"As a thief is ashamed when he is caught, so is the House of Israel ashamed. They, their kings, their officers, their priests and their prophets." As a thief is ashamed when he is caught. The Malbim explains: the ordinary thief, when he is caught, his shame is not because he is a thief, but because his wickedness has been exposed. That is, he is not embarrassed about stealing. Stealing does not embarrass him. There are people who go to the bank by day, others go by night. Each to his own work. It is his profession, it is his livelihood, and he does not... what is the disgrace here? It is the photos, it is being caught red handed, that now everyone sees him. That, that is the shortcoming. The act itself is not flawed in his eyes. The act itself is a way of earning a living, this is how he feels he can sustain himself.
I once read in the seforim, in the name of the Alter of Slabodka, I believe, that in Warsaw there was a band of thieves. There was a certain widow who was robbed, and it involved her children's dowry and so on. In short, this caused her tremendous grief, and she reached a state where she could not marry off her children. There were people who had connections in the underworld, and they tried to make contact with the band of thieves to see what could be done, to see if they would return part of it. In short, they sat with them, and meanwhile there was also a woman among the band of thieves, apparently on the administrative side, or I do not know exactly what, but she came there on behalf of the band. They explained the matter and the situation to them. And then she says, "Wait, I do not understand you. What do you think, that we are going to return everything? What, do we work for free? Do we work for free? You do not understand, there are people here who risked themselves, there are people here, what, what do you think, that now we will just take it all and give it back? Do you understand?" That is, "Sir, we worked for this, are you not ashamed? To come and want it all back? There are people here who work for the money. Suddenly he shows up and wants it all back. What, did we work for nothing? What kind of ill mannered people are you to come and ask such a thing? Who asks such a thing of a thief? What, does he not deserve to earn an honorable living?" Do you understand? So for them it is a livelihood. Stealing does not embarrass them. If they catch him red handed, that is what is called a workplace accident. What disgrace, what, in the language of the people, what an embarrassment. He was caught red handed. "Exactly, listen, my friend, whoever works clean does not work this way. That is the shame. That everyone sees, they caught you, come on now, among the guys, among the thieves, do they say this is how one works? You work sloppily, you do not... whoever works clean knows how to get in, how to get out, no one feels a thing." That is the shame. The shame of being caught, not the shame of the theft.
Now pay attention to how wonderful this is. The Malbim says: here we can distinguish between a person who sins essentially and a person who sins by chance. A person who sins by chance regrets the body of the sin itself. In contrast, a person who sins essentially does not regret the body of the sin, because the body of the sin has an ideology behind it. And this fits very well with what we just said. A person who has fixed himself as a thief is not embarrassed by theft. The shame, the disgrace, is being caught. So too he says: Klal Yisrael, once they follow idolatry as a method, as an ideology, for one to whom it is an ideology, this is no cause for shame. It is no reason to be embarrassed about it, to take criticism over it. That is what is called "the shame" here. But the matter itself, he is not embarrassed by it. But note, in contrast, one who is not like this, but for whom it is only "when he is caught" as a sin. He is a person who is not a thief by nature. But in order to obtain a sum of money that he urgently owes, because otherwise they will throw him out of his home, he went and stole. This person is embarrassed by the theft itself. Since theft is not a method for him, theft is not a goal, it is not intrinsic as we explained earlier, it is incidental. The goal is to obtain a sum of money. If I could obtain it in a kosher way, through some loan that would be spread out over the long term and I had the means, I would take it. But what can I do when I have no choice, and now "men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy himself when he is hungry." So he did it because... what shame, they caught me stealing, stealing. The "stealing" here is the great shame. That I stole is a great shame. But for the thief, the so called learned, the professional, the "stealing" is not the shame. The shame is how they caught me.
So he says, according to this you will also understand here, he says, like the harlot we spoke of, that if she commits harlotry for the sake of the fee, if they strip her naked and do not give her her bread and water, then she will be ashamed of the act itself. Why? How did I do such a repulsive act to receive money and in the end received nothing? In contrast, if harlotry is a principle for her, if she goes for the sake of the harlotry itself, then whether or not they gave her anything, what does it matter? She achieved her purpose. Harlotry is the main thing for her, and she achieved her purpose. That is what she wanted and that is what she got. Regarding this he says here: if Israel had served idolatry only for the benefit, only for the profit, because this idol will help me, because this god will make me wealthy, if that were the reason they served idolatry, then when he would see that as a result of it not only did I not receive profit but even damage, grief, anguish, I regret having served idolatry. Why did I go serve it in order to receive and received nothing? I regret the body of the act. But since, as we said here, their treachery and the idolatry they went to serve was not in order to obtain something else, it was a cause in its own right. It was a goal in its own right, to serve idolatry. So you are exactly "as a thief is ashamed when he is caught." Like a thief whose profession this is, who is caught, so he is not embarrassed by the theft itself, but by the "being caught." The shame is the shame of that thief "when he is caught," that they caught him red handed, that is the shame. Not the theft itself. So too you: since you turned idolatry into a method, you turned it into a way, into a goal in its own right, you are no longer embarrassed by the idolatry itself, but only by the fact that in the end idolatry did not deliver the goods. But serving idolatry you will continue, and that constitutes no shame for you.
And this is what he says: "so is the House of Israel ashamed, they, their kings, their officers, their priests and their prophets." So too their kings and their officers, none of them was ashamed of the evil path itself, but only of the failure that resulted in damage to us. But that is not what I intend to change my ways over. The evil path is my method, and I will continue it. Only what will I tell you, there was disgrace, in the end we did not receive. But his path is a path in its own right and a goal in its own right.
The Malbim says: according to this we can explain what is written: "Your own wickedness shall chastise you, and your backslidings shall reprove you." There the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded that the evil itself should be the cause of the rebuke. Not fear of Me will bring about the rebuke, but the thing itself. Why? Because, as we said, since for you the idolatry itself is the purpose, that is what could perhaps cause you to regret it itself. And not as now, what happens now? You do not regret the body of the idolatry. You regret that you had disgrace, that in the end you did not get what you wanted. But you did not regret the body of the idolatry. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: "Your own wickedness shall chastise you." Perhaps when the idolatry itself chastises you, perhaps this will bring you to regret the body of the idolatry, and not only that you failed to attain it, that you had shame in the end, that you did not receive what you wanted. And then perhaps you will regret the idolatry itself.
"Saying to a tree, You are my father, and to a stone, You gave birth to us; for they have turned their back to Me, and not their face; but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise and save us." The Malbim says: there were some idolaters who served idolatry as an intermediary, as a vessel through which to attain spirituality, as a vessel through which spirituality would connect with us. And how would they do this? They would make talismans and make teraphim and all sorts of forms, and these forms would receive spiritual influences, and through this they felt that they were, as it were, creating a connection with the spiritual through it. As we explained regarding the Golden Calf, that the calf too they would say "These are your gods, O Israel," and they were certain that the Holy One, blessed be He, would clothe Himself within the calf, which was in fact their intention. Since we do not have Moshe as the connector, we will have the calf as the connector. That was in fact their intent. He says here, this is not the reality. "Saying to a tree, You are my father." They think of the tree as though the tree created them, formed them. "These are your gods, O Israel," in the sense that it itself is, as it were, our god. And they say to a stone, "You gave birth to us," you bore us. And then it is not a vessel, the stone is not just something that I made in order to attain spirituality. No, the stone is the god. The tree is the god. And then it turns out that you turned them into a purpose in their own right. "For they have turned their back to Me, and not their face." And this is not understood. They turned their back to Me. If I turn my back to someone, do I turn my face to him? It is the opposite. So why does it say "they turned their back to Me and not their face"? If you turned your back, that is certainly not your face.
The Malbim says: it is quite possible for a person to turn both his back and his face. How, how is this possible? The Malbim says: if we take an example, a person who stands between the king and the general. The king on this side, the general on the other side. Now he turns to the general. When he turns to the general and the king is behind him, what does he turn to the king? His back. Correct? He turns his back to the king. There is here, apparently, an offense and disgrace. But note, if he turns to the general and says to him, "Do me a favor, I ask of you, turn to the king that the king should do good to me and give me such and such," then does it turn out that I turned my back to him? No. Because turning the face to the general is in fact, in its ultimate purpose, turning the face to the king. Because I turn to you only as an intermediary between me and the king. So this is not turning my back to the king. Turning one's back to the king means, "My lord the king, I do not want you, I do not need you, I have a general." It is obvious that by this you are called one who turns his back to the king. But if I turn my face to the general, even though technically my back is turned to the king, my aim is that the general turn to the king, and through this I obtain my desire, so it turns out that ultimately I turned my face to the king. Since the goal ultimately is to attain the face of the king.
The Malbim says: if you had turned your back to Hashem, and your face was to the idolatry, and the goal was as the idolaters back then had it, who would turn to the idolatry as an intermediary vessel between us and Hashem, then I would say you turned your back to Hashem, but it is a back that is in fact a face. Why? Because I turned to the idolatry so that it would turn to Hashem, and then my face and my aim are toward the Holy One, blessed be He. But in contrast, when you go to serve idolatry as an independent power, then you have turned your back to the king and not your face. It is a turning of the back that in no way is meant to reach Him. Because I am supposed to ask the idolatry and you will give to me, that is it, there is no Creator of the world, or you are the Creator of the world, and not the Holy One, blessed be He, who is at my back. That is called "back and not face." In contrast, if I had turned to the idolatry as an intermediary between me and the Holy One, blessed be He, it is a back that is a face. It is a back, but ultimately I turn my face to Hashem, may He be blessed, because ultimately the goal and the attainment will be through the Holy One, blessed be He. How wonderful, says the Malbim, this is the meaning here: "for they have turned their back to Me, and not their face." After you say to a tree "You are my father" and to a stone "You gave birth to us," then it turns out that you turned your back to the Holy One, blessed be He, and not your face. But if you had said to the tree, "You will only obtain for me a connection with the Master of the world," then it is a turning of the back that is a face. You do turn your back, but the goal is to attain the face of Hashem.
And with all this, "but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise and save us." In the time of their trouble, when they have distress, when evil comes upon them, they will say, "Arise and save us." They do not regret having abandoned Me to go serve the idol. Rather what? They want only salvation from Hashem. That is, Master of the world, we have a problem here, solve it for us. You solved it for us? We no longer need you. We have an idol. We have a god. How terrible to utter this, but the Holy One, blessed be He, says, as it were, that even when they need salvation from Hashem, this does not bring them to renounce their idolatry, to reach the conclusion that idolatry is worthless, has no power, is incapable. Behold, you see in the end that I was forced to turn to the Holy One, blessed be He. He says: no, they only want to obtain salvation and not to return and serve Me. Rather they abandon God entirely and turn to the idol as though it gave birth to them, and in fact all their aim is toward it. And even when they need salvation from Hashem, may He be blessed, it is what is called temporary salvation. Use and discard. As hard as it is to utter this expression.
"But where are your gods that you made for yourself? Let them arise, if they can save you in the time of your trouble; for according to the number of your cities were your gods, O Judah." "But where are your gods that you made for yourself?" The Malbim says: after you made yourself gods, they surely, if they were able, would surely arise to help you, to save you in the time of your trouble. If only they had power, since you made them, they are the work of your hands, they are obligated to repay their makers. And not only that, what will you say, perhaps they are far away? "For according to the number of your cities were your gods, O Judah." This means, they are with you everywhere. For according to the number of your cities so were your gods. He made himself gods everywhere. That is, he did not rely on the god of the other city. He made himself a local god. A local resident. And if so, the Holy One, blessed be He, says to them, so please, where are your gods, let them arise if they can save you in the time of your trouble, let them arise to help you in your time of distress.
"Why do you contend with Me? You have all rebelled against Me, says Hashem." Why do you contend with Me? How do you come to argue with Me and say "we have not sinned"? You have all rebelled against Me. Rashi says: this seemingly implies even the righteous. Chazal say, this is what people say: "together with the thorn the cabbage is struck." Chazal say that together with the thorns the cabbage too is struck. That is, when one hoes out the thorns, one inadvertently hoes out part of the cabbage as well. "Together with the thorn the cabbage is struck." This is a parable meaning that if the wicked are struck, so too the righteous. "If fire breaks out and finds thorns and the stack of grain or the standing grain is consumed." Chazal say: fire breaks out, why? Because of the thorns, because of the wicked. But who are those consumed first? The stack of grain or the standing grain. These are the righteous, who are of the category of the grain stack, not the category of thorns. And there are several reasons for this, as we elaborated on another occasion. In any case, he says, you have all rebelled against Me, says Hashem, together with the wicked the righteous are struck as well. The Radak explains that what is written here "why do you contend" means: you have complaints, as it were. When an enemy comes, whom do you find to complain against? Against Hashem. Why did Hashem abandon us? Why does the Holy One, blessed be He, not save us? Why does He not protect us? He says to them, why then do you contend with Me? Why do you quarrel with Me, says the Holy One, blessed be He, when you rebelled against Me? The meaning of "all of you," according to Radak's explanation, is your great ones and your small ones. That is "you have all rebelled against Me," from the greatest to the smallest. And if so, why do you contend with Me? What do you ask, that I save you? I am not obligated to you. If you made yourselves gods, turn to them. "Your gods that you made for yourself, let them arise if they can save you." So after you make yourself gods and you see that it brings troubles upon you, to whom do you come with complaints? To the Holy One, blessed be He? Why do you contend with Me? You have all rebelled against Me, says Hashem.
"In vain have I struck your children; they received no correction; your sword has devoured your prophets like a destroying lion." "In vain have I struck your children," for nothing, it did not help them to receive correction. Behold, see, "your sword has devoured your prophets." Rashi explains: what is "your sword has devoured your prophets like a destroying lion"? Rashi says: you killed Zechariah and Isaiah. Isaiah, as we recall, by whom was he killed? By Menasheh. Correct? There is the story that he was swallowed inside a cedar and he sawed the cedar. And likewise you killed Zechariah. Zechariah, we remember, Zechariah son of Yehoyada, who came and prophesied prophecies unpleasant to the ear, and because of this they killed him, and his blood was boiling on the floor of the Temple court, until Nevuzaradan came and slaughtered over it many good people, until the blood ceased from its boiling. They threw a stone at him and stoned him there in the courtyard. Should a priest and prophet be killed in the Sanctuary of Hashem? Whoever wishes can see in the sefer Mishnat HaGilgulim, where we bring many stories about the one who first threw the stone at the prophet Zechariah, how many reincarnations he passed through and how many great ones tried to repair him over the generations. It is astonishing. Regarding this he rebukes them here and says to them, in vain have I struck your children, they received no correction. Your sword devoured the prophets, you killed Zechariah, you killed Isaiah. The Radak, in contrast, finds this interpretation difficult. The Radak says: the simple meaning of "your prophets" refers to the false prophets you invented for yourselves. That is the meaning. And not the meaning "your prophets," our prophets, who are the true prophets. Therefore the Radak leans more toward explaining as his father explained, that "your prophets" means the false prophets. The meaning is: their prophecies, which they prophesied to you, did not help; rather you went, when you heard the word of Hashem, you went and killed the false prophets. What does it mean that you killed the false prophets? If we pay attention, it is written thus: "In vain have I struck your children; they received no correction; your sword devoured your prophets." He explains the matter: in fact it does not mean that you killed the prophets, but rather "your prophets" your sword devoured. The meaning is: your prophets, they caused the devouring by the sword. They caused devouring by the sword like a destroying lion. The meaning is: you, the prophets, corrupted them; the false prophets corrupted the people, and destroyed from soul to flesh. From soul, because when there are false prophets, they encourage them to serve idolatry. And unto flesh, because...
...them and strike them. And therefore this is what he says: "your sword devoured your prophets like a destroying lion." The sword of your prophets devoured the people like a lion destroying flesh and tearing it to pieces when it preys upon it; so too the false prophets destroyed them in their souls and their bodies.
The Malbim explains: "in vain have I struck your children; they received no correction." What I struck your children over, that they did not receive correction, was in vain, that is, your children are not to blame. They had no one from whom to receive correction. After your sword devoured your prophets like a destroying lion, you killed the prophets, he explains more along the direction of Rashi, you killed Zechariah and Isaiah, after you killed the prophets, then from whom were the children to receive correction? From whom would they receive rebuke? In vain have I struck your children, they received no correction, for you had already killed your prophets, so from whom were they to receive correction?
"O generation, see the word of Hashem. Have I been a wilderness to Israel, or a land of thick darkness? Why do My people say, We roam freely; we will come no more to You?" "O generation, see the word of Hashem." "See the word of Hashem" means, the Radak explains, there is a seeing that is in the heart, as in "and my heart has seen much," "and your matters are seen as good." So says the Radak, a seeing that is in the heart. Chazal expound: about what, about what seeing did He speak to them? Chazal say: He showed them the jar of manna. He brought out for them the jar of manna and said to them, see here how the word of Hashem avails. Behold, that the Holy One, blessed be He, willed and decreed sustenance, and manna descended for Israel in the wilderness. Therefore the Radak says, note, it is written "see the word of Hashem." It does not say "hear." When it says "see," that is, it seemingly points to something physical, something tangible. Yes? So He let them see the jar of manna so that they would see and trust in the Holy One, blessed be He.
"Have I been a wilderness to Israel?" Was I to them like the wilderness, or a land of thick darkness? The meaning is a dark land where a person does not find his needs. This is in the form of a rhetorical question. When they were in the wilderness, was it like a wilderness? Was it like a dark land? They had manna, they had sustenance, they had all their needs in the wilderness. So the One who was able to give them all that then, can He not care for you today? All their needs were found then. So why did they say "we roam freely"?
What does "radnu" mean? "Radnu" has two meanings. Two meanings. One meaning we will explain as the Radak explains, and afterward we will see the Malbim's explanation. The Radak explains that "radnu" is from the language of rulership. From the language of dominion. Yes? Rulership meaning from the language of governance. "Binyamin, ruler over them." There too the meaning is from the language of rulership, or like "and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over every living thing of the earth," and so on. A language of governance and dominion. So why, when I rebuke them, did they say "we roam freely, we will come no more to You"? We have a government. There are judges in Jerusalem. On Givat Ram there are legislators. We do not need You, Master of the world, we will come no more to You. We do not need Your laws, we have our own laws and we will decide, and we do not need religion, do not need Torah. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: all their needs and satisfaction, as long as they followed Me, everything was arranged. About everything they were secure. Was the wilderness a wilderness? Did you suffer there? Was it a land of thick darkness? So why do they suddenly take and make themselves their own government and say, "We do not want Your government, we do not need Your dominion, Master of the world"?
The Radak, as we said, explains "radnu" from the language of rulership. In contrast, Rashi explains that "radnu" means "we have separated ourselves." That is, why did My people say "radnu," the meaning is: we have separated from You, we will come no more to You. What is the connection of the word "radnu" to "we have separated"? Like "one who removes bread from the oven," where the meaning is from the language of "lirdot," to remove the bread from the oven. So too here, "radnu" means we have gone out from You. We are no longer connected to You, we have separated from You.
The Malbim explains. The Malbim here takes an approach that he will continue with in the following verses as well. That in Israel back then there were three factions. And against each faction the prophet in fact gives a response and delivers rebuke. The first faction would say: why do we not continue on the path of Hashem? Why do we not keep the mitzvot? Why do we not walk in the path of morality and awe? Because that earlier generation was a generation of fear of Heaven, a generation of righteous ones, a generation in which the word of Hashem was raised high in their midst. But we have already grown distant. We have already descended very far from the mountain of Hashem. Who shall ascend the mountain, who shall stand in His holy place? It is not for us. We are of a lowly rank.
The second faction would say exactly the opposite. The earlier generations were not sufficiently complete in the service of Hashem. We come and invent ways and methods to strengthen the service of Hashem even more. The opposite of the first faction, which says those earlier ones were capable, had abilities, were able, had strength. These say exactly the opposite: the earlier ones did not do enough. We serve Hashem better, as is fitting. And there was a third faction that argues neither this nor that. They forgot about the Torah, they forgot about the mitzvot. This is the son who does not know how to ask. He says to him, I am not interested in what these say, in what those say. Torah, mitzvot, this really does not interest him. He is on his own track, in his own vanities. He is not interested in what claims there are against the Torah, what claims there are for the Torah, whether the earlier ones were better, whether now is better. It does not interest him. He goes chasing after the desires of his heart, having completely forgotten the Torah.
The Malbim says: now he will begin to answer each and every one of them with responses. To the first faction, who would say the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed Himself only to the earlier generations, who were holy, great, while the last generation, we are in a very very low and lowly state. Regarding this he says to them, "O generation, you, see the word of Hashem." You too, the last generation, see the word of Hashem. The meaning is: the Holy One, blessed be He, appears among you. The Holy One, blessed be He, cleaves to you as in the earlier generations. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: "Have I been a wilderness to Israel?" It means like "in the wilderness." As if the connecting letter "beit" is missing here. As if: was I to Israel only in the wilderness? Only in the wilderness was I to Israel? Was it only there that I guided their way? Was it only there that I was close to them? Or in a land of thick darkness, was it only in a land of thick darkness that I was their God? Not for the inhabitants of the Land, not for the people who are here? Why do My people say "radnu"? Why do My people say "radnu"? According to the Malbim, "radnu" is from the language of descent. Not from the language of rulership nor from the language of removing bread, which means separation, but the language of descent. Why do My people say "we have descended," we descended to the depths of a pit, we reached lowly levels, we are not worthy of the divine connection, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not reveal Himself to us as He revealed Himself to the earlier generations, His mitzvot are heavy upon us, we are not of the caliber to attain that attainment there was then, for behold you see that the Holy One, blessed be He, too, is not close to us. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, to them: your words are false. Because I appear to your generation as I appeared to the earlier generations. For undoubtedly in those generations there was still prophecy. There was a divine connection. So says the Holy One, blessed be He: how do you say "radnu"? I am connected to you as I was connected then in the earlier generations.
The Malbim says: "radnu" is like "we have descended." And he explains that there is a verb "rod," as in "I complain in my meditation," and "I went down upon the mountains," and there is a difference between them. The Malbim says: "yarad" is always the descent of the body. And "rod" is the descent of the soul. Here, when they say "radnu," they do not say "yaradnu," but "radnu," this speaks of the aspect of the soul. That the soul, as it were, has descended. In contrast, where it is written "yaradti," the meaning is regarding the aspect of the body. That is the difference between "yarad" and "rad."
"Can a maiden forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? Yet My people have forgotten Me days without number." "Can a maiden forget her ornaments?" Does the maiden forget her jewelry? And does a bride forget her attire? "Her attire" means all sorts of jewelry that they would tie on the bride, ornaments and adornments. Israel, says the Radak, was compared to a bride on the day of the standing at Mount Sinai. So how is it possible that this bride forgot her ornaments and attire? She forgot all the jewelry she had there, the ornaments they received at the standing at Mount Sinai? "Yet My people have forgotten Me days without number." Israel forgot Me for endless days. This is by way of hyperbole. According to the Radak, "Can a maiden forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire," this is a repetition of the matter in different words. The same thing in two images. And why? Because the Radak argues, a bride is only in ornaments and attire if she is a maiden, and a maiden is only in ornaments and attire if she is a bride. So when one speaks of a bride, one speaks of a maiden bride who has ornaments and attire. So he repeats the matter in different words.
With all this, we know that with the Malbim there is no such thing as repetition of the matter in different words, and every expression comes to express a particular thing. The Malbim says: now, first of all, he argues with the faction that abandons Hashem out of forgetfulness. Those who forgot Hashem entirely. They are not for, they are not against, from their perspective there simply is no Holy One, blessed be He, there is no Torah, there are no mitzvot, they live in their own world, they live in complete heresy. Against them he says: how did you forget your glory? How did you forget your honor? Can a maiden forget her ornaments? And even if it happens that the maiden forgets her ornaments, can a bride forget her attire? "Her ornaments" means ornaments, jewelry. The maiden goes with jewelry. And the bride has her attire. What is the definition of "her attire"? The Malbim explains that "her attire" is what the groom gave her to signify the strong bond between them. We would define it like an engagement ring today. Or what the bride gives the groom, let us say a watch, or things of this sort. These are things that come to attest to the connection between them. Things that are customary only between groom and bride, and they attest to the connection between them. So he says, even if the maiden forgets her ornaments, but surely the bride will not forget her attire. She will not forget those jewels attesting to the strong bond between her and her groom. That is the sign that she is in fact bonded with him. And especially in those times, when she was still a bride before entering the wedding canopy, she was already betrothed. And if she was betrothed, then "behold you are betrothed to me with this ring" was already said to her. That is, she already has real attire between her and her husband. She has attire between her and him. So how is it possible that a bride would forget her attire? What does he in fact want to say? The Torah is the connection between us and Hashem. Through the Torah the Holy One, blessed be He, is to us for a God. How did we forget this? Regarding this he says: how have My people forgotten Me? And do not say a short time, but rather days without number. They forgot the Holy One, blessed be He, for days without number. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: how is it possible? A bride does not forget her attire. And we saw that Israel at Mount Sinai was like a bride. So how did this bride forget her bond with the Holy One, blessed be He?
"How well you direct your way to seek love! Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." "How well you direct your way to seek love." What is "you direct your way"? The Radak explains that there is an expression of "directing well" that is not necessarily for the good. Yes? I can say, he is meticulous in his precision in the transgressions he does. Do you hear? So this is "directing well," but negatively. And the meaning is: he is exceedingly precise in transgressions. He does the transgressions with much beautification. Yes? Like "Do you do well to be angry?" Anger is a negative thing. "You do well to be angry." That is, you see again that "well" means much, but not necessarily for the good. It can be negative, much negativity. It is also called "well." Yes? "For my father will do the evil upon you well." Does one do evil well? Yes, the meaning is he will increase the evil upon you. He does the thing in the best manner of that thing, and it does not come to say that the thing is positive. So too here the Radak says: "How well you direct your way to seek love." You repair your ways in the best manner in order to seek love. What is "to seek love"? Rashi explains: "to seek love" means toward your lovers. As it is written, "and she directed well her head at Jezebel." The meaning, when he speaks here of "your lovers," is the idols and the images that the Congregation of Israel inclined after. This is called "your lovers," because the Congregation of Israel is like a bride to the Holy One, blessed be He, and when she goes after the lovers, the idolatry, the expression is always "and she committed harlotry after the lovers." This is an aspect of harlotry and adultery, because she abandons the husband of her youth, the Holy One, blessed be He, and chases after idolatry.
"Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." What is "you have even taught the wicked ones"? Rashi says: you went over every evil way to learn the most corrupt of them all. Terribly terrible. You sought out the most corrupt ways that exist among the nations, to walk in all these corruptions, to attach them to yourself. "Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." You directed your ways among them in the most corrupt ways that the nations have. Someone once quoted a certain, how is it called, let us define it as a travel book, that describes cities in the world, what you can see in this city and what you can see in that city and what is here and what is there. And his descriptions of Tel Aviv were horrifying. Simply shocking. About the openness of the city, about how in this city one can find things that are among the most corrupt and disqualified of the nations. What a hymn of praise he wrote for Tel Aviv. Terribly terrible. "Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." You went and learned from the nations the most corrupt ways, the worst ones, you took it all and adopted it. You taught your ways, you directed your ways among them. We must emphasize that what we spoke of refers to a marginal and delusional minority that unfortunately makes a lot of noise in the media, and that is what, when they write to you about Tel Aviv, that is what they see according to the noise they make. But if we look at Klal Yisrael, and "your people are all righteous," among Klal Yisrael we see strengthening, among Klal Yisrael we see more walking in the path of Hashem, far more than in years past. Even in Tel Aviv, even in places that were considered strongholds of heresy, it is unbelievable. There is today a kollel even in Savyon, that is not Tel Aviv, but even in Savyon, even in northern Tel Aviv, even in places in Ramat Aviv, even in the most distant places, we see that today there is an awakening. There are Shorashim houses, there are Arachim houses, there is Hidabroot, what is there not. So even in the most distant places we see there is a state of awakening. What we are speaking of here is only the margins, those who are in the closet and have begun to come out of the closet. But all the rest, Klal Yisrael, this is certainly not their characteristic.
The Radak explains: "How well you direct your way to seek love." The Radak says: this comes to express the inclination of Israel who inclined after the nations to rely on them to save us. And we see the prophets in many places rebuking the people over this matter. That the people incline after Egypt, that Egypt will help us, and Egypt is a broken reed of a staff, that whoever leans on it, it pierces him and his blood flows, and not only does he see no benefit from them, he even has only harm. As he said, "What have you to do with the way of Egypt, what have you to do with the way of Assyria?" So "How well you direct your way," you strengthen your ways to seek love. From whom? Love of whom? Of the nations, that they should help you, that they should save you. And then what? "Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." That is, the wicked nations you have taught your ways. That is, you became more wicked than they, to the point, note how terrible, that they learned their evils from us. Do you hear? What is "you have even taught the wicked ones your ways"? According to what Rashi learned, the meaning is that you learned all the corrupt deeds of the nations. The Radak takes it a step further. You became teachers of the way for the nations. That is, when the nations sought to do evil deeds, whom did they imitate? Us. Instead of being a light unto the nations, we became the light of all evil, so that the gentiles would come and learn from us.
The Malbim explains that now he argues with the faction that I earlier defined as the middle faction. Those who would say, our forefathers did not serve Hashem perfectly. We are more righteous than they. And you always know that when someone tries to be more righteous, if it is not in a straight manner, then many times it is woe and alas. And this in fact is also what happens here. They came, they invented for themselves mitzvot of their own, they added additions of their own, and by this they ask, as it were, to add love of Hashem. That the Holy One, blessed be He, should, as it were, be closer to us, that the Holy One, blessed be He, should, as it were, cleave to us more. Regarding this he says to them, "How well you direct your way?" The meaning is: why do you think you are directing your way better than your forefathers? As if to seek love, I attain love of Hashem more than my forefathers attained. I serve Hashem on a higher level than my forefathers served Him. What, what are the examples in which you find yourself on a higher level? He says, behold, see, Achaz built an altar in the Temple. What was his model? The altar he saw in Damascus. That is, our altars are not enough. In Damascus I saw an altar that was really something. 2015, this is the latest model, there are no such things. He comes and brings here craftsmen to build an altar in the Temple like the altar he saw in Damascus. That is, he thinks, as it were, what? We serve Hashem on a higher level. The high places, the Torah, as it were, forbade making high places. But we, each one in his courtyard will build himself a high place. What are you talking about, those earlier generations were not frum enough. We are much more precise. By the time you get there, by the time you go to the Temple, my friend, in the backyard I built an altar. Do you have such things? Do you know what devotion I have? I, in my courtyard, all the time only offer sacrifices to Hashem. They feel, as it were, that they are more righteous. And yet this is slaughtering outside, it is a severe transgression, the high places were forbidden. But he has a theory, do not confuse him with facts. He goes on his track. "You direct your way to seek love," you think you are doing more beautified things in order to seek love. "Therefore you have even taught the wicked ones your ways." For in order to make your ways "good," you even taught your ways the wicked ones. As if you grasped the evil ways you learned from the peoples, as though by this you make your ways good. Like the altar he went and brought from Damascus. "Even the wicked ones," he goes and takes evil things and thinks that in this way it is a better way, a more beautified way, a more important way in the service of Hashem.
"Also in your skirts is found the blood of the souls of the innocent poor; I did not find them breaking in, but upon all these." "Also in your skirts," your skirts means like the wings, the hems of your garments. Like "and their lifeblood sprinkled upon my garments and I have stained all my clothing." The meaning is, as it were, in the corner of his garment, as we do at Tashlich, we shake the corner of the garment, as though the transgressions cling to the corner of the garment. The Targum Yonatan explains that "also in your skirts is found the blood of the souls" means, even in secret it was found that you shed innocent blood. Even in secret it is found, that is "in your skirts." "In your skirts" means from the language of covering and in his skirt. Concealing him. Even in secret it was found that you shed innocent blood. As it is written, "he shall not uncover his father's skirt," which means the concealed part of his father. What is his father's concealed part? It is his wife. So too here "in your skirts" the meaning is in secret. What is "is found the blood"? It is as if to say bloods. For bloods of the souls of the innocent poor were found. "I did not find them breaking in." What is "I did not find them breaking in"? It is written, "if a thief is found breaking in and is struck and dies, there is no bloodguilt for him." A thief who comes to tunnel into your house in order to steal, the Gemara says that it is permitted to kill him. Even before the Drorno law. Why is it permitted to kill him? Because if you do not kill him, he came either to take money or to kill. If someone stands against him he will kill him. That is, he has intent to murder. So there is here a law of "if one comes to kill you, rise early to kill him," I am permitted to kill him. So he tells you here, you will not be able to be caught up in this justification and argument, because I did not find them breaking in. You did not find them tunneling into your house and then you killed them. So if that is the case, it turns out they are the blood of souls of the innocent poor. So why, why did you kill them? Rashi and the Metzudat David, sorry, Rashi also goes according to the Radak's explanation, but the Metzudat David explains, what is written here "also in your skirts is found the blood of the souls of the innocent poor, I did not find them breaking in," the meaning is: you did not do these things in secret. When you do things in secret, there is an advantage, at least there is shame here, at least it does not become a norm. But you did the things openly. Not breaking in, you went and made them public. What does this show? It shows complete rebellion against Hashem. I am no longer embarrassed by transgressions. I do them openly.
The Malbim explains that here he continues and turns to that same faction that, as it were, says we are more precise, we made ourselves high places, we bring an altar from Damascus. He says to them, also in your skirts is found the blood of the souls of the poor. Through this, what did you cause? That when the prophets came to rebuke you, what did you do? You said to yourself, this prophet is the sitra achra. And he comes to distance me from the service of Hashem. He does not grasp how precise I am. He does not grasp how careful I am. As we said earlier, he feels that he is the righteous one. If he is the righteous one, then what is this prophet? He is simply a seducer and inciter. He comes to distance me from my righteousness, from my good deeds. And if so, it turns out that those who thought the way of the prophets is a way that does not suit us because it is too high, it is above us, we are not capable, Hashem was with them once but today He is not with us, they have no reason to kill the prophets. On the contrary, he says the way of Hashem is truth, but it is heavy for us. The Holy One, blessed be He, is not with us as He was then. So why would he kill the prophet? He recognizes that the prophet's words are truth. In contrast, precisely this faction, who think they are the more precise ones, for them the prophets are, as it were, false prophets. Because this prophet comes to distance me from the service of Hashem, at a time when I am strengthening myself more in the service of Hashem. This, incidentally, very much recalls all sorts of groups of zealots, such as sometimes exist in Meah Shearim and the like, and the groups of zealots, whom do they attack? The great ones. There were those who came out against Rav Elyashiv. Why? He is not, he is not frum enough, do you understand? He is not religious enough, he is not zealous enough. He is perhaps a bit too liberal. Do you understand? Rav Elyashiv. Who is in fact perceived from the outside as the peak of zealotry. They are more righteous. If they are more righteous, then the prophets are no longer good enough. So on the contrary, the prophets even come to corrupt us. So what must be done to the prophets? To the true prophets? They must be killed. Since they prevent them, the people, from being like us, we who are far more righteous, far more precise than the earlier generations. "I did not find them breaking in, but upon all these." The Malbim explains that the verse here, as it were, says: I am justified regarding all these ways of yours. In fact he, as it were, compares it as though the prophets who came to turn them back from their way seemed to them like a thief caught breaking in. He is like a thief who comes to prevent me, to withhold good from me, to rob my money. So they, the prophets, come to take from us our righteousness, our carefulness, the way of the good and upright in which we are more precise than the earlier generations. He says to them, you did not find the prophets breaking in. They did not come to steal money from you. Rather, upon all these ways I found them. That is, why did you kill them? Because they wanted to divert you from what? From the straight way. They wanted to withhold from you, as it were, your righteousness. This, this is what passes through their minds. I did not find them breaking in, they did not come to take money from me. What did they come to take from me? My fear of Heaven, my precision in mitzvot. And if so, says the Malbim, it turns out that their evil here is threefold. The first evil, the evil ways you learned remained with you, and you added defiance, and further corruption. And what else do you say? This is what Hashem wants. This is what Hashem wants. The second thing, when the prophets come to rebuke you and tell you this is not what Hashem wants, you even go and kill them. Because they come to withhold you from walking in the way of righteousness and uprightness. And the third thing, "yet you say, Because I am innocent, surely His anger has turned from me. Behold, I will enter into judgment with you, because you say, I have not sinned." Through this, of what are you certain? What does the Congregation of Israel say? "Because I am innocent." On the contrary, we, compared to the earlier generations, are far more righteous. So "I am innocent," I am clean and purified. Clean of all sin. "Surely His anger has turned from me." And therefore only now, through these deeds that I do, now His anger will turn away from me, because I am precise in His service. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: is that what you think? "Behold, I will enter into judgment with you, because you say, I have not sinned." Says the Holy One, blessed be He: I will give you a punishment especially, separate from the sin, for your saying "I have not sinned." For the very statement "I have not sinned," over this I will bring you to judgment. "Behold, I will enter into judgment with you." I will, as it were, enter into judgment with you. What is the meaning of "I will enter into judgment with you"? The Malbim explains that, as it were, they have claims against the Holy One, blessed be He, and, as it were, they come with Him to judgment. Like suing Him before a third party. "I will enter into judgment with you" like I will litigate with you. Yes? As if I come, I come in a lawsuit with you now to be judged before someone else, as if the Holy One, blessed be He, says I am in the wrong. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: now I will come with you in judgment and I will sue you, for what? For your saying "I have not sinned." The question is asked, so say the masters of mussar, this verse is a foundation for many discourses of the masters of mussar. The masters of mussar ask: "Behold, I will enter into judgment with you, because you say, I have not sinned." Did she sin or did she not sin? She sinned. If she sinned, then "I will enter into judgment with you" over your sin. It is not understood. "Behold, I will enter into judgment with you, because you say, I have not sinned." Either way? If she did not sin, if she did not sin, then let Him not judge her. If she sinned, then let Him judge her over her sin. What is "Behold, I will enter into judgment with you, because you say, I have not sinned"? The masters of mussar say: if you had sinned and recognized the sin, even though you had not yet repented, but you recognize the sin, there is hope. There are chances for repentance. Not today, tomorrow, not tomorrow, in another month, in another ten years. There are chances for repentance. Because at least you are aware that your deeds are corrupt. But if you say "I have not sinned," the "I have not sinned" is worse than the sin. Why? Because "I have not sinned" in fact locks the sin in a state where there is no possibility of return. That is the worst. Because "I have not sinned" says, I am such a righteous person, what is there even to talk with me about regarding repentance? Therefore precisely those who have some ideology, some ideology in the deeds they do supposedly for the sake of Heaven, precisely they are the most problematic. Them it is hard to bring back to repentance. You cannot talk with them. Why? Because he is certain that what he does is a mitzvah, and he is the precise one and he is the beautifier, you are not good enough for him. And then through this, on the contrary, the "you say I have not sinned" locks him into the position in which he is, and from there he will not budge at all. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: for this alone you are worthy of being judged.