Comentario citado sobre Isaías 27:1

POKEID’ (VISITING) THE INIQUITY OF THE FATHERS UPON THE CHILDREN UNTO THE THIRD AND FOURTH GENERATION OF THEM THAT HATE ME. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the meaning of the term p’kidah is similar to that of z’chirah (remembrance), just as in the verse, And the Eternal ‘pakad’ Sarah,³⁴⁵Genesis 21:1. which is like: “and the Eternal remembered her.” The purport [of the verse here, according to Ibn Ezra], is that G-d will postpone [punishment] of the wicked person because perhaps he will repent and beget a righteous son. But if the son walks in his father’s ways, as also the third and fourth generations, their memories will be destroyed, for G-d will ‘remember’ [to visit punishment upon them for] what the parents have done, and He will no longer postpone their punishment. All the commentators have similarly interpreted [the above Scriptural expression]. But if this be so, the sins of the fathers will not be visited upon their children nor upon the third generation, but only on the fourth. It would have been proper then for Scripture to say that He will visit the iniquity of the fathers and their sons and of the third generation upon the fourth generation! Perhaps these commentators will say that the sense of the verse is that He remembers the iniquity of the fathers upon their sons, saying [to them], “You and your fathers have sinned.” He does thus with the third and fourth generations, and then takes vengeance upon them, and never again does He visit it upon them, for He destroys them all in their iniquity.
But their explanation is not correct. Scripture mentions G-d’s remembrance of all of them equally, and it does not specify that the vengeance is exacted [only] in the end, i.e., on the fourth generation. Besides, the term p’kidah in conjunction with the word al — [as it occurs here: ‘pokeid’ avon avoth ‘al’ banim] — is not used in connection with remembrance, but rather signifies vengeance [or punishment]. Thus: And on the day ‘pokdi upakad’ti’ (that I do punish, I will punish) them for their sin;³⁴⁶Further, 32:34. In that day ‘yiphkod hashem’ (the Eternal will punish) with his sore and great and strong sword leviathan the slant serpent, and leviathan the tortuous serpent, and He will slay the dragon that is in the sea;³⁴⁷Isaiah 27:1. ‘yiphkod hashem’ (the Eternal will punish) the host of the high heaven on high.³⁴⁸Ibid., 24:21. All of these are expression of vengeance and punishment.
The correct interpretation thus appears to me to be that Scripture is stating that He visits the iniquity, which the father perpetrated, upon his children, and excises them on account of the iniquity of their father, something like it is said, Prepare ye slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers.³⁴⁹Ibid., 14:21. Similarly, He visits it upon the third generation if the sin of the two generations is not yet full, something like [it is said], for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet full.³⁵⁰Genesis 15:16. Sometimes He visits the iniquity of all three generations upon the fourth one when their measure [of iniquity] is filled and then he excises them. But in the fifth generation, no one is punished for the iniquity of his ancestor in the first generation. Now in the Book of Deuteronomy, [where the Ten Commandments are restated], He added a vav [to the expression ‘al shileishim’ (unto the third generation), thus making it] ‘v’al’ shileishim v’al ribei’im l’sonai.³⁵¹Deuteronomy 5:9. But the meaning of the vav [there is not the usual “and”] but “or” — [” ‘or’ unto the third generation ‘or’ unto the fourth generation of them that hate me” — as explained above].
Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that children’s children are called “children.” This is why He used the briefer term.³⁵²Ibn Ezra tried to answer this question: Since Scripture uses the terms shileishim and ribei’im to signify the third and fourth generations, why does it not say shni’im for the second generation instead of using the term banim (children)? For this reason, Ibn Ezra interpreted banim as meaning “children and children’s children,” for they are both called banim. Hence, Scripture could not use the term shni’im, for that would have meant only the second generation after the sinner, who is the first generation. However, in fact the second and third generations also need to be included here. For this reason, Scripture used banim, which includes the children’s children as well, i.e., the third generation after the sinner. Accordingly, in Ibn Ezra’s opinion, shileishim will mean the children of the third generation, who are the fourth generation after the sinner, and ribei’im will mean the children of the fourth generation, who constitute the fifth generation. Ramban will differ with this entire interpretation. You can understand this from the terms shileishim (the third generation) and ribei’im (the fourth generation).³⁵³Ibn Ezra’s intent is that when you consider the words shileishim and ribei’im, this question will occur: Why does Scripture not use the term shni’im instead of banim? You must then conclude as explained in the preceding note. But this is not so. Shileishim means the third generation in that sin. [Hence, it includes only the father, his children, and his children’s children.] Likewise, ribei’im means the fourth generation in that sin, totalling four sinners. And the verse stated in connection with the thirteen attributes of G-d, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third generation and unto the fourth generation,³⁵⁴Further, 34:7. is to be explained³⁵⁵The Hebrew text possibly lends itself to this translation: “He — [i.e., G-d, Who is proclaiming these thirteen attributes] — is explaining that al b’nei banim (upon the children’s children) is the shileishim (the third generation) and ribei’im (the fourth generation).” In other words, al b’nei banim is in apposition to al shileishim v’al ribei’im. as “the children’s children, who are the third and fourth generations.” It is for this reason that Moses, [when invoking the thirteen attributes] in the case of the spies, turned back [to this specific attribute as expressed here in the Ten Commandments] and said, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.³⁵⁶Numbers 14:18. He did not mention “children’s children,” for it is all one, [i.e., “children’s children” is the same as shileishim].
Now Scripture states [that this attribute of punishment applies only to] those that hate Me. That is, if the children hate G-d. If the sinner begot a righteous son, he does not bear the iniquity of the father, as [the prophet] Ezekiel has explained.³⁵⁷Ezekiel 18:20.
From the words of our Rabbis,³⁵⁸Tosephta Sotah 4:1. there appears a proof to the explanation I have presented above, [i.e., that ‘pokeid’ the sins of the fathers, etc., is to be understood in the sense of “visiting” or “punishing”]. From here, they have derived the principle that the [Divine] measure of good is greater than the measure of punishment, for the measure of punishment is for four generations [while that of reward is for thousands]. But if it were as the first explanation has it, [namely, that of Ibn Ezra, that pokeid means “remembers,” thus signifying that He postpones the punishment of the sinner until the fourth generation in the hope that perhaps he will beget a righteous son], then “the measure of good” would have been greater if He postponed punishment even to the tenth generation!³⁵⁹According to Ibn Ezra, the phrase in question represents a measure of G-d’s mercy. He does not punish the sinner immediately but “remembers” it until the third and fourth generations because perhaps he will repent and beget a righteous son. But, asks Ramban, if that were the interpretation, “the measure of Divine good” would be increased if such “punishment” were withheld even to the tenth generation! Why then did the Rabbis in the above-mentioned text speak of the Divine measure of good being manifested in punishment only to four generations when that Divine manifestation would apply even if it were extended to the tenth generation? But according to Ramban, who asserts that this verse represents a measure of G-d’s judgment — for pokeid means “punishing,” and the verse declares that the effects of the punishment are felt up to and including the fourth generation — that question cannot be asked. If punishment were extended to the tenth generation, it would no longer represent “a measure of good.” On the contrary, it would be a harsher judgment.
It is possible that this strict measure [of punishment that is imposed on a sinner and which is felt up to the fourth generation] applies only to idolatry, for it is with regard to this prohibition that He is warning here. However, in the rest of the commandments, [the rule applies that] every one shall die of his iniquity.³⁶⁰Jeremiah 31:30. You will find the hidden secret of visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children in the Book of Ecclesiastes.³⁶¹The allusion is to the verse, One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh (Ecclesiastes 1:4), upon which the Sefer Habahir commented: “that hath come already.” This means that the generation that passes away had come into the sins of the father “that had come already” in a previous generation, and the sins of the father are now visited upon the son, etc. (Ma’or V’shamesh). The mystic doctrine of the transmigration of souls is thus alluded to here. I have already written concerning it.³⁶²Genesis 38:8 (Vol. I, pp. 469-470).

פוקד עון אבות, “Who visits the sin of the fathers, etc.;” according to Ibn Ezra the meaning of the word פוקד here is the same as that of the word זוכר, i.e. “who remembers.” The word is used in that sense in Genesis 21,1 where it means that G’d remembered the fact that Sarah had not yet been blessed with child. In our verse it means that Hashem allows even the wicked time to rehabilitate themselves through repentance before imposing the punishment for the sins which they deserve. G’d hopes that during the time He holds the punishment in abeyance the sinner will sire a child who in turn will be righteous, thus retroactively making the sinner’s life worthwhile. However, if both the sinner’s children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren continue in the sinful ways of their forbears, G’d will not continue to delay punishment in the hope that this situation will change. Nachmanides challenges this interpretation of our verse, saying that if it were correct G’d would be visiting the sins not on the third generation but on the fourth generation. This would mean that the second and third generation of the father who went unpunished would also go unpunished. If that were so, the Torah should have written: זוכר עון אבות ובנים ושלישים על רבעים, “He will visit (show remembrance) of the sin of the fathers and the sons and the grandsons on the great-grandsons.” Perhaps what Ibn Ezra had in mind was that G’d remembers the sin of the father to the offspring by saying to the sinful offspring: “you as well as your (deceased) father or/and grandfather have been guilty of such and such.” As a result, the string of generations will be punished by that line being wiped out. However, the Torah does not say that all people, i.e. the sins of all fathers will be subject to an identical consideration by G’d. There are various verses in Scripture which indicate that sometimes G’d will exact punishment from the son or the grandson, as for instance we read in Isaiah 27,1 יפקד ה' בחרבו הקשה where the prophet announces that G’d will remember to punish the nations who have subjected Israel to violence, or Isaiah 14,21 הכינו לבניו מטבח בעון אבותם, “prepare a slaughtering block for their sons in retribution of the sins of their fathers, etc.” In both of these examples G’d is not described as waiting for four generations with exacting His vengeance. Sometimes the third generation will experience G’d’s vengeance, compare Deuteronomy 5,9, other times some descendants will experience it a generation sooner than their brothers, although to the uninitiated onlooker there appears to be no difference in conduct between them. When G’d indicated to Avraham that the Emorites were indeed guilty and deserved to be uprooted, He added that their guilt was not yet complete, i.e. the guilt of some of them, until the fourth generation had been reached, hence the descendants of Avraham could not be given their land until then. (Genesis 15,16). Any fifth generation experiencing G’d’s wrath is not being punished for the sins of the first of these five generations.

Into a tanim - Targum Yonatan Ben Uziel into a hiviah, and according to Rashi, nachash. And in any case it is necessary to make a distinction between a tanim and a nachash. The nachash that Moses' staff became above (4:3) is a snake of the ground, that is found in the forests and deserted places, and tanim is a water snake (vassershlange in Yiddish); as "[In that day the LORD with His sore and great and strong sword will punish] leviathan the slant nachash; leviathan the tortuous nachash; and He will slay the tanin that is in the sea." (Isaiah 27:1) And about Pharaoh it is said: "Great tanim, sprawling in your channels, Who said, My Nile is my own; I made it for myself." Since Pharaoh relied on the waters of the Nile that watered his land, he was compared to a great tanim/water snake that wanders on the Nile, and the proof is that Moses, whose staff became a tanim which can be compared to Pharaoh and his people; and the intention here is a rebuke regarding the plague of blood that changed the water of the river to blood, and the frogs that came from the river. And the wise men of nature [natural history scientists transl.] already said that there are the water snakes [sea snakes] and called it [Hidrarkhos] which is 114 feet long, close to 57 amot, as we see in the Mechilta of Shimon Bar Yochai... "the nachash is in the dry land, and this one grows in the land and that one (tanim) grows in the water, etc."

His hand caused pain to Pharaoh, who was called the barlike serpent (Isa. 26:1). חללה is an expression of pain and trouble. Likewise, elsewhere (ibid. 51:9): “are you not the one that hewed Rahab and slew (מחוללת), the sea monster?” Another explanation: His hand founded the leviathan, as in (Prov. 8: 25), “before the hills I was created (חוללתי).”

the heads of Leviathan Pharaoh is called [by] this [name], as it is said (Isa. 27:1): “the Lord will visit with His hard...sword on leviathan, etc.”