וַיָּשָׁב֩ יוֹרָ֨ם הַמֶּ֜לֶךְ לְהִתְרַפֵּ֣א בְיִזְרְעֶ֗אל מִן־הַמַּכִּים֙ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יַכֻּ֤הוּ אֲרַמִּים֙ בָּֽרָמָ֔ה בְּהִלָּ֣חֲמ֔וֹ אֶת־חֲזָהאֵ֖ל מֶ֣לֶךְ אֲרָ֑ם וַאֲחַזְיָ֨הוּ בֶן־יְהוֹרָ֜ם מֶ֣לֶךְ יְהוּדָ֗ה יָרַ֡ד לִרְא֞וֹת אֶת־יוֹרָ֧ם בֶּן־אַחְאָ֛ב בְּיִזְרְעֶ֖אל כִּֽי־חֹלֶ֥ה הֽוּא׃ (פ)
Kaya bumalik si Haring Joram sa Jezreel upang magpagaling mula sa mga sugat na ibinigay sa kaniya ng mga Arameo sa Rama, nang makipagdigma siya laban kay Hazael, ang hari ng Aram. At si Ahazias na anak ni Jehoram, ang hari ng Juda, ay bumaba sa Jezreel upang dalawin si Joram na anak ni Ahab, sapagkat siya ay may sakit.
Ramban
AZ YASHIR MOSHEH'(THEN MOSES WILL SING).91It is of course translated as a past tense: “Then Moses sang.” Rashi and Ramban will discuss why the future tense is used here by the Torah. Rashi comments: “[Then], when Moses saw the miracle, the thought came to his heart that he would sing a song,92According to Rashi, this explains why the future tense — yashir (he will sing) — is used here by the Torah, since the expression denotes Moses’ thought that he should sing. Rashi thus interprets yashir to be a pure future. Ramban will differ with this interpretation. and thus he actually did, [as it is said], and they spoke, saying. Similarly, az yedabeir Yehoshua93Joshua 10:12. Literally: “Then Joshua will speak.” means that when he saw the miracle [mentioned there], his heart prompted him to speak, and thus he actually did, [as it is said], and he said in the sight of Israel.94Ibid. The same interpretation applies to the Song of the Well, which begins with the words, az yashir Yisrael,95Numbers 21:17. Literally: “Then Israel will sing.” and Scripture explains after that, Spring up, O well, sing ye unto it.96Ibid. This part of the verse shows that the preceding expression, az yashir Yisrael, denotes intent of heart to sing, thus: “Then, when they saw the miracle, their hearts told them that they should sing,” and so they did, as is indicated by the expression sing ye unto it, which is the call to the people to sing. Likewise: az yivneh Shlomoh,97I Kings 11:7. Literally: “Then Solomon will build [a high place].” which the Sages of Israel explained it as meaning98Sanhedrin 91b. that he proposed to build but did not build it.99“Thus we learn that the yod as a prefix of the imperfect verb, [i.e., the future tense of a verb], indicates an intent to do a thing” (Rashi). This explanation serves to clarify the literal meaning of the text.”
But what will the Rabbi [Rashi] say concerning these verses: ‘Ya’asu’ [literally: “They will make”] a calf in Horeb;100Psalms 106:19. How oft ‘yamruhu’ [literally: “will they rebel”] against Him in the wilderness, and ‘ya’atzivuhu’ [literally: “they will grieve Him”] in the desert!101Ibid., 78:40. The entire psalm is so written [in the future tense]: yaharog [literally: “He will destroy”] their vines with hail;102Ibid., Verse 47. y’shalach [literally: “He will send”] among them swarms of flies103Ibid., Verse 45. — [when all of these verbs refer to past events]! Similarly: And from whence ‘yavo’u’ [literally: “shall they come”] unto thee?104II Kings 20:14. Of the wounds which the Arameans ‘yakuhu’ [literally: “shall smite him”].105Ibid., 8:29. Likewise, Now Moses ‘yikach’ [literally: “will take”] the tent106Further, 33:7. does not denote a continuous event,107At this point, Ramban’s intent is directed to another statement in Rashi’s explanation, namely, that where an action is continuously happening, it is proper to use either the future tense or the past tense. Where the action is mentioned once and once only, the future cannot be used. However, Ramban points out, in the verse, Now Moses ‘yikach’ the tent, where the future tense “shall take” is used, the action is not one of continuous happening and still the future tense is used! since he took it only once.108See Rashi further, 33:11, towards the end (“The Midrash explains, etc.”), that Moses’ removing his tent to pitch it outside the camp happened only once. Instead, [we must conclude that] it is the way of Scripture to use the future tense in place of the past form, and in many places the reverse is quite usual. The reason for this is that it is a distinctive way of language for a narrator of an event to place himself at a certain point of time which he desires, and he then alludes to the event. At times, he places himself at the moment of the action, and he speaks of it in the present tense as if he is watching it from its very beginning. He would say, “Israel is singing,” as if they were singing right before him, and so also in other cases. However, at times the narrator places himself after the event and says, “This has already been done.” It is all a matter of conveying an event realistically. It is for this reason that this interchangeable use of the tenses occurs in matters of prophecy.
But what will the Rabbi [Rashi] say concerning these verses: ‘Ya’asu’ [literally: “They will make”] a calf in Horeb;100Psalms 106:19. How oft ‘yamruhu’ [literally: “will they rebel”] against Him in the wilderness, and ‘ya’atzivuhu’ [literally: “they will grieve Him”] in the desert!101Ibid., 78:40. The entire psalm is so written [in the future tense]: yaharog [literally: “He will destroy”] their vines with hail;102Ibid., Verse 47. y’shalach [literally: “He will send”] among them swarms of flies103Ibid., Verse 45. — [when all of these verbs refer to past events]! Similarly: And from whence ‘yavo’u’ [literally: “shall they come”] unto thee?104II Kings 20:14. Of the wounds which the Arameans ‘yakuhu’ [literally: “shall smite him”].105Ibid., 8:29. Likewise, Now Moses ‘yikach’ [literally: “will take”] the tent106Further, 33:7. does not denote a continuous event,107At this point, Ramban’s intent is directed to another statement in Rashi’s explanation, namely, that where an action is continuously happening, it is proper to use either the future tense or the past tense. Where the action is mentioned once and once only, the future cannot be used. However, Ramban points out, in the verse, Now Moses ‘yikach’ the tent, where the future tense “shall take” is used, the action is not one of continuous happening and still the future tense is used! since he took it only once.108See Rashi further, 33:11, towards the end (“The Midrash explains, etc.”), that Moses’ removing his tent to pitch it outside the camp happened only once. Instead, [we must conclude that] it is the way of Scripture to use the future tense in place of the past form, and in many places the reverse is quite usual. The reason for this is that it is a distinctive way of language for a narrator of an event to place himself at a certain point of time which he desires, and he then alludes to the event. At times, he places himself at the moment of the action, and he speaks of it in the present tense as if he is watching it from its very beginning. He would say, “Israel is singing,” as if they were singing right before him, and so also in other cases. However, at times the narrator places himself after the event and says, “This has already been done.” It is all a matter of conveying an event realistically. It is for this reason that this interchangeable use of the tenses occurs in matters of prophecy.
Rashi
because of the smiters who smote him כִּי הַמַּכִּים. The meaning is: מִן הַמַּכִּים, because of the smiters, and so it is in II Kings (8:29).
From David to Destruction
At the time, we did not know how to respond. However, upon investigation, we discovered that one could reconcile this contradiction. When Chaza’eil wounds Yehoram, he gives Achazyahu the opportunity to visit the Israelite king (Melachim II 8:29). This, in turn, gives Yeihu the opportunity to kill both Yehoram and Achazyahu. Yeihu kills both of them, and Chaza’eil takes the credit.241TABC alumnus Binyamin Jachter (‘17) adds that by wounding Yehoram, the king of Aram weakens Yehoram to the extent where he is unable to carefully analyze and neutralize the situation that leads to his and Achazyahu’s deaths (as described in Melachim II 9).