Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Yehezkiel 32:24

שָׁ֤ם עֵילָם֙ וְכָל־הֲמוֹנָ֔הּ סְבִיב֖וֹת קְבֻרָתָ֑הּ כֻּלָּ֣ם חֲלָלִים֩ הַנֹּפְלִ֨ים בַּחֶ֜רֶב אֲ‍ֽשֶׁר־יָרְד֥וּ עֲרֵלִ֣ים ׀ אֶל־אֶ֣רֶץ תַּחְתִּיּ֗וֹת אֲשֶׁ֨ר נָתְנ֤וּ חִתִּיתָם֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ חַיִּ֔ים וַיִּשְׂא֥וּ כְלִמָּתָ֖ם אֶת־י֥וֹרְדֵי בֽוֹר׃

Di sana ada Elam beserta seluruh rakyatnya yang banyak itu, di sekeliling kuburnya. Mereka semua terbunuh, rebah oleh pedang; mereka turun ke bagian bumi yang paling bawah dalam keadaan tidak bersunat, mereka yang dahulu menebarkan kehancuran di negeri orang hidup. Maka mereka menanggung kehinaan mereka bersama orang-orang yang turun ke liang kubur.

Ibn Ezra

They come from a far country. They come from the country of Elam.7The Elam mentioned by I. E. cannot be the Elam of Dan. 8:2, the Persian province with the capital Susa, which is in the immediate neighbourhood of Babylonia, and by no means more entitled to be called a far country with regard to Babylon than Media, named in this same chapter (ver. 17.) The remark of I. E. is probably based on Is. 21:2, Go up, Elam, &c. and he seems to suppose that there was, besides the west Persian province Elymais, including Susiana, Dan. 8:2, another Elam or Elymais, an independent state in the north and east of Media and Persia (comp. Jer. 49:34, Ez. 32:24). The Elamites, warlike Semitic tribes (comp. Gen. 14:1, 10:22), had spread over the whole of the country between the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf, and left here and there traces of their conquests. Hence the Elymais, in the west of Persia, and another Elymais, in the north of Media; hence the great uncertainty and discrepancy among the ancient geographers and historians concerning the extent and position of Elymais. (See Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Geogr. sub voce Elymais; Niebuhr, Assur and Babel, p. 382, ff.) From the end of heaven. As if they came from the extremity of heaven; that is, they come from a great distance.
Tanya RabiBookmarkShareCopy

Ibn Ezra

And Elam, etc. In the following the prophet predicts the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar.5I. E. refers this prophecy to Nebuchadnezzar, and not to Sennacherib; because the siege described here, is to end in the fall of Jerusalem (ver. 14 ); this was in fact the result of the siege of Nebuchadnezzar, while Sennacherib was, by a miraculous destruction of his army, compelled to leave Palestine altogether. Elam. Even Elam, that was defeated by Nebuchadnezzar,6This statement is perhaps based on Jer. 25:25, 49:34 ff., where the collapse of the power of Elam is predicted; and Ezek. 32:24-25, where the extinction of the power of Elam is mentioned as an accomplished fact. Elam, according to I. E., conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, might be expected to refuse to join him in an expedition against Palestine.
7 The Hebrew text has the words אפילו שחם בעלי מדינות though they are in possession of provinces; they have no sense; for why should the inhabitants of Kir in that case not join Nebuchadnezzar? even if we join the following קיר with this phrase: though they are in possession of the provinces of Kir, it is impossible to find any sense in it. If, however, we add רחוקות distant, as is done in the translation, all difficulty is at once removed. קיר אפילו שהם בעלי מדינות רחוקות even Kir, that is a distant country, or, even the inhabitants of Kir, that live in distant countries, and must find an expedition against Jerusalem very hard and troublesome, etc.
was to take up arms against Jerusalem.
Tanya RabiBookmarkShareCopy