לַמְנַצֵּחַ לִבְנֵי־קֹרַח מַשְׂכִּיל׃ - For the Conductor, by the sons of Korach, a Maskil.
The Malbim explains that this psalm, like the preceding one, is founded upon the exile. The psalmist recalls the wonders that Hashem performed for us in days of old and pleads: just as You acted for us then, so save us today. He enumerates the afflictions we have endured in exile and emphasizes that despite everything, we still cling to You and still believe in You, and therefore it is fitting that You redeem us.
At first, he opens his prayer from the standpoint of the honor of Hashem, which is desecrated by our very presence in exile: Master of the Universe, redeem us so that Your Name will not be desecrated among the nations. As we saw in the previous psalm, the nations say, "My adversaries taunt me, saying to me all day, 'Where is your God?'" and this presents the God of Israel, as it were, as powerless - this is a desecration of Hashem's Name (Chillul Hashem). Afterwards, he appeals on the basis of Hashem's lovingkindness (chesed): the more destitute and downtrodden a person is, the more worthy he is of mercy, and we are at the lowest depth - "Our soul is bowed down to the dust... redeem us for the sake of Your lovingkindness." And the third basis is from the standpoint of Hashem's truth (emet), for Hashem promised to redeem us. These three foundations appear in the verse in Chapter 115: "Give glory to Your Name, for Your lovingkindness, for Your truth" - "to Your Name," so that Your Name will not be desecrated; "for Your lovingkindness," grant us kindness because we are low and degraded; "for Your truth," fulfill Your words that You promised to redeem us.
אֱלֹהִים בְּאׇזְנֵינוּ שָׁמַעְנוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ סִפְּרוּ־לָנוּ פֹּעַל פָּעַלְתָּ בִימֵיהֶם בִּימֵי קֶדֶם׃ - God, with our ears we have heard, our fathers have told us, the work You performed in their days, in days of old.
Immediately, a question arises here: after all, the psalm is "by the sons of Korach," and the sons of Korach were those who took part in the Exodus from Egypt and personally experienced everything Israel underwent in the wilderness. If so, what is the meaning of "with our ears we have heard, our fathers have told us"? You were there yourselves! We have already seen several explanations as to who the sons of Korach were - whether the reference is to his descendants rather than his actual sons, or to his actual sons. According to the view that it refers to his actual sons, Rashi explains: from here you learn that the sons of Korach were speaking on behalf of the future generations that would follow them. In other words, the sons of Korach speak in our name. They themselves saw and heard, but in the psalm they compose, they state that a generation is destined to arise in which there will be no open miracles, and that generation will say: our fathers have told us; we are sustained only by stories and by what is written in the Torah, but we have not been privileged to witness these miracles. Since the sons of Korach saw everything with their own eyes, it cannot be said that they are speaking about themselves. This is explicitly stated in Agadat Tehillim, that is, in the Midrash.
The Malbim explains: something a person received by hearsay, by word of mouth, without witnessing it firsthand, can be inaccurate, or to put it more bluntly, even false. This is for two reasons: first, that the initial teller fabricated the story from his own heart, and it subsequently spread; second, that someone along the chain altered it - for a rumor is like a game of "broken telephone," developing and taking on a life of its own as it passes along. Someone along the way may have fabricated details, misunderstood the matter, or changed aspects of it. Therefore, when a person receives something by hearsay, it is difficult for him to be certain that the report is accurate.
However, here, the verse states, the tradition we possess regarding the miracles of days of old is a true and absolute tradition, not mere hearsay. First - "with our ears we have heard," meaning that the matter did not pass through intermediaries. And if you might suggest that perhaps those who transmitted the tradition fabricated it from their own hearts, and you merely heard it directly from someone who fabricated it - to this he replies: we did not merely hear it from strangers, but rather "our fathers have told us."
The words of the Ramban are well known: the tradition - that which we have received from our forefathers - is stronger than anything else, for fathers do not bequeath a lie to their children. A father will not invent fables for his son or pass down falsehoods to him. Why would a father tell his son that the Giving of the Torah and the Revelation at Mount Sinai took place, and that he must observe the mitzvos, if it never happened? It is contrary to all reason for a father to bequeath a lie to his son. A tradition transmitted continuously from fathers to sons is an authentic tradition.
And if one should ask: both Christianity and Islam claim the same thing - Ahmed tells you that this is what his father told him, and that is what his grandfather told his father, and a Christian will likewise assert, "Fathers do not bequeath a lie to their children." True, but the difference lies in one crucial point. As discussed, and as learned at length in Sefer HaKuzari, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. You inspect a chain and declare: "It can lift a hundred tons." But someone tells you: "Look up at the top, where it hangs from the crane." And it turns out that it is suspended there by flimsy chicken-wire threads that cannot even bear the weight of the chain itself. It turns out that this is not a hundred-ton chain, but a hundred-kilo chain. By contrast, a chain whose links along its entire length can each hold ten tons - truly holds ten tons.
Take Christianity - how many adherents does it have? Millions, perhaps billions. Ostensibly, a hundred-ton chain. But where did it begin? With a handful of individuals who claimed to have seen things: three women who claimed they saw that man rise from his grave after being buried, whether they actually did or not; a few people who were at his last supper, where he distributed bread and everyone ate and left over; and a few other visionaries who saw him walking on water. And note: we have no theological difficulty accepting that such events might have occurred, for Chazal describe that he practiced sorcery and suspended a brick in the air, so walking on water would not have been difficult for him either. But what does that prove? It only proves someone had sorcerous ability, witnessed by a few individuals. That is a chain whose very first link is exceedingly weak. Furthermore: who witnessed that woman's conception by the "holy spirit"? The Christians were clever and constructed an unfalsifiable model in advance - an event where testimony is fundamentally impossible, as it supposedly occurred in private chambers. Now prove it did not happen! A completely unfalsifiable model.
The same applies to Muhammad, whom they call a prophet. Let anyone produce a single prophecy he uttered that was fulfilled! In the Torah, we have a multitude of prophecies that have been fulfilled down to the present day, one by one; and throughout the Prophets, there are dozens of fulfilled, verifiable prophecies - a topic once explored in an entire dedicated shiur. Muhammad does not possess even a single prophecy. In fact, throughout history, the nations of the world have had no prophets; Moshe Rabbeinu prayed for this, so they have no prophets, which is why they do not even presume to utter prophecies. Nevertheless, they have no problem believing in him and his delusions, claiming that the angel Gabriel appeared to him. Who was there? Who saw it? What we do have is clear evidence, documented by historians, that he suffered from epilepsy; he would collapse and convulse, and after each seizure, he would claim he received a prophecy from the angel Gabriel providing updates to what is written in the Torah. If it were not so tragic, it would be laughable - that on the basis of such claims, people go and murder, committing the greatest atrocities in the world without a shred of evidence. There, it is not even a chain, for no one saw anything at all. With Christianity, they at least recount witnessing miracles - which, as noted, presents no problem for us even if true - yet the accounts begin with a mere handful of individuals, which in itself is untenable.
In contrast, when speaking of the Revelation at Mount Sinai - we are speaking of six hundred thousand men who witnessed a divine revelation. And notice: if it were possible to plant such a story retroactively, both the Christians and the Muslims would have done so, claiming that what that man or Muhammad did occurred before hundreds of thousands. But it is impossible to invent an unprecedented story retroactively, for people would immediately ask: "Which hundreds of thousands? My father never told me that, nor did his father tell him, and nobody knows this story!" If someone recounts an event that took place before hundreds of thousands and no one disputes it, that proves it truly occurred. Thus, the first link of Judaism is extraordinarily strong. Even if you say there are only fifteen million believers today - call it ten tons, but it is ten tons that hold firm along the entire length; whereas with them, there is not even a single kilogram of support, because the very beginning of the chain is defective.
And those six hundred thousand were only the men between the ages of twenty and sixty. Our tradition teaches that at the Exodus from Egypt, there were at least five million people; the Eirev Rav (mixed multitude) went up with them, numbering twice as many as the Israelites. When you add the children under twenty and the elders over sixty, you reach at the very least - in the words of the Chafetz Chaim - five million people, and plausibly far more. The revelation took place before millions; the Sea split before millions. Such events cannot simply be fabricated and introduced out of nowhere in the middle of history. And when a person asks his father: "How do you know that the Revelation at Mount Sinai and the Giving of the Torah occurred?" his father answers: "From my father; he told me at the Pesach Seder." And his father heard it from his father, and his father from his father. At what point could people have decided to fabricate an institutionalized lie, pass it down to their children, and have everyone accept it? Unquestionably, this tradition is an authentic tradition.
And what does this tradition tell us? "You wrought a work in their days." The Malbim explains: a *ma'aseh* (ordinary action) operates within the bounds of nature, whereas *lif'ol po'al* (to work a deed) refers to a miraculous innovation transcending the natural order. You performed acts that transcended nature: the splitting of the Yam Suf, the plagues of Egypt, the Giving of the Torah, water from the rock, and the Clouds of Glory. Yet all of this took place "in their days," "in days of old" - whereas in our time, we do not see those wondrous deeds and miracles, and we yearn and long to see the Redemption.
אַתָּה יָדְךָ גּוֹיִם הוֹרַשְׁתָּ וַתִּטָּעֵם תָּרַע לְאֻמִּים וַתְּשַׁלְּחֵם׃ - You, with Your hand, dispossessed nations and planted them; You afflicted peoples and cast them out.
The Ibn Ezra comments here: "It is the way of the Hebrews to omit the letter *beis*" - meaning that in biblical Hebrew usage, the prepositional *beis* is often omitted where expected. Here, too, although the verse states *atah yadcha goyim horashta* ("You Your hand dispossessed nations"), the meaning is as if it were written *atah beyadcha* - "You with Your hand," by Your own power and Your own blow.
The Malbim explains: just as You dispossessed the nations in order to plant Israel there - meaning the Holy One, blessed be He, cleared out the seven Canaanite nations to settle the Jewish people - You did not do so through an intermediary, neither by an angel nor through the natural order, but You Yourself, with Your own hand, "dispossessed nations." And for what purpose? "And planted them" - to firmly plant Israel in the land. Secondly, this was also retribution for the wickedness of the nations themselves, as it states: "You afflicted peoples" - You willed harm to come upon them because of their evil deeds. Thus, there were two reasons: to bequeath the land to us, and to make the nations pay the penalty for their sins. Through this, "and cast them out" - You expelled them from the land, as Scripture says, "Because of the wickedness of these nations Hashem is dispossessing them before you, and in order to fulfill the oath..." Two birds with one stone: the nations received their due punishment, and Israel received their promised land.
The Malbim explains that the phrase "You, with Your hand" comes to exclude an intermediary - not through messengers, but You, with Your own hand. As for the distinction between goyim (nations) and le'umim (peoples), the Malbim reiterates this on numerous occasions: a goy is defined by social grouping, whereas a le'om is defined by religion. Any group of people gathered together is called a goy, even a tribe in Africa that has no formal religion, etiquette, distinct laws, or established government - the mere gathering of an ethnic group is called a goy. But organized nations that possess a government, laws, social conventions, and a specific religion by which they live - like the nations of Europe - are called le'umim. Hashem hates these le'umim on account of their false religions, practices, and idolatry, which is why it says, "You afflicted peoples (le'umim)," for those nations were idolaters.
The Malbim notes that the phrase tera le'umim ("You afflicted peoples") can be understood in two ways: either the letter lamed serves as a prefix of specification - le'umim meaning "the peoples," functioning as one of the grammatical prefix letters (becholam: be'umim, le'umim, me'umim, ke'umim) that are not part of the root; or le'umim is derived from the root le'om, and the verse means tera le-le'umim ("You afflicted the peoples"), where the prefixed lamed was elided - just as the beit of beyadcha was elided in the earlier clause, so too the lamed was elided here. This is not unusual in Hebrew scripture, as Ibn Ezra terms it mishpat ha-Ivrim - the customary rule of Lashon HaKodesh.
כִּי לֹא בְחַרְבָּם יָרְשׁוּ אָרֶץ וּזְרוֹעָם לֹא־הוֹשִׁיעָה לָּמוֹ כִּי־יְמִינְךָ וּזְרוֹעֲךָ וְאוֹר פָּנֶיךָ כִּי רְצִיתָם׃ - For not by their sword did they possess the land, nor did their arm bring them victory, but Your right hand, Your arm, and the light of Your countenance, for You favored them.
Now the verse explains that this did not occur according to the laws of nature, but rather, as stated, "You, with Your hand, drove out nations" - You Yourself, and not through intermediaries or nature. "For not by their sword did they possess the land" - the people of Israel, who came and inherited the land, did not possess it through their sword or their might, "nor did their arm bring them victory."
What is meant by the expression "arm" (zero'a)? The Malbim explains that the hand (yad) is the distal extremity, while the arm (zero'a) is the upper part closer to the shoulder, which moves the hand. When a person wants to move his hand, he moves his arm, and through the movement of the arm, the hand moves (and even the muscles and sinews in the arm are what activate the tendons of the hand). Thus, the arm is always the primary force, the origin of movement. Therefore, wherever Hashem's "arm" is mentioned - as the Malbim explains in several places - it signifies that the very beginning, the initial impetus of the action, comes from Hashem: just as the arm initiates the motion of the hand, so did Hashem's arm bring this about, for Hashem is the primary cause of all.
From this arises the distinction: all the deeds that Hashem performs on account of the merit of the Jewish people, rather than solely by His own Divine will and impetus, are described with the term "His hand" - because the merits are ours, and our actions, as it were, set the motion in play, making it a "hand." But when the action stems purely from His will, with no merits on our part, it is described with the term "arm," for the arm represents the beginning - showing that the initial cause itself came from Him alone.
Here, Scripture comes to tell us: not only did they not possess the land by their sword, but even by virtue of their deeds they were not deserving. The Torah states explicitly: "Not for your righteousness or the uprightness of your heart do you come to inherit their land, but because of the wickedness of these nations." Do not think this happened through your merits; rather, it was through their guilt. This is the meaning of "nor did their arm bring them victory" - there were no personal merits here; rather, "for Your right hand and Your arm": both the action and the initial cause were entirely from Hashem's right hand. Hashem's "right hand" is always an expression of supernatural providence, whereas the "left hand" denotes providence within nature; the right hand represents a guidance that works wonders. And this came about through His arm, which is the aspect of supreme chesed, defined by the Malbim as the kindness that looks to no merit whatsoever, never checking whether one is worthy or unworthy.
Nor were these hidden miracles; rather, "the light of Your countenance" - Hashem's light was revealed, and manifest miracles took place: hailstones falling from the heavens, and "Sun, stand still at Gibeon, and moon, in the Valley of Ayalon." This was the manifestation of Hashem's right hand. And why? "For You favored them" - the reason was the Supreme Will. And what is the Supreme Will? It is like when a child asks "Why?" and the answer is "Just because." The Supreme Will is always an expression of something beyond human comprehension. Therefore, in the Zohar and the writings of the Mekubalim, when they wish to describe an action that the Holy One, blessed be He, performed purely of His own accord without any prior cause, they say bire'uteih - by His will. What was the reason, what was the cause, from what merit did it stem? Bire'uteih, by the will of the Creator, blessed be He, and ask no questions. There is no discernible reason for the Will, says the Malbim; the Creator certainly has His reason, but we have no capacity to understand why His will is so.
אַתָּה־הוּא מַלְכִּי אֱלֹהִים צַוֵּה יְשׁוּעוֹת יַעֲקֹב׃ - You are my King, O God; command the deliverances of Jacob.
Now that it has become clear that the ancient wonders were not brought about by our merits or good deeds - "Not for your righteousness" - nor were You obligated to act for Your honor, since at that time, as the Malbim explains, Your Name was not yet associated with them. The argument that Hashem redeems us for His Name's sake, so that His Name will not be desecrated among the nations while the Jewish people are downtrodden and suffering, applies only when His Name is called upon us; in those days, "in their days, in the days of old," they were not yet called the people of Hashem. All the more so now, when we are already known as His people and the portion of His inheritance, and Your Name is proclaimed over us - surely You will have mercy on the honor of Your Name. And since "You are He, my King, O God," and Your Name is associated with me, it is fitting that You "command the salvations of Jacob" - that You save us as in days of old.
בְּךָ צָרֵינוּ נְנַגֵּחַ בְּשִׁמְךָ נָבוּס קָמֵינוּ׃ - Through You we will gore our adversaries; through Your Name we will trample those who rise against us.
And even if we are not on the spiritual level worthy of You saving us through open miracles - at least, "Through You we will gore our adversaries." Even if You do not perform miracles for us as You did back then, when we did not need to wage war at all - such as when Hashem routed the Philistines and in other situations where the Holy One, blessed is He, acted miraculously - at least grant us victory in battle by saving us through natural means. "Our adversaries" (tzareinu) are those who actively distress us, and them we will gore through You, with Your assistance. And if not even that, for You to assist us directly - "through Your Name we will trample those who rise against us": send us help in Your Name, meaning an angel who comes in the Name of Hashem, even if not directly by Your hand but through natural means and more distant channels, and then we will trample those who rise against us. The Malbim explains: those who rise against us (kameinu) are more dangerous than adversaries (tzareinu) - adversaries cause us distress in practice, but those who rise up actively rise to wage war against us. Therefore, at least through Your Name we will trample - if not our adversaries, at least those who rise against us, those who come to eradicate us in war.
And what is the meaning of navus ("we will trample")? Rashi explains: we will tread upon and crush our enemies, as in the expressions "wallowing in your blood" (mitboseset be-damayikh), "trample a honeycomb" (tavus nofet), and "like mighty men trampling in the mire of the streets" (bosim be-tit chutzot) - an expression of trampling underfoot. This is also the straightforward source of the Hebrew word tevusah (defeat): when describing a downfall in battle, one says "we defeated the enemies," meaning we trampled our adversaries.
כִּי לֹא בְקַשְׁתִּי אֶבְטָח וְחַרְבִּי לֹא תוֹשִׁיעֵנִי׃ - For not in my bow do I trust, nor does my sword save me.
The Radak explains that the use of the singular here is the collective voice: the entire nation is speaking here, and it is not David speaking of himself personally. This is the meaning of the verse: we do not trust that we will emerge from exile through our own strength and might, but rather we rely upon You and Your help.
The Malbim adds: it is inconceivable that You would abandon us to chance and to nature, expecting us to defeat our enemies with our own strength, for this is impossible both from the perspective of the agent and from the perspective of the action. From the perspective of the agent - the person performing the action - "For not in my bow do I trust": we are not seasoned warriors trained to fight with the bow, nor do we possess the power to execute this task. And from the perspective of the action itself, the very nature of warfare and battle - "nor does my sword save me." The sword is foreign to our essence; the sword belongs to Esau and fits his persona, whereas to Jacob no covenant of the sword was given, but rather "the worm of Jacob" - his strength lies only in his mouth. Just as a worm's power is solely in its mouth, so too Jacob's strength is solely in his mouth. Therefore, King David says, however we look at the matter, whether from the standpoint of the agent or the action, there is no way for us to save ourselves on our own. Consequently, we must turn specifically to You - as we said in the preceding verse, "Through You we will gore our adversaries; through Your Name we will trample those who rise against us." On our own, we have no such capability.
The psalm opens with a prayer of exile resting on three foundations: the honor of Hashem's Name that it not be desecrated, Hashem's abundant lovingkindness toward the lowly, and the truth of His promise to redeem. It bases this plea upon the tradition received from our ancestors - an unbroken, certain tradition free of distortion, for "with our own ears we have heard" and "our fathers have told us," and fathers do not bequeath falsehood to their children. Unlike other faiths whose chain of tradition begins on shaky ground, our chain of tradition begins with a revelation before millions of people. From within this tradition, he recalls the supernatural miracles - "a deed You accomplished" - and the inheritance of the Land, which came neither by the sword nor through our merits, but by Hashem's right hand, His arm, and the light of His countenance, by a supreme divine will beyond our comprehension. Hence the deduction a fortiori (kal va-chomer): if back then, when Your Name was not yet called upon us, You acted thus, how much more so now, when we are called Your people! And if we are not worthy of overt miracles, at least "through You we will gore our adversaries; through Your Name we will trample those who rise against us," for neither our bow nor our sword will save us, but You alone.