Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Micah 1:11
Pass ye away, thou inhabitant of Saphir, having thy shame naked: the inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth in the mourning of Beth-ezel; he shall receive of you his standing.
11. inhabitant ] The word in the Hebrew is feminine, the population of the city being (as often, e.g. Isa 1:8) personified as a virgin.
Saphir ] as if Fair town (a play on the name).
Zaanan ] The Zenan of Jos 15:37.
came not forth, &c.] Rather, is not come forth; the mourning of Beth-ezel taketh from you its standing-ground. Zaanan would willingly take to flight, but the sound of the mourning at Beth-ezel (which might mean ‘the house, or place, at one’s side’) fills them with despair. An ‘Azal,’ or rather Azel, is mentioned in Jerusalem in Zec 14:5 (see however on ‘Aphrah,’ Mic 1:10).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Pass ye away – (literally, Pass thou (fem.) away to or for yourselves), disregarded by God and despised by man) pass the bounds of your land into captivity.
Thou inhabitant of Shaphir, having thy shame naked – better, in nakedness, and shame. Shaphir (fair) was a village in Judah, between Eleutheropolis and Ashkelon (Onomasticon). There are still, in the Shephelah, two villages called Sawafir . It, once fair, should now go forth in the disgrace and dishonor with which captives were led away.
The inhabitants of Zaanan came not forth – Zaanan (abounding in flocks) was probably the same as Zenan of Judah, which lay in the Shephelah . It, which formerly went forth in pastoral gladness with the multitude of its flocks, shall now shrink into itself for fear.
The mourning of Beth-Ezel – (literally, house of root, firmly rooted) shall take from you its standings It too cannot help itself, much less be a stay to others. They who have been accustomed to go forth in fullness, shall not go forth then, and they who abide, strong though they be, shall not furnish an abiding place. Neither in going out nor in remaining, shall anything be secure then.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 11. Inhabitant of Saphir] Sapher, Sepphoris, or Sephora, was the strongest place in Galilee. – Calmet. It was a city in the tribe of Judah, between Eleutheropolis and Ascalon. – Houbigant.
Zaanan] Another city in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:13.
Beth-ezel] A place near Jerusalem, Zec 14:5. Some think that Jerusalem itself is intended by this word.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Pass ye away: the imperative is here put for the future, and the prophet does here foretell and threaten what shall befall this people, they shall go before the enemy into captivity. Saphir denotes either the beautiful and pleasant habitation, and so may be applied to any pleasant seat, such as were many in Judea; such were Samaria and Jerusalem, which perhaps are here intended. Or else it is the proper name of some particular town or city: who read Eusebius will meet with such a village in the mountains between Ashkelon and Hebron, or (as later it is called) Eleutheropolis.
Having thy shame naked; stripped by thy conquering enemy, so that thou shalt not have so much left as shall cover thy nakedness; with shame shalt thou be thus led into captivity, and change all thy beauty into shameful nakedness.
Zaanan; a place rich in pastures and sheep, say some; others take it for the proper name of a particular place in the tribe of Judah; it is likely at this time it might be some considerable garrison full of people and soldiers.
Came not forth; neither sent out succours to relieve their neighbouring besieged town Bethezel, but stood on their own guard, nor yet durst send out any to condole the captive state of their neighbours.
Bethezel; a strong town taken and wasted by the Assyrians, the people carried captive under the eye of the inhabitants of Zaanan, who mean time dare not stir or make many signs of sorrow.
He; the invading enemy, say some, others say it is the inhabitant of Zaanan.
Shall receive of you his standing: who refer this to the enemy make this the sense, viz. That the enemy should make his stay among them till he had conquered, spoiled, and captivated them; or, that he should by severe dealing make them pay dear for their obstinacy in defending their town against his forces, that he should strip them of all to recompense his expenses of treasure, time, and blood in taking them. But they that refer this to Zaanan and its inhabitants make this the sense, That they should take their measures, and judge what the enemy would do against them by that which he had done against Beth-ezel their neighbour.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
11. Pass ye awaythat is, Thoushall go into captivity.
inhabitant of Saphiravillage amidst the hills of Judah, between Eleutheropolis andAscalon, called so, from the Hebrew word for “beauty.”Though thy name be “beauty,” which heretofore was thycharacteristic, thou shalt have thy “shame” made “naked.”This city shall be dismantled of its walls, which are the garments,as it were, of cities; its citizens also shall be hurried intocaptivity, with persons exposed (Isa 47:3;Eze 16:37; Hos 2:10).
the inhabitant of Zaanan camenot forthIts inhabitants did not come forth to console thepeople of Beth-ezel in their mourning, because the calamity wasuniversal; none was exempt from it (compare Jer6:25). “Zaanan” is the same as Zenan, in Judah (Jos15:37), meaning the “place of flocks.” The form of thename used is made like the Hebrew for “came forth.”Though in name seeming to imply that thou dost come forth,thou “camest not forth.”
Beth-ezelperhaps Azal(Zec 14:5), near Jerusalem. Itmeans a “house on the side,” or “near.” Though sonear, as its name implies, to Zaanan, Beth-ezel received nosuccor or sympathy from Zaanan.
he shall receive of you hisstanding“he,” that is, the foe; “his standing,”that is, his sustenance [PISCATOR].Or, “he shall be caused a delay by you, Zaanan.” He shallbe brought to a stand for a time in besieging you; hence it is saidjust before, “Zaanan came not forth,” that is, shut herselfup within her walls to withstand a siege. But it was only for a time.She, too, fell like Beth-ezel before her [VATABLUS].MAURER construes thus:”The inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth; the mourning ofBeth-ezel takes away from you her shelter.” ThoughBeth-ezel be at your side (that is, near), according to hername, yet as she also mourns under the oppression of the foe, shecannot give you shelter, or be at your side as a helper (asher name might lead you to expect), if you come forth and beintercepted by him from returning to Zaanan.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Pass ye away, thou inhabitant of Saphir,…. A village, according to Eusebius l, between Eleutheropolis and Ashkelon; perhaps the same with Sephoron; it is mentioned among the cities of Judah, in the Greek version of Jos 15:48. Calmet m conjectures the prophet intends the city of Sephoris or Sephora in Galilee. Hillerus n: takes it to be the same with Parah, mentioned with Ophrah, in Jos 18:23; so called from its ornament, neatness, beauty, and elegance, as both words signify, to which the prophet alludes: now everyone of the inhabitants of this place are called upon to prepare to go into captivity to Babylon; which would certainly be their case, though they dwelled in fine buildings, neat houses, and streets well paved. In the margin it is, “thou that dwellest fairly” o; which some understand of Samaria; others of Judea; and particularly Jerusalem, beautifully situated, yet should go into captivity:
having thy shame naked; their city dismantled, their houses plundered, and they stripped of their garments, and the shame of their nakedness discovered; which must be the more distressing to beautiful persons, that have dressed neatly, and lived in handsome well built houses, and elegantly furnished, and now all the reverse;
the inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth in the mourning of Bethezel; or house of Azel, where the posterity of Azel, of the tribe of Benjamin, dwelt. Hillerus p suspects it to be the same with Mozah, Jos 18:26; so called from Moza, the great grandfather of Azel, 1Ch 8:37. Capellus takes it to be the same with Azal in Zec 14:5. This place being taken and plundered by the enemy occasioned great mourning among the inhabitants: and it seems to have been taken first, before Zaanan; perhaps the same with Zenan, Jos 15:37; and is here read “Sennan” by Aquila; the inhabitants of which did not “come forth”, in which there is an allusion to its name q, either to help them in their distress, or to condole them; they being in fear of the enemy themselves, and in arms in their own defence, expecting it would be their turn next, and that they should share the same fate with them. Some think that under the name of Bethezel is meant Bethel; and of Zaanan, Zion; and that the sense is, that when Bethel, Samaria, and the ten tribes, were in distress, they of Zion and Judea did not come to give them any relief; and when they were carried captive did not mourn with them, were not affected with their case, nor troubled themselves about them;
he shall receive of him his standing: either the enemy, as R. Joseph Kimchi, shall receive of the inhabitants of Zaanan his standing; that is, he shall make them dearly pay for stopping him, for making him stand and stay so long before their city before he could take it; for all his loss of time, men, and money, in besieging it; by demolishing their city, plundering their houses, and carrying them captive; who remained he put to death by the sword. Aben Ezra interprets the word “receive” of doctrine or learning, as in Pr 4:2; and renders it, “he shall learn”; either Bethezel, or rather Zaanan, shall learn, by the case of Bethezel, and other neighbouring places, what would be his own case, whether he should stand or fall.
l Ad vocem . m Dictionary, in the word “Saphir”. n Onomast. Sacr. p. 925. o “habitans pulchre”, Montanus; “habiatrix elegantis loci”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator. p Ibid. p. 516, 951. q from . Vid. V. L. vers.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The penetration of the judgment into Judah is now clearly depicted by an individualizing enumeration of a number of cities which will be smitten by it. Mic 1:10. “Go not to Gath to declare it; weeping, weep not. At Beth-Leafra (dust-home) I have strewed dust upon myself. Mic 1:11. Pass thou away, O inhabitress of Shafir (beautiful city), stripped in shame. The inhabitress of Zaanan (departure) has not departed; the lamentation of Beth-Hazel (near-house) takes from you the standing near it. Mic 1:12. For the inhabitress of Maroth (bitterness) writhes for good; for evil has come down from Jehovah to the gate of Jerusalem.” The description commences with words borrowed from David’s elegy on the death of Saul and Jonathan (2Sa 1:20), “Publish it not in Gath,” in which there is a play upon the words in b e gath and taggdu . The Philistines are not to hear of the distress of Judah, lest they should rejoice over it. There is also a play upon words in . The sentence belongs to what precedes, and supplies the fuller definition, that they are not to proclaim the calamity in Gath with weeping, i.e., not to weep over it there.
(Note: On the ground of the Septuagint rendering, , most of the modern expositors follow Reland ( Palaest. ill. p. 534ff.) in the opinion that is the name of a city, a contraction of , “and weep not at Acco.” There is no force in the objection brought against this by Caspari ( Mich. p. 110), namely, that in that case the inhabitants of both kingdoms must have stood out before the prophet’s mind in hemistich a, which, though not rendered actually impossible by Mic 1:9, and the expression in Mic 1:8, is hardly reconcilable with the fact that from Mic 1:11 onwards Judah only stands out before his mind, and that in Mic 1:8-10 the distress of his people, in the stricter sense (i.e., of Judah), is obviously the pre-eminent object of his mourning. For Acco would not be taken into consideration as a city of the kingdom of Israel, but as a city inhabited by heathen, since, according to Jdg 1:31, the Canaanites were not driven out of Acco, and it cannot be shown from any passage of the Old Testament that this city ever came into the actual possession of the Israelites. It is evidently a more important objection to the supposed contraction, that not a single analogous case can be pointed out. The forms for (Amo 8:8) and for (Jos 19:3 and Jos 15:29) are of a different kind; and the blending of the preposition with the noun , by dropping the , so as to form one word, is altogether unparalleled. The Septuagint translation furnishes no sufficient authority for such an assumption. All that we can infer from the fact that Eusebius has adopted the reading in his Onom. (ed. Lars. p. 188), observing at the same time that this name occurs in Micah, whilst Aq. and Symm. have ( in fletu ) instead, is that these Greek fathers regarded the of the lxx as the name of a place; but this does not in the smallest degree prove the correctness of the lxx rendering. Nor does the position of before furnish any tenable ground for maintaining that this word cannot be the inf. abs. of , but must contain the name of a place. The assertion of Hitzig, that “if the word were regarded as an inf. abs., neither the inf. itself nor for would be admissible in a negative sentence (Jer 22:10),” has no grammatical foundation. It is by no means a necessary consequence, that because cannot be connected with the inf. abs. (Ewald, 350, a), therefore the inf. abs. could not be written before a finite verb with for the sake of emphasis.)
After this reminiscence of the mourning of David for Saul, which expresses the greatness of the grief, and is all the more significant, because in the approaching catastrophe Judah is also to lose its king (cf. Mic 4:9), so that David is to experience the fate of Saul (Hengstenberg), Micah mentions places in which Judah will mourn, or, at any rate, experience something very painful. From Mic 1:10 to Mic 1:15 he mentions ten places, whose names, with a very slight alteration, were adapted for jeux de mots , with which to depict what would happen to them or take place within them. The number ten (the stamp of completeness, pointing to the fact that the judgment would be a complete one, spreading over the whole kingdom) is divided into twice five by the statement, which is repeated in Mic 1:12, that the calamity would come to the fate of Jerusalem; five places being mentioned before Jerusalem (Mic 1:10-12), and five after (Mic 1:13-15). This division makes Hengstenberg’s conjecture a very natural one, viz., that the five places mentioned before Jerusalem are to be sought for to the north of Jerusalem, and the others to the south or south-west, and that in this way Micah indicates that the judgment will proceed from the north to the south. On the other hand, Caspari’s opinion, that the prophet simply enumerates certain places in the neighbourhood of Moresheth, his own home, rests upon no firm foundation.
is probably the Ophrah of Benjamin ( , Jos 18:23), which was situated, according to Eusebius, not far from Bethel (see comm. on Josh. l.c.). It is pointed with pathach here for the sake of the paronomasia with . The chethib is the correct reading, the keri being merely an emendation springing out of a misunderstanding of the true meaning. does not mean to revolve, but to bestrew one’s self. Bestrewing with dust or ashes was a sign of deep mourning (Jer 6:26; 2Sa 13:19). The prophet speaks in the name of the people of what the people will do. The inhabitants of Shafir are to go stripped into captivity. , to pass by, here in the sense of moving forwards. The plural is to be accounted for from the fact that yoshebheth is the population. Shaphr , i.e., beautiful city, is not the same as the Shamr in Jos 15:48, for this was situated in the south-west of the mountains of Judah; nor the same as the Shamr in the mountains of Ephraim (Jdg 10:1), which did not belong to the kingdom of Judah; but is a place to the north of Jerusalem, of which nothing further is known. The statement in the Onomast. s.v. between Eleutheropolis and Askalon – is probably intended to apply to the Shamr of Joshua; but this is evidently erroneous, as the country between Eleutheropolis and Askalon did not belong to the mountains of Judah, but to the Shephelah. , a combination like in Psa 45:5, equivalent to stripping which is shame, shame-nakedness = ignominious stripping. is an accusative defining the manner in which they would go out. The next two clauses are difficult to explain. , a play upon words with , is traceable to this verb, so far as its meaning is concerned. The primary meaning of the name is uncertain; the more modern commentators combine it with , in the sense of rich in flocks. The situation of Zaanan is quite unknown. The supposed identity with Zenan see at Jos 15:37) must be given up, as Zenan was in the plain, and Zaanan was most probably to the north of Jerusalem. The meaning of the clause can hardly be any other than this, that the population of Zaanan had not gone out of their city to this war from fear of the enemy, but, on the contrary, had fallen back behind their walls (Ros., Casp., Hitzig). is most likely the same as in Zec 14:5, a place in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, to the east of the Mount of Olives, as Beth is frequently omitted in the names of places (see Ges. Thes. p. 193). Etsel signifies side, and as an adverb or preposition, “by the side of.” This meaning comes into consideration there. The thought of the words mispad beth , etc., might be: “The lamentation of Beth-Haezel will take away its standing (the standing by the side of it, ‘etslo ) from you (Judaeans), i.e., will not allow you to tarry there as fugitives (cf. Jer 48:45). The distress into which the enemy staying there has plunged Beth-Haezel, will make it impossible for you to stop there” (Hitzig, Caspari). But the next clause, which is connected by , does not suit this explanation ( Mic 1:12). The only way in which this clause can be made to follow suitably as an explanation is by taking the words thus: “The lamentation of Beth-Haezel will take its standing (the stopping of the calamity or judgment) from you, i.e., stop near it, as we should expect from its name; for (Mic 1:12) Maroth, which stands further off, will feel pain,” etc. With this view, which Caspari also suggests, Hengstenberg (on Zec 14:5) agrees in the main, except that he refers the suffix in to , and renders the words thus: “The lamentation of Beth-Haezel will take its stopping away from you, i.e., the calamity will not stop at Beth-Haezel (at the near house), i.e., stop near it, as we should expect from its name; for (Mic 1:12) Maroth, which stands further off, will feel pain,” etc. With this view, which Caspari also suggests, Hengstenberg (on Zec 14:5) agrees in the main, except that he refers the suffix in to , and renders the words thus: “The lamentation of Beth-Haezel will take its stopping away from you, i.e., will not allow you the stopping of the lamentation.” Grammatically considered, this connection is the more natural one; but there is this objection, that it cannot be shown that is used in the sense of the stopping or ceasing of a lamentation, whereas the supposition that the suffix refers to the calamity simply by constructio ad sensum has all the less difficulty, inasmuch as the calamity has already been hinted at in the verb in Mic 1:9, and in Mic 1:10 also it forms the object to be supplied in thought. Maroth (lit., something bitter, bitternesses) is quite unknown; it is simply evident, from the explanatory clause , that it was situated in the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem. The inhabitants of Maroth writhe ( chalah , from chul , to writhe with pain, like a woman in child-birth), because they are also smitten with the calamity, when it comes down to the gate of Jerusalem. , “on account of the good,” which they have lost, or are about to lose.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
The Prophet here addresses the cities which were on the borders of the kingdom of Israel, and through which the enemy would pass in entering the kingdom of Judah. He therefore bids the inhabitants of the city Saphir to pass over, and says, that the city would be ashamed or in a shameful manner naked. The word שפיר, shaphir, means splendid. He then says, “Thou art now beautiful, but the Lord will discover thy shame, so that thy nakedness shall be a shame to all, and the greatest disgrace to thyself.” There is a correspondence in the words, though not an alliteration. Hence the Prophet says, that though the city was called splendid, it would yet be deformed, so that no one would deign to look on it, at least without feeling shame. There is the same correspondence in the word Zaanan; for צעה, tsoe, means to transfer, as צען, tson, is to migrate. Hence the Prophet says, Go forth shall not the inhabitant of Zaanan for the mourning of Beth-Aezel; that is, he will remain quiet at home: this he will do contrary to what will be natural; for whence is the name of the city? even from removing, for it was a place of much traffic. But he will remain, he says, at home: though he may see his neighbors dragged into exile, he will not dare to move from his place.
He now adds, Take will the enemy from you his station. The verb עמד, omad, means to stand; nor is there a doubt but that when the Prophet says, He will take from you his standing, he speaks of the standing or station of the enemy: but interpreters however vary here. Some understand, that when the enemy had continued long in the land, they would not depart before they possessed the supreme power; as though he said, “Ye will think that your enemy can be wearied out with delay and tediousness, when not able soon to conquer your cities: this, he says, will not be the case; for he will resolutely persevere, and his expectation will not disappoint him; for he will receive the reward of his station, that is, of his delay.” But some say, He will receive his station from you. They explain the verb לקח, lakech, metaphorically, as meaning to receive instruction from hand to hand; as though the Prophet had said, Some, that is, your neighbors, will learn their own position from you. What does this mean? Zaanan will not go forth on account of the mourning of its neighboring city Aezel: others will afterwards follow this example. How so? For Zaanan will be, as it were, the teacher to other cities; as it will not dare to show any sign of grief for its neighbors, being not able to succor them; so also, when it shall be taken in its turn into exile, that is, its citizens and inhabitants, its neighbors will remain quiet, as though the condition of the miserable city was no object of their care. They shall then learn from you their standing; that is, Ye will remain quiet and still, when your neighbors will be destroyed; the same thing will afterwards happen to you. But as this bears but little on the main subjects we may take either of these views. (71) It afterwards follows —
(71) This verse is variously rendered; by Newcome thus,—
Pass on, thou inhabitress of Saphir, naked and in confusion. The inhabitants of Zanan went not forth to wailing. O Beth-Ezel, he shall receive of you the reward of his station against you.
By Henderson thus,—
Pass on, thou inhabitant of Shaphir, naked and ashamed; The inhabitant of Zanan goeth not forth; The wailing of Beth-Ezel will take away continuance from you.
It seems more consistent to take all the verbs in this and the preceding verse as imperatives, though they be not in the same person. Those in the second are evidently so; and I would render such as are in the third person as imperatives too. That Saphir, Zaanan, etc, as well as those which follow, are not appellatives, but proper names of places within or on the borders of Judah, is what is allowed by most, though not by all, especially by some of the ancient commentators, at least with regard to some of the names. I offer the following version of the tenth and eleventh verses, —
10. In Gath declare ye it not, in Acco weep not; In Beth-Ophrah, roll thyself in dust:
11. Pass thou over, yea, thou, O inhabitant of Saphir, Naked and in shame; Let not the inhabitant of Zaanan go forth wailing; Let Beth-Azel take from you its position; that is, follow your example.
The last word, עמדתו, presents the greatest difficulty. It is found here alone in this form. It occurs as עמד, a pillar, a station, עמוד, a stand, stage, and as מעמד, a standing, and also a state, Isa 22:19 Buxtorf gives the same meaning to the last with the one in the text, constitutio , constitution, a fixed order of things. The verb עמד signifies to stand, to stand erect, to remain the same, either in motion or at rest, to continue. Hence it may rightly signify a position, a standing, that is taken and maintained.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(11) Saphir . . . Zaanan.The sites of these cities, like that of Aphrah, are a matter of conjecture. They were probably south-west of Jerusalem, the prophet following the march of the invading army.
The inhabitant of Zaanan came not forthi.e., they remained in their city through fear of the enemy.
In the mourning of Beth-ezel.Rather, the wailing of Beth-ezel shall take from you his standingi.e., no support will be found in the inhabitants of Beth-ezel.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
11. The text of this verse is very obscure, which may be due in part to the attempt to secure paronomasia even at the cost of clearness, and in part to corruption of the text. The presence of several grammatical peculiarities and difficulties make it highly probable that the text has suffered in transmission. Various emendations have been proposed, but all are more or less unsatisfactory. The comments here are based upon the assumption that, essentially at least, the text is correct.
Pass ye away Into exile.
Saphir R.V., “Shaphir”; meaning “Beauty-town.” It has been identified with Shamir (Jdg 10:1) in Mount Ephraim; but the town must be looked for farther south, near the border of Philistia. The Shamir in the hill country of Judah (Jos 15:48) would be more suitable. Robinson identified Shaphir with one of the mud villages, called es-Suafir, about three and one half miles southeast of Ashdod; the same place seems to be mentioned by Jerome and Eusebius, and may be the place meant by Micah, but the identification must still be regarded as doubtful.
Having thy shame naked R.V., “in nakedness and shame”; with shame uncovered. If the text is correct, it implies a warning to the inhabitants of Shaphir that they will be driven into exile and subjected to shameful treatment.
Zaanan Meaning, perhaps, “March-town.” It is not yet identified; perhaps it is identical with Zenan (Jos 15:37).
Came not forth R.V., “is not come forth.” The inhabitants of Zaanan are so terrified that they do not dare leave their city to fight or to flee. Their terror increases as they learn of the fate of the neighboring towns.
Beth-ezel May be the same as Azel (Zec 14:5; see there). The meaning of the name is “The house by the side of,” and the city is named here on account of this meaning. Being in the neighborhood, it should become a place of refuge to the fugitives; but in this crisis the city belies its name, for it fails to give support.
He shall receive of you his standing R.V., “shall take (better, takes) from you the stay thereof.” An obscure expression, which has received manifold interpretations. The most satisfactory, though not free from difficulties, is that which makes the sentence to mean that the presence of the enemy in Beth-ezel will make it impossible for any fugitive from Zaanan to take refuge there; therefore, the inhabitants of the latter city, when they hear of the distress of the neighboring town, will hesitate to leave their own.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mic 1:11. Pass ye away, &c. Take care thou that inhabitest Saphir [a city in the tribe of Judah] to pass away naked and in disgrace. The inhabitants of Zaanan [another city in the tribe of Judah] shall not go forth to the mourning: Bethezel shall be taken away from you, while itself shall stand. By Beth-ezel is meant Jerusalem, to which Ezel was near, as appears from Zec 14:5. But there is a twofold meaning given to the word Ezel, which denotes separation, the prophet signifying that no aid could be expected from Jerusalem, because Jerusalem should fear for itself, and because the Syrian army should separate it from the city of Saphir, which is here addressed. The meaning of the last clause is, that though Jerusalem itself should stand or continue, yet no assistance should be obtained from it See Houbigant.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mic 1:11 Pass ye away, thou inhabitant of Saphir, having thy shame naked: the inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth in the mourning of Bethezel; he shall receive of you his standing.
Ver. 11. Pass ye away, thou inhabitant of Saphir ] Or, thou that dwellest fairly, as it were in a city set with sapphires, see Isa 54:11 , such as was Susa in Persia, and Antioch in Syria, a city so sweet and specious that Mahomet never dared come into it, lest he should be there detained by the pleasure of the place. Saphir here (say some) may allude to Samaria, that instead of her fairness shall be exposed to ignominy and nakedness: they shall be carried away, “young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Samaria,” Isa 20:4 . So the Pope’s champions dealt by the Waldenses in France, those ancient Protestants. One great city of theirs they took, and put to the sword sixty thousand. To another they gave quarter for life; but so as that both the men and the women should depart stark naked, and show all, partibus illis quae honeste nominari non possunt, sanctorum illorum cruciatorum oculis expositis.
The inhabitant of Zaanan
He shall receive of you his standing
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Pass ye away: i.e. go into exile.
Saphir, having thy shame, &c. Here we have contrast. Saphir = Beautytown, with beauty shamed; now es Suafir.
inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth. Hebrew not gone forth hath . . . Zaanan. Hebrew Figure of speech Paronomasia (App-6): lo yatz’ah . . . tz’anan = not gone out [to weep] hath the inhabitant of Outhouse.
in the mourning . . . his standing. Commence a fresh sentence here; thus: “The trouble of Beth-ezel (Neighbour-town) shall be a useless neighbour”. Or, “the Bystander’s house will, from you, get its standing-room”.
he shall receive, &c. : or, he will take from you its support.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Pass: Isa 16:2, Jer 48:6, Jer 48:9
thou inhabitant of Saphir: or, thou that dwellest fairly, Heb. inhabitress. having. Mic 1:8, Isa 20:4, Isa 47:2, Isa 47:3, Jer 13:22, Eze 16:37, Nah 3:5
Zaanan: or, the country of flocks
Bethezel: or, a place near
Reciprocal: Exo 32:25 – naked Isa 3:17 – discover Isa 20:2 – naked Lam 4:21 – and shalt Rev 3:18 – the shame
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Mic 1:11. The revolutionary events that were to come upon the country involved various cities and communities in one way or another. Some cities had encouraged Israel in wrongdoing, and others had taken the opposite trend and refused even to sympathize with the people of the Lord in their many misfortunes. The places and persons alluded to in this verse were among the descriptions given and all were destined to fall.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1:11 Pass ye away, thou inhabitant of {k} Saphir, having thy shame naked: the inhabitant of Zaanan came not forth in the mourning of Bethezel; he shall {l} receive of you his standing.
(k) These were cities by which the enemy would pass as he came to Judah.
(l) He will not depart before he has overcome you, and so you will pay for his staying.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Residents of Shaphir ("beautiful," "pleasant") would become the opposite of their name, shamefully naked, when the invasion came. Inhabitants of Zaanan, a town name that sounds like the Hebrew word translated "come out," would not be able to come out of their town to escape. The people of Beth-ezel ("house of removal") would lament because the Lord would remove its support.