Before us is the final section of Chapter 43 in Yeshayahu, from the verse "Do not remember the former things" until the end of the chapter. The prophecy opens with the promise of a future redemption that will surpass all redemptions that preceded it, continues with a description of the alteration of the natural order that will be wrought for Am Yisrael, and then turns sharply toward rebuke: the Holy One, Blessed be He, rebukes the generation, demonstrating that all the future goodness is not due to their own merits, but rather "for My own sake." We will follow the order of the pesukim guided by the Malbim, alongside Rashi, Radak, the Metzudos, and the Midrashim.
אַל־תִּזְכְּרוּ רִאשֹׁנוֹת וְקַדְמֹנִיּוֹת אַל־תִּתְבֹּנָנוּ׃ - Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old.
The Malbim notes the variation in phrasing: why does the verse say "rishonot" in one place and "kadmoniyot" in the other? The answer is that "rishon" (first / former) always refers to that which is truly first, with nothing preceding it. "Kadmon" (ancient / preceding), by contrast, is a relative term referring to anything that precedes another. The third precedes the fourth, and the fourth precedes the fifth, and each is termed "kadmon" relative to what follows it, even though it is not first at all.
According to this: "Remember not the former things (rishonot)" - this refers to the Exodus from Egypt, which was the very first of all redemptions, preceded by no other. "Nor consider the things of old (kadmoniyot)" - these are the redemptions that preceded you in earlier eras, foremost among them the redemption from Babylon. In other words, you need not contemplate either the very first redemption or those that came before you in earlier generations. The Malbim cites additional scriptural examples, such as "Declaring the end from the beginning (me-reishit), and from ancient times (u-mi-kedem) things that are not yet done," showing that the root "kedem" always denotes that which is relatively prior, whereas "rishon" denotes the absolute first.
הִנְנִי עֹשֶׂה חֲדָשָׁה עַתָּה תִצְמָח הֲלוֹא תֵּדָעוּהָ אַף אָשִׂים בַּמִּדְבָּר דֶּרֶךְ בִּישִׁמוֹן נְהָרוֹת׃ - Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it shall spring forth, shall you not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert.
Notice the precision of the language: earlier it said "nor consider (al titbonanu)," and here it says "shall you not know it (halo teda'uha)." Knowledge (yediah) differs fundamentally from contemplation (hitbonenut). Knowledge stems from direct sensory perception and is always clear and evident - one sees it directly, and it is tangible to the senses. Contemplation, on the other hand, is understanding one thing from another, drawing conclusions through the faculty of insight (binah) via deduction and logical reasoning regarding matters that are grasped by the intellect alone rather than the senses.
This explains the verse, "They also that err in spirit shall come to understanding (yede'u... binah)" - how does "knowledge" apply to "understanding / insight"? The Malbim explains this at length in Sefer Mishlei: while binah is indeed grasping one concept from another, one who delves deeply into it can attain the level of direct knowledge. The logical deduction becomes so clear and obvious that it is like an absolute axiom - as if seen with one's own eyes, as if physically felt. To what can this be compared? If a person is asked at what temperature water boils, he immediately replies, "one hundred degrees." When did he last test this? Never. Yet it is so known and certain that anyone states it matter-of-factly. This is the meaning of "they that err in spirit shall come to understanding": after deep contemplation, the matter settles into the category of clear, unquestioned knowledge.
And this is what the prophet promises regarding the future redemption: "Shall you not know it?" - it will be known with clear and absolute certainty, requiring no deep contemplation or deduction to arrive at, as everyone will plainly witness it.
"Now it shall spring forth" - redemption has the potential to arrive even right now. This is the meaning of the well-known story where Moshiach was asked, "When will the master come?" and he answered, "Today." The next day they met him and said to him, "Heaven forbid, did you utter a falsehood?" He told them, "'Today - if you will listen to His voice.'" That is, redemption is in the category of "now"; it is already prepared, and everything depends solely upon our will.
The Radak adds another explanation for "now": when people speak of something in the future, one harbors doubts about it - perhaps it will happen, perhaps it will not. But when something is shown right before one's eyes, its reality is clear. Therefore, the future redemption is spoken of in the present tense, as "now," as though it is already occurring right here and now before our eyes, so that faith and trust in it are clear and absolute.
And what is the knowledge of which the verse speaks? Radak explains: "Shall you not know it?" - I have already made this known to you from days of old, for it was already stated in the Torah, "Then Hashem your God will return your captivity and have compassion upon you, and will return and gather you from all the peoples." I am not bringing you a new message now; I have already written about it in the Torah.
And should you say: perhaps this promise was already fulfilled in the Babylonian redemption, and since then we have returned to exile and have no further promise? Radak answers that this cannot be. For it is said, "and gather you from all the peoples," whereas in Babylonia Israel was not dispersed among all the nations. Who ascended in the return to Zion? Only the Babylonian exiles. The Ten Tribes have not yet left their exile, and "and gather you from all the peoples" has not been fulfilled to this day.
Furthermore, it is stated there, "when you turn to Hashem your God with all your heart and with all your soul," yet those who returned from the Babylonian exile did not return with all their heart and all their soul - for among them were Sabbath desecrators and those who had married foreign women. Thus, it is clear beyond doubt that the promise in the Torah refers to the future redemption, which will gather the Jewish people from all the exiles, and not to a redemption that has already passed.
And the verse continues: "I will even place a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert" - in addition to what I have already made known in the Torah, I will also perform things I did not write in the Torah. "Even" (af) denotes an addition. I will place a path in the wilderness to redeem Israel, and in the wasteland, in a place of desolation and drought, there will be rivers, as it is said, "A voice calls in the wilderness: Clear a way!" The Holy One, blessed be He, says: This is how I will alter the order of nature so that the Jewish people will be redeemed from exile.
תְּכַבְּדֵנִי חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה תַּנִּים וּבְנוֹת יַעֲנָה כִּי־נָתַתִּי בַמִּדְבָּר מַיִם נְהָרוֹת בִּישִׁימֹן לְהַשְׁקוֹת עַמִּי בְחִירִי׃ - The beast of the field shall honor Me, jackals and ostriches, for I have placed waters in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to My people, My chosen.
The desolate land, the lair of wild beasts, jackals, and ostriches, suddenly becomes an oasis, and as a result, they too honor the Holy One, blessed be He. Yet the Malbim raises a difficulty: the wild beasts are not bound by any obligation to give this thanks, for several reasons.
First, they derive no benefit from the road or the water. The beast of the field is content in an arid habitat, and a humid place is not good for it at all. It is comparable to a Siberian polar bear: if you take it and bring it to Africa out of pity for the cold, it will die there. It is built for the cold, not for a "pleasant" climate. Likewise, animals accustomed to arid habitats - bringing them to a moist place is not beneficial to them. And from the paved way they derive no benefit at all, but rather the opposite: wherever humans arrive, the wild beasts are driven out. They lose their territory and feel threatened, to say nothing of when humans hunt them. The road merely disrupts and pollutes their domain.
Second, wild beasts were not created to praise and honor God at all, unlike man, whose entire purpose is for this. And third, even if they did derive benefit - these miracles were not performed for their sake at all.
Why, then, should they honor Him? To this the verse concludes: "To give drink to My people, My chosen." The wild beasts will rejoice in the miracles and wonders that the Holy One, blessed be He, performs for His people. As if to say: although I derive no benefit from this, look at the miracles and wonders Hashem performs for His nation! Because of the benefit accrued to Israel, they will honor Hashem.
Therefore, the Malbim notes with precision, the text does not say "the beasts of the field will praise Me," but rather "will honor Me." What is the difference between honor (kavod) and praise (tehillah)? Whom do we honor? Someone whose greatness we recognize. Whom do we praise? Someone from whom we have received a benefit. The beasts of the field did not receive a direct benefit from the water and the road, so they have no cause to praise; but out of recognition of the greatness of the Holy One, blessed be He, for His deeds - they honor Him.
עַם־זוּ יָצַרְתִּי לִי תְּהִלָּתִי יְסַפֵּרוּ׃ - This people I formed for Myself; they shall recount My praise.
If the beasts of the field, for whom this is not their role at all, arrive at the conclusion that Hashem must be honored - all the more so, a fortiori of the highest order, for the Jewish people, whom "I formed for Myself" specifically for this purpose, to praise My name. And not only that they should honor, but "they shall recount My praise": for who benefits from the road in the wilderness and the water in the wasteland? Man. And one who has received the benefit is obligated not only in honor but in praise - to laud and recount the deeds of Hashem and His wonders for the kindness He performed with them.
וְלֹא־אֹתִי קָרָאתָ יַעֲקֹב כִּי־יָגַעְתָּ בִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - But you did not call upon Me, O Yaakov, that you should have grown weary of Me, O Yisrael.
From here onward, the Radak explains, there is a turning point in the prophecy, and the prophet turns to rebuke the generation. The Holy One, blessed be He, says to them: All the goodness that I will bestow upon your children after you in exile - know that it is not in your merit. I will perform this good for My own sake, whereas based on your own merits, your children would not be worthy of redemption.
"Yet you did not call upon Me, O Yaakov" - you did not even call out to Me in your time of distress, and certainly you did not exert yourself, you did not make an effort to serve Me. The Radak explains the difficulty in the verse: How can you come and claim that you are wearying yourself in My service, when you did not even call out to Me? Had you served Me, you might still have claimed that you made an exertion, but you did not serve at all - so where does the claim come from that the mitzvos are wearisome to you?
This brings to mind a story of a rabbi whose son went astray, and after years they met. The son said that the reason he left was that Judaism was not liberal enough and did not move with the times; had the rabbis been more lenient, taken circumstances into account, adopted - as those far from mitzvos say - "the approach of Beis Hillel," understood the spirit of the youth, and had the Torah been more flexible, he certainly would have stayed, and many others would not have left either. His father asked him: How many of Hashem's mitzvos do you keep today? He replied: To tell the truth, nothing. His father said to him: Very interesting. You keep nothing, yet the Torah tires and burdens you, while I keep everything and do not feel burdened at all. And if the sheer number of mitzvos and their difficulty genuinely burdened you, you would at least keep the light ones! You would say: Master of the Universe, the hard ones I cannot manage, but the easy ones I will do. Rather, the conclusion is that you simply do not want to keep anything. And why do you demand leniencies? Because it bothers you that we are keeping them. The less we do, the fewer pangs of conscience you will have for not doing anything.
And this is like the man who went to an appliance store to buy a refrigerator priced at six thousand shekels. He bargained for a whole hour until he brought the price down to five thousand, wrote five checks, took the refrigerator, and left. The first check bounced. The store owner called him: What is going on? There are insufficient funds. He replied: I will tell you the truth, I won't lie to you - the remaining four checks have no coverage either. The owner said: If so, why did you bother me for a full hour to bring the price down? He replied: I wanted to minimize your loss; my heart ached that you would lose six thousand, so at least you only lost five... It is exactly like this: ostensibly your heart goes out to us that we are exerting ourselves, and so you want to reduce the demands, but as for you yourself, even if there were only a single mitzvah, you would not keep it.
And the proof of this: How many mitzvos was Adam HaRishon commanded? Only one - not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. And what did he do with it? Even that one he did not keep. Thus we find that it is not a matter of many or few: one who wants to will keep many, and one who does not want to - even one will be a burden upon him. And this is the meaning of "Yet you did not call upon Me, O Yaakov, that you should have grown weary of Me, O Yisrael": How can you say that My mitzvos weary you, when you have not kept even a single mitzvah?
And from here we see the difference between "avodah" (work or service) and "yegiah" (wearisome toil): avodah is the task a person is required to perform; yegiah is the surplus exertion, what a person strains beyond what is expected of him, and that is what wearies him.
There is another explanation of this verse: not only did you not call upon Me, but you also wearied Me with idolatry. If you had said, "I serve no one," so be it. But you went and served idols. Says the Holy One, blessed is He: the burden of idolatry you accepted with love, yet My burden was too heavy for you? You are willing to exert effort - so why make an effort for idols? If you are going to exert effort, expend it for Hashem!
A similar story is told about Rebbe Shmelke of Nikolsburg, who came to Vienna for medical treatment. The doctor examined him and said there was nothing to be done and no hope. People told him, "There is a witch doctor here, someone who works with segulot and incantations." He refused under any circumstances to see him. They asked him, "You have already traveled all this way; try it, what do you have to lose?" He replied, "Why do I go to a doctor at all? Because the Torah says, 'and he shall cause him to be thoroughly healed' (verapo yerapeh), from which we learn that permission was granted to a doctor to heal. But you are offering me a cure outside the realm of nature, something pseudo-spiritual, incantations and charms. As for the spiritual, I already have the Creator of the world! I go to the original address and need no substitutes. If it is natural means - as Hashem commanded - I will follow the natural path; but why should I turn to spiritual imitations when I can go straight to the Source?"
According to this explanation, "ki yagata bi" means: as it were, you burdened Me and wore Me out with the sins you committed.
The Malbim connects this verse to what precedes it. After stating, "This people I formed for Myself, they shall recount My praise," the Holy One, blessed is He, says: Indeed, in the future to come you will recount My praise and acknowledge Me. But I ask now - why until now did you not call upon Me? When you see how great, exalted, and high Hashem is, and what signs and wonders He performs, why did you not come until now?
Furthermore, the Malbim consistently distinguishes between "Yaakov" and "Yisrael." "Yaakov" refers to the lower rung among the people, the aspect of the heel (akev); "Yisrael" refers to the higher rung, denoting leadership and stature. If so, not only did the masses, "Yaakov," fail to call upon Me, but even "Yisrael," the greatest and most prominent members of the nation, additionally "wearied of Me" - My mitzvot felt like a burden to them. And concerning this, the subsequent verses come and ask: Wherein have I wearied you? How did I exhaust you with the mitzvot I instructed you to observe?
The Dubno Maggid offers a marvelous parable here, about which the elders remarked that it was one of three parables uttered with ruach hakodesh (divine inspiration). A distinguished businessman traveled abroad to deal in diamonds. He carried a small suitcase containing all the diamonds. He booked a room at a luxury hotel, and right at the terminal, a hotel porter approached him and said, "You do not need to carry anything. Get into the waiting taxi, and I will take everything." And he took the small suitcase as well. When the man arrived at the hotel, he waited for his belongings, and presently the porter arrived huffing, puffing, and dripping with sweat. He asked him, "What happened?" The porter replied, "Your suitcase, bless you, what did you put in there? It is so heavy, it wore me out!" The man was immediately alarmed and cried, "Woe is me, where is my suitcase?! You lost my suitcase!" The porter said, "It is right here, what are you talking about?" The man replied, "My suitcase is light! If you claim it is heavy, it is a sign that you brought someone else's suitcase. Where is my suitcase of diamonds?!"
So says the Holy One, blessed is He: "Yet you have not called upon Me, O Yaakov" - when you pray, you are not praying to Me, and when you serve, you are not serving Me. How do I know? "For you have grown weary of Me, O Yisrael" - I see that the mitzvot weary you. My package is light: "The orders of Hashem are upright, rejoicing the heart," and whoever serves Me properly is joyful all the time. If you see someone who falls into despair and depression over every mitzvah, it is a sign that you are not serving Me. Perhaps you are serving others, but not Me, for My mitzvot bring joy.
לֹא־הֵבֵיאתָ לִּי שֵׂה עֹלֹתֶיךָ וּזְבָחֶיךָ לֹא כִבַּדְתָּנִי לֹא הֶעֱבַדְתִּיךָ בְּמִנְחָה וְלֹא הוֹגַעְתִּיךָ בִּלְבוֹנָה׃ - You have not brought Me the lamb of your burnt-offerings, nor have you honored Me with your sacrifices; I have not burdened you with meal-offerings, nor wearied you with frankincense.
You claim that My mitzvot weary you? "You have not brought Me the lamb of your burnt-offerings" - your flocks you did not bring to Me; rather, you sacrificed them to idols. And what will you claim, that I burdened you? "I have not burdened you with meal-offerings" - I did not impose excessive labor upon you with the minchah offering; how much did I ask of you? Merely a fistful (kometz). "Nor wearied you with frankincense" - even the frankincense placed upon the meal-offering is a minuscule amount, and even that is not an absolute obligation but a freewill gift. If so, what wore you out so much in My mitzvot?
Radak explains that this refers to the days of Achaz, who abolished the service in the Beit HaMikdash, as it says: "And he shut the doors of the House of the Lord," and "He made altars in every corner of Jerusalem... and in every city he built high places to burn incense to other gods." Concerning that era it was said: "You have not brought Me the sheep of your burnt-offerings, nor have you honored Me with your sacrifices." Chizkiyahu likewise explicitly confessed: "For our fathers have trespassed and turned their faces away from the habitation of the Lord and turned their backs; they have also shut the doors of the porch, and put out the lamps, and have not burned incense nor offered burnt-offerings in the holy place to the God of Israel." It is over that era that the prophet laments.
Radak adds: Had you worked and labored on My behalf, there might have been grounds to claim that I weary you. But since you neither worked nor toiled, I have neither burdened you with servitude nor wearied you at all - for you did not come, you did not offer sacrifices, and you did not burn incense. On what grounds, then, do you claim that the mitzvot exhaust you?
The Malbim examines the precise nuances of the language. "You have not brought Me the sheep of your burnt-offerings": The burnt-offering (*olah*) that you brought - you did not bring it for Me. For in an *olah*, the owner sustains the greatest loss, as neither the Kohen nor the owner has any share in it; it is consumed entirely upon the altar fire. Did you add it to My flocks or sheep? You merely placed it on the fire. "Nor have you honored Me with your sacrifices": "Sacrifices" (*zevachim*) refers to peace-offerings (*shelamim*), of which only the fats are burned on the Altar, an exceedingly small portion - so how can you claim that it was a burden to you?
"I have not burdened you with meal-offerings": The meal-offering (*minchah*) is not an obligation at all, but a voluntary offering. And how much does one bring in it? Merely a fistful of fine flour. "Nor wearied you with frankincense": Notice why regarding the meal-offering Scripture uses "burdened you" (*he'evadticha*), whereas regarding frankincense it says "wearied you" (*hoga'ticha*). As explained, what a person is commanded to perform is called labor (*avodah*), while that which is demanded beyond that - the overtime - is termed "weariness" (*hoga'ah*), which is what exhausts him. Therefore: since the meal-offering itself was never an imposed labor, the frankincense that accompanies it as an addition certainly cannot be considered wearisome, for weariness only ever follows labor.
The Malbim further notes a rule: Wherever it says "brought to Me" (*heveita li*), with the act of bringing linked to the preposition *lamed*, it denotes bringing something for My personal need, to become My property. This is the meaning of "You have not brought Me the sheep of your burnt-offerings": I did not acquire anything from your offering; I gained nothing from it. For when a person brings a sacrifice, whom does it benefit? Himself - the sacrifice comes to atone for him, as an *olah* atones for improper thoughts of the heart. The Holy One, blessed be He, says: What do I gain from this? Do not entertain sinful thoughts, and do not bring an *olah*!
This is precisely what is meant by "Make your foot rare in your neighbor's house" - about whom was this said? About a person who constantly brings sacrifices. On the surface, this sounds wonderful; he spends all day in the Beit HaMikdash! But why is he bringing sacrifices? Because he failed here, stumbled there, and fell short yet again... The Holy One, blessed be He, says to him: "Make your foot rare in your neighbor's house" - and "your neighbor" refers to the Holy One, blessed be He, as in "your friend and your father's friend." Do not visit Me so frequently; do not sin, and then you will not need to visit so often. And when you come and say, "Master of the Universe, did You see that I brought You a sacrifice?" - the Holy One, blessed be He, responds: Did you bring it for Me? Do I need it? I ask of you not to commit sins and not to bring sacrifices. It follows that all sacrifices are solely for your own benefit and atonement; thus, "you have not brought to Me" - you did not bring it for My sake or as My acquisition, and everything you brought was done entirely for yourself.
לֹא־קָנִיתָ לִּי בַכֶּסֶף קָנֶה וְחֵלֶב זְבָחֶיךָ לֹא הִרְוִיתָנִי אַךְ הֶעֱבַדְתַּנִי בְּחַטֹּאותֶיךָ הוֹגַעְתַּנִי בַּעֲוֺנֹתֶיךָ׃ - You have not bought Me sweet cane with money, nor have you sated Me with the fat of your sacrifices; rather, you have burdened Me with your sins, you have wearied Me with your iniquities.
There are two contrasting interpretations here, both of which are noteworthy. Rashi explains that the "cane" (*kaneh*) is the sweet cane designated for the incense (*ketoret*), meaning: you were not even required to purchase it with money, for it was abundant in the Land of Israel. Rabbi Abba said: Cinnamon grew in Eretz Yisrael, and goats and gazelles would eat from it - that is, it was so plentiful that animals grazed upon it. If so, "You have not bought Me sweet cane with money" means: you did not even bring the cinnamon that I commanded for the incense, even though it was readily available and cost you no money at all.
Radak, on the other hand, explains the reverse: "cane" is fragrant calamus, and the Holy One, blessed be He, holds them accountable for failing to purchase it with money. According to his approach, the passage speaks of the era when the Jewish people did not serve God, in the days of Achaz, when they brought neither burnt-offerings, nor meal-offerings, nor frankincense, nor did they purchase cane with money. Why does the verse use the language of buying? Because this cane was not native to the Land of Israel, but could only be acquired by purchasing it from a distant land; it had to be imported at personal expense, as it is written: "and the sweet cane from a far country." The straightforward resolution is that this refers to two different eras: there was a time when sweet cane was plentiful in Eretz Yisrael, and a time when it was not, and upon this historical reality rests the dispute between Rashi and Radak.
What is meant by "you have burdened Me with your sins"? The Holy One, blessed be He, says: You caused Me to become an attendant to idolaters. This is a startling explanation cited by Rashi: Yechezkel saw, "and behold, a stormy wind came from the north" - this refers to the Shechinah departing toward Babylonia, to subjugate the entire world under the hand of Nevuchadnezzar. As it were: I was made into the armor-bearer of Nevuchadnezzar, going out to assist him.
And why was there even a need to assist Nevuchadnezzar? The Holy One, blessed be He, says: Even this was an act of loving-kindness toward you. I could have delivered you into the hands of the lowly nations nearby, which would have been a great disgrace to you. I did not want that; I had mercy on you and specially went to bring an important nation from afar to rule over you, so people would not say that He handed them over to a base nation. It turns out that through your sins, you turned Me into the armor-bearer of an idolatrous nation - "You burdened Me with your sins, you wearied Me with your iniquities" - you made Me labor to go and exert Myself to bring such a nation from afar.
Radak adds the parallel: I said, "I have not burdened you with meal-offerings," and "I have not wearied you with frankincense" - I did not burden or exhaust you; but you indeed burdened Me and wearied Me, as it is stated: "You have wearied Hashem with your words."
אָנֹכִי אָנֹכִי הוּא מֹחֶה פְשָׁעֶיךָ לְמַעֲנִי וְחַטֹּאתֶיךָ לֹא אֶזְכֹּר׃ - I, even I, am He Who blots out your transgressions for My own sake, and your sins I will not remember.
What is the double phrasing "I, even I"? Rashi explains: I am the One Who blotted them out back then, and I blot them out now as well. Radak explains that "back then" refers to the generation of the wilderness. And by what merit? "For My own sake" - not because of your merit, nor through the righteousness of your forefathers, but so that My Name will not be desecrated; for if I destroy you, the Name of Heaven would be desecrated among the nations. Therefore, I do not destroy you, but on your own merit you have no special claim that I should blot out your transgressions.
The Malbim notes an interesting distinction here: regarding "blots out" (mocheh), the verse uses "your transgressions" (peshaecha), while regarding "your sins" (chatosecha), it uses "I will not remember" (lo ezkor). What is the difference? When a person sins and brings an offering, the sacrifice is called a chatas (sin-offering), and a chatas atones only for unintentional sins (shegagos), not for willful transgressions (zedonos). For pesha'im, intentional rebellions, the Holy One, blessed be He, says that He does not accept a sacrifice. It turns out that what truly needs to be blotted out are the major transgressions, the willful sins, since for the lighter sins, a sacrifice is effective.
From this, the repetition of "I, even I" becomes clear: when a person offers a sacrifice and the Holy One, blessed be He, pardons his unintentional sins, the person comes away feeling that he too accomplished something - indeed Hashem forgave, but I brought the sacrifice, I was a partner in wiping away the sin. In contrast, regarding deliberate rebellions - what did you do? Nothing, for a sacrifice is useless for rebellion. And who wiped it away? The Master of the Universe alone. Therefore it says, "I, even I, am He Who blots out your transgressions" - I alone, without any assistance from you. And not for your sake, but "for My own sake," because I desire loving-kindness, and it is My attribute and My nature to forgive, not on account of your merit.
And if you should say: At least regarding unintentional sins I brought an offering and had a part in it - to this comes the end of the verse, "and your sins I will not remember": the lighter sins I did not even hold against you, and they did not enter My reckoning. The primary need for forgiveness was for the intentional transgressions, and those I blotted out entirely on My own, as an act of generosity and unearned grace, so that My Name would be sanctified and out of My attribute of loving-kindness, not for your sake.
הַזְכִּירֵנִי נִשָּׁפְטָה יָחַד סַפֵּר אַתָּה לְמַעַן תִּצְדָּק׃ - Remind Me, let us enter into judgment together; state your case, so that you may be justified.
Rashi explains: "Remind Me" - tell Me what debt I owe you, by which you claim that something is coming to you from Me, and let us come together for judgment.
Radak explains the connection to the preceding verse: After I said, "and your sins I will not remember," lest you think that I do not remember your righteous deeds either - for if there is, as it were, forgetfulness before His Throne of Glory, perhaps your good deeds were forgotten as well? To this comes "Remind Me, let us enter into judgment together": No, I remember every single one of your righteous deeds. And if, nevertheless, it seems to you that there is some act of righteousness or good deed you performed that I do not remember - remind Me, and let us enter into judgment like a person who comes to court with his fellow and says to him: If I have treated you unfairly, speak up, and let us go and see who is in the right.
"State your case, that you may be justified" - what does this mean? There is a principle: "The first to plead his case seems right" (Mishlei 18:17). We have already explained that when two litigants come to court, a judge is forbidden to hear one of them in the absence of the other, as it is said, "Hear out your brethren, and judge righteously" (Devarim 1:16) - meaning both must be present. And why? Because a person is captivated by initial impressions. If a person comes alone and recounts the wrong done to him, I strongly empathize with him, and when the second party arrives, it will be very difficult for me to rid my heart of that initial impression and change my mind.
This is also the reason why it is so difficult for many *ba'alei teshuvah* to change their former habits and previous lines of thinking. Sometimes you debate with someone who is far from mitzvot, and after reaching a certain point, he suddenly reverts to his original arguments - even though you already resolved that issue and explained it! The reason is that he has heard those things for forty years in the media; now he received an answer, but he still cannot digest it. An initial mindset is very hard to uproot.
The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: I am willing to give you this priority. "State your case" - you start alone and speak, as it were, while your opposing party is not here, so that you may be "the first to plead his case." And even so - even if you go first and tell the truth, you will not be vindicated. Even if you do not recount all your sins, and do not recount all the acts of charity I performed with you, ultimately the kindnesses I did for you far exceed what you deserved, and I did not collect full retribution from you for your sins.
The Malbim also links this verse to the preceding one: After I said, "and your sins I will not remember," if you have any merit or claim against Me for your benefit - remind Me and let us judge, let us debate and see if there is any substance to your words. Furthermore: "State your case, that you may be justified" - I will not even argue with you at all, but rather remain silent. State your merits, and even if it is in My power to refute your claims, I will not refute them; instead, I will listen and accept them. And why? Because I desire to vindicate you and find merit in you. I will remain silent and listen, lest you put forward some merit - even though I know it is without merit. Yet unfortunately, even this does not exist; there is not even a single claim of merit.
אָבִיךָ הָרִאשׁוֹן חָטָא וּמְלִיצֶיךָ פָּשְׁעוּ בִי׃ - "Your first father sinned, and your intercessors transgressed against Me."
וַאֲחַלֵּל שָׂרֵי קֹדֶשׁ וְאֶתְּנָה לַחֵרֶם יַעֲקֹב וְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְגִדּוּפִים׃ - "Therefore I have profaned the holy princes, and given Yaakov to destruction, and Yisrael to reproaches."
Who is "your first father" who sinned? Radak explains: Adam HaRishon, through whom humanity was stamped with sin, "for the inclination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Bereishit 8:21). According to this, Metzudat David explains an *a fortiori* argument (*kal vachomer*): If Adam HaRishon, the handiwork of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the pinnacle of creation, nevertheless sinned - how much more so you, who were born of a man and woman who are full of iniquity by their very nature.
Rashi explains: "Your first father" refers to Avraham, who asked, "Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" (Bereishit 15:8). "And your intercessors transgressed against Me" - these are the ones whose merit you rely upon; there is no one you can depend upon in whom I did not find transgression. Yitzchak loved My enemy, Esav. And so on in this manner; regarding every single one, a sin, transgression, or iniquity can be found. Upon whom, then, can you rely? Whom will you bring forward in defense?
Radak explains "and your intercessors" as their princes and leaders. Why specifically them? Because they were suited to rebuke the people and return them in repentance, yet they too transgressed against Me, and consequently they cannot speak in your defense either. Radak further explains that "your first father" refers to your king, as it is stated, "the hand of Hashem will be against you and against your fathers" (Shmuel I 12:15) - that is, against your kings - referring to Yerovam. Others explain that this refers to Shaul, who was the first king of Yisrael, who sinned in the matter of Amalek and in several other things for which he was held accountable.
The Malbim also connects this verse to the preceding one: After I said, "Remind Me, let us plead together," the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: But what could you actually state? What merit could you cite to claim that I exiled you unjustly? After all, this refers to the generation exiled in the destruction of the First Temple. What merit can you claim for your early ancestors? They sinned through idolatry, forbidden relations, and bloodshed, and because of these three sins, Yisrael was exiled from its land. If so, those upon whom you wished to rely are not available to you, for "your first father sinned."
And if you say: But I had holy and righteous individuals, I had *kohanim* and prophets - regarding this it says, "and your intercessors transgressed against Me." What is a *melitz* (intercessor)? A person who stands between two parties and conveys messages between them, as in "for the interpreter was between them" (Bereishit 42:23), standing between Yosef and his brothers. And who are those standing between us and Hashem? The *kohanim* and prophets, who bring down and convey the word of Hashem to the people. And if you wish to rely upon them - "your intercessors transgressed against Me," for they failed to rebuke the people.
Notice the difference in phrasing: regarding the forefathers who transgressed, the text uses the term "chata" (an unintentional sin), while regarding the teachers and intercessors, it says "pash'u" (rebelled). Why? The Malbim explains: what is considered an unintentional error (shegagah) among the masses is considered willful rebellion (pesha) among prominent figures, the prophets and the kohanim. The tzaddik is held accountable for his inadvertent lapses as if they were deliberate rebellions; conversely, an am ha'aretz who knows nothing has his willful sins treated like unintentional errors, since he is ignorant after all. Therefore, your forefathers' actions fall under the category of "chata," whereas the teachers who failed to properly rebuke the people - their deliberate wrongdoing is counted against them as "pesha'im" (willful rebellions).
And from here we turn to the final verse, in which the Malbim shows that the clauses of the text parallel one another, but in reverse order: the second half of verse 27 corresponds to the first half of verse 28, and the first half of verse 27 corresponds to the second half of verse 28. Because "your teachers have rebelled against Me" - "Therefore I have profaned the sanctuary's officers": and who are the sanctuary's officers? They themselves, the kohanim and prophets in charge of sacred matters, and as a result of their rebellion, I desecrated their honor. And because "your first father sinned," referring to the masses - "and I delivered Yaakov to destruction": "Yaakov" always denotes the lower tier of the nation, the humbler level, the aspect of the heel (ekev), and in the wake of their sin, the enemy came and gave them over to destruction and desolation. In contrast, "and Yisrael to revilement" - "Yisrael" refers to the holy ones of the nation, its leaders and men of stature, whom they scorned and reviled: their Torah, their learning, and their greatness. All of this came as a consequence of those two realities: that your first father sinned, and that your teachers rebelled against Me.
The chapter opens with a great promise: the future Redemption will surpass the Exodus from Egypt ("the former things") and the redemption from Babylonia ("the things of old"), and it will be as clear as tangible knowledge rather than an intellectual deduction; it is in the aspect of "now" - ready and waiting, dependent solely on us. The natural order will be transformed to such an extent that even the beasts of the field, who derive no direct benefit from the path and the water, will honor Hashem for the miracles He performs for His people - and how much more so Israel, who were created for this very purpose, not only to honor Him but "they shall declare My praise." Yet immediately afterward comes the rebuke: all this goodness is not due to your own merit. "Yet you have not called upon Me, O Yaakov, for you have grown weary of Me, O Yisrael" - if one finds the mitzvos wearisome, it is a sign that he is not serving Hashem at all, as in the Dubno Maggid's parable of the suitcase; for "the orders of Hashem are upright, gladdening the heart." And the Holy One, blessed be He, shows that He did not burden them at all - not with burnt offerings, not with meal offerings, and not with frankincense - while they burdened Him with their sins. Even so, "I, only I, am He Who blots out your transgressions for My own sake": He alone wipes them away, out of unearned grace and for the sake of His Name. He even summons them to judgment and lets them speak and present their arguments first - yet they possess no claim of merit, since their forefathers sinned and their teachers, the kohanim and prophets who failed to rebuke them, rebelled. From this came the destruction and the exile: the profanation of the sanctuary's officers, destruction upon Yaakov, and revilement upon Yisrael.