, are shining. They are, as it were, glowing, so when he looks into the hole, the hole is dark, and he sees there the eyes of the snake; they appear to him like two lanterns inside, two lamps. And therefore this interests him, arouses his curiosity, they appear to him like two diamonds or two precious stones glowing there inside, and he will want to put his hand in, because he saw the "me'orat tzif'oni." What is "me'orat"? The light of its eyes; he saw the eyes of the viper. And despite all this it will not harm him. This is an additional explanation of "me'orat tzif'oni." A third explanation is that of Rashi, and this is the explanation accepted by us today. "And Menachem interpreted it," says Rashi, as an expression of a hole and burrows in the earth, like "Ur Kasdim," "in the fires honor God," "urim" meaning tunnels, meaning holes; that is the meaning of "or" in "me'orat tzif'oni." So this is similar to "hole of the cobra." "Hole of the cobra" is the hole where the snake hides; "me'orat" is what we today call a lair (me'urah), the place where the viper is located. So we have three interpretations: either from the word "or" (light) according to the Malbim, or from the word "me'or einayim" (eyesight), which speaks of the snake's vision, or from the word "me'urah," what we today call a lair.
Pasuk 9. "They will not do harm or destroy in all My holy mountain, for the land will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea." The predatory animals, who as we said have a way to do harm and to destroy, will not do harm or destroy. What is the difference between doing harm and destroying? The Malbim says: a person who harms someone else may do it for his own benefit and pleasure. By contrast, a person who destroys, this is what we today call a destroyer, without any intention of pleasure but simply destruction, to take, to tear, and to damage; that is called destroying. So he says "they will not do harm," for example, if a lion devours a deer, that is called doing harm since it does it for its own pleasure. "They will not do harm," and not only will they not do harm but they will not even destroy, which for example is the cobra and the snake; the Gemara says they are told "what pleasure do you have when you bite?" It is not in order to devour. The lion wants to devour, it wants meat, so it devours, but by contrast the snake bites, and many times it does not deal with the prey at all; it continues on its way. So not only will the animals that devour in order to eat not do harm, but even those that have no pleasure at all from what they destroy will not destroy. "In all My holy mountain" means in the entire Holy Land. "For the land will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea." He comes, as it were, and says that the recognition of God, blessed be He, will spread to such an extent that even the predatory animals will feel that we are now in a new time, the time of rectification, so that even though they lack the power of intellect, despite all this it will be in the aspect of "as the waters cover the sea." Does anyone know the meaning of the word "yam" (sea)? "Yam" is correct as one meaning, but know that this is not the meaning here. "Yam" means the basin in which the water is found. So says the Radak. And here I will give you a proof, says the Radak: for it is stated "the Yam that Shlomo made." What did Shlomo make? Did he make the water, or did he make the basin? The basin. That is, "yam" is the basin in which the water is found. According to this you will understand the pasuk "as the waters cover the sea." Just as the waters cover the entire basin within which the sea is found, the entire valley within which the sea was, the waters cover it entirely. What does "cover it entirely" mean? Is there any single point that has no water? Is there any single point that was not made wet by the water covering the basin? No. The Malbim says: so too will the knowledge of God be, like the water that covers all the places in the place called "sea." So too the knowledge of God, blessed be He, will cover everything, until even the physical matter of the animals, which by its nature is not fit for intellect, which has no sense, despite all this the knowledge of God will be so great that it will influence even the animals and spread even to them, so that they too, as it were, will change their nature for the good, and "they will not do harm or destroy in all My holy mountain."
"And it will be on that day that the root of Yishai, who stands as a banner for the peoples, to him the nations will seek, and his resting place will be glory." "And it will be on that day, the root of Yishai," this is the King Mashiach, whom he mentioned in pasuk 1, where we saw "a shoot will come forth from the stump of Yishai and a branch will sprout from his roots." So on that day the root of Yishai "who stands as a banner for the peoples." What is a "nes" (banner)? A "nes" is a tall pole upon which the flag was hung, to summon the peoples either to battle or for other matters. Here it means that at first, when the King Mashiach is revealed, the root of Yishai will stand as a banner for the peoples; it will, as it were, call all the peoples to come to war against him. At first the peoples will not like the fact that there is a king from Israel who rules and has dominion over all. So that root of Yishai, who at first will stand as a banner for the peoples, all the peoples will be called to the flag to come and fight against him, which will be the war of Gog and Magog, but know that "to him the nations will seek." In the end all will recognize that he is the true redeemer, "and his resting place will be glory." His resting place will not be like the rest of an ordinary person or an unimportant king. There is an unimportant king against whom no one bothers to go to war. Rather, on the contrary, he will be so important that at first everyone will come to fight against him, and such a one, when in the end everyone accepts his kingship, this will be enormous glory, showing that he succeeded against all those kings and that the hand of God was his help. Let us note that he says "stands as a banner for the peoples, to him the nations will seek." What is "amim" (peoples) versus "goyim" (nations)? We already explained this, that a "people" is greater than a "nation," because a people has a kingdom, an organized monarchy, whereas a "nation" is a mixed collection of tribes that have no organized monarchy. For example, in Somalia there are "nations," whereas when you want to speak of Britain or the United States, those you can call a "people," there is an organized monarchy there. And he comes and says: know that even the nations will recognize the truth of the redeemer in the future, "to him the nations will seek." Even the nations, meaning even those who have no kingdom, those who, as I would say, are considered more benighted, those without an organized monarchy, they too in the end will recognize the kingship of the redeemer who will come forth from the root of Yishai.
"And it will be on that day that God will again, a second time, extend His hand to acquire the remnant of His people who will remain, from Ashur and from Egypt, from Patros and from Kush, from Eilam and from Shinar, and from Chamat and from the islands of the sea." On that day God will again, a second time, extend His hand to acquire the remnant of His people. What was the first time that God extended His hand to acquire His people? In the redemption from Egypt. But the future redemption, "as in the days of your going out from the land of Egypt I will show him wonders." The future redemption will be like that redemption at the exodus from Egypt, which had wonders in it, and then, after all recognize the truth of the redeemer, there will be an ingathering of the exiles from Ashur, from Egypt, from Patros, as it was in the first redemption.
"And He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the dispersed of Israel, and the scattered of Yehudah He will collect from the four corners of the earth." "And He will raise a banner for the nations," a "nes" as we explained is a tall pole upon which the flag is hung; this, as it were, will call everyone to the flag, so that all will come after the King Mashiach, that they will come here for the ingathering of the exiles. "And gather the dispersed of Israel." "The dispersed of Israel" are the Ten Tribes. Why? Because we essentially have two things: we have "the scattered of Yehudah He will collect." "The scattered of Yehudah" are those who are scattered today. All that we have today is Yehudah and Binyamin, and a little of the tribe of Levi, and a tiny amount from all the rest of the tribes. But essentially what are they? They are scattered. They are found in every place in the world. This is the people of Israel familiar to us today. By contrast, there are those from the people of Israel who are banished. The banished are those of whom we do not know where they are; they are in remote places. Who are these? These are the dispersed of Israel. Those who were from Israel, for there was Israel and Yehudah. Israel was the kingdom of Shomron, the Ten Tribes; Yehudah was Yehudah and Binyamin, of whom we are descendants. So first "He will gather the dispersed of Israel," these are the tribes who are banished from their place; they are not scattered but banished beyond the Sambatyon River and beyond the Mountains of Darkness, and there they are gathered together. Those He will gather in and bring, because there is no need to gather them, they are already gathered together, they are only banished. But "the scattered of Yehudah" is the Jewish dispersion familiar to us today, found at every point on the globe; from there God will gather them from the four corners of the earth.
"The envy of Efrayim will depart, and the adversaries of Yehudah will be cut off." Efrayim will not envy Yehudah, and Yehudah will not harass Efrayim. In the past we know that the kingdom of Yehudah had two adversaries. First, there was the envy of Efrayim. Efrayim were not adversaries of Yehudah, but they envied them over the matter of the monarchy. We saw many times that they envied them, that is, it was hard for Efrayim to see that the monarchy was in the hands of the men of the tribe of Yehudah, and they came several times to fight with them over this matter. So Efrayim had envy against the kingdom of Yehudah. Additionally, Yehudah also had adversaries. The adversaries were from the hostile nations, from the nations who came to fight against them, who came to harass and trouble them. He tells you that in the future, with the coming of the Mashiach, "the envy of Efrayim will depart." Efrayim is only envy, Efrayim were not adversaries of Yehudah, they only envied them. And also "the adversaries of Yehudah," who are the nations, they too will be cut off. Now everything will be clear to them: Efrayim will not envy Yehudah, and Yehudah will not harass Efrayim. Yehudah were harassers of Efrayim, why? Because Efrayim rebelled against the kingdom of the House of David. For example, Sheva ben Bichri, who went and rebelled against the kingdom of the House of David, so Yehudah had to besiege him. He says: Yehudah will not need to besiege Efrayim, since Efrayim will not envy Yehudah and will accept his kingship over him, so consequently Yehudah will not need to come and fight against him in order to impose his kingship by force of arms. Chazal expound this regarding two future messiahs. There will be Mashiach ben David and Mashiach ben Yosef. So he tells you "the envy of Efrayim will depart," Efrayim will not envy Yehudah, Yehudah will not harass Efrayim; both will lead the kingdom of Israel with a high hand, without there being envy between them. We know that the most complicated government is a unity government. Why? Because there, when there are two together, they constantly quarrel among themselves. But here, with the coming of the Mashiach, there will be such peace between them that there will be two heads, there will be Mashiach ben Yosef and there will be Mashiach ben David, and both will lead the kingdom in righteousness and uprightness through a division of authority, as is known that Mashiach ben Yosef represents the physical redemption and Mashiach ben David represents the spiritual redemption, and "one will not draw near the other," there will be no envy, no hatred between them, they will not harass one another.
The Malbim explains that there are three kinds of envy. In the Scriptures we find three kinds of envy. There is a person who envies another: why does he have a position, why does he have an advantage, why did they give it to him and not to me? And this matter, says the Malbim, does not arouse hatred in him, but he merely envies him: why did he merit the advantage that I do not have? "And Rachel envied her sister." Such envy comes with the letter "bet" (in). I envy him. It always comes with the letter "bet," "and Rachel envied (be) her sister." There is envy in which I am zealous for the honor of so and so. How could you do such a thing to him, I am zealous for his honor. This envy comes with the letter "lamed" (for). "I have been zealous for God." I am zealous for Him. Like how Moshe Rabbeinu said to Yehoshua regarding those who were prophesying in the camp, Eldad and Meidad, he said to him "are you zealous for me?" This comes with the letter "lamed." To be zealous for him, I am zealous for his honor, how could you harm his honor. A third thing is a person who envies his fellow in order to harm him. And this comes with the word "et." To envy "et," to envy him. The Malbim says: what is the difference between "to envy et" the envy of Efrayim? "Efrayim will not envy et Yehudah," "will not envy et Yehudah" means in order to trouble him. What is the difference between this and "tzorer" (adversary)? A "tzorer" is one who, because you did me harm once, or I hate you, and out of this I harass you. By contrast, "to envy" is that I think the advantage you have should be mine, and when you received an advantage it detracts from me. If they gave it to you, it, as it were, harms me. And then I envy you, this is "Efrayim will not envy et Yehudah." And since then Efrayim will know that this greatness belongs to Yehudah, he will not have a feeling that "you took something that belongs to me," he will not have a feeling that this detracts and diminishes from me, so consequently Efrayim will not envy Yehudah.
"And they will fly upon the shoulder of the Pelishtim to the west; together they will plunder the people of the east; upon Edom and Moav will their hand be sent, and the children of Amon will obey them." "And they will fly" means they will fly swiftly to the flank and side of the Pelishtim, "to the west," meaning to fight against the Pelishtim who are in the west. Who are the Pelishtim? The Palestinians. They will fight them swiftly. "Together they will plunder the people of the east," those who are in the east: Edom, Moav to the south, the children of Amon, this is what is called Jordan, in the direction of Jordan. "Together they will plunder the people of the east," those in the east. "Upon Edom and Moav will their hand be sent," the hand of Israel will be sent as far as Edom and Moav, that far their dominion will spread, "and the children of Amon will obey them," and the children of Amon too will submit to their authority, meaning they will not refuse the kingship of the King Mashiach.
"And God will utterly destroy the tongue of the Sea of Egypt, and He will wave His hand over the River with the might of His wind, and He will strike it into seven streams and enable people to walk across in sandals." "And God will utterly destroy the tongue of the Sea of Egypt" means God will dry up the tongue of the sea located near Egypt, so that those banished in the land of Egypt will be able to pass through there. It may be that he is speaking of the Suez Canal, I do not know what he means by "the tongue of the Sea of Egypt," but that those banished in the land of Egypt will be able to pass through there. "And He will wave His hand over the River with the might of His wind." "Over the River" means the Euphrates River; there too God will wave His hand with His wind, "with the might of His wind" meaning with the strength of His wind, as it were drying up the Euphrates River so that those lost in the land of Ashur will come. "And He will strike it into seven streams" means those seven places that he mentioned in pasuk 11, aside from Egypt: Ashur, Patros, Kush, Eilam, Shinar, Chamat, and the islands of the sea, all those seven places, "and He will strike it into seven streams," their streams that are there, God will, as it were, strike them and lock them with sandals, He will lock those streams so that these streams will not flow their waters, and then all those exiles in those places will be able to cross on dry land, so that they can return from their land of exile.
"And there will be a highway for the remnant of His people who will remain from Ashur, as there was for Israel on the day it went up from the land of Egypt." Through God drying up the tongue of the Sea of Egypt, waving His hand over the River of Ashur, striking the seven streams, all this will cause "and there will be a highway," there will be a paved road "for the remnant of His people who will remain from Ashur, as there was for Israel on the day it went up from the land of Egypt," where there too we walked on a highway, where? In the midst of the sea on dry land, after God dried up the Sea of Reeds. So too God will, as it were, dry up the rivers and the seas, and just as there we entered the Land of Israel, God dried up the Jordan, so too the Holy One, blessed be He, will pave for us a trodden and paved road, that the people of Israel will go out speedily from their exile, speedily in our days, amen. [Voice from the audience: Amen.]