The division of tongues and the meaning of regret

Nebuchadnezzar plotted and was scourged as one who blessed God, just as the devil spoke instead of blaspheming, and he did not realize; for he did not cast off godliness. Furthermore, it is not said improperly: 'I will hide you from the lashes of the tongue' (Psalm 52:2). What is this 'lash of the tongue'? Do not take it in a sensory way. It is a false word, a slander. In this way also the evil powers, since they are overcome more by the lashes of the ruling faculty being unguarded against them, are called 'lashes.' And that these lashes are such, they 'were gathered together.' This means they were united in purpose, according to some reasoning. They were split apart and were not unified. Agreement upon evils is a great evil, it is harmful.

Thus, those coming from the east and coming into the plain of Sennacherib, where also Nebuchadnezzar raised his image, once agreed in one mind. And see that this is evil. It is interpreted as 'a scattering of teeth.' Often teeth are taken instead of words; for instance, 'he crushed the teeth of the sinners,' and we do not mean these sensory millstones; for this was never recorded. And: 'The Lord crushed the millstones of the lions.' He does not speak of the sensory, four-footed, and wild beasts, but of such humans. Therefore, agreement upon evils is most trivial. But the scattering and the division of these is something good.

If those realize that because of private malice they were scattered from those being in agreement, and by the sparing of God—just as the Sadducees and Pharisees once agreed according to Paul, when they also brought him into the council, and the high priest gave him to them so that he might be bound to know something about him—they had taken haste to overthrow him. But they deemed themselves worthy to have him led away and to stand upon the steps. 'Knowing that the one part belongs to the Sadducees and the other to the Pharisees,' something said that dissolved and split their agreement; for he said: 'Concerning the resurrection of the dead I am judged today' (Acts 23:9), and they were split, some saying: 'He says nothing absurd' (Acts 23:9), and the other part, the lying. If they had realized from this split, they would no longer have plotted against Paul. They were not unified, therefore; they did not know the cause of the division. And David, indeed, prays and says: 'And cut off the tongues...'

Their tongues are divided; for then their tongues are divided when they begin to fight in speech. This indeed happened to the elders according to Sosannas; their tongues were divided, the first saying one thing and the second another. If they had realized their error, they would have ceased the accusation and would not have endured what they underwent.

Thus 'they were split' and 'they did not realize'. The one who split them did so so that they might realize and repent; but they did not know the cause of their splitting and their division. Regarding 'they did not realize'—they did not change their mind. To realize is to set aside one's former thought and original disposition. Indeed, when Ahaziah realized what had passed, God says to Elijah, 'Have you seen how Ahaziah realized?' (2 Kings 9:27), for he returned weeping. And regarding this change of his, He called it his realization. And the Saint, if he says, 'so that my glory may sing to you and I may never realize,' he means 'may I never change my mind.'

Regarding other matters, realization happens concerning things not going rightly. 'They tested me, they mocked me with a sneer.' It was necessary for them, having realized, to cast away their anger against me, but instead they laid upon me, they attacked, they tested me, they mocked me with a sneer. However, even though they tested me, they did not find me as they wished; they did not enter into temptation, I was not seized by the snares of their temptation; for this is also what is interpreted: 'lead us not into temptation' (Matt 6:13). 'They mocked me' means they treated me with contempt. And again, bravely standing against their sneer, I showed nothing.

'They gnashed their teeth at me.' One gnashes his teeth sometimes against another, and sometimes against himself when he changes his mind, having fallen into the cruelties of what he has done; 'there will be weeping and the gnashing of teeth' (Matt 13:42), because knowing that they are punished because of their own impiety and sin, they weep and gnash their teeth in repentance. Another gnashes; therefore 'he gnashed his teeth at me' is said concerning the devil, and concerning the wicked here: 'they gnashed their teeth at me.' Failing in what they were striving for, they gnashed as if having done evil in vain or having fallen into a trial of what they intended to do, suffering what they intended to do to another. Regarding the words, then, must we take the teeth?—if there is repentance.