Prophecy to Achaz – Calamity or Consolation/2

Prophecy of Calamity or Consolation?

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Consolation

Yeshayahu's words constitute a prophecy of consolation and encouragement.  This approach subdivides regarding the event about which Achaz is being comforted:

The Aramean-Israelite Threat

All of Yeshayahu's words relate to the threat posed by the Aramean-Israelite alliance. Yeshayahu tells Achaz that he need not worry since both countries are soon to be destroyed by Assyria.

Sources:A. Chakham¹

Single message – One of the advantages of this approach is that it presents Yeshayahu as speaking about only one issue, with one unified message, throughout the chapter.  Everything the prophet says relates to the downfall of Aram and Israel.

Anger regarding the sign – According to this approach, despite Yeshayahu's anger at Achaz for refusing a Divine sign, the prophet continues to promise Hashem's aid and encourage the king that he has nothing to fear from his enemies.

"יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ... יָמִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא בָאוּ לְמִיּוֹם סוּר אֶפְרַיִם מֵעַל יְהוּדָה" – Despite first impressions, these words need not connote that calamity is to befall Yehuda, as the term "יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ" can relate to good tidings as well as bad.²  Yeshayahu is prophesying that with the fall of Israel at the hand of Assyria,³ the state of the nation will revert to what it had been before the split of the kingdom (לְמִיּוֹם סוּר אֶפְרַיִם מֵעַל יְהוּדָה), when there was just one monarch who ruled over the entire country.⁴ This might reflect hopes that Chizkiyahu was to revive the Davidic dynasty of old,⁵ take control of the Northern kingdom, and be a Messianic type of figure.⁶

Flies of Egypt and bees of Assyria – According to this approach, the mention of the "זְּבוּב אֲשֶׁר בִּקְצֵה יְאֹרֵי מִצְרָיִם" is not intended to connote that Egypt was to join forces with Assyria; it is simply a metaphor for any vast army. As such, the image of both the flies and the bees refer to the swarms of Assyrian soldiers who were to fall upon Aram and Israel.

"תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה" – According to this position, the words "מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר" serve to identify the "תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה".  Assyria is likened to a "razor" as it is about to raze the lands of Aram and Israel until not a hair is left.  This approach might agree with Rashi Yeshayahu 7:15-25About R. Shelomo Yitzchakithat "הַשְּׂכִירָה" refers to an honored or important person (or nation),⁷ rather than a hired hand.

"Butter and honey" – This approach could read the two appearances of the image in one of two ways:

• Blessing of prosperity – In both verses 15 and 22, the eating of "butter and honey" is a metaphor for blessings which will benefit Yehuda.  Yeshayahu declares that after Aram and Israel are defeated, the cattle of the Judeans⁸ will give forth so much milk that butter will be made from the leftovers. This positive understanding of the image might be supported by its similarity to the phrase "אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ", a description which consistently has a positive connotation in Tanakh. 
• Prosperity and desolation – Alternatively, while the image in verse 15 connotes blessing, in verse 22 the excessive butter signifies the desolation in Aram and Israel. Yeshayahu tells Achaz that due to the Assyrian invasion, all agricultural produce in his enemies' countries will be ruined, so that the refugees from war will have only milk to consume. According to this reading, everything in verses 18-25 refers to the destruction which will take place in Aram and Israel.⁹ The prophet might intentionally uses the same image in contrasting ways because the desolation brought to Yehuda's enemies is what will allow Achaz' own land to thrive.

"לַשָּׁמִיר וְלַשַּׁיִת יִהְיֶה" – The description of desolation in verses 23-25 relates to the lands of Aram and Israel.  After they are subdued by Assyria, the land will be barren and overgrown. This would fit with Yeshayahu's earlier promise to Achaz in verse 15: "כִּי בְּטֶרֶם יֵדַע הַנַּעַר מָאֹס בָּרָע וּבָחֹר בַּטּוֹב תֵּעָזֵב הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה קָץ מִפְּנֵי שְׁנֵי מְלָכֶיהָ".‎¹⁰

Both the Aramean-Israelite and the Assyrian Threat

Yeshayahu tells Achaz that he has nothing to fear from Aram and Israel, since Assyria is soon to ravage both countries.  Though Assyria will invade Yehuda as well, Yehuda will survive and Sancheriv's army will be defeated.

Sources:Ibn Balaam, RashiYeshayahu 7:15-25About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Ibn EzraYeshayahu 7:15-25About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RadakYeshayahu 7:15-25About R. David Kimchi, Abarbanel

Relationship between parts of the chapter – These sources maintain that Yeshayahu has a dual message in the chapter.  Though he initially deals with Achaz' current worry, the alliance of Aram and Israel, he then changes focus to speak of upcoming dangers, and the salvation from them. At first glance, one might question the relevance of the latter and why Yeshayahu would raise yet another event for Achaz to worry about. One could respond that Yeshayahu is simply putting Achaz's fears in perspective, and pointing out that even a far greater threat will end in salvation.

Mix of comfort and woe – According to this approach, though the prophecy as a whole is one of consolation and reassurance, Yeshayahu notes that devastation will precede the period of prosperity.  This explains the mixed imagery of the chapter.

"יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ... אֵת מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר" – These sources understand this verse to mean that Yehuda, too, will be attacked by Assyria. Yeshayahu tells Achaz that though he has nothing to fear from Aram and Israel, he should worry about Assyria. He will be plagued by Tiglat Pilesser, and his son, Chizkiyahu,¹¹ will be by attacked by Sancheriv.

"יָמִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא בָאוּ לְמִיּוֹם סוּר אֶפְרַיִם מֵעַל יְהוּדָה" – Yeshayahu compares the attack of Sancheriv to the split of the kingdom to emphasize the enormity of the danger and devastation.  This is the first time since the split that Yehuda will find herself in such dire straits, with the potential to lose her land.

Flies and bees

"תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה" – These sources do not identify the "תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה" with Assyria, but rather present Yeshayahu as saying that Hashem will use his "blade" to raze Assyria.  They suggest that the verse refers to the angel and plague which decimated Sancheriv's army and caused him to retreat. As such, this verse represents the turning point in the prophecy, introducing the consolation.  Though Assyria is to attack, Yehuda is to be saved.

"Butter and honey" – According to these sources, the image in both verses 15 and 22 can refer to the same blessing. Ibn Ezra, Radak and Abarbanel explain that in the aftermath of Sancheriv's campaign the surviving righteous will be able to subsist on even a single calf or two sheep since they will be so productive. The milk will be so abundant that they will dismiss it and drink only of the fat. [Alternatively, they will have no choice but to make butter from the leftovers.]

"לַשָּׁמִיר וְלַשַּׁיִת יִהְיֶה" – These sources struggle to find the message of consolation in verses 23-25, and are forced to interpret the verses against their simple sense:

• Rashi asserts that the verse suggests that all the vineyards will be overgrown with thorns because the generation of Chizkiyahu will be busy learning Torah and scorn wine.  In the hills, in contrast, there will be no fear of bramble (לֹא תָבוֹא שָׁמָּה יִרְאַת שָׁמִיר וָשָׁיִת). The land there will be worked to produce grain, and provide pasture for animals.
• Radak suggests to read verse 23-24 as if inverted: all the sites which today are full of bramble, and to which one will only approach with bow and arrow, will be filled with valuable vines. shadal, however, points out tha=e obvious disadvantage
• Finally, Abarbanel asserts that verses 23-24 depicts the situation during Sancheriv's campaign, while verse 25 represents the promise of what will happen in its aftermath. Even the hilly land (normally home to robbers) will be worked, and there will be no fear of barreness.  Due to the peacefu climate, the areas will be open to roaming oxen and sheep.

Rebuke

Yeshayahu's words constitute a rebuke to Achaz for not trusting in Hashem's promise that He will aid Yehuda. As punishment for seeking human assistance, Achaz is told that Assyria will smite not only Aram and Israel, but Yehuda as well.

Sources:R. Eliezer of BeaugencyYeshayahu 7:15-25About R. Eliezer of Beaugency, ShadalYeshayahu 7 IntroductionYeshayahu 7:12Yeshayahu 7:15-25About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, MalbimYeshayahu Beur HaInyan 7:15-25About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

Refusal to receive a sign – Achaz's refusal to ask for a sign betrayed his lack of belief in Hashem's aid, clarifying to Yeshayahu that Achaz had no intention of heeding his advice to trust in God and not seek foreign assistance ("הִשָּׁמֵר וְהַשְׁקֵט").

The sign: Emanuel – Shadal claims that due to Achaz' refusal to ask for a sign, Yeshayahu gave him one which did not suffice to calm his fears.  Since the birth of Emanuel was not to be immediate, Achaz was left to his worries.  This ensured that he continued on the path he had set for himself, bribing Assyria to fight against his enemies (See Melakhim II 16:8-9 and Divrei HaYamim II 28:16)

"יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ... אֵת מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר" – According to these sources, the words "יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ" imply that Assyria will attack Yehuda itself. After telling Achaz about the fall of Aram and Israel, Yeshayahu warns Achaz that the very kingdom which he hoped would help him, will eventually turn on him and devastate his country. These sources differ regarding the specific event to which Yeshayahu refers:

• Tiglat Pilesser's invasion – According to Shadal, Yeshayahu is speaking of Tiglat Pilesser, who attacked not only Aram and Israel but Yehuda as well. As Divrei HaYamim shares, "וַיָּבֹא עָלָיו תִּלְּגַת פִּלְנְאֶסֶר מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וַיָּצַר לוֹ וְלֹא חֲזָקוֹ".‎
• Sancheriv's campaign – R"E of Beaugency, in contrast, assumes that Yeshayahu is referring to Sancheriv's campaign against Yehuda in the time of Chizkiyahu. The prophet speaks of a future rather than immediate punishment.¹²

Biblical parallels – Elsewhere in Tanakh, as well, there are similar warnings that seeking foreign aid rather than trusting in Hashem will result in catastrophe (especially when one invites a foreigner to attack one's own brother):

• Turning to Aram – In Divrei HaYamim II 16, when Asa seeks Aram's help against Basha, he is rebuked by the prophet Chanani, "בְּהִשָּׁעֶנְךָ עַל מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם וְלֹא נִשְׁעַנְתָּ עַל י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ עַל כֵּן נִמְלַט חֵיל מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם מִיָּדֶךָ".‎¹³
• Turning to Egypt – Yeshayahu speaks out against going to Egypt for aid in Yeshayahu 20 and Yeshayahu 31:1-3, promising "וּמִצְרַיִם אָדָם וְלֹא אֵל וְסוּסֵיהֶם בָּשָׂר וְלֹא רוּחַ וַי"י יַטֶּה יָדוֹ וְכָשַׁל עוֹזֵר וְנָפַל עָזֻר וְיַחְדָּו כֻּלָּם יִכְלָיוּן".
• Turning to Bavel – Chizkiyahu's showing of his treasures to Merodakh Baladan of Bavel has been understood as an attempt to join an alliance against Assyria.¹⁴ Yeshayahu reacts in anger, warning Chizkiyahu, ‎"‎‎הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים וְנִשָּׂא כׇּל אֲשֶׁר בְּבֵיתֶךָ וַאֲשֶׁר אָצְרוּ אֲבֹתֶיךָ עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה בָּבֶלָה".

"תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה" – The image of a "תַעַר הַשְּׂכִירָה" refers to Assyria, so called because he had been "hired" by Achaz to attack Aram and Israel.¹⁵

"אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְשַׂעַר הָרַגְלָיִם וְגַם אֶת הַזָּקָן תִּסְפֶּה" – The description of razing from head to feet would seem to suggest a totality of destruction.  This would fit the campaign of Sancheriv when all of the fortified cities of Yehuda were conquered and only Yerushalayim remained, but would appear not to be an appropriate description of the invasion of Tiglat Pilesser.  This leads Shadal to suggest that the image of "shaving" is intentionally used because it implies a cutting of the hair, but not the skin. Tiglat Pilesser's soldiers plundered and ravaged the land, but did not actually battle and cause bloodshed.¹⁶

Flies of Egypt – This approach might suggest that Egypt is mentioned, not because they joined forces with Assyria against Yehuda, but because they were another enemy country which Judean kings relied upon and turned to for assistance when dealing with foreign affairs.¹⁷  Yeshayahu tells Achaz that any empire in whom he will trust rather than Hashem will ultimately not only fail him, but turn into a foe.¹⁸

Butter and honey – According to Shadal. the same image is used to connote opposite concepts in verses 15 and 22.  In verse 15, the promise that Emanuel will eat fat and honey is a sign of the upcoming salvation from Aram and Israel, while in verse 22 it signifies the devastation to be wrought on Yehuda. Since all the agricultural land will be laid barren by the Assyrian forces,¹⁹ the only thing that will be left to eat will be the milk produced by cattle. It is possible that the prophet intentionally used the same image to highlight how Achaz' lack of belief turned a promise of blessing into a curse.

"לַשָּׁמִיר וְלַשַּׁיִת יִהְיֶה" – This description of devastation refers to the aftermath of Assyria's attack on Yehuda. Yehuda will be barren, her fruitful vines laid to waste, and her land filled with thorns.²⁰  This description could match either of the eras discussed above as being the setting of Yeshayahu's words:

• Era of Achaz – Chizkiyahu says of his father's reign: "וַיְהִי קֶצֶף י"י עַל יְהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלָ‍ִם וַיִּתְּנֵם [לְזַעֲוָה] (לזועה) לְשַׁמָּה וְלִשְׁרֵקָה" (Divrei haYamim II 29:8).,.
• Era of Chizkiyahu –

¹ A. Chakham, Da'at Mikra Commentary to Sefer Yeshayahu (Jerusalem, 1984): 83-87. A. Chakham brings two readings for the unit, one in which he reads all the verses as being consolation, and one in which he reads them as rebuke.

² See, for instance, Bereshit 18:19 where Hashem speaks of bringing blessing to Avraham or Devarim 28:2 where Hashem promises rewards for obedience, " וּבָאוּ עָלֶיךָ כׇּל הַבְּרָכוֹת הָאֵלֶּה".

³ Even though the Northern Kingdom is not totally exiled in this period, Tiglat Pilesser's attack marks the beginning of the end.

⁴ This reading would work better had the verse not ended with the words "אֵת מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר" which suggests that Hashem is not only bringing upon Yehuda an era comparable to that of the United Monarchy, but also bringing upon him Assyria.  This position would respond that the words "אֵת מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר" only come to explain how the revolutionary change is to take place.  When Assyria conquers Israel, there will be an opportunity to revert back to the conditions that existed before the split of the kingdom. 
It is also possible that the term "יָבִיא י"י עָלֶיךָ" simply means that tumultuous events are to occur which Yehuda will be witness to and affected by. Assyria is to decimate and exile Ephraim, an event which will be similar in gravity to the split of the kingdom (even if it won't bring full control back to Yehuda).

⁵ This would explain why Yeshayhau says that events are to affect not only Achaz and the nation("עָלֶיךָ וְעַל עַמְּךָ"), but also "בֵּית אָבִיךָ", his individual line and dynasty .

⁶ See R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla and Shadal who understand Yeshayahu 11 and the promises there to refer to Chizkiyahu.

⁷ In support of such usage he points to Yirmeyahu 46:21.

⁸ The fact that the verse describes those who eat from the milk as "כׇּל הַנּוֹתָר בְּקֶרֶב הָאָרֶץ" is somewhat difficult for this approach, since there is no reason to describe the Judeans as "a remnant" if the entire prophecy is one of consolation and reassurance that they are not to be attacked by Aram and Israel.

⁹ Thus, the "land" spoken of in verse 22 is identical with that mentioned in verse 24. [According to the first possibility brought, in contrast, one verse speaks of the land of Yehuda and one of the lands of Aram and Israel.]

¹⁰ According to this reading " תֵּעָזֵב הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה קָץ מִפְּנֵי שְׁנֵי מְלָכֶיהָ" means that the lands of the kings who are distressing Achaz will be barren, and not that the two kings will leave the land of Yehuda.

¹¹ Radak claims that the prophet says "וְעַל בֵּית אָבִיךָ" rather than "על בנך" out of respect to Chizkiyahu who did not follow in the evil ways of his father.

¹² The dispute might relate to differing evaluations of the level of destruction wrought during the two periods.  Does the description of invasion and destruction at the end of the chapter better match the invasion of Tiglat Pilesser or the campaign of Sancheriv?

¹³ Later in history, as well, asking a foreigner for help against a brother has similar consequences.  In Second Temple Times, when Aristobulus and Hyrcanus invite Rome to intervene in their conflict over the throne, it marks the beginning of Roman dominion over Israel and spells disaster for all involved..

¹⁴ See Y. Elitzur, "ישעיהו מול חזקיהו ומראדך בלאדן", in ישראל והמקרא, (Ramat Gan, 2000): 201-209.

¹⁵ Even if one assumes that Yeshayahu is speaking of Sancheriv, who had not been bribed and "hired" to attack, it is still possible that the prophet intentionally uses the image to highlight that the invasion is due to the initial hiring of Assyria.

¹⁶ He understands the phrase "וַיָּבֹא עָלָיו תִּלְּגַת פִּלְנְאֶסֶר מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וַיָּצַר לוֹ וְלֹא חֲזָקוֹ" to mean that Tiglat Pilesser did not attack with "חזקה", with excessive force.

¹⁷ See above, that in Yeshayahu 20 and Yeshayahu 31:1-3 the prophet warns the people against trusting in Egypt for aid.

¹⁸ Shadal, instead, suggests that the "flies of Egypt" is simply an analogy, meant to convey a huge army. Since the Nile bred many insects, such swarms were common in Egypt, and served as an apt metaphor for Assyria's army.

¹⁹ See verses 23-25.

²⁰ According to this position, the description of plentiful fat and honey in verse 22 is intrinsically related to this description of desolation. The former is an outgrowth of the latter.