Musar su Salmi 95:78

The destruction of the second Temple is a result of the destruction of the first Temple: we are told in Yuma 21, that the second Temple lacked five major manifestations of the שכינה, and that this is the reason why in Chagai 1,8 וארצה ואכבד, "I shall look upon it and be glorified," the word ואכבד is spelled with the last letter ה – that should have been there – missing. Clearly, Israel had never recovered from the hatred of its neighbors, even when a second Temple was built under the patronage of the Persians. The new element of intensified harassment expressed by the word Sitnah did not last very long; during the entire period of the second Temple, however, the hatred of the kind expressed by the word התעקשו, i.e. the level of animosity experienced by Isaac when he dug the first well continued all the time. The Torah does not mention the reason for the name of the well called Sitnah, because it did not represent a new element in our relations with the Gentile nations. The reason the Torah adds the word עתה, is simply to alert us to the fact that the timing of the building of that third Temple is in our hands. This is similar to the answer given to the questioner in Sanhedrin 98 who wanted to know when the Messiah would come. He was told to look at Psalms 95,7 היום, אם בקולו תשמעו, "This very day, if only you heed His voice."

The Midrash quotes two verses to prove the relationship of the Jewish people as children of G–d as valid also during those times when these children are in exile and have been expelled by their Father from His table. Had the Midrash only quoted the first verse in which the Jewish people are described as G–d's children, we would have understood this as being merely an allegory, a term of endearment such as people are in the habit of applying to one another. If only the last verse in Jeremiah 31,8, in which G–d describes Himself as our Father, had been quoted, we would have thought that the meaning is that G–d watches over us and has pity on us just as a real father watches over his children and on occasion pities them. Still, if this is correct, we would have expected Jeremiah to say: כי הייתי לישראל אב instead of כי הייתי לישראל לאב. If the meaning of אב is that of an actual father, and the meaning of בנים in Deut. 14,1 is that Israel are actual children of G–d and He is their actual father, based on the Divine origin of our souls, then the expression לאב seems justified, for G–d was an actual father to us. Ever since we have gone into exile, however, we have become orphans without a real father. This would correspond to what we said before, that the children have been barred from the table of their father. In the future, however, G–d will again be a proper father, a role which G–d declares Himself as ready to assume as soon as His children return to Him as penitents. This is similar to the reply Elijah is quoted to have given the person who questioned him about the date of the redemption. He told his questioner: היום, אם בקולו תשמעו, "This very day, if you will hearken to His voice" (Psalms 95,6). This is the sentiment G–d expresses through Jeremiah 31,8 when He describes Himself as הייתי לישראל לאב, "I am always prepared to be a true father of Israel, just as I used to be."

The Midrash quotes two verses to prove the relationship of the Jewish people as children of G–d as valid also during those times when these children are in exile and have been expelled by their Father from His table. Had the Midrash only quoted the first verse in which the Jewish people are described as G–d's children, we would have understood this as being merely an allegory, a term of endearment such as people are in the habit of applying to one another. If only the last verse in Jeremiah 31,8, in which G–d describes Himself as our Father, had been quoted, we would have thought that the meaning is that G–d watches over us and has pity on us just as a real father watches over his children and on occasion pities them. Still, if this is correct, we would have expected Jeremiah to say: כי הייתי לישראל אב instead of כי הייתי לישראל לאב. If the meaning of אב is that of an actual father, and the meaning of בנים in Deut. 14,1 is that Israel are actual children of G–d and He is their actual father, based on the Divine origin of our souls, then the expression לאב seems justified, for G–d was an actual father to us. Ever since we have gone into exile, however, we have become orphans without a real father. This would correspond to what we said before, that the children have been barred from the table of their father. In the future, however, G–d will again be a proper father, a role which G–d declares Himself as ready to assume as soon as His children return to Him as penitents. This is similar to the reply Elijah is quoted to have given the person who questioned him about the date of the redemption. He told his questioner: היום, אם בקולו תשמעו, "This very day, if you will hearken to His voice" (Psalms 95,6). This is the sentiment G–d expresses through Jeremiah 31,8 when He describes Himself as הייתי לישראל לאב, "I am always prepared to be a true father of Israel, just as I used to be."