דָּרַ֤ךְ קַשְׁתוֹ֙ וַיַּצִּיבֵ֔נִי כַּמַּטָּרָ֖א לַחֵֽץ׃ (ס)
Armou o seu arco, e me pôs como alvo à flecha.
Ramban
BEHOLD, I WILL ‘MAMTIR’ (CAUSE TO RAIN) BREAD FROM HEAVEN FOR YOU. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that because the manna came down like rain from heaven, He said mamtir, [which is derived from the root matar (rain)]. But we find: ‘yamteir’ (He will cause to rain) coals, fire and brimstone;295Psalms 11:6. And the Eternal ‘himtir’ (caused to rain) upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire.296Genesis 19:24. [Brimstone and fire do not come down like rain, and yet Scripture uses the word matar with reference to them!] Perhaps in these cases they accompanied the rain of which the term “coming down” may properly be used. Onkelos’ opinion is that mamtir just means “cause to bring down,” for he translated: “behold, I will cause to bring down.” [However, it has no connection here with rain, as Ibn Ezra would have it.]
It is possible that the word mamtir can be associated with the expression ‘kamatarah’ (as a mark) for the arrow,297Lamentations 3:12. although they are of different roots.298For the word matarah (target) is of the root natar (keep), since a target is kept in sight and watched. Mamtir however is of the root matar (rain). Yet, as Ramban concludes, they have a common association, as is explained in the text. Scripture makes use of both terms when speaking of every form of “falling from above.” Thus it is called matarah (target) because they come down like arrows [on a target], and it says, ‘vayamteir’ (And He caused to rain) upon them flesh as the dust, and winged fowl as the sand of the seas.299Psalms 78:27. It may be that [Scripture does not use the term mamtir for every form of “falling from above,” but only] for the fowl of heaven. [Therefore, the term, vayamteir in the above — mentioned verse refers only to the winged fowl] because they came down upon them as the rain.
It is possible that the word mamtir can be associated with the expression ‘kamatarah’ (as a mark) for the arrow,297Lamentations 3:12. although they are of different roots.298For the word matarah (target) is of the root natar (keep), since a target is kept in sight and watched. Mamtir however is of the root matar (rain). Yet, as Ramban concludes, they have a common association, as is explained in the text. Scripture makes use of both terms when speaking of every form of “falling from above.” Thus it is called matarah (target) because they come down like arrows [on a target], and it says, ‘vayamteir’ (And He caused to rain) upon them flesh as the dust, and winged fowl as the sand of the seas.299Psalms 78:27. It may be that [Scripture does not use the term mamtir for every form of “falling from above,” but only] for the fowl of heaven. [Therefore, the term, vayamteir in the above — mentioned verse refers only to the winged fowl] because they came down upon them as the rain.
Rabbeinu Bahya
In his Book of Proverbs Solomon taught us important principles about the nature of rebukes and how to administer them. He taught the people that life itself is closely linked to rebukes and the ability to accept same, whereas death is inextricably involved with people who resent being rebuked and are unwilling to accept rebukes. We know that life is closely linked to rebukes from Proverbs 6,23: “instructive rebukes are a way to life.” We also have a verse expressing similar sentiments in Proverbs 10,17: “he who accepts rebukes is on the way to the path of life.” Yet another verse from Scripture dwelling on the same subject is found in Proverbs 15,4: ”a healing tongue is a tree of life,” i.e. the way to heal a tongue (which has wagged) is to rebuke the owner. On the other hand, death attaches itself to people who hate being rebuked as we know from Proverbs 15,10: “Harsh discipline is needed for those who abandon the right path; he who hates rebuke will die.” He who departs from the right path (of Torah) only temporarily but does not hate being rebuked will be judged by harsh discipline in order to make him abandon the path of evil; the one who hates rebukes, however, cannot be brought back to the right path by afflictions. There is no hope for him. As a result, such a person will be sentenced to death (by the celestial court)
A love to accept rebukes is a strong indication that the person in question possesses fine qualities, generally. A negative attitude to rebukes indicates that such a person also suffers from other negative traits. This is the reason Solomon says (Proverbs 9,8) “do not rebuke a scoffer lest he will hate you, rather rebuke a wise man and he will love you.” When rebuking a fellow human being one must reveal sincerity and not engage in flattery. One should give him credit for whatever good points he has, and at the same time restrict oneself to point out such a person’s shortcomings, for the righteous and the wicked are two total opposites. When someone has escaped the path of wickedness he does not automatically qualify for the appellation of צדיק, a righteous person, until he has embraced the path of righteousness in his lifestyle. This is because the character of a wicked person is so totally different from that of a righteous person. When such a wicked person has abandoned his former path in life he has only reached the half-way mark separating him from the truly righteous person. This is why the rebuker has to be candid and explain to him the whole truth and not indulge in flattery, praising him for abandoning the path of evil, thereby lulling him into the belief that he has already completely rehabilitated himself. This is what prompted Solomon to say: “better open rebuke than concealed love.” He may appear to reveal hatred by rebuking so candidly; however, better to appear in that guise than to appear as loving the subject of the rebuke by suppressing further guidance and congratulating the subject as if he already had completed the path of rehabilitation.
R' David Kimchi, (Radak) quoting his father, takes a different view of the meaning of our introductory verse. He understands Solomon as saying that an open rebuke is good; however it is so only if the rebuker reveals underlying love for the rebuked by speaking to him privately, not exposing him to embarrassment.
A Midrashic approach mentioned in Devarim Rabbah (Lieberman edition item 8) states that the “open” rebukes are the ones addressed by Moses to his people, whereas the ones described as “from hidden love,” refer to the rebukes of Bileam who flattered Israel by pronouncing blessings, whereas in his heart he hated the very people upon whom he showered all his blessings. For instance, when he complimented the people on preserving each other’s privacy by saying: “how goodly are your tents O Yaakov,” etc., (Numbers 24,5) what he really wanted to say was: “how goodly are your tents O Moav, your dwellings, children of Ammon.” Had G’d not twisted his mouth this is what would have come out of it.
There is yet another way to understand this saying by Solomon. The words: “open rebuke,” refer to the rebukes we read in Leviticus chapter 26, whereas the ones in Deuteronomy, all of whom originate with the Lord Himself, though the wording may have been Moses’, were approved by G’d as we explained already. The words מאהבה מסוטרת, may mean: “from the One whose love is not manifest, i.e. G’d, the attribute Shechinah.”
This attribute is often referred to as אהבה, “love,” such as in Proverbs 15,17: “better a meal of vegetables where there is love than a fattened ox where there is hate.” The “love” referred to in that verse is a reference to the Presence of the Shechinah. The basis for such exegesis is found in Song of Songs 2,7: אם תעירו ואם תעוררו את האהבה, “do not dare to arouse the love,” [a reference to premature attempts to secure the redemption, return to Israel of the Shechinah. Ed.] The word באהבה in Song of Songs 8,7 “that vast floods cannot quench love,” also refers to the Shechinah. Similarly, the word אהבה, love, is used in our liturgy when we say להודות לך וליחדך באהבה, “to give thanks to You and to declare Your unity in the form of the Shechinah,” (prior to reciting the Kriyat Shema). [The reason the word באהבה in that paragraph is not taken at face value, is presumably that the same word occurred immediately before the word להודות already, thus making it redundant unless it meant something different than usual. Ed.] Therefore, Solomon describes open rebuke as emanating from G’d’s attribute Shechinah. Wherein then is the goodness of which Solomon speaks manifest? Even though the Israelites had violated so many of the commandments that G’d had been forced to bring upon them all the various afflictions mentioned both in Leviticus chapter 26 and in Deuteronomy chapter 28 so that the people were progressively deprived of the first Temple and the second Temple, all this was for their own good. Moses explained this to the people already in Deut. 8,21 when he said that G’d starved the Jewish people “in order to afflict you, to subject you to trials in order to treat you well in your distant future.” All afflictions serve an educational purpose, to ensure that in the end you will become worthy of your lofty destiny. Although all the curses have been exhausted (fulfilled) i.e. Israel deserved the afflictions, the Jewish people have not ceased to exist. This is the meaning of Maleachi 3,7: “I the Lord have not changed, and you the Children of Yaakov have not perished.” Our sages in Tanchuma Nitzavim 1 comment on this verse that when the Gentile nations experience a single series of afflictions this results in their demise from history, whereas the Jewish people, in spite of having experienced one holocaust after another, are still around and flourishing. They cite Micah 7,8 as proof of this. We read there: “Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy! though I have fallen, I rise again, though I sit in darkness the Lord is my light.” Deut. 32,23 proclaims the same message when the Torah writes: “My arrows I have used up against them, yet they have not perished.” The matter can be compared to a warrior who erects a beam shooting all his arrows at the beam. In the end, the warrior finds that he has exhausted his supply of arrows but that the beam is still standing. Although Israel has collapsed frequently under the afflictions G’d has disciplined it with, it always emerged from these afflictions and was rehabilitated. This is also the meaning of Jeremiah in Lamentations 3,12: “He has bent His bow and made me the target of His arrows.”
This is also what Moses said in his admonitions here in the following verse:
A love to accept rebukes is a strong indication that the person in question possesses fine qualities, generally. A negative attitude to rebukes indicates that such a person also suffers from other negative traits. This is the reason Solomon says (Proverbs 9,8) “do not rebuke a scoffer lest he will hate you, rather rebuke a wise man and he will love you.” When rebuking a fellow human being one must reveal sincerity and not engage in flattery. One should give him credit for whatever good points he has, and at the same time restrict oneself to point out such a person’s shortcomings, for the righteous and the wicked are two total opposites. When someone has escaped the path of wickedness he does not automatically qualify for the appellation of צדיק, a righteous person, until he has embraced the path of righteousness in his lifestyle. This is because the character of a wicked person is so totally different from that of a righteous person. When such a wicked person has abandoned his former path in life he has only reached the half-way mark separating him from the truly righteous person. This is why the rebuker has to be candid and explain to him the whole truth and not indulge in flattery, praising him for abandoning the path of evil, thereby lulling him into the belief that he has already completely rehabilitated himself. This is what prompted Solomon to say: “better open rebuke than concealed love.” He may appear to reveal hatred by rebuking so candidly; however, better to appear in that guise than to appear as loving the subject of the rebuke by suppressing further guidance and congratulating the subject as if he already had completed the path of rehabilitation.
R' David Kimchi, (Radak) quoting his father, takes a different view of the meaning of our introductory verse. He understands Solomon as saying that an open rebuke is good; however it is so only if the rebuker reveals underlying love for the rebuked by speaking to him privately, not exposing him to embarrassment.
A Midrashic approach mentioned in Devarim Rabbah (Lieberman edition item 8) states that the “open” rebukes are the ones addressed by Moses to his people, whereas the ones described as “from hidden love,” refer to the rebukes of Bileam who flattered Israel by pronouncing blessings, whereas in his heart he hated the very people upon whom he showered all his blessings. For instance, when he complimented the people on preserving each other’s privacy by saying: “how goodly are your tents O Yaakov,” etc., (Numbers 24,5) what he really wanted to say was: “how goodly are your tents O Moav, your dwellings, children of Ammon.” Had G’d not twisted his mouth this is what would have come out of it.
There is yet another way to understand this saying by Solomon. The words: “open rebuke,” refer to the rebukes we read in Leviticus chapter 26, whereas the ones in Deuteronomy, all of whom originate with the Lord Himself, though the wording may have been Moses’, were approved by G’d as we explained already. The words מאהבה מסוטרת, may mean: “from the One whose love is not manifest, i.e. G’d, the attribute Shechinah.”
This attribute is often referred to as אהבה, “love,” such as in Proverbs 15,17: “better a meal of vegetables where there is love than a fattened ox where there is hate.” The “love” referred to in that verse is a reference to the Presence of the Shechinah. The basis for such exegesis is found in Song of Songs 2,7: אם תעירו ואם תעוררו את האהבה, “do not dare to arouse the love,” [a reference to premature attempts to secure the redemption, return to Israel of the Shechinah. Ed.] The word באהבה in Song of Songs 8,7 “that vast floods cannot quench love,” also refers to the Shechinah. Similarly, the word אהבה, love, is used in our liturgy when we say להודות לך וליחדך באהבה, “to give thanks to You and to declare Your unity in the form of the Shechinah,” (prior to reciting the Kriyat Shema). [The reason the word באהבה in that paragraph is not taken at face value, is presumably that the same word occurred immediately before the word להודות already, thus making it redundant unless it meant something different than usual. Ed.] Therefore, Solomon describes open rebuke as emanating from G’d’s attribute Shechinah. Wherein then is the goodness of which Solomon speaks manifest? Even though the Israelites had violated so many of the commandments that G’d had been forced to bring upon them all the various afflictions mentioned both in Leviticus chapter 26 and in Deuteronomy chapter 28 so that the people were progressively deprived of the first Temple and the second Temple, all this was for their own good. Moses explained this to the people already in Deut. 8,21 when he said that G’d starved the Jewish people “in order to afflict you, to subject you to trials in order to treat you well in your distant future.” All afflictions serve an educational purpose, to ensure that in the end you will become worthy of your lofty destiny. Although all the curses have been exhausted (fulfilled) i.e. Israel deserved the afflictions, the Jewish people have not ceased to exist. This is the meaning of Maleachi 3,7: “I the Lord have not changed, and you the Children of Yaakov have not perished.” Our sages in Tanchuma Nitzavim 1 comment on this verse that when the Gentile nations experience a single series of afflictions this results in their demise from history, whereas the Jewish people, in spite of having experienced one holocaust after another, are still around and flourishing. They cite Micah 7,8 as proof of this. We read there: “Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy! though I have fallen, I rise again, though I sit in darkness the Lord is my light.” Deut. 32,23 proclaims the same message when the Torah writes: “My arrows I have used up against them, yet they have not perished.” The matter can be compared to a warrior who erects a beam shooting all his arrows at the beam. In the end, the warrior finds that he has exhausted his supply of arrows but that the beam is still standing. Although Israel has collapsed frequently under the afflictions G’d has disciplined it with, it always emerged from these afflictions and was rehabilitated. This is also the meaning of Jeremiah in Lamentations 3,12: “He has bent His bow and made me the target of His arrows.”
This is also what Moses said in his admonitions here in the following verse: