‏ Jeremiah 22:23

Jer 22:21-23

The cause of this calamity: because Judah in its prosperity had not hearkened to the voice of its God. שׁלות, from שׁלוה, security, tranquillity, state of well-being free from anxiety; the plur. denotes the peaceful, secure relations. Thus Judah had behaved from youth up, i.e., from the time it had become the people of God and been led out of captivity; see Jer 2:2; Hos 2:17. - In Jer 22:22 תּרעה is chosen for the sake of the word-play with רעיך, and denotes to depasture, as in Jer 2:16. As the storm-wind, especially the parching east wind, depastures, so to speak, the grass of the field, so will the storm about to break on Judah sweep away the shepherds, carry them off; cf. Jer 13:24, Isa 27:8; Job 27:21. The shepherds of the people are not merely the kings, but all its leaders, the authorities generally, as in Jer 10:21; and "thy shepherds" is not equivalent to "thy lovers," but the thought is this: Neither its allies nor its leaders will be able to help; the storm of calamity will sweep away the former, the latter must go captive. So that there is no need to alter רעיך into רעיך (Hitz.). With the last clause cf. Jer 2:36. Then surely will the daughter of Zion, feeling secure in her cedar palaces, sigh bitterly. The inhabitants of Jerusalem are said to dwell in Lebanon and to have their nests in cedars in reference to the palaces of cedar belonging to the great and famous, who at the coming destruction will suffer most. As to the forms ישׁבתּי and מקנּנתּי, see on Jer 10:17. The explanation of the form נחנתּי is disputed. Ros., Ges., and others take it for the Niph. of חנן, with the force: to be compassionated, thus: who deserving of pity or compassion wilt thou be! But this rendering does not give a very apt sense, even if it were not the case that the sig. to be worthy of pity is not approved by usage, and that it is nowhere taken from the Niph. We therefore prefer the derivation of the word from אנץ, Niph. נאנח .hpi, contr. ננח, a derivative founded on the lxx rendering: τὶ καταστενάξεις, and Vulg. quomodo congemuisti. The only question that then remains is, whether the form נחנתּ has arisen by transposition from ננחתּ, so as to avoid the coming together of the same letter at the beginning (Ew., Hitz., Gr.); or whether, with Böttch. ausf. Gramm. §1124, B, it is to be held as a reading corrupted from ננחתּי. With "pangs," etc., cf. Jer 13:21; Jer 6:24.
Copyright information for KD