Kommentar zu Jeschijahu 41:29
הֵ֣ן כֻּלָּ֔ם אָ֥וֶן אֶ֖פֶס מַעֲשֵׂיהֶ֑ם ר֥וּחַ וָתֹ֖הוּ נִסְכֵּיהֶֽם׃ (פ)
Sie alle sind nichtig, eitel ihre Werke, Wind und Leeres ihre Gebilde.
Rashi on Isaiah
Behold them all,...naught You should know that, as for the prophets of those who deny the Torah ([mss.:] pagan prophets;) ([other mss.:] prophets of Baal), all their deeds are naught and of no substance.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Ibn Ezra on Isaiah
They. The idols.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Isaiah
their molten images Heb. נִסְכֵּיהֶם. Comp. (supra 40:19) “The graven image the craftsman melted (נָסַךְ).” Jonathan renders this section differently: [27] The first one to Zion etc. The words of consolation that the prophets prophesied concerning Zion, from before, behold they have come. And according to the Targum, the entire section speaks of the King Messiah and of the last redemption, but I see that the prophecy that Isaiah prophesied concerning Cyrus is all in the same language as this section. Comp. (infra 45:13) “I aroused him with righteousness”; (Infra 46:11) “Calling from the east a bird of prey”; (infra 45:11) “The signs ask Me;” (infra 46:10) “Who tells from the beginning the end.” All of this resembles the topic of this section.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Ibn Ezra on Isaiah
אין ═ און nothing as some explain ; the letters אֹ הֹ וֹ יֹ interchange. It can, however, also be taken literally.36There is hardly any difference between the two explanations, since און in the meaning vain must ultimately be derived from אין nothing. The meaning of the verse is, they are vanity, much more so their works.37I. E. here again neglects the accents, which demand the following rendering: Behold, all of them! their works are vain, nothing.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Ibn Ezra on Isaiah
נסכיהם According to some their images; comp. עגל מסכה molten calf (Ex. 32:4). I explain it their libations, that is, the libations which the idolaters offer to their idols.38The parallelism of the verse demands for נסכיהם a rendering similar in meaning to מעשיהם their works. If therefore the former is correctly rendered drink-offerings, the latter must refer to sacrifices, to which, however, the remark of I. E. they themselves are vain, how much more their works cannot be applied. The author seems here to have neglected the rule of the parallelism which he repeatedly recommends, without any necessity; for נסך admits also the meaning to weave to form, and מעשה ═ נֶסֶך the work ; comp. I. E. on Ex. 32:4.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy