Introduction
In this part of the psalm, Asaph continues to lay out the distress of the exile before the Holy One, Blessed be He: the tears that the people of Israel eat and drink, the mockery of the nations, and from there he moves to the great parable of the vine - a vine transplanted from Egypt, rooted in the land, extending its boughs to the sea, whose fences were ultimately breached and abandoned to every passerby. Out of this parable arises the great plea: "Restore us, and cause Your face to shine, and we shall be saved." Let us follow the order of the verses.
"Bread of Tears" and "Tears in Triple Measure"
הֶאֱכַלְתָּם לֶחֶם דִּמְעָה וַתַּשְׁקֵמוֹ בִּדְמָעוֹת שָׁלִישׁ׃ (ו) - You fed them bread of tears, and gave them tears to drink in triple measure. (6)
Rashi explains that "You fed them bread of tears" refers back to the days of Egypt: there they were enslaved, and ate their bread in tears and weeping. And what is meant by "and gave them tears to drink in triple measure [shalish]"? Rashi explains that this refers to the Babylonian exile, which lasted seventy years. What is the connection to a third [shalish]? How long were we in Egypt? Two hundred and ten years. And a third of two hundred and ten is exactly seventy. Thus Rashi learned based on Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan: You gave them tears to drink in a third measure - a third of the duration they spent in Egypt.
Rashi brings another explanation: "Tears in triple measure [shalish]" hints at the third kingdom, which is the Greek empire, representing the third period of distress. Rashi raises a difficulty: wasn't Greece ostensibly the fourth - Egypt, Babylonia, Persia and Media, and Greece? Rather, the entire seventy years of Babylonia are counted as only one exile. (Some printed texts mistakenly read "is only a true exile" [galut emet], which is an error; the correct reading is "is only one exile" [galut achat].) Within those seventy years, Babylonia, Media, and Persia are included as a single exile. Thus we find: Egypt is one, Babylonia with Media and Persia is two, and Greece is the third.
The Three Tears of Esau
"And our Rabbis interpreted," Rashi writes, that this refers to the three tears shed by Esau. When Esau came and saw that the blessings had been taken, according to his distorted perception that they rightfully belonged to him, Scripture states: "And he cried with a great and exceedingly bitter cry" - "a cry" is one, "great" is two, "and bitter" is three. For the sake of these three tears, he merited to live by his sword, as it says, "And it shall come to pass when you shall break loose." In Midrash Shocher Tov, the matter is explained further: Israel says before the Holy One, Blessed be He - Master of the Universe, because of three tears that Esau wept, You gave him dominion from one end of the world to the other; when You come to look upon our humiliation and the oppression of our souls, how much more so should You redeem us!
The Tehilot Mahari"tz expands on this point. He cites the Midrash: Rabbi Elazar said, Esau shed three tears from his eyes - one from his right eye, one from his left eye, and the third remained bound in his eye, meaning it did not fall at all. As it says, "and gave them tears to drink in triple measure [shalish]" - shalish from the root meaning three tears, signifying that the Holy One, Blessed be He, gave us to drink because of Esau's tears; we drink his tears, meaning we suffer on account of them. Israel said: Master of the Universe, in the merit of three tears that Esau shed from his eyes, You granted him dominion from one end of the world to the other and gave him tranquility in this world; as for us, whose tears flow constantly day and night, how much more so! And this is the meaning of "You fed them bread of tears": just as a person eats bread constantly, so too our tears flow constantly - how much more so should You be filled with compassion for us.
And why are the three tears divided in this specific manner - right eye, left eye, and a suspended tear? The Tehilot Mahari"tz explains: The first tear was because Esau had toiled, exerted himself, and prepared delicacies for his father out of respect for his father, and Jacob came and "snatched" the mitzvah from him. This was a positive weeping - I had an opportunity to fulfill a mitzvah and lost it. This is a tear from the right side (sitra deyemina), the good side, and therefore it fell from the right eye. The second tear was over not obtaining the blessings: Father was bestowing blessings and someone took them from me - of the dew of heaven and the fat of the earth. This crying was no longer for the sake of Heaven, but over the desires of this world, "in her left hand are riches and honor," and therefore it was a tear from the left eye.
And the third tear remained bound in his eye: he was infuriated that the blessings specifically fell into Jacob's hands. Had it been a case of "it shall be neither mine nor yours," Esau would have been calmer; but when he heard that not only did he fail to receive them, but his brother received them instead - that enraged him far more. This is already the evil eye: it is one thing that you have nothing, but why does it pain you that he has? This is the deeper meaning of the phrase "bound in his eye" - it was bound to Esau's eye, to his evil eye, and therefore it never fell. For the two tears that did fall, we have endured suffering; but the tear of envy and begrudging never fell. Therefore we say: Master of the Universe, our tears flow constantly day and night, and unlike the tears of Esau which were shed over wealth, honor, and begrudging envy, ours are tears for redemption, salvation, and closeness to God - how much more so should they evoke mercy on High!
"How Long Will You Smoke Against the Prayer of Your People" - The Very Pursuit Proves He Desires Us
יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים צְבָאוֹת עַד־מָתַי עָשַׁנְתָּ בִּתְפִלַּת עַמֶּךָ׃ (ה) - Hashem, God of Hosts, how long will You fume in anger against the prayer of Your people?
Here it is explained that we, as it were, turn to the Master of the Universe and say: If You are abandoning us in exile because You are content with the ministering angels - since those below have corrupted their ways, and those on High are enough for You - this was indeed the argument made by the holy Seraphim in the days of Haman. When there was a decree to destroy Israel, they argued, "The celestial beings are enough for You"; let them be destroyed, for they have corrupted their ways and deserve it. To refute this claim, we argue: If You have truly become solely the "God of Hosts" of Heaven above and accepted the angels' counsel - if so, how long will You fume against the prayer of Your people? You should have simply left us alone like all the nations, as it says, "He saw and released the nations" - the Holy One, blessed be He, left them alone, and they live comfortably, in wealth and honor, without troubles, and He even permitted them, so that even if they observe mitzvos, they receive reward as one who is not commanded yet performs. There is no logic in saying that the Holy One, blessed be He, is no longer interested in us and yet continues to pursue us.
This is a point often emphasized: the very reality that the Jewish people are persecuted among the nations is the clearest proof that the Holy One, blessed be He, still desires us. A person who throws his son out of the house because he refuses to acknowledge him does not continue to chase after him and beat him. He threw him out, and that is the end of it. If he still pursues him and strikes him, you immediately understand that he is waiting for him to wake up and return. Perhaps a slap will awaken him; perhaps financial loss will make him realize that he needs his father. One torments someone from whom one still holds expectations; from someone of whom there are no expectations, he is simply abandoned and it is over. The very fact that we are persecuted proves that the Holy One, blessed be He, still expects something of us and wants us to return to Him.
And what is left for us? "You fed them bread of tears" - for the gates of tears are never locked. Even the bread we eat comes through tears and prayer: the heavens are shut tight without rain, and only when our eyes shed tears does the Holy One, blessed be He, begin to give us a little sustenance. Thus, the bread we eat is bread of tears, and the water we drink is tears in full measure. And if you see that the Holy One, blessed be He, still afflicts us, it is a sign that He desires us; for if He had abandoned us completely, why would You "fume against the prayer of Your people"?
"You Make Us an Object of Strife to Our Neighbors"
תְּשִׂימֵנוּ מָדוֹן לִשְׁכֵנֵינוּ וְאֹיְבֵינוּ יִלְעֲגוּ־לָמוֹ׃ (ז) - You make us an object of strife to our neighbors, and our enemies mock among themselves.
Rashi explains: You make us an object of strife to all our neighbors. Madon means contention and strife, as in the verse cited by Radak, "a man of strife and a man of contention to the whole land" - they are constantly quarreling with us; the Greeks came and provoked us.
One might examine the wording carefully: "and our enemies mock them [lamo]" - it should have said, "mock us [lanu]"! In light of this difficulty, Radak explains that this is written as a euphemism, for in truth our enemies are mocking the Holy One, blessed be He. When enemies triumph, they assume that "their God has no power to save them," which is a desecration of the Divine Name - "Because Hashem was unable," where is their God, why does He not save them, "Who among all the gods of these lands delivered their land from my hand?" as Sancheriv said when besieging Jerusalem. And because Scripture avoids expressing any derogatory remark toward Heaven, it wrote "they mock them [lamo]" - as if they were mocking themselves. Similarly, "and behold, they put the branch to their nose," where the intended meaning is "to His face," but out of respect and to avoid derogatory language toward Heaven, Scripture modified the phrasing to "to their nose."
The Malbim explains differently: "and our enemies mock them" - the enemies mock our neighbors themselves. This refers to Sanballat, Toviah, and their companions: the other enemies mock our neighbors for squabbling with such a lowly, degraded, and feeble people. "Is it against such a weak congregation that you march out to war?" Therefore, we plead: Restore us, shine Your countenance, and we shall be saved - so that we no longer remain in this degraded, humiliated state, but that You restore us to the greatness and abundance we once enjoyed.
"God of Hosts, Restore Us" - The Repeated Request
אֱלֹהִים צְבָאוֹת הֲשִׁיבֵנוּ וְהָאֵר פָּנֶיךָ וְנִוָּשֵׁעָה׃ (ח) - O God of Hosts, restore us; shine Your countenance, and we shall be saved.
Rashi explains "restore us and we shall be saved" as referring to redemption from the Greek exile, as explained earlier. Ibn Ezra explains that the repetition of the request alludes to the kingdom of Judah, which was exiled twice. Radak notes that this plea is repeated three times because it is the way of a supplicant to reiterate his words to strengthen his supplication, though with a slight variation each time.
Here it is worth noting the fundamental difference in approaches: Radak's approach is that Scripture often uses "repetition of the concept in different words" (kefel ha'inyan bemilim shonot). According to his view, there is no question as to why something is written two or three times, or why it says "rich and noble" or "poor, destitute, and needy" - this is simply poetic flourish (tiferet hamelitza). The Malbim's approach is the exact opposite: wherever Scripture repeats a concept, it is a sign that there is an additional meaning and another deeper layer, and every single word has its own precise significance.
The Parable of the Vine
גֶּפֶן מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּסִּיעַ תְּגָרֵשׁ גּוֹיִם וַתִּטָּעֶהָ׃ (ט) - You plucked up a vine out of Egypt; You drove out nations and planted it. (9)
Rashi explains: The vine of Israel - You uprooted it from Egypt, plucking them out from there. But how can one speak of "moving" (lehasi'a) a vine, which is something firmly planted? Rashi cites proof from Iyov: "And He plucked up my hope like a tree." You brought this vine from Egypt, drove out the seven nations who dwelt here, and planted it in their land. Radak explains similarly, likening Israel to a vine and citing: "For the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the House of Israel, and the people of Judah are the plant of His delight" (Yeshayahu 5:7), and "My beloved had a vineyard on a fruitful hill... and he hoped it would yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes" (ibid. 5:1-2). We see that Israel is compared to a vine. Incidentally, a grapevine does not accept grafting - one cannot graft other trees onto it; so too, Israel does not assimilate or merge with other nations, as they are "a people that dwells alone" (Bamidbar 23:9).
The Malbim explains that the third part of the psalm begins here. After "O God of Hosts, restore us, shine Your countenance and we shall be saved," which concluded the second part, the psalmist now turns to plead that Hashem help the Jewish people in the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash and free them from the yoke of the kings of Persia - for when they ascended to rebuild the Temple, they were still subjugated to the Persian Empire. He recalls the Exodus from Egypt: You took a vine out of Egypt, You drove out seven nations and planted it on a fruitful hill - Master of the Universe, do for us today just as You did then!
פִּנִּיתָ לְפָנֶיהָ וַתַּשְׁרֵשׁ שָׁרָשֶׁיהָ וַתְּמַלֵּא־אָרֶץ׃ (י) - You cleared space before it; it took deep root and filled the land. (10)
כָּסּוּ הָרִים צִלָּהּ וַעֲנָפֶיהָ אַרְזֵי־אֵל׃ (יא) - The mountains were covered with its shadow, and its boughs became mighty cedars. (11)
"You cleared space before it" - the Holy One, blessed be He, cleared out the seven nations dwelling in the Land. "It took deep root (vatashresh sharasheha)" - its roots struck deep into the ground. Radak makes a grammatical observation here: there is a difference between hishrish in the hif'il conjugation, which means to take root or produce roots, and sheirash in the pi'el conjugation, which means to uproot. "And in all my crops take root (tashresh)" (Iyov 31:12) means taking root, and likewise "and it took deep root (vatashresh sharasheha)" means that You caused the roots to be firmly established in the ground; in contrast to "and uproot you (veyashereshkha) from the land of the living" (Tehillim 52:7), which means to tear out by the root. These are two opposite meanings derived from the same root: to take root, or to uproot.
We find a similar phenomenon with the word lesakel: in one sense, it means to clear away stones (as in sikul avanim), while in another sense, it means to pelt with stones. It carries a dual meaning: to remove stones or to cast stones. So too with lesharesh - in the hif'il conjugation it means to take root and plant, while in the intensive pi'el conjugation it means to uproot completely.
The Malbim explains that this describes how Hashem also cleared out the surrounding nations around Eretz Yisrael, such as Aram-Syria and the like, so that the vine could expand - both below in its roots and above in its branches, until the mountains were covered by its shade and its boughs resembled mighty cedars. Normally a vine is not as strong as a cedar; rather, Scripture wishes to express the sheer power and might that the Holy One, blessed be He, granted the Jewish people in their Land. This is certainly a metaphorical expression - it does not mean that an actual vine cast shade over the mountains, but rather that the Jewish people are like a vine providing shade over the mountains.
And what is meant by "cedars of God" (arzei El)? Radak explains, as he does in several places, that whenever Scripture wishes to magnify something, it connects it to the Name of God: "a city great to God" (ir gedolah le-Elokim) said of Nineveh means an immense city; great darkness is called ma'afelyah, with the addition of the divine name Yah - the darkness of God, signifying profound darkness; and likewise "mighty mountains" (harrei El) means towering, majestic mountains. So too, arzei El means colossal, magnificent cedars.
תְּשַׁלַּח קְצִירֶהָ עַד־יָם וְאֶל־נָהָר יוֹנְקוֹתֶיהָ׃ (יב) - It sent out its branches to the sea, and its shoots to the river. (12)
"Its boughs" (ketzirah) refers to its branches, its foliage. The branches of this vine - the people of Israel dwelling in their land - multiplied and grew. "Unto the sea" - up to the Great Sea (the Mediterranean), which was its border. "And its shoots unto the River" - this is the breadth of Eretz Yisrael, from the wilderness to the Euphrates River, and "its shoots" (yonkoteha) are the tendrils and roots through which the vine draws nourishment. And similar to the verse "May he have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the River unto the ends of the earth" - so did the Holy One, blessed be He, spread Israel out and magnify them in their land.
"Why have You broken down its fences?"
This entire lengthy introduction was leading up to the next verse:
לָמָּה פָּרַצְתָּ גְדֵרֶיהָ וְאָרוּהָ כָּל־עֹבְרֵי דָרֶךְ׃ (יג) - Why have You broken down its fences, so that all who pass along the way pluck at it? (13)
Why now, Master of the Universe, after all that abundant goodness, have You broken down the vineyard's fences, allowing all who pass along the way to come and pluck at it? The word arúha has two explanations: First, they harvested it, plucking its grapes, as in "I have gathered (ariti) my myrrh with my spice," and as in the Mishnah, "as though he plucked it (oreh) into his basket" - oreh means harvesting or gathering. Thus: why did You break down its fences, to the point that all who pass by enter and pluck its fruit? The second explanation is that arúha comes from the root of "curse" (arur), meaning that all who passed by cursed it; everyone sees how ruined the vine is after being trampled, and consequently, everyone curses it.
The Radak explains that "You have broken down its fences" means that Hashem removed His protection from the vine, leaving it exposed and vulnerable to any passerby, as it is written: "And I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured." Note that the Torah's expression for the afflictions brought upon us by the nations and for exile is "devouring" (or "eating") - and so it is here: the nations came and devoured and pillaged its fruit.
The holy Alshich explains that the plea here is: after the Jewish people attained such an exalted stature and You held them in such high regard, why have You now broken down its fences? He interprets this based on the Pesikta on the verse, "O Lord, You have seduced me, and I was seduced": an angel dispatched by the Blessed One came, placed one foot on Jerusalem's wall on this side and one foot on that side, and pressed down and breached the walls. Nor did he stop there, but cried out in a loud voice: "Come to the vineyard whose watchman is no longer inside; destroy the cluster whose owner has departed!" As it were, Hashem sent an angel who actively invited the nations.
And why did they need to be invited? Would they not come on their own? Rather, at first the nations could not believe what their eyes were seeing - "The kings of the earth did not believe... that the adversary and the enemy would enter the gates of Jerusalem." They feared: who knows, perhaps this is an ambush, perhaps Jerusalem has not truly fallen into our hands. Therefore, it was necessary for an angel to come and invite them. And this is the meaning of "Why have You broken down its fences?" - by breaking down the walls and calling out to the nations, restraint was abandoned and "all who pass along the way pluck at it"; everyone comes to seize spoil and take booty, stripping her of everything she has. Hence the cry: after all that greatness she once possessed, why does this happen to us now?
The Malbim explains that "You have broken down its fences" parallels "I will break down its fence, and it shall be trodden down" in Yeshayahu: at first, "all who pass along the way pluck at it" - ordinary, everyday passersby who entered - and then came the next stage described in the following verse.
יְכַרְסְמֶנָּה חֲזִיר מִיָּעַר וְזִיז שָׂדַי יִרְעֶנָּה׃ (יד) - The boar of the forest ravages it, and whatever moves in the field feeds on it. (14)
Afterward came the destroyers of lands - Nevuchadnezzar, his ministers, and the commanders of his army - and they completely ruined that vine.
The Radak explains yecharsmenah based on Targum Yerushalmi on the verse "for the locust shall consume it" - translating it as "arei yecharsam yateih gova." This is the familiar Hebrew verb for "gnawing" or "ravaging" (lekharsem), and it also appears in the Mishnah in Pe'ah (2:7): "a field that ants have stripped bare (kirsemuha)" - although there it is spelled with a kuf, the meaning is identical. The Radak notes that kuf and chaf share the same phonetic origin. While in Modern spoken Hebrew the distinction is barely heard, in truth there is a difference: among Yemenite Jews and exacting Sephardim, a kuf is distinctly a kuf and a chaf is a chaf, each possessing its own pronunciation. For our purposes, however, they share a phonetic source, and therefore gnawing whether spelled with a kuf or a chaf is one and the same.
In the word miya'ar ("from the forest"), the letter ayin is suspended - it does not rest on the line, but hangs higher. Midrash Shocher Tov explains: If Israel is worthy, it is read as mi'ye'or ("from the river") - just as the river creature has no dominion on dry land, so their enemies will have no power over them; but if they are not worthy, it is read as miya'ar ("from the forest").
"Burned with fire, cut down"
שְׂרֻפָה בָאֵשׁ כְּסוּחָה מִגַּעֲרַת פָּנֶיךָ יֹאבֵדוּ׃ (יז) - It is burned with fire, it is cut down; at the rebuke of Your countenance they perish.
What is the meaning of kesuchah? Today, the Hebrew root sounds like modern slang, but it is actually the language of the Mishna and Aramaic. On the verse, "nor prune your vineyard" (Vayikra 25:4), the Targum renders: "you shall not tikhsach." We likewise find this root throughout the Mishna - anything that is broken and severed is called kisuch. Radak explains that this verse refers back to the shoot or to the vine, which is why it appears in the feminine form, and kesuchah means severed or cut down.
In Midrash Shocher Tov: Rabbi Shila said, it does not say "uprooted" (akuratah), but rather "cut down" (kesuchah), and anything that is cut down regenerates. The Midrash says this for our benefit: Had the vine been uprooted, torn completely from its roots, all would be finished and it would have no future. But kesuchah means it was merely broken and cut off, embodying the principle that "its trunk will sprout anew" - the trunk was indeed severed, yet it sprouts once more, sending forth branches and boughs, and the vine flourishes again.
And should you ask, is it not also "burned with fire"? Even burning does not destroy it entirely. After all, what is done to myrtle branches to make them grow in dense sets of three? They are burned. One takes a myrtle bush and singes it, and when it grows back the next time, it emerges fully formed in triads. This shows that burning does not consume it completely; its roots remain intact beneath the earth, and it sprouts anew. So it is with the vine: though burned and cut down, it is never uprooted; therefore its trunk sprouts anew, and Israel retains its eternal existence.
"At the rebuke of Your countenance they perish" - according to Radak, this refers to Israel, who are the vine: at the rebuke of Your face they perish, for You hid Your face from them, which itself is a rebuke, and through that concealment the enemies come, as in "The boar from the forest ravages it," and so forth. But the Malbim explains differently: "Burned with fire, cut down" certainly refers to Israel, yet "at the rebuke of Your countenance they perish" refers not to them, but to the nations. That is: Israel has been burned with fire and cut down by the nations - and please, Hashem, may those very nations who ravage the vineyard perish at the rebuke of Your countenance! This is a prayer and a plea that the Holy One, blessed be He, destroy the ravaging boar and the beasts of the field, the oppressors who ruin the vine.
"May Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand"
תְּהִי־יָדְךָ עַל־אִישׁ יְמִינֶךָ עַל־בֶּן־אָדָם אִמַּצְתָּ לָּךְ׃ (יח) - May Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand, upon the son of man whom You strengthened for Yourself.
Rashi explains: Turn the blows back upon Esav, who is the man against whom Your right hand is poised to exact retribution.
Ibn Ezra notes an important grammatical nuance: wherever the word yad ("hand") is followed by the preposition bet ("in" or "against"), it indicates harm or punishment, such as "the hand of Hashem was against them" (Devarim 2:15) or "the hand of Hashem will be upon your livestock" (Shemot 9:3). But wherever it is not followed by a bet, it signifies favor and blessing: "Let Your hand be ready to help me" (with a lamed, Tehillim 119:173), "and the hand of Hashem was strong upon me" (Yechezkel 3:14), "the hand of Hashem was upon me" (Yechezkel 37:1). Accordingly, "May Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand" means may Your assistance rest upon the man of Your right hand, since there is no bet here, which proves that it is for the good.
The Malbim explains: In contrast to what was said earlier, "and the shoot that Your right hand planted," the verse speaks here of the "man of Your right hand," who is the enemy. Why is the enemy called the "man of Your right hand"? Because he, too, comes through the power of Hashem's right hand - the Holy One, blessed be He, granted him might and dominion to lay waste to lands, and he did not come on his own; as we saw, the angel summoned and invited him, meaning he comes through the agency of Hashem's hand. And against the one whom You brought with Your right hand, may Your hand now turn! Furthermore, in contrast to the structure mentioned earlier that fortified the vine, there is a "son of man" whom You empowered, who comes to tear down and ruin that sacred structure - this is Esav, this is Nevuchadnezzar, these are the oppressing nations. Concerning this, the plea is made: Master of the Universe, let the strike of Your hand fall upon the man of Your right hand; as it were, may Hashem's left hand strike down the one who comes empowered by the right.
Rav Mazuz makes a precise observation: Why does it specifically say "ben adam" (a son of man) here? To refute the erroneous belief of the Christians, who latch onto verse 16:
וְכַנָּה אֲשֶׁר־נָטְעָה יְמִינֶךָ וְעַל־בֵּן אִמַּצְתָּה לָּךְ׃ (טז) - And the stock that Your right hand planted, and upon the son You strengthened for Yourself.
They interpret "son" as referring to that man, may his name and memory be blotted out, claiming: Here is the son whom Hashem adopted for Himself. A few verses later, Scripture comes and clarifies who that son actually is - "and upon a son of man You strengthened for Yourself." Merely a human being, a mortal man; not the son of the Holy One, blessed be He, not the holy spirit, and none of the other delusions they invented. Thus it does not refer to that man at all, and Scripture itself comes to dismantle the notion of the misguided.
"And We Will Not Turn Back from You"
וְלֹא־נָסוֹג מִמֶּךָּ תְּחַיֵּנוּ וּבְשִׁמְךָ נִקְרָא׃ (יט) - And we will not turn back from You; revive us, and we will call upon Your Name.
"And we will not turn back from You" - Master of the Universe, do not cause us to turn back from You. When You judge us with the attribute of strict justice, it pushes us away; when Israel is in exile they deteriorate, intermarry with the gentiles, and lose their connection with the Holy One, blessed be He - You cause us to turn back from You. "Revive us, and we will call upon Your Name" - revive us from this exile and redeem us, and then we will acknowledge Your goodness, recount Your might, and call upon Your Name.
The Three Mentions of the Divine Name in the Conclusion
יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים צְבָאוֹת הֲשִׁיבֵנוּ הָאֵר פָּנֶיךָ וְנִוָּשֵׁעָה׃ (כ) - Hashem, God of Hosts, restore us; shine Your countenance, and we will be saved.
Rashi points out that three Divine Names are mentioned here: Hashem, Elokim, Tzevaot. In the middle refrain - in verse 15, "God of Hosts, return now, gaze from heaven and see, and take notice of this vine" - two Names are mentioned. And in the first - in verse 4, "O God, restore us, and shine Your countenance and we will be saved" - only one Name is mentioned. What is the reason for this progression? It all corresponds to the intensity of the exiles, the distress, and the redemption: the more intense the exile and suffering become, the more we feel the need to multiply our invocations of Hashem's Name to plead before Him to redeem us.
The Malbim explains: "And we will not turn back from You" - we will not turn back from faith in You, only keep us alive throughout the duration of this exile and these tribulations, so that we may call upon Your Name. Then we will cry out and say: Restore us, Master of the Universe, return us to the Land. For if we die in exile - even spiritual death - who will cry out to Hashem? Therefore, please Hashem, revive us so that we may call upon Your Name and at least be able to pray for redemption.
And since the request here concerns the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash, the four-letter Name of Hashem (Havayah) is mentioned here. For the Ineffable Name as written is pronounced only in the Beit HaMikdash; today we do not pronounce it as written but rather as Adonai, and only in the Beit HaMikdash did the Kohen Gadol utter the explicit Name (Shem HaMeforash). Therefore, in verse 4 only "Elokim" is used, in verse 15 "Elokim Tzevaot," and here, where the subject is our restoration to the Beit HaMikdash, it says "Hashem, Elokim, Tzevaot, restore us" - for here we reach the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash, which makes it possible to mention the Shem HaMeforash.
In summary:
The psalm leads us from the tears of exile to the prayer for redemption. First comes "bread of tears" and "tears by the measure" (shalish) - whether a third of the duration of Egypt, or the third calamity, or the three tears shed by Esav for which he merited dominion. From this emerges an a fortiori argument: our tears flow constantly, day and night, and they are tears longing for redemption and closeness to God. The very persecution proves that the Holy One, blessed be He, still desires us, for were it not so, He would have left us alone like the rest of the nations. Next comes the parable of the vine: a vine transplanted from Egypt, deeply rooted in the Land, filling it and covering mountains in its shade - yet ultimately its fences were breached. But it is "cut down," not "uprooted" - its trunk renews itself, and in the end it will flourish once again. From here stems the prayer that Hashem's hand be upon the enemy who comes with the strength of his right hand, and that He grant us life so that we may call upon His Name. Therefore, the psalm concludes with three Divine Names including the Explicit Name: "Hashem, God of Hosts, restore us; shine Your countenance, and we shall be saved" - until our complete restoration to the Land and to the Beit HaMikdash.