Глава 5

1–4. Fourth symbolic action: shaved hair. 5–17. Explanation of symbolic actions. Ezek.5:1. And you, son of man, take yourself a sharp knife, take yourself a barber’s razor, and run it over your head and over your beard, and take yourself scales, and divide your hair into parts. The prophet must now present the outcome of the siege of Jerusalem, and he himself again acts as a representative of the besieged city, and his hair represents the inhabitants. He shaves off the hair on his beard and head and thus symbolizes shame (cf. 2 Kings 10.4–5, which is why shaving was forbidden to priests - Lev.21.5) and desolation (Isaiah 7.20, etc.), and by the fact that the prophet destroys the shaved hair in various ways, he represents the ways in which the Lord will carry out his judgment on the population of Jerusalem and Judea. - “Get yourself a sharp knife,” thank you. more precisely "sword". “The very fact that the prophet uses a sword instead of a razor indicates what will happen” (Smend). - “Take the barber’s razor for yourself,” that is, take a sword as a real razor; glory “sharper than a razor.” The word “barber”, “galav”, not used anywhere else in the Old Testament (its root is Arabic), indicates that in the time of Ezekiel this profession already existed. The shaved hair is hung on scales, as a sign of the special accuracy of God's predestination into 3 equal parts. According to LXX, hair is hung into 4 parts and two parts undergo the first fate; this, starting with the blessed. Jerome, they admit it was an oversight of the scribes; It may be that originally the fourth part meant the burnt hair tied in clothes (see v. 3), and then the first part was doubled. Ezek.5:2. Burn the third part with fire in the middle of the city when the days of the siege are completed; Take the third part and cut it with a knife in its vicinity; and scatter the third part to the wind; and I will draw my sword after them. “In the middle of the city”, i.e. its image on a brick. - “When the days of the siege are fulfilled,” i.e., the lying down of the prophet symbolizing it. – All three details of the symbolic action are explained in v. 12. Burning hair means the deadly disasters of a siege: famine and plague, and perhaps the burning of a city during a siege. - “Cut with a sword in its environs,” that is, the city drawn on the brick; beating those undertaking a sortie. Symbol and reality are so little separated from each other that this would be a reproach for the newest writer; but ancient man did not draw such a sharp line between symbol and reality as we do. - “Scatter in the wind.” It means the dispersion of Jews throughout the earth, which began soon after the capture of Jerusalem: in addition to Babylonia, part of them retired to Egypt. - “I will draw my sword after them.” The scattered Jews will always be in awe of the enemies pursuing them. The symbol temporarily gives way to direct speech: the Lord himself takes the place of the prophet, and the people take the place of the hair. But such an invasion of direct speech makes some see in the phrase an insertion from Art. 12. Ezek.5:3. And take a small number from this, and tie them in your lapels. Hair tied in the floor (symbol of security: 1 Samuel 25.29) means the Jews who survived the conquest of Jerusalem, both those who remained in Judea and those resettled in Babylon. "A small number" of letters. “a few in number,” that is, so few that you can count them, and that’s a hair! Ezek.5:4. But take some more from this, and throw it into the fire, and burn it in the fire. From there fire will come out on the whole house of Israel. Part of this hair is burned, which, according to some interpreters, signifies the struggle between Gedaliah and Ishmael (Jeremiah 40.1 et seq.), but more accurately, the death of some who returned from captivity. From this it is clear that Ezekiel awaits a further purifying judgment in which the survivors of the first catastrophe will be destroyed (cf. Is 6.13); this idea already appears in Ezek.3.16–21: “he will die by death” (Bertolet). - “From there fire will come out on the whole house of Israel.” From where the last piece of hair lies, from the place of captivity, from those who survived the disaster; Greek εξαυτης, d.b. cities; according to others - from the people, from the fire itself. Under this last fire, which was about to spread to the entire house of Israel, were meant various post-exilic disasters, starting from the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes (Blessed Theodoret) and ending with the two destructions of Jerusalem under Titus and Hadrian (Blessed Jerome). It is more reasonable to understand here the cleansing fire for Israel as a whole, which the Savior came to “come to earth” (Luke 12.49); Wed Isa.6:12–13, Ezek.6.8–10. But this explanation is not invulnerable: fire everywhere in the Old Testament symbolizes the judgment of God (Jer 4.4; Zeph 3.8, etc.), and why would such fire come out if more than ⅔ has already been destroyed, and all, according to Ezekiel, should not perish? Therefore, they think that the words “over the whole house of Israel” should be connected after LXX with the next sentence, and “fire came out” the insertion may be from Ezek.19.14 (but these words are transmitted everywhere). Ezek.5:5-17. The punishment threatening Jerusalem is justified (vv. 5-10) and described without symbol (vv. 11-17), and the speech gradually moves from Jerusalem to the country (cf. ch.: VI and VII) and from the content of the last symbolic action to the explanation of all of them. The general thought of vv. 5–10: Israel, who was so highly distinguished from the pagans, turned out to be worse than them and for this is subject to the most severe punishment. Ezek.5:5. Thus says the Lord God: This is Jerusalem! I set him among the nations, and the lands around him. Jerusalem is called the middle of the nations and the earth (cf. Eze. 38.12), as the focal point of the earth in a historical sense (and not geographical, as rationalists want, seeing here naive geographical ideas), as a city in which God has placed the throne of a blessed kingdom, from where will come the law (Isa. 2.2; Mic. 4.1) and salvation (Ps. 73.12) for all nations. This idea presupposes the people’s belief in their world-historical significance, on the basis of which they feel themselves to be the focal point of world history and therefore of the earth. “For this assessment of Jerusalem, Solomon, who thought of elevating it to the level of a cosmopolitan metropolis, did much less than Isaiah; for the latter, world history revolves around Jerusalem, as the corner point of Ezek.29.5 and Ezek.31.5); Jehovah has fire in Jerusalem (Ezek.31.9); so at the end of time it must again become a faithful city, a mountain of righteousness (Isaiah 1.26). During the time of Ezekiel, they relied on it as an external reality, in the possession of which they considered themselves invincible (Jeremiah 7.7). And for Ezekiel, Jerusalem is a city without comparison, since here is a church in which the only legitimate cult is possible (Bertolet). - “I set him among the nations and around his land.” The second sentence reinforces the point of the first. “Land” (plural) is characteristic of Ezekiel: it has the meaning of “pagan land” and is found in him 27 times, while it is not found in the previous prophets, with the exception of Jeremiah, in whom it is 7 times” (Bertolet). Ezek.5:6. But he has acted more wickedly against My statutes than the heathen, and against My statutes worse than the lands around him; for they have rejected My statutes and do not walk in My statutes. Ezek.5:7. Therefore thus says the Lord God: Because you have multiplied your iniquities more than the Gentiles who are around you, you do not walk in My statutes and do not fulfill My statutes, and you do not even walk in accordance with the statutes of the Gentiles who are around you - Who should be a teacher of truth and piety turns out to be the leader of all wickedness. Not to mention the decrees (glorified: "justifications", supposedly more important, moral laws) and statutes (glorified "laws", supposedly ritual of God), Jerusalem does not act according to the "decrees" (not statutes) of the pagans, i.e., according to the prescriptions of the natural law of conscience (in Ezekiel 11.12, the prophet Ezekiel, on the contrary, reproaches the Jews for acting according to decrees of the surrounding pagans, but they obviously mean religious and ritual decrees, therefore that place does not contradict the present and there is no need to eliminate this contradiction to cross out the “not” here, which, however, is not found in several Jewish manuscripts (Peshito). Thus, the present passage is “a dogmatic anticipation of the teaching of the Apostle Paul about the moral natural law among the pagans in Rom. 2.14, etc., being at the same time a further development of the same thoughts of Amos (Amos 3.9) (Egypt and the Philistines have their own moral judgment, which condemns the behavior of Israel); Am 1.3 – Am 2.3 (the Gentiles are responsible for their sins); Jeremiah Jeremiah 18.13 also appeals to the moral judgment of the pagans; Jer 6.18 et c.; Wed Ezek.3.6; however, the idea of ​​God's revelation to all humanity, even a covenant with him, was already expressed in Gen. 9.4–17; Wed from later times, the so-called “Noah’s Commandments” (Bertolet). Ezek.5:8. Therefore thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, even I myself, and I will bring judgment among you before the eyes of the Gentiles. “Here I am against you” is Ezekiel’s favorite expression. Speech returns to units. ch. (of course, the closest image is Jerusalem), only not to the 3rd person, but to the 2nd person - “I Myself.” Emphatic (to enhance thought) repetition. “This is I, whom you thought was asleep, but who always reigns and punishes sin” (Troshop). “Judgment is before the eyes of the Gentiles” (cf. Jer 1.15), among other things, so that they see in this proof of Divine justice. “The later Jews show fear lest they become a disgrace for the atheists, and their constant prayer to God, for example, in some psalms, that He would mercifully protect them from the gloating of the latter. Ezekiel does not have this fear for his people; on the contrary, he nails him to the pillory, as if he is not connected with him by any ties” (Bertolet); before that, God is everything to him. Ezek.5:9. And I will do to you what I have never done and what I will not do in the future, for all your abominations. Unheard of godlessness will be met with unheard of punishment. Here you can clearly see how unheard of the death of the nation was for the captives. For the conquest of Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity, the expression here seems too strong (apparently contradicting Matthew 24.21); one can understand the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus and Hadrian; and this latter understanding can hardly be hindered by the consideration that the Jews were no longer the people of God and that they were then punished for a new sin - the rejection of the Messiah (Qliphoth, Das Buch Ezechiels Prophet, 1864-1865, in this place), the people and their sin cannot be so divided into eras. Ezek.5:10. Therefore fathers will eat their sons among you, and sons will eat their fathers; And I will execute judgment on you, and scatter all your remnant to all the winds. Leo also threatens those who do not stop at violating the most basic requirements of the natural moral law with this terrible unnaturalness. 26.29; Deut 28.53; but here the threat is aggravated by the last words: “sons will eat fathers.” A similar thing already happened during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6.24–29) and probably this is not a simple hyperbole when fearing the horrors of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem in Lamentations 2:20, 4:10; Var. 2.8; Jer 19.9. “One can also understand the Roman siege” (Blessed Jerome). - “I will scatter all your remnant, that is, what survived the siege.” The same metaphor is in Ezek.12.14, 17.21; cp. Jer 49.32, 36. Ezek.5:11–17. The punishment of Jerusalem is described more closely, in its execution, under the ever-repeated assurance that it is not Ezekiel, but the Lord who says so; this is done in three different tirades, which are separated from each other by the same number of times repeated: “I the Lord have spoken these things” (vv. 13, 15 and 17). Ezek.5:11. Therefore, as I live, says the Lord God, because you have defiled My sanctuary with all your abominations and all your abominations, I will make you belittle, and My eye will not have mercy, and I will not have mercy on you. The Lord swears with His life (the most solemn of oaths; cf. Num 14.21, 28; Deut. 32.40) that for the iniquities of Jerusalem, the main one of which was the desecration of the church (started by Manasseh) with abominations (perhaps idols) and abominations (maybe their cult; similarly, in Chapter VI, the main sin of Israel is considered to be “high places” with their idolatry) Jerusalem will be dealt with without the condescension so usual for God. “I will diminish”, lit. “I will reject” (glorified “I will reject”) either you, or “I will turn away” My eyes from you, so that somehow pity for you does not awaken. Ezek.5:12. A third part of you will die of plague and perish of hunger in your midst; the third part will fall by the sword in your surroundings; and the third part I will scatter to all the winds, and I will draw my sword after them. Serves as an explanation for Article 2, in which, however, only the first term needed explanation: here it bifurcates (ulcer and famine), due to which 4 punishments are obtained; if they are divided into 3 groups (in LXX 4), then the basis for such a division is that the first third perishes in the city, the second in the immediate vicinity of the city, and the third in the distance, in captivity. Famine, plague and sword often appear in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 6.11 and Ezek. 7.15, 12.16), as 3 punishments of God; wild animals are often added to them as the 4th punishment (v. 17; Ezek.14.21, 33.27); these same punishments are calculated in the same way by Jeremiah (18 times) and wedge-shaped inscriptions (Müller, Ez. - Studien, 58–62). – “I will draw my sword” – v. 2. Ezek.5:13. And My wrath will be fulfilled, and I will satisfy My wrath against them, and I will be satisfied; and they will know what I, the Lord, have spoken in My jealousy, when My wrath is finished upon them. Strongly expressed anthropomorphism. The Prophet himself is clearly infected by the indignation of the Lord, and his speech here reaches the highest degree of angry pathos. “And they will know” - the survivors, i.e. the third of those indicated in Art. 12. parts. “And they will know that I, the Lord, have spoken.” – Ezekiel’s favorite expression, not found in other prophets. Ezek.5:14. And I will make you a desolation and a reproach among the nations that are around you, in the sight of everyone who passes by. Ezek.5:15. And you will be a mockery and a reproach, an example and a terror among the nations that are around you, when I bring judgment on you with anger and fury, and with furious executions; - I, the Lord, have spoken this; – They naturally return from the fate of the captives to the fate of the devastated city by further development of data 8 et seq. poems. The country will turn into a desert, comparison with which will be offensive to any land. – An “example” of punishment that will teach other nations not to sin. - “Terror” before the great disasters that will befall Jerusalem. Ezek.5:16. and when I send upon them the fierce arrows of famine, which will destroy, when I send them to your destruction, and I increase the famine among you, and destroy your grain support, Ezek.5:17. and I will send famine and fierce beasts against you, and they will make you unhappy; and plague and blood will pass through you, and I will bring a sword against you; I, the Lord, have spoken this. Further development 15b; Art. 16a even continues the construction of art. 15, which then breaks off anacoluthically (without observing the law of sequence of thoughts). The threat is limited to repeating once again those indicated in Art. 12. punishments, but with strengthening of expressions and the addition of one new punishment, due to which the number 4, so significant for this case, is obtained; Wed Ezek.14.21 and Ezek.1.5. It is remarkable that famine appears as the greatest disaster, before which even the enemy’s sword retreats, which corresponded to reality. Noteworthy is the 3 liter change. pl. h. first for 2 liters. pl. tsp, and then 2 liters. units h. The fact that the scribes were not embarrassed by this and did not try to correct it, Bertolet explains by the fact that for them the connection between the individual and the whole and the personification of the people and society lay deeper in the blood than we can understand in modern times; for them, the people and society were built much less from individual individuals than these latter received the right to exist through their belonging to the people and society. The horror of wild beasts, which was a consequence of military devastation, is very often spoken of (cf. esp. 2 Kings 17.25; Exodus 23.29; Deut. 32.24; Lev. 26.22). “Proof that the culture of St. land has always remained relative. The comparison of ulcers and blood is striking, since the latter is clearly not shed by the sword (cf. Ezek. 14.19, 17); Meanwhile, the expression hardly has a pathological lining (“blood abscess”), but rather only alliteration (placing words next to each other with the same letters at the beginning, in Hebrew: dever - dam) and may be a proverb” (Bertolet). You might be interested in: