In this section of the chapter, the prophet addresses a prophecy entirely devoted to examining the question of the merit of the righteous: Does the righteousness of a tzaddik protect his generation, his city, or even his sons and daughters? The Holy One, blessed be He, enumerates four judgments - wild beasts, the sword, famine, and pestilence - and repeatedly emphasizes regarding each one: even if there were in the land three righteous men like Noach, Daniel, and Iyov, they would deliver only their own souls. The commentators all seek to understand why the prophet specifically chose these three, when there were so many righteous individuals throughout the generations. We will examine several explanations, beginning with Rashi.
וְהָיוּ שְׁלֹשֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה בְּתוֹכָהּ נֹחַ דָּנִיֵּאל וְאִיּוֹב, הֵמָּה בְצִדְקָתָם יְנַצְּלוּ נַפְשָׁם נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה׃ - "Even if these three men were within it, Noach, Daniel, and Iyov, they by their righteousness would save only their own souls, says the Lord God."
Rashi explains that these three righteous men witnessed three worlds. Noach saw the world built, saw it destroyed in the Flood, and saw it built once again after the Flood. Daniel saw the Beit HaMikdash standing and saw himself in his greatness, chief over all the ministers; afterward the Temple was destroyed, and he himself was cast into the lions' den; and ultimately the Temple was rebuilt, and he returned to his greatness after the lions did not harm him. So too with Iyov: he saw himself in wealth, with children and possessions, blessed with every good thing; then all the afflictions befell him; and at the end of the Book of Iyov, the Holy One, blessed be He, restored to him double.
Therefore, they specifically were cited as an example for the generation of Yechanyah, who likewise saw the Temple standing, saw it destroyed, and were destined to see the Second Temple. The Holy One, blessed be He, says to them: I have a special affection for you, in that I show you - you, Yechanyah and his exile - that if one of the lands of the nations sins against Me, I decree harsh judgments upon it and nothing remains of it, whether famine, wild beasts, sword, or pestilence, as they appear here one after the other; and even if these three righteous men were within it, they would save no one. And despite all this, with you the matter was far harsher, for with you I did not bring "either/or," but all four together upon Jerusalem. That is one point. And the second point: see that you do not have these three righteous men among you, and yet you will be saved - meaning, you will have a remnant and survival.
Thus two points emerge here: First, if there were a land containing three such righteous men, and only one of the four troubles came upon it, they would not be saved. And second, upon you all four troubles came together - sword, famine, pestilence, and wild beasts - and although you do not have these three righteous men among you, nevertheless you will be saved. Consequently, there is consolation in these words, and this consolation is expressed at the end of the chapter, to encourage that generation that was destined to go into exile.
Rashi brings another explanation: the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered these three men from all the judgments mentioned here. Noach was saved from wild beasts - for when he entered the Ark, the beasts also wanted to enter, and it is said, "And the Lord shut him in," and "shut" refers specifically to protection from beasts, just as Daniel says, "and He shut the lions' mouths, and they did not hurt me." A lion came to enter and its teeth were blunted; a bear came to enter and its legs became tangled, as brought in Bereishit Rabbah. He was also saved from famine - as it is said, "from the ground which the Lord has cursed," and Bereishit Rabbah states that ten famines descended upon the world, one of them in the days of Noach. And he was also saved from the sword - for the people of his generation declared that they would not allow him to enter, and came with swords to dismantle and break the Ark. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: I will have him enter only at midday, and whoever feels aggrieved, let him speak! That is to say: let us see who is capable of preventing Noach from entering the Ark that I commanded him to enter. Therefore it is said, "On that very day, Noach entered," in the broad daylight of midday.
And so too with Daniel: when Nevuchadnezzar entered the Sanctuary in the days of Yehoyakim, he killed Yehoyakim and exiled Daniel after seeing that he was filled with a spirit of wisdom - thus he was saved from Nevuchadnezzar's sword. And from famine - for before Jerusalem was conquered in the days of Yehoyakim, there was a three-year siege, and Daniel was there while the famine grew severe, yet he survived. And from beasts - "and He shut the lions' mouths, and they did not hurt me," for he was cast into the lions' den and was saved. And so too regarding Iyov, Rashi says that he escaped all three matters: from famine, as some say Iyov lived in the time of Yaakov, when it was said, "And there was a famine in the land"; from wild beasts, as it is said, "and his substance increased in the land," which Chazal interpret to mean that he breached the normal fence of the world, such that beasts did not harm his livestock, like a form of insurance; and from the sword, as it is said, "He cleaves my reins asunder, and does not spare," as if feeling a sword piercing his kidneys and God seemingly showing no pity - yet ultimately he was saved.
Radak explains that the common denominator among the three righteous men is that each of them saved only himself. Noach was righteous in his generation along with his sons, and out of all the people of his generation he saved only himself and his family. Daniel saved only himself. And if you ask: but was he not exiled, so what salvation is there here? Radak explains: from exile he indeed did not save himself, for he could not prevent that. Moreover, what purpose would there have been in remaining here? How could he and his righteous companions, Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah, remain in a ruined and desolate land, with no one to assist them? Certainly four or five men cannot settle the land on their own. On the contrary, it was for their benefit that they were exiled, so that they would not witness the destruction of the city and the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. In any case, we see that he himself was spared, and became a minister in Nevuchadnezzar's palace.
And if you object: were there not other pious people in the city who could have been saved, as it is said, "the flesh of Your pious ones to the beasts of the earth" - why did God not save them? Radak answers that it is very possible that such a pious person was an isolated individual among the masses. When there is a group, there is greater scope for deliverance, but when it is an individual, very extraordinary merits are required for the Holy One, blessed be He, to save him. Whereas Daniel, Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah were indeed worthy of deliverance, yet even so, God did not spare them to remain in the Land, but rather delivered them there, in Babylonia; remaining here in the Land would have afforded them nothing.
Similarly, Iyov saved only himself from death, but did not save his sons and daughters, as his companions told him: "If your children sinned against Him, He banished them for their transgression." We see that Iyov did not manage to save his children. Regarding this, Chazal said on the verse, "And there is none that can deliver out of My hand" - Avraham does not save Yishmael, and Yitzchak does not save Esav. And if you should ask, did Iyov not fail to save even himself, given that he suffered severe afflictions - the Radak explains that the afflictions were for his own good, to purge sins that were upon him even though he was not aware of them himself.
What were those sins? The Radak does not specify, but as noted in the teachings on gilgulim (reincarnation), Iyov was the reincarnation of Terach. For this reason, he needed to be cleansed of all the idolatry he had manufactured in his previous gilgul, and therefore he returned in a new incarnation. As previously discussed, this is hinted at in the verses, "And Terach died in Charan... And Hashem said to Avram, 'Go forth'": the initials of "beCharan, Vayomer, Hashem, El" form the name "Iyov" in reverse - the Beit of "beCharan", the Vav of "Vayomer", the Yud of Hashem's Name, and the Aleph of "El". Immediately when Terach died, the Torah hints that he returns and reincarnates - which is why the hint appears in reverse order, from left to right - returning as Iyov. This was explored at length in the teachings on gilgulim, with many parallels and further explanations cited. In any case, the suffering that Iyov endured was for his benefit, serving as a cleansing and a tikkun.
The Radak cites an additional common denominator: all three stood firm in their righteousness through a trial and were saved. Noach was commanded, "Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood," and he did so before the eyes of his entire generation, at great risk of being killed, yet he did not fear and passed the test. Daniel was cast by the king into the lions' den, and a moment before, he could have recanted and said that he also believed in the divinity of Nevuchadnezzar, but he did not do so. Likewise Iyov, whom the Satan struck with severe boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head, yet he did not sin with his lips nor utter improper words against God. Thus, all three withstood severe tests unlike those faced by other righteous individuals. Seemingly, if this is the reason, one might ask why Yosef was not also mentioned, since he too faced a tremendous trial that few others endured. At any rate, according to this explanation, the common denominator is that they withstood great tests - yet despite this, they did not save their generation. From this you can deduce that even if they were present in the city, they would not save the local people through their righteousness.
The Malbim connects the three righteous men to the four judgments mentioned earlier, showing that those very judgments struck them as well. The Flood was a heavenly calamity, of the kind we saw earlier under the category of pestilence. Iyov was afflicted through the elements of wind and fire - fire descended from the heavens and a stormy wind blew - and these too are heavenly calamities. Daniel was saved from the sword and from wild beasts: from the sword, in that he was not killed in the sanctuary of Yechonyah, and from wild beasts - from the lions. And this is the meaning of "they, through their righteousness, would save their own lives": even though this was the harshest rebuke, their righteousness would avail only to save their own lives and no more, and certainly not their children.
לוּ־חַיָּה רָעָה אַעֲבִיר בָּאָרֶץ וְשִׁכְּלָתָּה, וְהָיְתָה שְׁמָמָה מִבְּלִי עוֹבֵר מִפְּנֵי הַחַיָּה׃ שְׁלֹשֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה בְּתוֹכָהּ, חַי־אָנִי נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה אִם־בָּנִים וְאִם־בָּנוֹת יַצִּילוּ, הֵמָּה לְבַדָּם יִנָּצֵלוּ וְהָאָרֶץ תִּהְיֶה שְׁמָמָה׃ - "If I were to cause wild beasts to pass through the land and bereave it, and it would become desolate with no one passing through because of the beast; though these three men were in its midst, as I live, says the Lord Hashem, they would not save either sons or daughters; they alone would be saved, and the land would become desolate."
The verse begins with wild beasts, which is lighter than famine and precedes it, for famine comes at the end because it is the harshest blow. One might have thought that here, in a blow that is not as severe, their righteousness would indeed help - yet it still does not avail. And what is the meaning of "lu chayah ra'ah"? Rashi and the Malbim explain "lu" in the sense of "if" ("im"), as in "If you had kept them alive" ("lu hecheyitem otam"). It can also be explained as an expression of wishing: if only nothing worse than wild beasts had come, since there were harsher afflictions, sword and famine. And here wild beasts roam the land, and in that very place three righteous men are present - yet despite this, "they would not save either sons or daughters; they alone would be saved." Even though it is merely wild beasts, the righteous will have no power to protect the people of their place.
אוֹ חֶרֶב אָבִיא עַל־הָאָרֶץ הַהִיא וְאָמַרְתִּי חֶרֶב תַּעֲבֹר בָּאָרֶץ וְהִכְרַתִּי מִמֶּנָּה אָדָם וּבְהֵמָה׃ וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת הָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה בְּתוֹכָהּ, חַי־אָנִי נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה לֹא יַצִּילוּ בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת כִּי הֵם לְבַדָּם יִנָּצֵלוּ׃ - "Or if I bring a sword upon that land, and say: 'Let a sword pass through the land,' and I cut off man and beast from it; though these three men were in its midst, as I live, says the Lord Hashem, they would not save sons and daughters, for they alone would be saved."
Wild beasts are less severe than the sword, for regarding wild beasts Chazal said, "a lion does not attack two" - when two people walk together, the lion is more hesitant to confront them, whereas when one walks alone, the lion feels confident. Apparently, in ancient times the lion had less confidence and people had more; today it seems the balance has shifted somewhat, and a lion will confront even four or five, and in any event it is very dangerous. But in the era of the Gemara the rule was "a lion does not attack two," unless the lion was ravenously hungry or in an unusual state. Accordingly, even though sons and daughters are many, and a group seemingly has greater power to stand against a wild beast, and even though the three righteous men together possess immense spiritual strength - nevertheless, those who will be saved are only the three righteous men, and the rest will not be saved through their power and righteousness. And so too regarding the sword: "they would not save sons and daughters, for they alone would be saved" - they will not save them through their righteousness from the sword.
אוֹ דֶּבֶר אֲשַׁלַּח אֶל־הָאָרֶץ הַהִיא וְשָׁפַכְתִּי חֲמָתִי עָלֶיהָ בְּדָם לְהַכְרִית מִמֶּנָּה אָדָם וּבְהֵמָה׃ וְנֹחַ דָּנִיֵּאל וְאִיּוֹב בְּתוֹכָהּ, חַי־אָנִי נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה אִם־בֵּן אִם־בַּת יַצִּילוּ, הֵמָּה בְצִדְקָתָם יַצִּילוּ נַפְשָׁם׃ - "Or if I send pestilence to that land, and pour out My fury upon it with blood, to cut off man and beast from it; though Noach, Daniel, and Iyov were in its midst, as I live, says the Lord Hashem, they would not save either son or daughter; they, through their righteousness, would save their own lives."
Pestilence is a plague, a harsher blow, a calamity from Heaven. Here the Malbim points out a shift in phrasing: earlier it said "they would not save sons and daughters" in the plural, whereas here it says "either son or daughter" in the singular - they would not save even a single son. Why? Because pestilence is more contagious when many people are gathered together, and when they are numerous the toll is greater; when individuals are alone, there is a better chance of survival. Even so, the verse states that even solitary individuals will not be saved, and with all their righteousness, they will save only their own lives, unable to rescue even a single son or daughter.
The Malbim further notes: Why is it said specifically here, "they by their righteousness shall deliver their souls," whereas regarding wild beasts and the sword it only says, "they alone shall be delivered"? Because here, with pestilence, it is an all-encompassing plague. Once permission has been granted to the destroying angel, he does not distinguish between righteous and wicked, as we saw with the Plague of the Firstborn. On the contrary, a special distinction is required here to save the righteous person - namely, a special consideration by the Holy One, blessed be He, of their righteousness, and through this they deliver their souls. For had that not been the case, even their righteousness would not have availed, as it is a sweeping plague upon everyone.
כִּי כֹה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה, אַף כִּי־אַרְבַּעַת שְׁפָטַי הָרָעִים חֶרֶב וְרָעָב וְחַיָּה רָעָה וָדֶבֶר שִׁלַּחְתִּי אֶל־יְרוּשָׁלַ͏ִם לְהַכְרִית מִמֶּנָּה אָדָם וּבְהֵמָה׃ - For thus said the Lord God: Even when I send My four terrible judgments - sword, famine, wild beasts, and pestilence - against Jerusalem, to cut off from it man and beast!
What is the meaning of "af ki" written here? Radak explains: "Af ki" means how much more so. For all the previous examples dealt with a situation where the Holy One, blessed be He, sends just one of the judgments against a nation, and even if these three righteous men were in it, they would not protect it. If so, all the more so when I bring all four judgments against a single nation: "I have sent against Jerusalem" - how much more so was it fitting that it should be completely annihilated. Yet despite all this, I did not make a complete end of them, as Hashem promised: "yet I will not make a full end of you." And as for what is said, "to cut off from it man and beast" - it would have been fitting for man and beast to be cut off by My judgments, yet come and see that they were not completely wiped out.
The Malbim addresses the order of the judgments here: sword, famine, wild beasts, and pestilence. Seemingly, did we not say that famine should come last, as it is the most severe? Rather, here they are enumerated in the order in which they befell Jerusalem: through the sword came the siege, causing famine in the city; then wild beasts came upon the corpses and attacked those slain outside; and afterward there was pestilence within, an epidemic inside the city. Therefore, he listed them in their chronological order.
וְהִנֵּה נוֹתְרָה־בָּהּ פְּלֵטָה הַמּוּצָאִים בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת, הִנָּם יוֹצְאִים אֲלֵיכֶם וּרְאִיתֶם אֶת־דַּרְכָּם וְאֶת־עֲלִילוֹתָם, וְנִחַמְתֶּם עַל־הָרָעָה אֲשֶׁר הֵבֵאתִי עַל־יְרוּשָׁלַ͏ִם אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר הֵבֵאתִי עָלֶיהָ׃ - Yet, behold, there shall be left in it a remnant that shall be brought forth, both sons and daughters; behold, they shall come forth to you, and you shall see their way and their doings, and you shall be consoled concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning all that I have brought upon it.
"Yet, behold, there shall be left in it a remnant" - sons and daughters were left in it, those brought forth into exile. See that I did not make an utter end of you; there is a remnant here. And why did the Holy One, blessed be He, leave them? This was by divine providence, for two reasons. First, to justify the heavenly judgment, so that the exiles in Babylonia would not complain about why Hashem poured out His wrath so harshly. The Holy One, blessed be He, says: I will direct toward you those who have now been exiled from Jerusalem, and you will be consoled concerning the calamity I brought, seeing that it was done with justice and judgment. For they will tell you of the abominations committed there in Jerusalem and of their evil deeds - just as we saw with Yechezkel himself, during the tour the Holy One, blessed be He, conducted for him through the Beit HaMikdash, leading him from chamber to chamber and showing him all the abominations. Through this, you will have no questions as to why Hashem acted this way, but rather accept the heavenly judgment.
וְנִחֲמוּ אֶתְכֶם כִּי־תִרְאוּ אֶת־דַּרְכָּם וְאֶת־עֲלִילוֹתָם, וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי לֹא חִנָּם עָשִׂיתִי אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר־עָשִׂיתִי בָהּ נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה׃ - And they shall console you, when you see their way and their doings; and you shall know that I have not done without cause all that I have done in it, says the Lord God.
And the second reason: The members of the exile of Yechanyah were grieving over the fact that Hashem had exiled them before the rest of the nation. Regarding this it is said, "And they shall console you" - when you see their way and their doings, you will know that I did not act without cause, and you will understand that you derived great benefit from having been exiled early. For had you been exiled later, you too would have suffered all four afflictions we enumerated. Now that you were exiled earlier, what did you experience? Only exile, but not the sword, not pestilence, and not famine - none of these tribulations did you suffer. From this you will realize that you got off lightly, while this later generation, which acted more wickedly, paid the full price. Thus Chazal say that sending out the exile of Yehoyachin - the craftsmen and the smiths - beforehand was for their good, since the generation of Tzidkiyahu was a generation of wicked people. As we have mentioned several times, they had idols behind the door: when they shut the door, the idol stood there inside, invisible from the outside. Through all of this you will know that I did not act in vain, and that everything is by Hashem's decree: first, you will justify the heavenly judgment; and second, you will thank Hashem that you were exiled earlier and were spared what was suffered by those who came after you.
The prophet reiterates regarding the four judgments - wild beasts, sword, famine, and pestilence - that even Noach, Daniel, and Iyov would only deliver their own souls. Rashi explains that they were specifically chosen because they witnessed three eras, building, destruction, and rebuilding, as an analogy to the generation of Yechanyah, and also because they were all saved from these very judgments. Radak explains that all three saved only themselves and neither their contemporaries nor their children, and that all endured severe trials yet could not protect others. The Malbim analyzes the textual nuances: "sons and daughters" in the plural versus "son or daughter" in the singular regarding pestilence, and "they by their righteousness" specifically in an all-encompassing plague where the destroying angel does not distinguish. Finally, the chapter concludes with consolation: upon Jerusalem came all four judgments together, yet a remnant remained; and the refugees arriving in Babylonia will recount to the exiles the deeds of that generation, leading them to accept the justice of the heavenly judgment and recognize the goodness shown to them in having been exiled first.