00:00 Sefer Yirmiyahu, chapter 49. Concerning the children of Ammon, thus said Hashem: Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Why then has Malkam taken possession of Gad, and his people dwelt in its cities? Concerning the children of Ammon, now the navi prophesies about the children of Ammon, and as we mentioned, the navi prophesies to the nations as well and about the calamity of the nations. Now he prophesies about the children of Ammon and says, thus said Hashem: Has Israel no sons? "The sons" is said as an expression of wonder, does the nation of Israel have no sons? "Has he no heir" means, does the nation of Israel have no heirs? Why then has Malkam taken possession of Gad? Malkam means their king, that is the plain understanding, and shortly we will see another explanation. Why has Malkam taken possession of Gad? When Gad and Reuven, the children of Gad and the children of Reuven, were exiled from the land, Ammon and Moav were their neighbors, for Gad and the children of Reuven are on the eastern side of the Yarden, there is where the Yarden is, yes? That is the place where Ammon and Moav dwelt. When they saw the territory that had been vacated, the children of Gad and Reuven having been exiled, the children of Ammon and Moav came and settled there. They were also certain that it belonged to them, since they held some deed which they produced from so and so many hundreds of years earlier, and the high court, as is known, always justifies the enemies of Israel, so it justified them and told Israel to clear out, yes? That is to say, that place supposedly belongs to the children of Ammon and Moav, they had territory there before we came and conquered the place. So on this he comes and says, Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Does the nation of Israel have no sons, no heirs? Why has Malkam taken possession of Gad, and his people dwelt in its cities? Why did the king of the children of Ammon go and take possession of Gad, the place where Gad and the children of Reuven dwelt, and go and settle in their cities?
Malkam, we explained according to the Radak that it means their king, and so too the Malbim explains. In contrast, Rashi explains that Malkam is like Milkom. Milkom is the idol of the children of Ammon, that is what it is called, "and for Milkom, the abomination of the children of Ammon." Yes? So that in effect it turns out that here he comes with a complaint against them and against their god, in whose name they, as it were, commit their abominations.
Therefore, behold, days are coming, says Hashem, when I will sound against Rabbah of the children of Ammon the shout of war, and it shall become a desolate mound, and its daughters shall be set ablaze with fire, and Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, said Hashem. Therefore, behold, days are coming, says Hashem, when I will sound against Rabbah of the children of Ammon the shout of war. Since he holds the land of Gad, then the plunderer will come, take note, up to the royal city, which is Rabbah of the children of Ammon, and he will destroy it and its daughters. That is to say, do not think that because you seized Gad unlawfully, the enemy will merely come and clear you out of Gad. No, rather he will come and fight against the royal city, against Rabbah of the children of Ammon, there will be the shout of war. And there will be a desolate mound, meaning the place will be desolate as a result of what the enemy will do there. And its daughters shall be set ablaze with fire. What does "its daughters shall be set ablaze with fire" mean? "Daughters" is an expression that appears often in the Scriptures, and the intent of the verse is the cities, the satellite cities, the cities near it, they are called its daughters. When we speak of Yerushalayim and all its daughters or the daughters of Yehudah, many times they speak of the cities near Yerushalayim, not the daughters themselves, or "the daughters of Yehudah rejoiced." The daughters of Yehudah are the cities situated near Yehudah, the cities of Yehudah. So "daughters" many times refers to cities. That is what he says here, and it shall become a desolate mound, and its daughters, the daughters of Rabbah of the children of Ammon, the smaller cities near it, shall be set ablaze with fire. They will be burned with fire, how? By Nevuchadnetzar, for at that time he will come and fight against the children of Ammon as well.
The Radak adds and says, since we said that the children of Ammon took possession of the land of Gad, he says, know that there will be a time when Israel will take possession of Ammon. That is to say, for the Radak there is a difficulty here, for it is written here, "and Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, said Hashem." The nation of Israel is destined to dispossess those who dispossessed him, whom? Those who took possession of the place of the children of Gad and the children of Reuven, the nation of Israel is destined to inherit those very places. Says the Radak, and we have not heard of such a thing, for in his time there was no such thing, since even the conquest of Ezra and Nechemyah did not include the Golan Heights, it did not include the places that are on the eastern side of the Yarden. And if so, how is it written here, "and Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, said Hashem"? Says the Radak that this prophecy is for the future to come. That in the future to come, when the nation of Israel will inherit the land and its boundary will be from sea to sea, then in the future to come Israel too will dispossess those who dispossessed him, the nation of Israel will come and inherit the places that the children of Ammon took. And it is quite possible to explain that this is already in our own time, that some of the places that are on the eastern side of the Yarden, yes, that belong to us, some of these places, yes, such as the Golan and so on, it may well be that this is the inheritance of the children of Ammon that he speaks of, which the nation of Israel is destined to inherit, it may be that this is part of that very place.
But he explains an additional explanation, that it is quite possible that we will explain this concerning the present as well. Thus says the Radak, how will you explain "and Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him"? He says, for the children of Ammon were stricken by Madai and Paras. So it is brought in the prophecy of Yechezkel, "Behold, I give you to the children of the east as a possession." And Israel came up from the exile through Koresh, who was the king of Paras. And then it is quite possible that he granted them a right in the land of the children of Ammon as well. Since the king of Paras conquered Ammon, and since he granted us permission to come up here to the land, then it is quite possible that he also granted us permission and a right in that very place which he conquered, which is in the land of the children of Ammon. And then, if so, it turns out that this prophecy was not spoken about the future to come, but was already fulfilled in the coming up of Ezra and Nechemyah.
Wail, O Cheshbon, for Ai is despoiled; cry out, O daughters of Rabbah, gird yourselves with sackcloth, lament and rove about among the enclosures, for Malkam shall go into exile, his priests and his officers together. Wail, O Cheshbon, for Ai is despoiled. Since the enemy came by way of Ai of Moav, he says to them, Wail, O Cheshbon, meaning Cheshbon shall wail, and Ai is despoiled, from there he came to Rabbah, from there he came to Rabbah of the children of Ammon, through this cry out, O daughters of Rabbah. He is actually enumerating here all the stations that the enemy passed through, and he says of each place that the enemy reaches, the nation there cries out and screams from the distress of the enemy. And therefore, by the time he reaches the daughters of Rabbah, which means the cities near Rabbah of the children of Ammon as we explained, the cities under Rabbah, of which he said "and its daughters shall be set ablaze with fire" in the previous verse, then they too, cry out, O daughters of Rabbah, those satellite cities of Rabbah of the children of Ammon will cry out. Gird yourselves with sackcloth, we said that girding with sackcloth expresses mourning. Lament, this is eulogy. And rove about among the enclosures. What is "and rove about among the enclosures"? That is to say, they will be forced to rove among the enclosures, for they will no longer have houses, their houses will be destroyed.
Rashi brings Targum Yonatan, "and be confounded in groups." "Sien" means groups. Groups means bands. "Hitmomen" means from the root of confounding, from the language of confounding them. And if so, the meaning is, band together in troops, that is the meaning. That is to say, roving soldiers, there will be roving bands, that is the meaning of "and rove about among the enclosures." Another explanation he gives, "and rove about," wallow in the dung of the sheepfolds. That is to say, he explains "and rove about" as an expression of disgrace. It is written, "And Esav despised the birthright," "and Esav despised the birthright." "Shat" is from the language of disgrace. So "and rove about" here means, you will be disgraced, as if wallowing in dung, that is the meaning of the "roving about" written here.
The Metzudat David says, and rove about among the enclosures, they would hear here and there. And actually I racked my brain to understand what he wants, what is "they would hear here and there," and I searched to see whether in other printings something else is written, but the same thing is written. And in truth there is no doubt that this is a printing error. It is a scribal error. It is not "they would hear" but "they would rove." The mem resembles a tet, and the ayin too resembles a tet, and the letters got switched here. So if so, they would rove here and there, from the language of roving. And whoever wishes to see that this interpretation is correct, let him see what the Metzudat Tziyon says. The Metzudat Tziyon is the Metzudat David, only there is a part where he explains the verse, and there is a part where he explains the words. In the Metzudat Tziyon he explains the words. And rove about, a matter of going here and there, and likewise "they roved in the streets of Yerushalayim." He says, "and rove about" is not a matter of hearing. What is the connection between "rove about" and also what is the connection to say "they would hear here and there"? What is "they would hear here and there"? Therefore certainly there is no doubt, and rove about among the enclosures, they would rove here and there to hide among the enclosures, the place where the sheep lie down, they would go in order to hide in the place where the sheep lie down.
Why do you glory in the valleys, your flowing valley, O rebellious daughter, who trusts in her treasures, saying, Who will come against me? Why do you glory in the valleys, why do you boast in the valleys. What is "in the valleys"? Rashi explains, their land is a land of valleys. They do not suffer from drought, from the withholding of rains. The sun does not dominate it. Your flowing valley, he says to her, prepare yourself, for you will receive a blow of abundant rains until the waters flow in the valley. So Menachem explained. That is to say, "your flowing valley" is a punishment. You glory in the valleys? Your flowing valley, O rebellious daughter, who trusts in her treasures, your valley will flow from abundant rains, that is, a great flood will come upon them. The Radak explains, what is "your flowing valley"? That very valley in which you take pride, your valley will flow with the blood of your slain. It will flow with the blood of the slain, that is "your flowing valley." What will flow there? The blood of those killed as a result of the punishment that Rabbah will receive. And Yonatan translated, your flowing valley, your strength shall be destroyed, your might shall be laid waste. The Malbim explains that this city Rabbah was a place called "the city of waters." It is a place with rivers, a valley place full of water. And they could not conquer this place because the place had rivers around it, a place where there was "your flowing valley." And this is what causes you to glory in the valleys, since your valley flows, you say, here in our valley there are rivers on every side, it is hard to conquer us. And they also had treasures there, who trusts in her treasures, and therefore she says, Who will come against me, who can come and conquer me.
Behold, I bring terror upon you, says Hashem, the Lord of Hosts, Hashem the God of Hosts, from all around you; and you shall be driven out, each one before him, and there is none to gather the wanderer. Behold, I bring terror upon you, says Hashem the God of Hosts. Terror in order to cause them to flee from the fortress. And this flight will be, each one from all around you and you shall be driven out, each one before him. "Each one before him" the Radak explains, each one will flee toward the nearest direction there is for him. Wherever his face is directed, there he will flee. That is to say, from the abundance of terror and panic, when a person's fear is not great, then he calculates his ways and reckons where it is best to flee. But when the fear is great, each one flees wherever his face is directed, wherever his face turns, there he flees. He means to say the fear will be so great that you shall be driven out, each one before him. Each one will flee straight ahead of himself from the abundance of terror. And not only that, but also there is none to gather the wanderer. That is to say, the driven-out ones will not gather together. When the driven-out ones gather, that is, each one fled and afterward at some place they assemble together, says the Radak, they comfort one another. They comfort one another. That is to say, they band together, they plan plans together. But when each one flees and finds himself alone, there is none to gather the wanderer, then this brings an additional breakage, that they have no mutual strengthening from one another.
The Malbim explains that we note there is the expression "you shall be driven out" and there is "there is none to gather" and there is also the expression "wanderer." And you shall be driven out, each one before him, and there is none to gather the wanderer. What is the difference between "driven out" and "wanderer"? The Malbim explains, the "driven out" one is driven from his place. But it may be that perhaps he is only driven from here, yet he is gathered in another place. In contrast, the "wanderer" is one who wanders from place to place and is scattered. He cannot be gathered. And therefore he says, and there is none to gather the wanderer. He does not say this regarding the "driven out" one, for the driven out one may perhaps yet be gathered. But for the wanderer there is none to gather.
And afterward I will bring back the captivity of the children of Ammon, says Hashem. After they receive their recompense, says Hashem, I will bring back the captives of the children of Ammon, that they will return to their place.
Our chapter is a collection of prophecies to the nations. After we spoke of the children of Ammon, now he moves to speak of Edom. Concerning Edom, thus said Hashem of Hosts: Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman? Has counsel perished from the understanding ones? Has their wisdom become rancid? This is a prophecy that the navi prophesies against Edom, and take note, according to the Radak this prophecy is a future prophecy. That is to say, it is not something happening now, it is a prophecy that is meant to be in the future to come. In contrast, we will see in the Malbim that the Malbim explains that this is a prophecy that speaks both about the present period in which the navi stands and about the future period. Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman? Take note, this prophecy appears in Ovadyah as well. "And I will destroy wise men from Edom." And if you see that he says, Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman, and Teiman means Edom, for Teiman comes from the children of Elifaz son of Esav, one of the sons of Elifaz son of Esav was Teiman. And if so, they are speaking here about the descendants of Edom, Esav is Edom. So, is there no longer wisdom in Teiman, has counsel perished from the understanding ones? Is there no longer wisdom in them? What is the intent of the matter? Says the Radak, from this phrasing you understand that Edom were considered wise. And since this is so, when it happened that they did something considered an act of folly, of this he says, Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman. We see that over the years Edom and Rome and the nations of Europe were considered more intelligent than, for example, when speaking of the Arab nations, yes? Even though, know that in history, in the time of the Rambam there stood great wise men among the Arab nations, yes? Only in the later period did they begin to occupy themselves with bombs instead of books, and this brought them to the great genius they have today, that if there is at all some engineer then he is one who produces bombs. That is the great wisdom that the Arab nations have today, there is no intelligence there and no wisdom and no... you will not hear of the renowned Arab scientist. When did you last hear such a thing? What scientific discoveries or what progress have the Arab nations brought us? If there are developments it is only, as I said, in the field of bombs, and even when they need to produce an atom, which already requires more educated people here, then all this they import from Russia and from other places. There is no wisdom there. In any case you understand that among Edom it was accepted that they were wise. And therefore the navi wonders about this and says, Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman? Has the wisdom of Edom already perished? How is it possible that evil came upon them, that counsel has perished from the understanding ones and their wisdom has become rancid?
Counsel has perished from the understanding ones, the Radak explains that "from the understanding ones" is not in the sense of sons, meaning descendants. It cannot be said that it is not in that sense, for Yonatan translates "mibanim" as "from the sons," meaning truly from the sons. But in contrast, the Radak himself explains that "mibanim" means from the language of understanding. He says, like "understand my thought," which is from the light conjugation. Yes, "tevunah" is a heavy conjugation, since it has several syllables. "Banim" is a light conjugation. So he says, counsel has perished from the understanding ones, as if saying their understanding has perished, he does not mean to say from their sons, yes? So he wonders and says, how is it possible for such a thing? Targum Yonatan explains that Teiman means the south. He does not explain that Teiman means one of the sons of Elifaz, but that Teiman means those dwelling in the land of the south.
As I opened earlier, the Malbim explains that the prophecy here concerning Edom deals both with the near period and deals with the future to come. Concerning two destructions that Edom had, both in the near time and in the future. The Malbim explains, and gives a small introduction, in Yeshayahu 21 we learned that when Edom was destroyed, the matter was as a result of some trap that was set for her. And what was that trap? Well, the children of Dedan were far off, and Edom went out to fight with them. Since the children of Edom went out with all their army to fight against the children of Dedan, this caused him to become distant from the border of his land, the enemy came and entered his land and it fell into his hand like ripe fruit. Of this the navi wonders and says, Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman? What folly they committed, that they went to pursue the children of Dedan into the distance and left their land exposed to the coming of the enemy. Is there no longer wisdom in Teiman? Do they have no sense, how did they do such a thing? Counsel has perished from the understanding ones, the Malbim too explains that "mibanim" is from the language of understanding ones. Until now there were understanding ones among them, and now their wisdom has become rancid, that is, they committed an act of folly, counsel has perished.
The Malbim says that the difference between "banim," meaning understanding, and "chochmah," wisdom, is that wisdom the Malbim explains a great deal in Sefer Mishlei, as we return to the matter many times. Wisdom is what a person receives from others, and understanding is what a person observes and learns on his own, understanding one thing from another. So he says, although they did not gain wisdom, wisdom perished, they did not gain wisdom from others, but could they not observe on their own? Do they have no self-understanding to grasp that the course they are taking is a mistaken course?
Flee, turn away, go deep to dwell, O inhabitants of Dedan, for I have brought the calamity of Esav upon him, the time when I visited him. The Malbim explains, the children of Dedan fled, went deep to dwell. That is to say, they fled far away. This is how he explains the trap into which Edom fell. As a result of this Edom went out to pursue them since they fled, turned away, went deep to dwell, they distanced themselves. And through this, the calamity of Esav I brought upon him. The enemy came and conquered the land of Edom since there were no longer warriors there. "And the calamity of Esav" means the calamity destined for him from the side of the order of things, what is destined for Esav, that Esav must suffer and receive his punishment. "The time when I visited him," this is the time destined for the downfall from the side of Providence and from the side of the accounting of his sins, now Hashem visits upon him his sins, this is the time of the calamity that the Holy One, blessed be He, brought upon them, that which was decreed for them.
The Radak, in contrast, explains that Dedan is actually an additional name of Edom. According to the Radak, flee, turn away, go deep to dwell, he is actually saying to Edom, since the enemy will come upon you, flee. Inhabitants of Dedan, who are the inhabitants of Dedan? According to the Malbim it is those who drew Edom out and actually distanced them from their land and brought their downfall. According to the Radak, no, this is a continuation of the speech that the navi speaks to Edom. So just as you see Edom, he calls it sometimes Edom and sometimes he calls it Teiman, and now he calls it Dedan. Says the Radak, Dedan is from Edom, as it is written in the prophecy of Yechezkel, "and Dedanah shall fall by the sword." And therefore, as it were, he continues and turns to Edom and says to them, flee, since the enemy is near.
If grape-gatherers came to you, would they not leave gleanings? If thieves in the night, they would destroy only what suffices for them. This is a haftarah that we all know, the haftarah found in Ovadyah, the haftarah of Vayishlach, the vision of Ovadyah. And there too there is a similar verse, "If thieves came to you, if grape-gatherers, would they not leave gleanings?" We will now explain the meaning of the matter, but first we will emphasize what Chazal say. Rashi brings it here. Says Rashi, everything similar to this example Ovadyah prophesied concerning Edom. And since one style is given to several nevi'im, and no two nevi'im prophesy in one style, in some of the matters they differ. That is to say, the idea is the same idea, but the phrasings differ. That is to say, we see that this is not an exact copy of the same prophecy. And why? One style is given to several nevi'im, and no two nevi'im prophesy in one style. This sounds like a heading of a contradiction, but here the first style differs from the second style, and I will explain. The Abarbanel explains, this is found in Yeshayahu chapter 2 verse 2, the Abarbanel says that it is possible for the conceptual matter to be equal in both, but not that the words are equal, rather they are interchanged. That is to say, when we speak of the matter itself, it is the same matter, the message is the same message. But the phrasing is a different phrasing. And therefore you will see, these are actually the same ideas, if thieves came to you, if grape-gatherers, would they not leave gleanings, these are the same ideas, but the phrasings are not exactly the same phrasings, since prophecy, as we have spoken several times, passes through the navi. And since it passes through the navi, it receives something from the navi himself. And then there are changes in the phrasing. In contrast, we said that if there were two nevi'im like Moshe Rabbeinu, they would phrase it in exactly the same phrasing. And why? Because with Moshe Rabbeinu his great level was that he saw through the clear lens. What is the clear lens? It is a polished mirror, meaning polished glass without any blemish. What does this mean? That Moshe Rabbeinu sees the matters, the words of Hashem, directly. Every navi, when the matters pass through him, then as we said there remains a flavor of the vessel itself of the navi. It passes through him and comes out from him. Moshe, "and what are we." "The most humble man upon the face of the earth." Moshe takes up no space at all. So the word of Hashem enters and exits as it is. There is no personal aspect of the navi here, there is no self-expression of his here because he takes up no space. So that were it to be imagined that there really were two nevi'im like Moshe, we would not have such a concept that no two nevi'im prophesy in one style. Both would prophesy in the same style, since the matters did not receive Moshe's style, for Moshe Rabbeinu was in the category of zero, "and what are we," nothing at all. And consequently the prophecy comes out exactly as it is received.
If grape-gatherers came to you, would they not leave gleanings? The Malbim explains, the enemies who came upon Edom, on one hand came like thieves, since they came without the owner's awareness, a thief comes in secret. And on the other hand they came like grape-gatherers, since a thief comes at night while they came by day. They permitted themselves to attack Edom since they were not at home as we said, they had gone out to fight against the children of Dedan. He comes to tell you here, see that they are worse than grape-gatherers and worse than thieves. Worse than a grape-gatherer who comes by day, and even worse than a thief who comes at night. If grape-gatherers came to you, when grape-gatherers come, meaning those who come to steal from the vineyard by day, would they not leave gleanings? Do they not leave the grapes, the small clusters, which it is not worth investing time to pick? "Gleanings" is from the language of "child and suckling," these are the smaller clusters, so the Ibn Ezra explains. He says, and come and see, they left nothing at all. It turns out then that they are worse than the grape-gatherers, for the grape-gatherers at least leave gleanings. Likewise they are worse than the thieves. Since the thieves are not careful to leave gleanings, because the thieves come at night and then they destroy everything. He does not, he is not careful to leave gleanings, he takes everything, he comes at night, he cannot begin to examine and see what suits him and what does not suit him, he takes everything. He says, but they, even the thieves would destroy only what suffices for them. This means, according to his need he would destroy and say enough. They will not destroy things for which they have no need. And also the thieves at night do not know all the hidden places, for at night it is hard to find the hideouts, the hidden places. But behold, come and see, he says here, thieves in the night would destroy only what suffices for them, whereas here come and see that they searched and destroyed everything. As it is written in Ovadyah, "How Esav was searched out, his hidden treasures sought out." Meaning the places that are hidden, these too they discovered. This too gushed forth and came out. So come and see that the state of Esav is worse than if thieves or grape-gatherers came to him. For thieves or grape-gatherers still leave something, and here nothing remained.
For I have laid Esav bare, I have uncovered his secret places, and he cannot hide himself. His seed is despoiled, and his brothers, his seed and his brothers and his neighbors, and he is no more. For I have laid Esav bare, as we said, here they searched and destroyed everything, so there is a situation here in which Esav, all his secret places are exposed. And I have laid Esav bare. And I bared him also of the fortresses with which he was surrounded, and he trusted in his fortresses that no one could overcome him. Says Hashem, I have uncovered his secret places, I have uncovered the places in which he was hidden. And he cannot hide himself. Why? Because one who is inside the city seeks a place to hide. But when you go to fight against the enemies and go out, as was the case with Esav, with Edom who went to fight against Dedan, then he cannot hide, he has nowhere to hide. And then consequently he cannot hide himself, and he was not at all in his house so that he could hide. Of this he says, for his seed is despoiled, and his brothers and his neighbors, and he is no more. His seed is despoiled, and his brothers and his neighbors, and where is he himself? He is no more, he went to fight against the children of Dedan. He is not there at all at the place, he is not at all in his house.
Says the Malbim, take note, it is written here "I have laid Esav bare, I have uncovered his secret places." What is the difference between "laid bare" and "uncovered"? Says the Malbim, "chasaf" is when a person removes something that is attached to another thing. Like the bark of a tree. "The exposure of the white," when Yaakov exposed the bark and removed it from the rods which he peeled in white streaks in the water troughs, there it is called "the exposure of the white," since to "chasaf" means something that is attached and you removed it. And from there, says the Malbim, they took it as a borrowed term for anything that is covered permanently and one removes the covering from it, even if it is not attached. Like "bare-buttocked," "bare-legged." "Bare-buttocked" means that they are naked. And here he describes that the Holy One, blessed be He, removed the fortresses. In contrast, "uncovering," says the Malbim, "uncovering" is not specifically to lay bare something covered, but anything. It is a more abstract expression, I say also "reveal a secret." Even though in revealing a secret you lifted no covering. It is something more abstract. In any case we express ourselves with the expression "revealing," revealing the hidden thing, revealing a secret and so on. "Revealing" is a more inclusive expression that deals also with abstract matters.
Leave your orphans, I will keep them alive, and let your widows trust in Me. Says the Malbim, this is said as an expression of wonder. Leave your orphans, I will keep them alive? For you left your orphans here, you went from your land, you left them without protection, you went to fight with the children of Dedan, and shall I keep them alive? And your widows, shall they trust in Me? And do you rely, says Hashem, that I will keep watch for you over your widows? For you left them and went, so consequently there is no one to worry and care for them, and since this is so they will pay the full price, as we will soon see in the next verse. The Radak, in contrast, explains that the expression "leave your orphans, I will keep them alive" means that when a person goes to war or even falls in battle, and he is dying, then another person says to him, leave your orphans, I will keep them alive. That is to say, you are worried, who will care for your sons, who will care for the widow, so he says, do not fear, leave your orphans, I will keep them alive. So a soldier says to his comrade when he is wounded in battle. He says here, there is no one to say this to them, leave your orphans, I will keep them alive, and let your widows trust in Me. Since, as it is written in the prophecy of Ovadyah, "and there shall be no survivor to the house of Esav." So if there is no survivor then who will say to whom, leave your orphans to me, I will keep them alive? No one remains to survive in order to take responsibility for the orphans of his comrade who fell in battle, since in the end all will fall, there shall be no survivor to the house of Esav.
For thus said Hashem: Behold, those whose judgment was not to drink the cup shall surely drink; and shall you be the one to go unpunished? You shall not go unpunished, but you shall surely drink. Says Hashem, those whose judgment is not to drink the cup shall surely drink. What is the meaning of the matter? There are those whose judgment is not to drink the cup, and why in any case shall they surely drink? The Malbim explains, since they became liable from the side of the general order. As when a fire goes out and finds thorns and a stack or standing grain is consumed, it burns and destroys everything. After the rod of Hashem's wrath goes out to shake up kingdoms, says the Malbim, it no longer distinguishes and destroys everything. So behold he says, you, as we saw in the form of a question, leave your orphans, I will keep them alive, let your widows trust in Me? Do you think that I will keep them alive, says Hashem? For those whose judgment is not to drink the cup shall surely drink. Those who do not deserve the punishment in law as a result of their evil deeds, in any case shall surely drink. And you, for you are the cause of all this, the destroyer went out because of you, since you are the one who is wicked. So how do you think that you shall surely go unpunished? This is something impossible. And not only will you not go unpunished, but you shall surely drink. You are obligated according to the judgment to drink the cup, meaning the cup of poison, and you will be worse than all the nations. Since the nations, after they drink, will be cleansed of their sin. But you, although you shall surely drink, in any case you will not be cleansed of your sin. The Radak explains that what is actually said here, for thus said Hashem, behold, those whose judgment is not to drink the cup shall surely drink, those upon whom the punishment is not imposed as we explained, they do not need to be punished on their own account, even so they shall surely drink. You upon whom the punishment is imposed, how much more so. And why? Since all the nations were not a brother to Israel. But you, says the Radak, for Esav is a brother to Israel. From a brother to Israel we would have expected that someone who is our brother would help us. We would have expected that in a time of distress when others rise against us, he would be a help and support to save us from their hand. And not only was he not a help and support against those who rose against us, but he himself never ceased all the time to distress us and torment us and pursue us. As Ovadyah said in his prophecy, "For the violence against your brother Yaakov, shame shall cover you." You should be ashamed of the violence you did to your brother Yaakov throughout all the years, "and you shall be cut off forever." And therefore the judgment of Edom to drink the cup of poison is greater than all the other nations. For the other nations, even if they distressed us, it was not on the same level as the nations of Edom who throughout all of history pursued us, and the soil of Europe is filled with the blood of Israel throughout their generations. And a second thing, from them more is expected, since they are our brothers, and as our brothers, as we said, on the contrary, you should have helped us. So he says, your situation is not like the situation of the other nations.
For I have sworn by Myself, says Hashem, that Botzrah shall become a desolation, a reproach, a ruin, and a curse; and all its cities shall be everlasting ruins. Says Hashem, I have sworn by Myself, says Hashem, that your situation is not like theirs. Since we said that they, the sword, the poison, will cease. But for you, says Hashem, a desolation, a reproach, a ruin, and a curse. Several harsh expressions. He says, there is a time when the royal city of Edom will be destroyed and then it will be a desolation and ruin forever. He is not speaking here about the prophecy as we explained in the Malbim that there are two prophecies here, a prophecy about the destruction of Edom in the present and about its destruction in the future to come. In the present, as we saw at the time when they went to pursue the children of Dedan. Of that he does not say a desolation, a reproach, a ruin, and a curse, everlasting ruins. For a person will say, behold, Edom are not destroyed as everlasting ruins. This prophecy was not given about then, it was given about the future to come. That in the future to come Edom will be a desolation, a reproach, a ruin, and a curse. A day will come at the end of days and it will be destroyed a second time, and then there will truly be complete desolation. And then it will not be cleansed forever. And all its cities, all the cities of the land, will be everlasting ruins. The Malbim explains, what is written "ruin," he says this is in a place where there are buildings, so they speak of "ruin" which is from the language of "the buildings will be destroyed." "Desolation" is an expression that speaks of the whole land, that the whole land will be desolate. And more than this he adds, that every place, the more inhabited it is, so its downfall will be greater. So that in the place where there are cities, they will be ruins and a curse will fall upon them, which is more than a reproach. For "a desolation, a reproach," this is the places that are the general land. And in contrast, "a ruin and a curse Botzrah shall become," which is the place that is inhabited there, there not only reproach will there be a curse, and there will also be destruction. The more inhabited and more important the place is, so its destruction will be greater.