After the prophet opened with expressions of love and affection for Israel, he now transitions to rebuke. The rebuke is primarily directed at the Kohanim, since they were the ones who engaged in acts of contempt in the sacrificial service, as the prophet will proceed to detail.
בֵּן יְכַבֵּד אָב וְעֶבֶד אֲדֹנָיו וְאִם אָב אָנִי אַיֵּה כְבוֹדִי וְאִם אֲדוֹנִים אָנִי אַיֵּה מוֹרָאִי אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת לָכֶם הַכֹּהֲנִים בּוֹזֵי שְׁמִי וַאֲמַרְתֶּם בַּמֶּה בָזִינוּ אֶת שְׁמֶךָ׃ - A son honors a father, and a servant his master. If I am a father, where is My honor? And if I am a master, where is the awe of Me? said the Lord of Hosts to you, the Kohanim who despise My Name. And you said: "How have we despised Your Name?"
A son honors his father out of love, for a son loves his father. A servant respects his master not necessarily out of love, but out of fear: the master rules over him, and he fears punishment; therefore, he will not do anything his master does not desire. The Holy One, blessed be He, says to them: If I am a father - meaning you are like sons before Me and are supposed to serve Me out of love - where is My honor? Why do you not treat Me with honor? And if I am a master, in the sense of "if as servants," where service is performed out of fear - where is the awe of Me? At the very least, you should have had awe. Hashem directs both of these questions to the Kohanim: "To you, the Kohanim who despise My Name." And they respond: "How have we despised Your Name?"
In Torat HaParashah, an explanation is cited as a homiletic insight. Where is a father's fatherhood expressed? When the son seeks him. But if the son detaches himself from his father, how is it recognizable that he is his father? Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, says: If I am a father - do you know what My honor consists of? When you say "Ayé" (Where?) - where is Father? We desire His closeness. The "Ayé" itself is the honor! And likewise with a master: how is it evident that he is a master? When his servant approaches him, stands by him, and seeks to receive instructions from him. But if the servant has withdrawn and is disconnected from him, he is not considered a master to him. Therefore: if I am a master - "Ayé" is the awe of Me. When you ask where the Master is, that itself shows you are connected to Him and hold Him in awe. The "Ayé" is what is required of us: to seek the Holy One, blessed be He.
מַגִּישִׁים עַל מִזְבְּחִי לֶחֶם מְגֹאָל וַאֲמַרְתֶּם בַּמֶּה גֵאַלְנוּךָ בֶּאֱמׇרְכֶם שֻׁלְחַן יְהֹוָה נִבְזֶה הוּא׃ - You offer defiled bread upon My altar, yet you say: "How have we defiled You?" By your saying: "The table of the Lord is contemptible."
These two claims correspond to the two aspects: from the standpoint of honor and love, it is unfitting that you despise the Name of Hashem, since contempt is the opposite of honor; and from the standpoint of awe, it is unfitting that you offer defiled bread, meaning an abhorrent sacrifice, for punishment will follow such an act. And they reply to both: "How have we despised Your Name?" and "How have we defiled You?" - as though to say, we have done no such thing! Hashem responds: I will prove it to you. Corresponding to despising the Name - "By your saying: 'The table of the Lord is contemptible.'" "The table of Hashem" is the altar, as the verse states, "This is the table that is before Hashem." Upon the altar they would offer the fats and the blood, and they would display disgust toward it. This is a very grave offense: to show disgust toward that which ascends upon the altar.
The Gemara relates concerning Yissachar of Kefar Barkai that he would perform his service wearing gloves, because he was repulsed by handling the fat and the blood, as if it were beneath his dignity. Yet a Kohen is forbidden to perform the service wearing gloves. Once, the king and queen were debating which kind of animal was superior - that is, which meat was tastier. They said: Let us ask the Kohen, who offers sacrifices all day and eats from them; he certainly knows the differences. He came and said that lamb is tastier, waving his hand in a dismissive gesture, thereby also contradicting the king's opinion. A king never lets himself lose, and although there was no grievance against merely disagreeing with him, for the dismissive gesture he made with his hand, it was decreed that his right hand be cut off. He went and bribed the executioner to cut off his left hand instead, so that his right hand would remain. And so they did. Later, the matter came to the king's ears, and he commanded that the original decree be carried out - and so it resulted that both of his hands were cut off: his right hand was decreed, and he paid to have his left hand cut off as well! The Gemara says that it was a merit for Yissachar of Kefar Barkai that he received his punishment in this world. A person's lifespan is seventy years, and he was no longer a youth; he had perhaps thirty years remaining. It is far better to receive punishment here than there. In any case, we learn from this: one who relates to the sacrifices as something repulsive that requires gloves - this is utter contempt toward the table of Hashem. And this is what the prophet told them: "By your saying: 'The table of the Lord is contemptible,'" you despise what is offered upon the altar, the fat and the blood, and thereby despise His Name and His honor.
כִּי מִמִּזְרַח שֶׁמֶשׁ וְעַד מְבוֹאוֹ גָּדוֹל שְׁמִי בַּגּוֹיִם וּבְכׇל מָקוֹם מֻקְטָר מֻגָּשׁ לִשְׁמִי וּמִנְחָה טְהוֹרָה כִּי גָדוֹל שְׁמִי בַּגּוֹיִם אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת׃ - "For from the rising of the sun to its setting, My Name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is burnt and offered to My Name, as well as a pure offering; for My Name is great among the nations, said Hashem, Master of Legions."
Rashi cites in the name of our Sages that this refers to Torah scholars who delve into the laws of the Temple service wherever they may be, and to the prayers of Israel offered in every place, which are considered before Hashem like a pure offering. Targum Yonatan similarly translates: whenever you perform My will, I accept your prayer, and My great Name is sanctified through you, and your prayer is like a pure offering before Me. This, then, is the meaning of the verse: Hashem says to them, why do you desecrate My Name? For My Name is great among the nations, and I have such love and affection for you that wherever you may be among the nations and call upon My Name - I listen to you and turn toward you. Even in exile, wherever you turn to Me, you receive a response and an answer from Hashem. If so, your prayer is a pure offering to Me, and when you do My will, My Name is honored among the nations through you - so why, then, do you desecrate My Name among the nations?
וְאַתֶּם מְחַלְּלִים אוֹתוֹ בֶּאֱמׇרְכֶם שֻׁלְחַן אֲדֹנָי מְגֹאָל הוּא וְנִיבוֹ נִבְזֶה אׇכְלוֹ׃ - "Yet you desecrate it by your saying: 'The table of the Lord is defiled, and its produce, its food, is despised.'"
You desecrate the Name of Hashem by saying that His table is defiled. Yet you merit to sacrifice to Hashem Himself, unlike the nations who sacrifice to those subordinate to Hashem - to His intermediaries, as it were - but rather to Hashem Blessed is He Himself. If so, His table, which is the altar dedicated to His Name, all the more so deserves to be honored properly and according to its dignity.
The Malbim explains that there were two categories of offerings brought upon the altar. First, there are the parts consumed upon the altar itself, such as the fat and the blood of the sacrifices - and regarding these they said "it is defiled," meaning loathsome and repulsive, as though they were disgusted by the fat and the blood. Second, there is "its produce" (neivo), the fruit of the table: the consecrated meat that is eaten, such as the meat of the sin-offering and guilt-offering eaten by the Kohanim, and the meat of lesser sanctities - peace-offerings, the Pesach offering, and the like - eaten by the owners, all of which constitutes partaking from the table of the Most High. Regarding this they said "its food is despised," treating the eating with contempt and having no desire for it, arguing: why should we share with everyone? - and thus spurning it.
וַאֲמַרְתֶּם הִנֵּה מַתְּלָאָה וְהִפַּחְתֶּם אוֹתוֹ אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת וַהֲבֵאתֶם גָּזוּל וְאֶת הַפִּסֵּחַ וְאֶת הַחוֹלֶה וַהֲבֵאתֶם אֶת הַמִּנְחָה הַאֶרְצֶה אוֹתָהּ מִיֶּדְכֶם אָמַר יְהֹוָה׃ - "And you said, 'Behold, what weariness!' and you turned up your nose at it, said Hashem, Master of Legions; and you brought the stolen, the lame, and the sick, and brought it as an offering - shall I accept it from your hand? said Hashem."
It has often been noted that wherever rare expressions appear, interpretations multiply. Rashi explains: "Behold, what weariness" - you would say, what can we do, that we bring a sacrifice that is not choice, an emaciated animal? For "matla'ah" comes from the language of weariness and exhaustion: an exhausted, gaunt, aged animal, since we lack the financial means to bring something more honorable. "And you have caused grief over it" (ve-hipachtem oto) - Rashi explains that this is one of eighteen tikkunei Soferim (emendations of the Scribes). A tikkun Soferim means that Scripture avoids phrasing that appears derogatory toward the Holy One, Blessed is He, and therefore employed a euphemism. As it were, it should have been written, "and you caused Me grief" (ve-hipachtem oti), but Scripture used an indirect expression and wrote "it" (oto). And its meaning is: you have caused Me heartache, you have grieved Me with the sacrifice you bring before Me.
The Radak explains "and you blew it away" (ve-hipachtem oto) in the sense of casting it to the ground in a contemptuous manner, as in Targum Yonatan's translation "and you cast it down," from the idea of shaking and flinging - as if taking the animal and throwing it onto the floor of the Courtyard, saying: here, this is what I have to bring to the altar. He also cites another explanation, similar to Rashi's, that it is an expression of heartache (mapach nefesh), except that in his view the grief is not directed toward the Holy One, Blessed is He, but toward the person from whom the sacrifice was stolen - one went and robbed his fellow of an animal and brought it as a sacrifice, causing him deep heartache. The Radak cites yet another interpretation in the name of his father: "and you blew" (ve-hipachtem) is from the root of blowing, like one who blows on coals of fire. They would claim that they were weary and worn out from the burden of the sacrifice, as if they had grown tired carrying it all the way to the Temple, when in fact the opposite was true: you brought an animal so gaunt and light that carrying it involved no burden whatsoever. Others explained further: you brought an animal so emaciated that if you were to blow on it, it would fall to the ground. That is to say, you claim, "Behold, what weariness!" - we grew tired from the heavy sacrifice - but in reality "you could blow it over," a sacrifice that falls from a single puff of breath, and bringing such a sacrifice to the Temple is an outright disgrace.
The Malbim cites here an explanation in the name of the Abarbanel - a novel interpretation that presents a difficulty in understanding. It is well known that when skinning an animal, there is a way to separate the hide without a knife, since a knife creates cuts in the skin: after shechitah, a puncture is made in the side of the animal and air is blown into it, so that the hide inflates and separates from the flesh. In small cattle such as a goat this is easy to do, whereas in large cattle such as an ox it is difficult; nowadays, this is done with a compressor that introduces air pressure. According to this, the Abarbanel explains "and you blew at it" (vehipachtem oto): they would blow air between the hide and the flesh, so that an emaciated, lean lamb suddenly appeared fat, for people did not know that it was not fat but air. And you would say, "Behold, what a weariness!" - look how I carried it on my shoulders and how exhausted I am, whereas in truth, "and you blew at it" - the lamb was emaciated, and you merely inflated it so that it would look fat.
Yet there is a major difficulty with this, for it is hard to understand what timeframe this refers to. After all, a korban is slaughtered inside the Beis HaMikdash and not outside, as animals slaughtered outside are disqualified from being offered! If so, when was it inflated? If you suggest it was inflated outside, that is inconceivable: would someone cut into an animal in his home, blow into it, and separate the hide while it is alive? Aside from the severe prohibitions involved, quite simply, an animal whose skin has been peeled away becomes a tereifah and is no longer fit to be offered as a korban. And if it was inflated after arriving at the Beis HaMikdash, why complain about having dragged it while inflated? After all, it was not brought there inflated, but lean, and only inside the Beis HaMikdash did it become inflated! I have not seen anyone address this, and if anyone has an explanation, it would be welcome.
In addition to the emaciated and inflated offering, the verse continues: "And you brought that which was stolen" - a mitzvah accomplished through a transgression, where one stole an animal from his fellow and brought it as a korban; "and the lame, and the sick" - which are disqualified as sacrifices. Furthermore, often a meal offering would be brought along with the korban, namely the libation meal offering. Hashem says: "And you brought the meal offering; should I accept it favorably from your hand?" - I do not desire the meal offering either! Even though it is inherently valid on its own, because the animal sacrifice is disqualified and blemished, Hashem desires neither it nor the meal offering that accompanies it.
וְאָרוּר נוֹכֵל וְיֵשׁ בְּעֶדְרוֹ זָכָר וְנֹדֵר וְזֹבֵחַ מׇשְׁחָת לַאדֹנָי כִּי מֶלֶךְ גָּדוֹל אָנִי אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת וּשְׁמִי נוֹרָא בַגּוֹיִם׃ - "Cursed be the deceiver who has in his flock a male, yet vows and sacrifices a blemished animal to the Lord; for I am a great King, says the Lord of Hosts, and My Name is revered among the nations."
The Malbim explains that nochel ("deceiver") is related to kili, a miser: he acts deceitfully out of stinginess, plotting cunning schemes due to his parsimony. "Who has in his flock a male" - he possesses a respectable, fitting sacrifice, and has no pretext to claim that he had nothing else to bring. Nevertheless, he goes "and vows and sacrifices a blemished animal to the Lord," bringing a corrupted, defective, sick, and ruined animal. In this action, there is deceit from three perspectives.
The first aspect: it would have been fitting for him to say, "Harei zo" ("Behold, this is..."). One must understand the distinction between two formulas of dedication for a korban. One who says, "Harei zo olah" ("Behold, this is an olah") and designates a specific animal - if on the next day a wild beast preys upon it, he is exempt from bringing another korban, because he said "harei zo," and the animal already belonged, as it were, to the Temple, and he fulfilled his obligation. But one who says, "Harei alai olah" ("Behold, upon me is an olah") and then designates an animal - if it is preyed upon, lost, or harmed, this does not exempt him, since he accepted personal liability: "harei alai," meaning "I obligate myself," and if it is not brought, he must take another animal and offer it. Chazal explain that "harei zo" is termed a nedavah (voluntary gift), where he does not assume personal liability, while "harei alai" is called a neder (vow). This is why the verse states "and vows": he ought to have donated the male in his flock as a nedavah, saying "harei zo," yet he specifically says "harei alai." By not consecrating a specific animal, he leaves himself free a month or two later to sell the unblemished, prime male in his flock or slaughter it for his own food, and bring an inferior animal instead, claiming that this is all he has. Had he said "harei zo," he would have been obligated to bring that very animal, and would not even have been able to substitute it, as it is stated: "He shall not alter it nor exchange it, a good for a bad or a bad for a good; and if he does exchange it, then both it and its exchange shall be holy." Thus, he acts cunningly: he avoids saying "harei zo" so that he will not be bound to bring the fine animal, but instead takes upon himself a personal obligation, sells the fine one in the interim, and brings from the worst.
The second aspect: "and sacrifices." It would have been fitting for him to bring his offering as an olah (burnt offering), which is entirely consumed for Hashem. Instead, he brings a zevach shelamim (peace offering), whose meat is eaten by the owner, because he seeks personal benefit as well. The third aspect: "a blemished animal." At the very least, he should have brought an unblemished, complete offering, yet he brings one that has a defect.
Regarding all this, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says, "Cursed": the deceiver who does all this through cunning and trickery is cursed. "For I am a great King" - for the greater the One being dishonored, the greater the punishment. "And My Name is revered among the nations" - and if My Name is revered even among the nations, how is it that he does not revere My Name and commits such an act? Therefore, his punishment will be commensurate.
The prophet begins with a rebuke to the Kohanim from two angles: that of a son who loves his father, and that of a servant who fears his master - "If I am a father, where is My honor? And if I am a master, where is My fear?" And homiletically: the very "where" (ayeh), the yearning and searching for the Holy One, Blessed be He, is itself the honor and the fear. They disgraced Hashem's Name by saying, "The table of the Lord is contemptible," despising the fats and the blood offered upon the Altar - like the conduct of Yissachar of Kfar Barkai, who performed the service wearing gloves and was punished in this world - and they also disgraced its "fruit" (nivo), the consumption of the consecrated meat. Yet the truth is the very opposite: Hashem's Name is great among the nations, and the prayers of Israel everywhere are before Him like a pure meal offering. Instead, they brought emaciated, inflated, stolen, lame, and sick animals, to the point that even the meal offering brought alongside them is not accepted favorably. Finally, Scripture curses the miserly deceiver who has a male in his flock yet acts cunningly in his vow, his sacrificial choice, and the blemishes of his offering - "For I am a great King, says the Lord of Hosts, and My Name is revered among the nations."