Sefer Yirmiyahu, chapter 18. "The word that came to Yirmiyahu from Hashem, saying. Arise and go down to the potter's house, and there I will let you hear My words." Hashem tells him, go and go down to the potter's house. "The potter's house": the Targum Yonatan renders "beit pacharah," and pacharah, as we know, means clay, referring to the house of the craftsman who forms vessels of clay. And there the Holy One tells him, I will let you hear My words. The Malbim explains that since, after all the decrees He had decreed upon them, He told him: know that it is possible to annul all of them through the merit of keeping Shabbat, all the decrees I decreed and all the harsh things we will see below about what is destined to befall Yerushalayim, if only they will keep Shabbat all of it will be nullified. Hashem tells him, I want you to understand this tangibly, meaning that you should see these things in a concrete way in order to grasp how firmly resolved and settled these matters are with Me, that if they keep Shabbat all the decrees will be annulled.
"So I went down to the potter's house, and behold, he was doing work on the wheels." It is written as one word, "vehinehu," and we read it as "vehineh hu," reading it as two words, and it means the same. He was doing work on the wheels: the "ovnayim" are the potter's instrument upon which the potter forms his vessels, and the Targum renders it "sadna." Sadna is from the word "sadan," the block upon which the potter fashions his work. "And the vessel that he was making of clay was spoiled in the hand of the potter, and he made it again into another vessel, as it was right in the eyes of the potter to make."
Come and see there: the Malbim says that He gave him two parables here. The first parable is that the first vessel was spoiled and completely undone in the hands of the potter. The second parable is that all this ruining was temporary, only for a moment, for behold he immediately forms from the vessel, from the material, another vessel. And not in a different form, but only as he wished to make it, as it was right in the eyes of the potter to make, meaning as he had wished to make from the outset. The meaning: whoever has once seen people who work with clay, they have a kind of pedals that create a situation in which the wheel turns, and upon it they place a lump of clay, and as this lump of clay turns on the wheel, he forms a shape in it, yes? He makes a circle, and from it forms a jug, and so on in this way. This is the potter's instrument. Now sometimes it happens that the vessel is spoiled, that is, he comes to make something, presses too hard, it fell apart, a situation is created in which it is crushed. What does one do? One takes it all again, makes another lump, places it and begins again. Starts anew. That is, this reality of the breaking of the vessel and starting anew is the parable for the story of Am Yisrael.
"Then the word of Hashem came to me, saying: Can I not do to you as this potter does, O house of Yisrael, says Hashem? Behold, as the clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in My hand, O house of Yisrael." For what did you now see? How the potter wished to bring forth a vessel for his work and his work was spoiled, and again he took it and kneaded it and formed it again and brought his first plan into effect. So He tells them: Can I not do with you as the potter does with the clay? For behold, you are as the clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in My hand. The meaning is that although I had a plan to bring forth a vessel, you were spoiled. "Spoiled" means you corrupted your ways, and following this what needs to be done is simply to make the vessel anew. So too He tells him: although I decreed harsh decrees, all these harsh decrees are a kind of spoiling. There is spoiling here, but what do you see? That even the potter, after he spoiled it, can rebuild anew. So if the potter can, can I not rebuild you anew? For you are as the clay in the hand of the potter, so if only you will keep Shabbat all your reality will change and all the breaking and spoiling will be as though it never was.
"At one moment I may speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to uproot and to pull down and to destroy. But if that nation turns from its evil concerning which I spoke, then I will relent of the harm that I thought to do to it. And at another moment I may speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant. But if it does evil in My eyes, not obeying My voice, then I will relent of the good with which I said I would benefit it." He gives him a parable and clarifies the matters further. He tells him, come and see: just as you see that the breaking of the vessel was only for a moment in order to renew it anew, so too Hashem tells him, understand that what I spoke about a situation of My abandoning the house of Yisrael, that I pull down the house of Yisrael, is momentary. "At one moment I may speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to uproot and to pull down and to destroy." The decree that I decreed upon them is a decree for a moment, and all this was like with the potter who takes and crushes it all, you damaged it more, it was only crushed a bit, you crushed it all, but everyone understands this is in order to begin forming something new here. So too here, the entire intent of the speech I spoke about "to uproot and to pull down" is not in order to bring it about in practice, but in order to form from you a new vessel.
Rashi and the Metzudat David explain that what is written "at one moment I may speak" means: in a moment I decree upon a nation, that is the meaning of "at one moment I may speak." But according to the Malbim the intent is that although you saw that for a moment there was destruction here, the destruction is momentary since the whole purpose is to build. "But if that nation turns from its evil": behold, see that the whole purpose of what I spoke about uprooting and pulling down the house of Yisrael is so that they will return in teshuvah. "But if that nation turns from its evil concerning which I spoke, then I will relent of the harm."
There is a grammatical difficulty here. "But if that nation turns from its evil concerning which I spoke." This is not understood. "If that nation turns from its evil that it did" would be understood. "And I will turn from My evil concerning which I spoke" would also be understood. But to say that the nation will turn from its evil concerning which I spoke? From its evil that I spoke about? Am I, from the harm that I spoke, is that what it turns from? What is the meaning? So Rashi explains: "from its evil concerning which I spoke" means from the sins in its hand on account of which I spoke about it, to uproot and to pull down. "If that nation turns" from the sins in its hand, as it were one must add here, for on account of these its evil concerning which I spoke, on account of these the harm that I said I would bring upon it.
In contrast, the Malbim explains that much more is stated here. The Malbim says: the Holy One says, behold, all their teshuvah is on account of dread and fear and terror, since there are harsh prophecies, there is destruction, there are terrible things that are supposed to happen and the prophet testifies about them and warns them. There would be room to say this is not teshuvah. This is not teshuvah, what, you put a gun to his temple and as a result he changes his ways? He has no choice and therefore he does so. And if so, I would think such teshuvah has no value. He tells you: nonetheless. Now see how wondrous this is in the language of the pasuk. "If that nation turns": what kind of teshuvah was this? Poor teshuvah. "From its evil concerning which I spoke." Why did it turn? From the fear that I brought its evil concerning which I spoke. Because of this it did teshuvah, this is fear from dread of punishment. Hashem tells him: nonetheless, "I will relent of the harm that I thought to do to it." Although I thought to do it harm, such poor teshuvah, done only out of fear of punishment, suffices for Me to relent of the harm that I thought to do to it. "Relent" means another thought arose in Me, that is the meaning of "I relented."
"And at another moment I may speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant." And sometimes I speak concerning a kingdom to build and to plant, and this is only for a moment. "A moment" means a short time. And this is like the first parable, where we saw what happened to the first vessel. At first we saw a vessel but it broke. Some incorrect movement, some incorrect press, crushed. And then we saw that he took it and made from it a lump and again built the vessel anew. So we see there was an intent to plant at first. At first there was here an intent to make a vessel, but what happened? It was crushed and pulled down. He says: why did such a thing happen that only for a moment I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom to build and to plant? Because "it does evil in My eyes, not obeying My voice." Afterward it did evil in My eyes, and this is the parable there where we saw that the vessel, being so, was spoiled. "Then I will relent of the good with which I said I would benefit it." Therefore the good with which I said I would benefit it, I relented of it, and so what does Hashem do? He makes another vessel. I break the vessel, I had an intent that there be an original vessel, but this vessel is originally bad, and therefore I broke it. And then through this, the purpose of the breaking, notice, is to repair. It is not a purpose of breaking in order to nullify.
And therefore the Malbim says, notice: regarding the harm He said "that I thought to harm it." Regarding the good He said "with which I said I would benefit it." "I will relent of the good with which I said I would benefit it." What is the difference? The Malbim says: regarding the matter of harm the Holy One relents even of the thought. Hashem relents of the harm that I thought to do to it, even the thought is erased. That is, this is a harm that will be completely nullified, it is not found even in thought. To give an example, sometimes a person writes something and erases it, but after he erased it an impression still remains. One sees there were other intentions here. In contrast, if he erased it completely and absolutely, no impression remains. Here the Holy One says, I will relent of the harm that I thought to do to it, that is, the relenting will be even of the thought, the thought too will be erased, no impression will remain of it, the harm will be nullified entirely. In contrast, regarding the good, notice of what He relents: He relents only of the saying, not of the thought. And why? Because the thought of benefiting remains even now. Hashem always wants to do good. He always wants to do good, but what? We, the recipients of the good, are not always worthy to receive the good. But the thought forever remains. Hashem says, I always have a thought to do good, only sometimes I say I will do good when you are worthy, and when you are not worthy then I relent of the saying and I do not say I will do good, but I never relent of the thought. The thought will forever remain to do good. And all the relenting is only of the saying. And therefore the thought of good, says the Malbim, remains even now, for behold you see that even the breaking, its purpose is to do good. The breaking, its purpose is not to harm. So although I relented of the good that I said I would do to it, I have no choice but to bring the good afterward through rough paths, after breaking and repairing anew, and then the good will come.
Therefore, notice that regarding good He says "to benefit it." Why "to benefit it"? It should have said "I will relent of the good that I said I would do to it." Why "to benefit it"? Rather the intent is that the goal is to improve the person and bring him back to the proper path. That is the meaning of "to benefit it," to build him anew in a positive way, to bring him back to the proper path.
"Now therefore speak to the men of Yehudah and to the inhabitants of Yerushalayim, saying: Thus says Hashem, behold, I am forming evil against you and devising a plan against you. Return now every man from his evil way, and better your ways and your deeds." Hashem says, behold, I am forming evil against you, thus He requests, I am preparing a harsh decree against you, make this known to the men of Yehudah. And why, says the Radak, did He use the word "forming"? Because He is dealing here with the passage of forming clay vessels, and therefore He says, behold, I am forming evil against you, like the potter forming the vessels. But know that the thought is not in order to harm, but rather the thought itself, even when I form evil against you, I am devising for you a plan of "return now every man from his evil way." The purpose of the evil is that you return in teshuvah. The evil is not a purpose in itself. Behold, I am forming evil against you and devising a plan against you. What plan? This plan is "return now every man from his evil way." So although in practice you see evil, know what the inner thought is: return now every man from his evil way. Like a father who chastises his son, whose goal is to set him on the right path. A father punishes his son when his goal is to correct him, not, God forbid, to take revenge on him. So Hashem says, I want you to return in teshuvah, "return now every man from his evil way and better your ways and your deeds." "Return" refers to the past, and "better your ways" refers to the future. As we saw in the parable of the vessel, that he broke the previous vessel, that is the "return" concerning the past, and formed from it a new vessel, that is the future building. "And better your ways and your deeds." What is the doubling of "your ways and your deeds"? The Malbim says: many times we find this in Tanach and it appears in a doubled form, "your ways and your deeds." The prophet tells them: you must improve yourselves both in the "ways," which are the ways of the soul, and in the "deeds," which are the actions that grow from those ways of the soul. I will explain. A person can envy his fellow over something and go to harm him. So the envy we call a "way." The harming we call "deeds." "Deeds" refers to the actions he does in practice. In contrast, the "ways" are the negative way that is in his heart, that is called "your ways." So "better your ways and your deeds": better your ways, which is what is in your hearts, and also your deeds, meaning the actions you perform on the strength of those negative soul traits.
"But they say: It is hopeless, for we will follow our own plans, and each of us will act according to the stubbornness of his evil heart." Hashem tells him: when you tell them these things, "they say: It is hopeless." They will say "it is hopeless" - what does this mean? They will say the words of one who despairs, of a person who no longer desires correction. Our heart despairs of walking after the ways of Hashem, so the Radak explains. So against "better your ways" they say to him "we will follow our own plans," for we explained that "your ways" means the inner heart, the character traits. And against "better your deeds" they say to him "each of us will act according to the stubbornness of his evil heart." "The stubbornness of his evil heart he will do": this speaks of action, corresponding to "your deeds."
"Therefore thus says Hashem: Ask now among the nations, who has heard such things? The virgin of Yisrael has done a most horrible thing." Thus says Hashem, ask now among the nations: this is a fixed pattern of rebuke, frequent among the prophets, that when the prophets wish to rebuke Yisrael they wish to show them that they have become worse than the nations. And we elaborated on this in the past, that this was the reason Yonah did not want to go on Hashem's mission to rebuke Nineveh. For if he rebukes Nineveh and they do teshuvah, then there will be a great accusation against Am Yisrael, that once again they are worse than the nations. The nations I rebuked and they returned, whereas Am Yisrael are rebuked morning and evening and do not return in teshuvah. Therefore he gave up his life so that there would be no accusation against Am Yisrael. So here too we see that same pattern of rebuke. Thus says Hashem, ask now among the nations, who has heard such things? The virgin of Yisrael has done a most horrible thing. Who has heard such disgraceful things that Am Yisrael did, meaning even among the nations there are no such things. "Sha'arurit" is a thing of disgrace. It is like when we say "sha'arurah" (scandal), "shamah" and "sha'arurah" and so on, expressions of this sort. The expression "sha'arurit," "sha'arurah," its meaning is disgrace. The Radak explains that its meaning is filth and defilement. The Metzudat Tzion says it is a disgraceful and ugly thing, yes? So He says, come and see that they did strange, disgraceful and ugly things. And ask now among the nations, even the nations will listen to the prophets who rebuke and warn against evil deeds. And we saw an example of this in Nineveh. The prophet went and rebuked them and they accepted. The oracle of Damascus, the oracle of Edom, we see prophecies also for the nations. So therefore He tells them, ask now among the nations. "Does the snow of Lebanon leave the rock of the field? Are the cool flowing waters that come from afar forsaken?" What is "does the snow of Lebanon leave the rock of the field"? Does a person who is thirsty leave the snow of Lebanon that flows from the rock of the field? The meaning: a person who is thirsty, and there is snow flowing from Lebanon, for the rivers that come from Lebanon are melted snows. Is there a person who would leave this snow that comes forth from the rock of the field, from a rock located in the field? Is there any chance that someone thirsty would leave such pure and clear water and go away and not drink from it?
"Are the strange, cool, flowing waters forsaken?" "Are the strange waters forsaken?" The expression "strange" (zarim) here is a bit unusual and there are many interpretations of it. What are "strange waters"? "The strange waters are forsaken." So one interpretation, this is explained by the Malbim and also by Rashi in his first interpretation, is that it is from the word "zerem" (stream). Waters that flow, abundant waters. "Are the strange waters forsaken?" The meaning is waters flowing with force, abundant waters. "And cool": cool not in the sense of contrasting with warm, but "cool" means waters that come from their source. That is the meaning, that these are always excellent waters with a flowing spring. And we saw an expression of this: "I dug and drank waters," as it is written there regarding Sancheriv, yes? Which means waters flowing from their source, yes? Like we say there is Rosh HaNikra, also there, it is from the word "nikrat hatzur" (the cleft of the rock), meaning waters that flow from the source. "And flowing" means it is not waters that one must exert oneself to draw, they flow, there is no toil in drawing them. So it emerges that there are here abundant waters that are drawn easily and flow from the rock of the field and are good and of quality, and this person is a thirsty person, so is it possible that a thirsty person would leave such good and excellent waters? Rashi explains that "zarim," as he brings in the name of Menachem, is not from the word "flowing" but from the word "healing." What is the connection between "zarim" and healing? Like "they were not pressed out (zoru) nor bound up." We once explained why healing is called "mazor"? Because their way over wounds was to take remedies, grind them and scatter (zorim) them on the wounds. Therefore from here comes the expression "they were not pressed out nor bound up," they would scatter remedies on the wound and afterward place the bandage. So this is the expression "mazor," from here comes the meaning of the word "mazor." Here He comes and says to them, they were not pressed out, these waters, "does the snow of Lebanon leave the rock of the field, are the strange waters forsaken?" What are "strange waters"? The meaning is waters in which there is healing. That is the meaning of "strange waters," from the word "zoru," waters that heal. Is it possible that these waters would be forsaken? He says that it cannot be from the word "stream," for then it would have to say "zormim" (flowing) or "zerumim," the mem would have to be doubled, and therefore he does not explain it as from the word "stream" but from the word "healing." Rashi brings a further explanation, that it is from "are they forsaken to be strange, loathsome waters." The meaning is loathsome waters, this is "zarim," like "a stranger is considered," from the word waters that are strange to us, that a person does not desire. "Are the strange, flowing waters forsaken": the meaning, the waters are so excellent, would you forsake them like strange waters? Like loathsome waters? You will not drink from them when the waters are so excellent? So it emerges that according to Rashi's first interpretation it is from the word "stream," and according to the second it is from the word "stranger."
"For My people have forgotten Me, they burn incense to worthlessness, and they have stumbled them in their ways, the ancient paths, to walk in bypaths, on a way not built up." After Hashem states the parable, that it cannot be that a thirsty person leaves excellent waters, He says, come and see if this is not what happened here. Hashem says, "for My people have forgotten Me": they burn incense to the host of heaven in which there is no benefit, and they cause them to stumble in their ways, those paths of heaven, "and they have stumbled them in their ways, the ancient paths." That is, the paths of the world too cause them to stumble in their ways. What does this mean? The Metzudat David explains that when they see the ways of nature in the world and they see how the power of nature operates through the stars, which, as is known, is a true and correct thing, that the influence of the stars flows downward, that is, the stars are the channel of influence, yes? That is, one born under this constellation will be such, and under that constellation will be such, this one will be a shedder of blood or will be humble, this one will be such, that one will be such, we see that indeed the stars have power to influence. Only Hashem says, "from the signs of heaven do not be dismayed." Am Yisrael are above the constellation. But certainly there is a constellation, we do not ignore this. And Avraham was very great in astrology. Therefore Avraham, according to his astrology, knew that he would not beget. And the Holy One said to him: go out. What is "go out"? Go out from your astrology and look and count the stars. Why? Because you are above the stars. And one who is below the stars is influenced by them, one who is above the stars is not influenced by them. But the people, what did they mistakenly think? They saw and recognized that the stars indeed influence, and therefore they thought they could receive abundance by praying to them, sacrificing to them, serving them, this is called "ovdei kochavim umazalot" (one who serves stars and constellations). And such a person is completely an idolater, yes? Therefore the stumbling block was the star. This is what He says, "they have forgotten Me, to worthlessness they burn incense," who is the worthlessness as we said? To them, the stars, "and they have stumbled them in their ways, the ancient paths, to walk in bypaths, on a way not built up." They see the influence of the stars and they think that all the abundance comes from them, and through this they walk on a way that is not built up, meaning a way from which the obstacle has not been removed, this is "a way not built up." A built-up way is a way from which the obstacles have been removed. What is the meaning in their concept? That if they had delved deeper they would have seen that the way you walk on is a rough way, since the stars and their powers too are from Him, may He be blessed. Everything is influenced by the Holy One. So what place is there to serve the stars as a power of their own? So the way you walk on is a rough way, it is a way not built up, you serve the star instead of serving Hashem, who is the One who gave the power.
The Malbim explains, "My people have forgotten Me," they left Me, the source of living waters, and in My place they went in My stead, "to worthlessness they burn incense," as it is written, "to hew out for themselves broken cisterns." "And they have stumbled them in their ways," what is "in their ways"? Notice, "and they have stumbled them in their ways, the ancient paths, to walk in bypaths, on a way not built up." They place several expressions about "way": way, path, bypaths, a way not built up. The Malbim explains: the ways of serving Hashem, the ways of Torah and mitzvot, are broad ways. And the Malbim has already explained several times, as we saw in the past, that a "way" is always a way for many. When Scripture mentions "way," it is what is called a highway, it is a way for many. And then this way is a way for many, it is the king's way, it is the way of the Torah, it has a general guidance in every place, at every time, for every person, there is no one who does not have guidance in the Torah. There is no one who does not have a way from the Torah. So it emerges that the Torah is a very broad way, it is a way for everyone. Even the king has ways of conduct for how he should act according to the Torah, and also the lowly person and the wise man and the ignorant man, everyone. Therefore it is called a "way." This way is a way for everyone. And there are also "ancient paths." A "path," the Malbim says, is the route of the individual. Paths are generally for individuals, even today we use this expression generally for a path that is an individual path. So too in the Torah, there is not only a way for many, there is also a path for individuals, in all the details of actions, which action to do, when to do it, in what manner to do it, these are aspects of paths. And this thing is eternal, it will never change, therefore it is called "ancient paths." These are not temporary paths, these are paths that are forever. And they cause them to stumble in their ways, they place obstacles on these ways. They are not comfortable for travel because they place obstacles upon them. The meaning: these enticing people, what do they do? They tell you: no, the way is not good. There are obstacles on it, there are stones there, on his GPS he finds you an alternate route. Recalculating route. What happened? He tells you: no, the way of the Torah is not good. It is not successful. And then following this he guides you to a different route. To what bypaths? To walk in bypaths, on a way not built up. He sends you to walk on a way not built up. The meaning is, first of all it is "bypaths," bypaths are not a place that is inclusive for many but only for individuals, and this way is not built up, "and he sends astray in a trackless void." That is, they show you something that appears to be a way but in truth it is not built up. So it emerges that they took them from the built-up way, which has good paths too, to a way not built up and to bypaths that are, as I said, not for the general public and are, as I said, full of obstacles.