"So says Hashem, Lord of Hosts, God of Israel: add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat meat." Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices. What is the plain meaning of the verses? What is "add" and what is "your burnt offerings upon your sacrifices"? Rashi explains: the burnt offering is entirely consumed on the altar. It would be better for you to add it to the sacrifices, which are peace offerings. And the statement here is cynical. As if He is saying to them: your burnt offering is not accepted by Hashem anyway. So is it not a shame that you are destroying the meat for nothing? It would already be better if you added the burnt offerings and turned them into peace offerings, so at least you would eat meat. At least you would be eating meat, since from peace offerings there is also a portion for the one who brings the offering. So would it not be better that you add your burnt offerings to your peace offerings, and then at least you would have the eating of meat?
The Radak says: the burnt offerings, as we said, are entirely consumed. The sacrifices are the peace offerings, from which the owners eat meat. The Radak says: the sin offering and guilt offering are not mentioned here. For a simple reason: because they did not confess and did not bring offerings for their sin. Therefore he mentions your burnt offerings, therefore he mentions your sacrifices, which are of the nature of peace offerings, but he does not mention the matter of sin offering and guilt offering. Because a sin offering and a guilt offering are brought by someone who feels he has sinned, someone who feels he is guilty. And in particular the Radak says that they were committing transgressions intentionally. And a person who sins intentionally does not bring an offering; for an intentional sin there is no offering. Rather what? They would bring only burnt offerings. Because the burnt offerings essentially had in them the matter of showing outwardly that they were supposedly servants of Hashem. Here I bring an offering entirely consumed to Hashem. And the peace offerings they would bring in order to eat meat. So He says to them: why do you need to bring sacrifices and not add upon them more burnt offerings? And you think this is pleasing to Me? As it is written, "and it shall be accepted for him to atone for him." He says to them: this is not pleasing, both the burnt offerings and the sacrifices, all of them are not pleasing. "Add your burnt offerings," the Radak says, this is from the language of addition. In contrast, the Malbim explains that "add" is not from the language of addition, but rather from the language of destroying. "I will utterly consume them, says Hashem." And "add" is from the language of "they are consumed, they are finished." So the Malbim explains.
Cease, add, from the language, as we said, of the nature of cutting off and ceasing. Cease the burnt offerings along with the sacrifices, do not bring this or that, and eat meat, meaning do not eat meat as peace offerings, but rather take the animal, slaughter it, eat. "Add your burnt offerings upon your sacrifices," as if to say the burnt offerings and the sacrifices, cease one on top of the other, like the men, as people would say about the women, the meaning is in addition. Cease the burnt offerings in addition to the sacrifices, because Hashem desires neither this nor that, but rather what? Eat the meat, because Hashem has no desire in these anyway.
"For I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice." Let us read another verse: "But this thing I commanded them, saying: listen to My voice, and I will be your God and you shall be My people; and walk in all the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you." There is a great difficulty in the verse, as all the commentators feel it. "For I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice"? This is not correct. After all, Scripture is full of commandments regarding offerings. After all, the entire book of Vayikra is about offerings. And if so, how is it possible that the Holy One, blessed be He, would say that He did not command Bnei Yisrael concerning the matter of burnt offering and sacrifice? After all, from the day He brought us out of the land of Egypt we brought the Pesach offering, and afterward when the Mishkan was built there is "command Bnei Yisrael and say to them: My offering, My bread for My fire offerings, a pleasing aroma to Me, you shall be careful to offer to Me at its appointed time," and countless other commandments of offerings that appear in Scripture. So how is it possible that Scripture would say "for I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice"?
So indeed, Rashi says that the meaning of the matter is that the beginning of My commanding and My speaking with them was not about the matter of burnt offering and sacrifice, but rather with what did Hashem begin? "If you will surely listen to My voice and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasure." The meaning is that the beginning of the matter was not with burnt offering and sacrifice. So too, in a similar vein, the Radak explains: the first commandment and what He commanded them at Marah, "there He set for it a statute and an ordinance, and there He tested it." What did He command them? Shabbat, He commanded them laws, He did not command them burnt offering or sacrifice. That is to say, what is written here, "for I did not speak with your fathers," means this was not the beginning of My speaking with them. And there is significance to the beginning of the speech, because the beginning of the speech indicates the importance of the matter. The Holy One, blessed be He, says: come and see that it was not the important and primary matter for Me, an offering or a sacrifice, for behold you will see that this was not the beginning of My speaking with them. The beginning of My speaking with them was "and you shall keep My covenant, listen to My voice," Shabbat, laws, but not matters of offerings.
He further says that the essence of the commandment was not concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice. That is to say, the Holy One, blessed be He, says: I am giving you the Torah, and the essence of My commandments is not the offerings, but rather listening to the voice of Hashem. Notice, says the Radak, that in all of the Ten Commandments, which are the entirety of the whole Torah, there is no mention of burnt offering and sacrifice. The Ten Commandments, which are the essentials of the Torah, do not include within them burnt offering or sacrifice. And also, says the Radak, when He speaks with them about offerings, He does not command to bring an offering, but rather "a man when he brings from you an offering to Hashem," if he does such and such he shall do it. The Radak says: there is no commandment to bring an offering. What will you say, but the daily offerings? "Command Bnei Yisrael," here this is a command, "My offering, My bread for My fire offerings," day by day to bring the perpetual offering, here it is indeed a command. The Radak says: the daily offerings are a command to the community, but not to the individual. And here Scripture is addressing the individual. To individuals He did not command to bring an offering. The daily offerings that He commanded are for the honor of the Temple; they come for the community. But the individuals He commands to do justice, He commands them all the commandments, but does not command to make an offering. Unless a person sins unintentionally, then He says: I have a possibility of correction for you. And then He commands him to burn the fats, so that the sinner returns to his heart and succeeds in overcoming his desires, there he shall burn the fat and the blood, as it were, so that he takes care not to fail in any commandment. But as an obligatory command, says the Holy One, blessed be He, whoever wants atonement and correction, let him do it in this way.
Another thing he says: it is quite possible also, as the Rambam wrote, that even the matter of the offerings that Hashem commanded regarding the communal offerings, the Rambam has a very original reasoning regarding offerings, and we had occasion to speak about this when we discussed the book of the Kuzari. The Rambam writes: why does Hashem command the offerings? Says the Rambam: to transfer the foreign beliefs, and regarding the temples that belonged to the idolaters, He wanted to transfer them to the service of God and that the name of idolatry would be erased from them. The Rambam makes here a truly novel approach. Essentially the Rambam argues that the matter of offerings was in order to draw them away from their disgraceful habits of bringing offerings to idolatry. For this purpose there was a need to create a substitute, so the Holy One, blessed be He, said: you know what? Come and offer in the House of Hashem. As if to give them something else so that through this they would be connected and would not connect through impurity in those disgraceful habits they had of bringing offerings; He says to him: come and take this to the service of Hashem. And then it comes out, therefore, that even the command that I commanded, "command Bnei Yisrael My offering, My bread," which are the communal offerings, it is quite possible that they too, as I explained, are not as a command in itself but only as a prevention that they not go after idolatry, and therefore they would offer in this way. Now this explanation is very difficult from several angles; we have already discussed it, so I do not want to enter into it now. I will only state the difficulty. After all, Adam offered an offering even before there was idolatry in the world, so that it is very difficult to find in this the reason. And Kayin and Hevel offered an offering also even before there was any reality of idolatry in the world. Beyond that, in the holy books there are lofty and very high intentions regarding the entire matter of offerings, so how is it fitting to say that the offerings are only to prevent idolatry? And there are also several types of offerings for which it is also very difficult to find this reason, such as the offering of a woman who has given birth and various other offerings. In short, the words of the Rambam require explanation, and we explained them on another occasion; now we will not enter into this. Only that in any case, what we have just explained provides an explanation of what the Holy One, blessed be He, argues: I did not command them as a command as something that is My will, according to the words of the Rambam, but rather the command that I commanded them is only in order to draw them and to extract them from idolatry, that they should offer offerings and do this in a holy way instead of doing this toward corruption and idolatry.
The Malbim explains: "for I did not speak nor command your fathers, but this thing." Says the Malbim: when I spoke and commanded your fathers whom I brought out of the land of Egypt, I commanded them concerning burnt offering and sacrifice; says the Malbim, how is it possible to say this, after all the entire book of Torat Kohanim is full of laws about bringing offerings? Rather he explains: I did not command them burnt offering and sacrifice, the meaning is that this was not the primary purpose of My command. Even when I commanded concerning burnt offering and sacrifice, "behold, to listen is better than a sacrifice, to heed than the fat of rams." That is to say, even when I commanded concerning burnt offering or sacrifice, the matter and the essence of the entire matter of offerings is: listen to My voice. The essence of the command and the essence of the thing requested is: to listen is better than a sacrifice. That is to say, what does an offering give you if you despise the word of Hashem? What does an offering give you when you do not do the essential thing, which is to listen to the voice of Hashem? The essence of the command of offerings is to listen to My voice; this is the essential thing requested from the one who brings the offering. And therefore He says to them: listen to My voice. The meaning, the purpose of the offerings, the Malbim explains, is threefold.
First, listen to My voice. It is a pleasing satisfaction before Me that I said something and My will was done. That is to say, the very fact that a person gave an instruction to his son and the son immediately listened, went, did and fulfilled his father's word, beyond what I asked of the child, "prepare me a cup of tea," and he prepared me a cup of tea and now I have a cup of tea, beyond this I have enjoyment in the very matter that I commanded my child something and he did it. Even if he had not brought me anything, that is to say even if I do not have the practical result, but the very fact that your child is obedient, you have satisfaction from this. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, the first matter regarding offerings: it is a pleasing satisfaction before Me that I said something and My will was done. The very fact that we listen to the voice of Hashem, this is a virtue in itself. Another thing, "and I will be your God." The meaning of this is: when a person comes and brings an offering to a king, that is, brings him a gift, there is a great chance that the king will say to him: I do not want a gift from you. So that you not feel that you gave me something and did something for me, I do not want a gift from you. As Rabbeinu Yonah says, "and a gift he will not accept from his hand," when the king does not desire the service of the one serving him. That is to say, the very fact that He is willing to accept a gift from you, this is a virtue. Perhaps if we want to illustrate this, like today when a person goes to a great person and says to him: I bought you a gift. Go to Rav Steinman and say to him: Rebbe, I bought you a shtender. I have my shtender that has served me for sixty years and is enough for me. He will not accept from you. Go to a great person, want to give him a gift, he will not want to take a gift from you. He will say to you: no, it's fine, what I have is enough for me, "one who hates gifts will live," he will not want to take from you. The Gemara says that a woman who gave a great person a gift and he accepted it from her, the Gemara says she can be betrothed to him with this. How can she be betrothed to him? He would need to give her. The Gemara says: no, she has satisfaction that he was willing to accept the gift from me. This is worth money. This is worth money. If now they say to you: come, sir, buy, let's say, buy Rav Chaim Kanievsky a table upon which he will learn. How much are you willing to pay for this? Fifty thousand shekels, a hundred thousand shekels, upon my table he will learn. And if we say afterward you will hold a fundraiser for me, I will buy him a bookcase, after 120 years. Right? You are willing to pay a lot for this. That is to say, notice, I am buying him something and he is not paying me, and I am still willing to pay a lot so that he will take it. So this woman, the very fact that she gave a great person a gift and he accepted it from her, this itself is great satisfaction for her that is worth a lot of money. So he can say to her: behold you are betrothed to me through the fact that I accepted the gift from you. Do you understand? He accepted, and he betroths her with this. You see that the very fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, says I am willing to accept from you a burnt offering or a sacrifice, says the Malbim, this is already an enormous thing. "And I will be your God," I am your God and willing to accept this from you. There are those whose offerings I do not desire, and I am not interested that they bring offerings to Me. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, this itself, "and I will be your God," this is a virtue. A third thing says the Malbim: "and you shall walk in all the way." The additional thing is to walk in the way of Hashem. "And you shall walk in all the way," the meaning of this is to remind them through the offerings to walk in the way of Hashem. Like voluntary offerings, pilgrimage, "so that you learn to fear Hashem." Obligatory offerings, sin offerings, guilt offerings, through this you will remember that you failed, you need to bring an offering, you need to atone, you need to correct. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: in everything that I have just enumerated for you, there is not one thing that is for My benefit. There is not one thing that is for My need. The first thing, that they listen to My voice, it is a pleasing satisfaction before Me that I said something and My will was done, but I do not need the body of the offering. The second thing I said, "and I will be your God," this is still between Me and you, that I am willing to take an offering from you. And the third thing, "and you shall walk in all the way," to remind you to walk in the way of Hashem, like voluntary offerings that are meant to remind you not to deviate from the way. If so, the entire matter of offerings is not because I need the meat, the fat, and the blood; it is not for My need. The entire matter of offerings is so that through them you recognize Hashem, draw close to Hashem, find favor in the eyes of Hashem. All this is for you, for your good, because the Holy One, blessed be He, does not need this entire matter.
Says the Malbim, he explains here the distinction: there is speech and there is command. "For I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice." Says the Malbim: notice, it is written here "I did not speak with your fathers" and it is written "I did not command them." What is the difference between speech and command? Says the Malbim: speech comes even upon a matter of permission. A command comes upon a matter of obligation. And this is very logical. "I spoke with him that he should do such and such." Did I obligate him? No, I spoke with him; whoever wants will do it. "I commanded him that he should do such and such." This is not "I spoke," this is "I commanded," and it is what is called compulsory. I gave him a command and obligated him to carry out my order. Says the Malbim: in offerings there are speeches and there are commands. Voluntary offerings, Hashem spoke, Hashem did not command. There is no command to offer a voluntary offering. If you want, offer; if you do not want, do not offer. "A man when he offers," when he wants he offers. "A man when he offers from you an offering to Hashem." In contrast, in obligatory offerings we indeed found a command, as we said, "command Bnei Yisrael, this is the law of the burnt offering, My offering, My bread for My fire offerings." That is to say, we see that in offerings there is also an aspect of speech, a type of speech, and also a type of command. Offerings in which there is obligation and there is command. Says the Malbim, the verse says here: although regarding the offerings themselves there is speech and there is command, but regarding the purpose of the offerings, meaning what Hashem as it were desires through the offering, here speech of permission does not apply; here there is only command. This is what he says: even though I spoke and also commanded concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice, I spoke concerning voluntary offerings, I commanded concerning obligatory offerings, in both of them the command was that they listen to My voice. When you speak about the offering itself, you can say there is an offering that is speech, there is an offering that is command. When you speak about the purpose, and what is the purpose? To listen to the voice of Hashem, here there is no speech and command. As if, if you will, there is no speech. And is there speech to listen to the voice of Hashem? There is a command! You must listen to the voice of Hashem. So if so, everything to which speech versus command applies, this applies only when speaking about the body of the offering. But when speaking about the will to do the word of Hashem and the obligation to do the word of Hashem, here there is no speech. Because speech is, as it were, "if you want." Is there speech to do the word of Hashem? Regarding "listen to My voice" there is an absolute command; this I commanded them. Since I commanded them, there is here an absolute obligation, where there is no room to deviate from the command and the obligation.
And with this the Malbim explains the verse: "But this thing I commanded them, saying: listen to My voice, and I will be your God and you shall be My people; and walk in all the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you." Because essentially for the Malbim there is a difficulty here. You say "I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice." You should have said "but this thing: listen to My voice, and I will be your God." Why again "but this thing I commanded them, saying"? You do not need "I commanded," you already said it before. "I did not speak nor command concerning matters of burnt offering and sacrifice, but this thing: listen to My voice." Why does he repeat "but this thing I commanded them, saying"? Says the Malbim, in his book Ayelet HaShachar, he brings a rule that whenever "but" is written and he repeats again "I commanded" as here, "nor did I command them" and he repeats again "but I commanded them," this comes to state an addition to what we can understand in the plain sense. That is, it comes to mention this in order to expound. And therefore he says: understand, "but this thing I commanded them, saying," the matter of offerings was speech, the matter of offerings was command. Voluntary offerings are speech, obligatory offerings are command. But in contrast, "I commanded them, saying: listen to My voice," here there is no speech, here there is only command. To listen to My voice is an absolute obligation. To listen to My voice is an instruction that is of the nature of a command and not of the nature of speech, "if you want, listen." So that in fact there is no possibility to come and argue that Hashem is interested in the body of the offering. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: no, the only command is to listen to My voice, and the entire matter of offerings is only an instrument so that through it you arrive at listening to the voice of Hashem. So if so, it is very correct to say "I did not speak with your fathers, nor did I command them, concerning matters of burnt offering or sacrifice" as a purpose for its own sake, but rather the purpose is to listen to the voice of Hashem.
And the result: "But they did not listen and did not incline their ear, and they walked in the counsels, in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and they went backward and not forward." "But they did not listen," says the Holy One, blessed be He, I spoke with them and they did not listen. "And did not incline their ear," that is to say, it is not enough that they did not listen, because the essence of the matter of offerings, as the verse says, the essential matter is "saying: listen to My voice," and you did not attain the purpose. And they did not listen. In the end the purpose was not attained; they are not willing to listen. And indeed, even though they multiplied in offerings, they did not bring this toward the fitting purpose in order to listen to the voice of Hashem. And not only did they not listen, but they did not even incline their ear. To listen is to heed; to incline the ear is even temporarily. He says, and not only did they not walk in the way that I commanded them, but they walked in the counsels. Says the Malbim, what is "counsels"? Counsels is to distinguish it from a sin done unintentionally. In an unintentional sin a person fails without noticing. In counsels he consulted and planned the sin. This is the definition of "in counsels." Says the Malbim, so that you not think that the sin here was unintentional, but rather they walked after their counsel. But they walked in the stubbornness of their evil heart. The stubbornness of their heart, what is the meaning of the word "sherirut"? Well, there are in this two explanations. One explanation, says the Radak, is from the language of gazing. It gazes upon people, like "I see it but not now, I behold it but not near," this is from the language of gazing. "Look, gaze, and see," yes? Whoever remembers. You see that "to gaze" is a matter of seeing. So "they walked in the stubbornness of their heart" means in the vision of their heart. Wherever their heart draws them, shows them, to this they were drawn. There is another explanation which is seemingly more graspable, from the language of "sinew" (sharir). They walked in the hardness of their heart, they walked in the heaviness of their heart. This is the definition of "they walked in the stubbornness of their heart." So he says: behold you will see that they walked after the corrupt counsel and also after the stubbornness of the heart, the meaning as we explained, both from the aspect of the vision of their heart and from the aspect of the obstinacy of their heart. And "they went backward and not forward." "They went backward and not forward," the meaning of this is: the Holy One, blessed be He, the purpose for which Hashem gave Torah and mitzvot was so that I would be their God, and through this they would rise from level to level, "and you shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." The goal is that through this they would be elevated and become more spiritual and closer to Hashem, blessed be He. Says the Holy One, blessed be He, but what happens with them? "And they walked in the counsels, in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and they went backward and not forward." The meaning of this is that they returned backward from the level they had, a kingdom of priests, a holy nation, until they went backward and not forward. Says the Malbim: to the lowly level that they descended from the level of the human species and were likened to animals, to distinguish the idea. The expression, to such an extent that "they went backward and not forward," as it is written "they turned away backward." That is to say, so that you not say like one who goes toward perfection and returns and goes back and again advances and falls and again is elevated and descends. He says: no, and they went backward and not forward. That is to say, if you say they went backward, then this is not forward. When I say he drove in reverse, then this is not forward. He drove in reverse, then this is not forward. What is "and they went backward and not forward"? Sometimes you say he drove in reverse, he advanced a bit and then reversed again, and again advanced a bit and then reversed again. But if I say to you: no, he drove backward and not forward, that is to say he did not advance at all, but always only backward. This is what he wants to say here. Sometimes it happens that a person deteriorates, he has some slight strengthening, is elevated a bit, again descends, and again some slight strengthening and again descends. So you say that he goes backward but also a bit forward. But here he wants to say that they had a continuous deterioration without ever going forward. But rather they went backward, and they were backward and not forward. All their descent was only backward and never at all did they go forward.
And this is what he now describes: "From the day your fathers came out of the land of Egypt until this day, I sent to you all My servants the prophets, daily rising early and sending." "From this day your fathers came out of the land of Egypt," says the Radak, in every generation there were sinners among them. And the Radak has here a harsh expression: and most of the generations, most of them were sinners, says the Radak. And even though I always warned them through the prophets, daily rising early and sending. "Daily" means day by day, day after day. "Rising early and sending," says the Malbim, says the Radak, that the meaning is every morning. Why? Because most of the warning would be in the morning before a person goes to his work. So before he goes to commit transgressions, then now you warn him. "Going and sending," I would send a messenger early in the morning so that he would go and rebuke the people. And behold you will see, "from the day your fathers came out of the land of Egypt until this day," says the Malbim, this is what is written "backward and not forward." From then they are only backward. A kingdom of priests and a holy nation, but from then they are in constant decline. And do not say that I did not rebuke them through the prophets; behold you will see that I rebuked them, and not in a one-time manner, but in a constant manner, and you will see that the matters were of no avail.
"But they did not listen to Me and did not incline their ear, and they stiffened their neck, they did worse than their fathers." "And did not incline their ear, they did worse than their fathers," here too notice the expression of the Radak. In every generation most of them did worse than their fathers. It is alarming to see how much the Radak here presents the matters in a harsh manner. It spread throughout all strata of the community, most of them did worse than their fathers. Like Menasheh and Amon, who were the last, they increased guilt more than the first ones. About Menasheh it is written that he filled Yerushalayim with blood from end to end, he set up an idol in the Sanctuary. Amon scraped off the divine names, was intimate with his mother, terrible and dreadful things. Terrible and dreadful. So come and see that the more the kings went on and distanced themselves, that is to say more distant from the standing at Mount Sinai, they go on and deteriorate. Going backward and not forward. About Achav, who was still among the earlier wicked kings, it is written in Chazal that he was balanced. When Hashem spoke with him, sent Eliyahu, "have you murdered and also inherited," it is written about him that he wore sackcloth and walked softly. That is to say, there was someone to talk to. But when you reach the kings, to Amon, you reach wicked people who say to you: am I seeking pleasures? Behold, all my concern is to anger my Creator. That is to say, we understand what level of wickedness is being discussed. And about this He says to you, they did not listen to Me and did not incline their ear, and they stiffened their neck. What is this expression "stiff-necked"? We explained it several times. Here we see the expression, here the Metzudat David explains it as well in place. Stiff-necked is a person who has an iron sinew in his neck. His neck is stiff. What is this, what does this mean? I now recall that once there was some orthopedist who said to someone abroad that he wanted to make aliyah. He asked him: why make aliyah? This is a true story. Why make aliyah? He says: because I understood that the Israelis, they need a lot the matter of an orthopedist and they... He says to him: how is that connected? He says to him: because they are a stiff-necked people. So I am an expert, I know how to release the neck, I am the one... they are a stiff-necked people. They need a masseur. In short, what is the expression "a stiff-necked people"? Since you have a stiff sinew in your neck, someone calls you and says: hey, come here, listen for a moment, hey come here, turn around. Your head, no, it is a block, it is forward, it is not able to turn backward in order to listen to what he wants from you, someone who wants to correct you. This is what is called today "head in the wall." He goes, he will crash into the wall, he has no problem, but he will not turn his head. This is what he says, a stiff-necked people, not wanting to turn his face toward his fellow to listen to his words. So here says the Holy One, blessed be He: I call them, they do not incline their ears, and they stiffened their neck, they did worse than their fathers. They did greater evils than their fathers. And says the Malbim: notice, there is here evil upon evil. They did not listen to Me, and also did not incline their ear. If they had at least inclined an ear, even if they had not listened, then I would say: listen, he checked and it did not find favor in his eyes. But the worst is that he was not willing to check. He also did not incline his ear. Do you want to give your child something to eat? No, I don't like it. Did you taste it? No, I don't like it. Come on, don't you want to taste? No, I don't like it. This is aggravating, right? At least taste it, decide if you like it or not. But why, why don't you taste it and also decide that you don't like it? This is what he says here, it is not enough that they did not listen, but also they did not incline their ear. As if at least if they had inclined their ear, I could say it did not find favor in their eyes. But if they also do not incline their ear, that is to say that from the outset he disqualified this way, the way of Hashem. And about this the anger toward them was a much greater matter, they are not even willing to examine the words of the prophets. And not only this, even if they were shown the punishments of Hashem, then they stiffened their neck. They stiffen their neck, they do not turn backward as we said. And with this they did worse than their fathers. Says the Malbim: because their fathers indeed walked in the counsels, in the stubbornness of their evil heart, but they walked in the counsels. They investigated, they consulted as we explained. There was here counsel. At least he checked. And he decided to deviate from the way of Hashem. A mistaken decision. But at least he walked in counsel. These do not even want to walk in counsel. From the outset he decided that he rejects the way and it is finished. So is this not worse than their fathers? At least their fathers still checked, but he is not even willing to check, not even willing to listen.
"And you shall speak to them all these words, but they will not listen to you; and you shall call to them, but they will not answer you." "And you shall speak these words, but they will not listen to you," the Holy One, blessed be He, says here to the prophet: I know that they will not listen to you. And they will not even answer you. At least you call to someone, he answers you, he responds. He says here: they will not even answer you. And nevertheless, says the Holy One, blessed be He, warn them.
And then, "and you shall say to them: this is the nation that did not listen to the voice of Hashem their God and did not accept discipline; faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth." "And you shall say to them," say to them, this is the nation that did not listen to the voice of their God. Says the Malbim: here he speaks about the way in which I approached them. First, they did not listen to the voice of their God. I approached them from the aspect of the intellect. Listen, heed, I want to explain to you. Try to understand. This did not help. And also they did not accept discipline; discipline is suffering. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: I saw that it does not go through the intellect, so perhaps through suffering, I will discipline them with punishments. And they did not accept discipline. Faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth. So if so, faithfulness perished from their heart, and also was cut off from their mouth. That not even the deeds of their fathers are in their hands. What is the meaning of this? There is a level where faithfulness perished but was not cut off from their mouth. What does this mean? He no longer believes. Why does he do it? By the power of inertia. Why does he do it? Because his father did it so he continues. So on Friday night he knows you take a cup, put wine, recite some particular text, and that's it, and afterward everyone goes about his business. This is Shabbat for him, this is Kiddush for him. He does something, is he doing it out of faith? No. Faithfulness has perished, but at least it was not cut off from their mouth. As Ariel Sharon once said, may his merit protect him. He said that I at least still knew, I knew my grandfather who still made Kiddush. He said: but I worry about my grandchildren who do not even know what Kiddush is, they never saw their grandfather doing it. What he did with this remark is another matter, but at least a fine reward for a good statement, that at least he truly raised a problem. Because the generation that was the third generation at least knew a grandfather with a kippah, a God-fearing grandfather. But those who come afterward knew a grandfather with an iPhone. This is what he knows of the grandfather, this is what he knows. Well, so how, what do you expect to come out of him? So he says: at least there was a reality of "was not cut off from their mouth." But here faithfulness perished and was cut off from their mouth. Here faithfulness perished and also was cut off from their mouth, because even as a commandment of men learned by rote or as some act of tradition, this too they do not have. It is possible to explain in an additional way, as some explain, "faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth": we have seen such people who, although they were not God-fearing people, at least you would still hear from their mouth "with the help of Hashem," "if Hashem wills," you would hear expressions of this sort. But you reach a generation where faithfulness perished from their mouth, meaning also the name of Heaven is not mentioned in their mouth. Once, even if you say well it is only outwardly, but in any case this was at least heard. In any case to say "with the help of Hashem" was not considered a foul word in the media. But today whoever says "with the help of Hashem," that is to say, wait, do you want to tell me that the Aman and the Shabak and the Mossad are not preparing properly? Why? Because you said that with the help of Hashem, you hope that this... Do you understand? That is to say, on whom are you leaning, on the Holy One, blessed be He, instead of preparing? For them this is a foul word. So to say that it will be with the help of Hashem, how could you say such a thing? You need, the IDF needs to be ready, do not build on the mysticism that you believe in. Dust in their mouth. So we need to know that the very statement "with the help of Hashem" and the recitation of the words, even if it is not done from a truly believing heart, but at least it changes the discourse. That the public discourse in which they do not fear to mention the name of Heaven, in which they can say that the reality is with the help of Heaven, they mention the name of Heaven. The name of Heaven was not cut off from their mouth. He tells you that the reality was that they did not accept discipline, faithfulness perished and also was cut off from their mouth. Even in the mouth, even as recitation, they would no longer mention it. So that this reality is a worse reality. The Radak explains: "faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth," faithfulness, the Radak explains, is truth. It is known that faithfulness, "emunah," "amen," is from the language of truth. When I say Amen on a blessing, the meaning is that it is true what you blessed that "everything came to be by His word," it is true. Amen is truth. And faithfulness is also a meaning of truth. "I tell you this in faithfulness," the meaning is I tell you this in truth. Says the Radak: most people speak with their mouth what is not in their heart, to show themselves as good when they are not. That is to say, this is "faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth." They do not speak truth with their mouth and all the more so in their heart. Faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth, he lies freely. He has no truth in mouth and in heart; about whom can one speak at all? Who, who can speak about such demands? In contrast to the righteous who speak truth in their heart. If in his heart he decided to sell to you at a lower price, even though you added to the price, he will not, he will sell it to you as he wanted, he will sell it to you from the start as he decided in his heart. This is speaking truth in his heart. So at least if he does not speak truth in his heart, he speaks truth in his mouth. And these, not even in their mouth. This is what he says, faithfulness has perished and been cut off from their mouth. Even to lie officially he has no problem.
"Cut off your hair and cast it away, and raise up a lamentation on the heights; for Hashem has rejected and abandoned the generation of His wrath." "Cut off your hair," "gozi" is from the language of cutting. "Cut off your hair" means pluck out your hair. Like "and He brought quail," "and he shaved his head." Rashi says another interpretation: "nizrekh" is your crown, a language of greatness. The meaning is: remove your crown. The Radak explains: why is the growing of hair called "nizrekh"? After all, you are speaking about the cutting of hair, so why does he say "cut off your hair" (nizrekh)? Why does he not say "cut off your hairs"? Cut your hairs. The Radak says an interesting thing. After all, the Nazir would grow his hair. So "cut off your hair" (nizrekh) means cut off the hairs that grew long, like with the Nazir whose hairs would grow long. So make a bald spot on your head. And also "cut off your hair and cast it away, and raise up a lamentation on the heights." "Raise up on the heights a lamentation," the meaning of this is that "shefayim" is a high place. So the Radak and the Malbim explained regarding "al," that these are the high places. Rashi explained that "shefayim" means streams of water, meaning riverbeds, this is the meaning of "shefayim." "For Hashem has rejected and abandoned the generation of His wrath." The Holy One, blessed be He, rejected and abandoned the generation of His wrath. What is "the generation of His wrath"? This generation upon which Hashem poured out wrath. This generation with which Hashem, as it were, was filled with anger. Another explanation, this is what Targum Yonatan says: "His wrath" (evrato) is not from the language of wrath and anger, but rather a language of passing (la'avor). A language of passing. What is the interpretation? "Evrato," the generation that transgressed His word. "Hashem has rejected and abandoned the generation of His wrath," the generation that transgresses His commands. According to the first explanation, this is the generation upon which He has anger, from the language of wrath. According to the second explanation, the meaning is the generation that transgresses the commands of Hashem. The Malbim explains that the matter of "cut off," what is He essentially commanding them, pluck out your hairs? What, what is the matter? What is the goal in "cut off your hair"? Says the Malbim: this is a sign of despair. This is a sign of mourning. We know that when a person is in despair, when a person is in pain, then it is written that he tore out the hairs of his head, he plucked out the hairs of his head. This always expresses anger, this expresses despair, this expresses mourning. There are gentiles for whom this is part of the process of mourning, to scratch themselves and pluck out the hairs of their head. So he says "cut off your hair," pluck out the hairs of your head, as it were as a sign of despair and mourning. "And raise up a lamentation," lamentation means to truly lament, and this will be in public. Raise up a lamentation on the heights. The lamentation that you lament will be on the heights, the meaning is you have no hope, this will be in a high and lofty place. And about what is the essence of the lamentation? About the fact that Hashem rejected, and not merely rejected but also abandoned. The abandonment was not only temporary but an abandonment as it were for a long time. And the reason that Hashem abandoned is even harder, for Hashem rejected. Since Hashem rejected us. And this is a terrible thing today. Because rejection means absolute distancing. "For the children of Yehudah have done what is evil in My eyes, says Hashem; they have placed their abominations in the House that is called by My name, to defile it." For the children of Yehudah did evil in the eyes of Hashem, in My eyes, says Hashem. What is that evil? They placed their abominations in the House. Achaz and Menasheh and the children of Yehudah with them placed the idolatry, the abominations, inside the Beit HaMikdash. Says the Malbim: like placing a rival wife beside her. As if this is a god and this is a god. So as if into the House of Hashem they came and said there are additional powers, there is additional idolatry, they placed it too in the House of Hashem. You want to serve your idolatry, serve it in your house. This is severe enough. To bring it into the House of Hashem, they placed their abominations in the House, and more than this, they accept upon themselves severe service to idolatry. This is what he continues in verse 31. But before that, let us just learn the moral that concerns us. After all, the great ones of Yisrael say that the most impure abomination of the generation, the most impure of the generation, the Satan the likes of which the Holy One, blessed be He, did not create from the day the world was created, this is the various iPhones. So now tell me, is this not what is written, is this not our generation? "The children of Yehudah have done what is evil in My eyes, says Hashem; they have placed their abominations in the House that is called by My name"? In the synagogue he takes out his iPhone. All the great ones of Yisrael say that it is an absolute prohibition to hold this. This is idolatry, this is forbidden relations and bloodshed, he has no share in the World to Come. Disqualified from testimony. You could make a whole list of what has been said about this. And he comes to the House of Hashem, which is the most detestable thing in His eyes, blessed be He, and he takes it out and now scrolls through it. Is this not "they have placed their abominations in the House that is called by My name, to defile it"? "And they built the high places of the Tofet that is in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in fire, which I did not command and which did not come up upon My heart." And they built the high places of the Tofet. The high places of the Tofet is the Molech. Molech was a severe and terrible idolatry, that it is truly difficult to contain in the human mind how it is at all fitting to do such a thing. This shows to what distortion they arrived. They had a Tofet. What is Tofet? They would bring an offering to the Molech. And this type of offering, this type of offering was, there are in this two descriptions in Chazal. We will mention both of them. Rashi here mentions one description. The Molech was of copper. It was a large idol with hands extended forward, like hands that lean to receive something. And they would heat it from beneath. And its hands were outstretched and heated. That is to say, they would fill it with fire, and this entire giant idol would become something that was entirely a fire flame, entirely glowing and red. From the fire they would heat it. And they place the child on its hands, and it would be scorched and cry out. And the priests would beat on the drums so that the father would not hear the voice of the son and his mercy would be aroused. And this is called Tofet, because they would drum (metofef) so that the father would not hear the cries of his son. And this was that which is in the Valley of Ben Hinnom. Why the Valley of Ben Hinnom? Because of the wailing (nehamah) of the son, therefore it was called the Valley of Ben Hinnom. And there is an additional explanation and description in Chazal, that they would make two bonfires on the two sides, large bonfires, and they would make the child run between them. And the child would cry out, and they would also drum on drums according to the same principle as he explains here, drumming on drums so that his cries would not be heard. This was a terrible and dreadful idolatry. This was the Tofet, and they built the high places of the Tofet that is in the Valley of Ben Hinnom. They would go to a person and say to him: the idolatry chose you that you should offer your son to it. This was as it were a great honor that he offers his son to idolatry. "To burn their sons and their daughters in fire, which I did not command and which did not come up upon My heart." What is "I did not command"? Hashem says: I did not command that they offer sons as an offering. There is no such command in the Torah, not even for the sake of Hashem. All the more so not for idolatry. "And I did not speak," I did not speak to one of the prophets. Chazal expound: what is "which I did not command and did not speak and did not come up upon My heart"? Says the Radak, perhaps before the exposition of Chazal, he says: if I commanded, I commanded concerning the flesh of an animal to burn before Me, I did not command their sons and their daughters, and they burn them to another god, so it is not enough that you do not have mercy on him, you even offer to idolatry. Chazal say: "which I did not command," this is Yiftach. "And did not come up upon My heart," this is Meisha king of Moav, as it says, "and he took his firstborn son and offered him as a burnt offering." And their thought, they raised it to the heavens. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: even if you see such people who did such things, like Yiftach who offered his daughter, and there are opinions in Chazal whether he only enclosed her in some house or truly offered her. Whoever wants can hear this in our recording on the book of Shoftim. And likewise Meisha king of Moav, that Meisha king of Moav heard through what Yisrael succeeds, because Avraham Avinu was willing to bind his son, he said: then I will offer my son. He went and raised up and offered his son. And then through this it is written that there was great anger against Yisrael, as if this aroused a great accusation against Yisrael. So says the Holy One, blessed be He: even these commands I did not command and it did not come up upon My heart. But after all Hashem said to Avraham "take please your son"? Chazal say: it did not come up upon My heart. It did not come up upon My heart that he should slaughter him, but only in order to make known his righteousness. And I said to him "take please your son, raise him up," and afterward when he raised him up I said to him "bring him down." Says the Malbim: what is "I did not command and it did not come up upon My heart"? I did not command that they do for Me such services. And do not say that I did not command because I thought that surely they would not listen to Me. He says: but truly it came up upon My heart. I said surely they will not fulfill My words. He says: no, know that it did not even come up upon My heart, since this idolatry is detested and abominable to Hashem, blessed be He. Therefore, "behold days are coming, says Hashem, and it will no longer be called the Tofet and the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but rather the Valley of Slaughter, and they will bury in the Tofet for lack of place." It will no longer be said, the place of the high places will no longer be called by the name Tofet and the valley the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but rather they will call it the Valley of Slaughter. Why? Because there in this place many will fall slain by the enemies. To such an extent, and they will bury in the Tofet for lack of place. That is to say, there will no longer remain a place to bury. That is to say, the punishment will be that this place will be a burial ground. "And the carcass of this people will be food for the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth, and none will frighten them away." The carcass of this people who do these terrible things will be food for the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth. And always when the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth arrive, then there is someone who drives them away so that there will not be disgrace to the dead. But here he says: none will frighten them away. So, first, there will no longer be a place to bury. Second, there will not even be anyone to drive away the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth so that they do not eat from the corpses. "And I will cause to cease from the cities of Yehudah and from the streets of Yerushalayim the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride, for the land will become a ruin." "And I will cause to cease," says the Malbim, he has here an interesting explanation. He says: after the great wars, after the great slaughter, then there are many matches. There are many pairings. Because after the enemy comes and kills many, then many people die. Many women die by the enemy. And then what? There are pairings. A certain widower with an unnamed widow, there are pairings. And then they will want to take wives, to bear children, to settle the land. As it is written in chapter 33, "there will yet be heard in this place the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, for I will return the captivity of the land as at the first." Now he says: it will not be so. He says: the land will become a ruin. So there will not be heard the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride, for the land will become a ruin. There the land will be built, but here the land will be destroyed. And since it is so, the thing that would be expected, which is the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, this will not be the result of what the enemy will do here.