וַיְהִי דְבַר־יְהוָה אֵלַי לֵאמֹר׃ - And the word of Hashem came to me, saying:
The Malbim explains: After the prophet prefaced in the first chapter the beginning of his prophecy, the nature of the prophecy he receives, and the missions that would be entrusted to him, this chapter now serves as an overarching introduction to all the words of calamity that he will prophesy throughout the entire book. And the introduction is this: know that despite all the punishments and afflictions that the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring upon the Jewish people - nevertheless, I am with them. I do not abandon them. Although I have brought suffering upon them and will yet bring severe suffering upon them, My love is still given to them, and I have not forgotten the covenant I made with them of old.
Not only this, but those who oppress Israel are indeed a rod of chastisement in the hand of Hashem, yet they themselves will still be called to account and punished for their deeds. This is comparable to a father who became enraged at his son and handed him over to cruel messengers to strike him: the father's heart still aches over the son's condition, for he is his son. He knows that he deserves it, but it pains him that the son deteriorated to such an extent. And beyond that, the father will yet take vengeance upon the one who strikes his son with cruelty.
This also explains why the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts punishment from the nations. Seemingly, they carried out the will of Hashem, and the commentators ask: why was Egypt punished when it was decreed that they would enslave His children? There are two explanations for this: first, they intensified and went beyond what was decreed; and second, as stated here, they did it out of sheer cruelty. You did not go to fulfill the command of Hashem; you went because you are cruel. You heard that the people of Israel deserved blows, and you jumped to be the first to strike. For such cruelty and hatred, one deserves punishment.
הָלֹךְ וְקָרָאתָ בְאָזְנֵי יְרוּשָׁלִַם לֵאמֹר כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה זָכַרְתִּי לָךְ חֶסֶד נְעוּרַיִךְ אַהֲבַת כְּלוּלֹתָיִךְ לֶכְתֵּךְ אַחֲרַי בַּמִּדְבָּר בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא זְרוּעָה׃ - Go and proclaim in the ears of Jerusalem, saying: Thus said Hashem: I remembered for you the kindness of your youth, the love of your bridal days, your following after Me in the wilderness, in an unsown land.
Rashi explains: If you were to return to Me, My only desire is to have mercy upon you. I remember the kindness of your youth and the love of your bridal days - that I brought you under the chupah; kelulotayich stems from bringing in and gathering under the canopy. And what is the kindness of your youth? Your following after Me, following My emissaries Moshe and Aharon, leaving a settled, inhabited land like Egypt to enter the wilderness, without provisions, without water, without anything, amidst venomous serpents and scorpions - and nevertheless, you had faith in Me and set out.
The Malbim likens the connection between the Holy One, blessed be He, and the people of Israel to the bond between a bridegroom and a bride, a betrothed couple, as we have already learned in Shir HaShirim that the Community of Israel and her Beloved are like a groom and bride. He depicts the imagery: a man came from afar, and the daughter of a wealthy man, the fairest of women, married him. She brought him into her wealthy father's house, showed him kindness, and provided for all his needs. Afterward, she became united with him in full marriage, and ultimately she trusted him so completely that she was willing to follow him out into the wilderness and leave behind the wealth of her father's home, out of complete faith in her devotion to him.
And so it is in the analogue. At first, the holy Patriarchs kept the way of Hashem and made known the Divinity of the blessed Creator in the world - which corresponds to the groom whom the wealthy daughter welcomed into her home. And why are we likened to the rich man's daughter and He to the groom? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, was not recognized in the world before then; the one who publicized Him in the world, magnified His name, and proclaimed His Divinity was Avraham Avinu - the entire world was on one side and Avraham was on the other, at a time when everyone worshipped idols and sun-images. This is "the kindness of your youth," which took place in the days of youth, in the days of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. Afterward comes "the love of your bridal days" - the Exodus from Egypt and the Giving of the Torah, when they entered into a covenant with the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Revelation at Mount Sinai was like a chupah. And following that, they proceeded into the desert, an arid wasteland of fiery serpents and scorpions, out of their immense desire for divine closeness.
We thus find here, the Malbim says, three categories of merit: the first merit before the betrothal - Avraham Avinu; the second merit at the betrothal itself - the Revelation at Mount Sinai; and the third merit after the betrothal - journeying in the wilderness for forty years, wandering in a place devoid of water and food. And concerning all of this, the Holy One, blessed be He, says: this kindness that you performed for Me is still remembered in My heart; I do not forget it.
Let us note the wording "Haloch vekarata" ("Go and proclaim"). Why does it not simply say "and proclaim" (ukarata)? The Malbim explains: wherever the verb of walking (haloch) is combined with an action, it denotes persistence and constancy in that action. "Ukarata" would mean a single proclamation; "haloch vekarata" means proclaim again and again and again. Likewise, "haloch vekanita" ("Go and buy") means persist in the action until you achieve the result. So too, "haloch ve'amarta el Tzidkiyahu" ("Go and speak to Zedekiah") means even though they will not let you enter and you will face obstacles, persist until you reach Zedekiah. The expression "haloch" always indicates persistence.
Why this repetition? After all, a wilderness and a land not sown seem to be the exact same thing. The Malbim explains that there are two kinds of wilderness. There is a wasteland and arid desert (yeshimon and tziyah) - places where nature has made it impossible for human beings to survive, such as vast sand deserts. He lists names of deserts known in his time: the Gobi Desert in Asia, the Great Salt Desert that cuts Persia in two, the Arabian Desert, and the greatest of them all, the Sahara Desert in Africa. These are places where no life can exist at all - neither man nor plant. In contrast, there is an ordinary "wilderness" (midbar): a place without forests and lakes, yet it is a sown land where certain sparse fruits do grow, though they are thin, meager, and pale due to the scarcity of moisture, streams, and rivers. Grazing pasture for sheep can be found there; these are the "oases of the wilderness" (ne'ot midbar). It was to such a place that Moshe Rabbeinu led Jethro's flock, "beyond the wilderness" - certainly not a Sahara-type desert, where grazing is impossible.
Therefore, Scripture is precise: "your following after Me in the wilderness" - and what kind of wilderness? Not the kind where flocks can graze, but "in a land not sown," a desert devoid of even a seed. Journeying through such a place demonstrates vastly greater devotion. This explains the duplication.
קֹדֶשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל לַיהוָה רֵאשִׁית תְּבוּאָתֹה כָּל־אֹכְלָיו יֶאְשָׁמוּ רָעָה תָּבֹא אֲלֵיהֶם נְאֻם־יְהוָה׃ - Israel is holy to Hashem, the firstfruits of His harvest; all who devour him shall be held guilty, evil shall come upon them, says Hashem.
"Israel is holy" - like terumah (the priestly tithe), which is called holy. "The firstfruits of His harvest" (reishit tevu'atah) is explained by Rashi as the first of the harvest before the offering of the Omer. For the Omer permits the new grain: once the Omer is offered on the sixteenth of Nisan, eating from the new harvest becomes permissible, whereas beforehand it falls under the category of chadash (new grain), which is forbidden by Torah law, and whoever eats it incurs guilt and liability. So too, Israel is like that first harvest prior to the Omer offering, which is forbidden to consume. Targum Yonatan renders it similarly.
The Malbim explains differently: "The firstfruits of His harvest" refers to terumah, which is forbidden to non-Kohanim. It is termed the "first" - as in "the first of your kneading bowls" and "the first of your tithe" - being separated first. And whoever consumes it incurs guilt both in soul and in body: "All who devour him shall be held guilty" refers to spiritual guilt of the soul, as it is written, "and bring upon them guilt and iniquity through their eating of their holy things," while "evil shall come upon them" refers to physical punishment, suffering in the body as well. That is to say: even though I prophesy that you will fall prey to the teeth of lions, know that these lions will ultimately be held accountable and punished like one who consumed consecrated food, like one who ate Hashem's terumah.
Notice that the word tevu'atah ("its harvest") has an unusual form: it does not end with a vav (tevu'ato, "His harvest"), nor does it have a mappiq heh, but appears feminine, as though meaning "her harvest." To what does this pronoun refer? The Malbim explains that it refers to the wilderness: you, Israel, are the first harvest of the wilderness. This wilderness had never produced anything; and what grew in it first? The people of Israel. You are the first produce of the desert.
And what does ye'eshamu ("shall be held guilty") mean? In Ayelet HaShachar, his work formulating the principles of the Holy Tongue, the Malbim clarifies the distinction between asham (guilt) and chet (sin): a sin (chet) can sometimes exist without punishment, but wherever the root asham appears, it indicates that punishment is deserved, or that the sinner recognizes his punishment. Sometimes it refers to spiritual punishment of the soul, as in "and that soul shall be held guilty," and sometimes to physical punishment of the body. Since in most places it denotes spiritual punishment of the soul, Scripture had to add "evil shall come upon them" - to teach that evil will befall their physical bodies as well.
The Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchak Ze'ev Soloveitchik, in his Chiddushim, cites in the name of his father, Rav Chaim Soloveitchik: what is the connection between holiness, terumah, and the state of Israel in exile? Rather, the prophet depicts Israel as terumah, and terumah possesses two distinct attributes of sanctity: "holy to Hashem" is one virtue, and "the firstfruits of His harvest" is a second virtue. The world was created Bereishit, "for the beginning" - for the sake of Israel, who are called reishit ("beginning"); Israel is, as it were, the terumah separated from the entire world. And the Holy One, blessed be He, says to the nations: know that whoever consumes them will be punished twice.
And how so? The Rambam in chapter 6 of Hilchot Terumot rules that a non-kohen who intentionally eats terumah receives lashes and does not pay, because of the principle of "kam leih bidrabbah mineih" - one receives the greater punishment and not the lighter one. Whereas in chapter 1 of Hilchot Me'ilah, the Rambam rules that one who consumes kodashim (consecrated property), whether altar offerings or items consecrated for the upkeep of the Temple, receives lashes and pays restitution - both lashes and monetary payment. Along comes the prophet and says: Israel is cherished before the Holy One, blessed be He; "holy to Hashem" - that is one dimension; furthermore, the Holy One, blessed be He, elevated them above all nations and they are terumah, "the firstfruits of His produce" - that is the second dimension. Therefore, justice dictates that whoever plunders them, robs them, and harms them will be struck both financially and bodily: "All who devour it shall be held guilty" - financially, like one who consumes consecrated property and must pay; "evil shall come upon them" - bodily, like one who consumes terumah and receives lashes. It emerges that they receive the punishment of one who consumed something that is both terumah and kodashim, and therefore receives lashes and pays restitution.
שִׁמְעוּ דְבַר־יְהוָה בֵּית יַעֲקֹב וְכָל־מִשְׁפְּחוֹת בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - Hear the word of Hashem, O house of Yaakov, and all the families of the house of Yisrael.
Following the introduction in which the Holy One, blessed be He, declares that He remembers for Israel the love of their bridal days, He now comes to rebuke them for having forgotten Him. And what is the distinction between "the house of Yaakov" and "the families of the house of Yisrael"? The Malbim explains: wherever these two names appear together, "house of Yaakov" alludes to the common people, the masses, while "families of the house of Yisrael" refers to the leaders and men of renown. As has been explained several times, the name "Yaakov" expresses the lower level - Yaakov derived from *akev* (heel); whereas "Yisrael" indicates the higher level - from the language of *serarah* (authority and nobility), as in "you have striven (*sarita*) with beings divine and human."
כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה מַה־מָּצְאוּ אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם בִּי עָוֶל כִּי רָחֲקוּ מֵעָלָי וַיֵּלְכוּ אַחֲרֵי הַהֶבֶל וַיֶּהְבָּלוּ׃ - Thus says Hashem: What injustice did your fathers find in Me, that they went far from Me, and walked after vanity and became vain?
According to the Radak, this refers to the early generations who entered the Land and engaged in idolatry. But the Malbim explains that He is contending with them about what happened right from the beginning, when they were still in the wilderness - and already from that time it worked to their detriment. The Malbim explains: when someone leaves something for a reason, one must examine what that reason was. The first possibility: I found fault or injustice in it, and therefore I distanced myself. To this the verse responds, "What injustice did your fathers find in Me?" Is there any injustice in the Holy One, blessed be He? Did His cooking spoil? What was wrong?
The second possibility: there was no wrongdoing, but I found an advantage in the other option - like the words of Rabbi Akiva, "he found another woman more pleasing than her"; I have no complaints against the first, but I simply found a more profitable enterprise. To this the verse replies: "and walked after vanity" - did the alternative you chose possess any virtue? It is utter vanity! As the prophet says later on: "They have forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, to hew for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water." If you had said that you found a new, more bountiful quarry, that would be one thing; but to abandon a spring of living water to pursue vanity - is there any logic to that? Does that make any sense?
A third possibility: perhaps a person leaves because serving the new god is easier. I have no complaint against the Holy One, blessed be He, nor do I claim that the new god is superior - on the contrary, the Holy One, blessed be He, is far better. Rather, the new god makes things easy for me; his demands are less rigorous, he is accommodating, he does not burden or impose stringencies - an undemanding god, a light, flexible, elastic religion rather than something restrictive and demanding. To this the verse says: not only did you walk after vanity, but "and became vain" - the very act is an exercise in futility. You say that serving Hashem is difficult? True, but it is hard labor that yields diamonds at the end. And serving the false god is easy? True, but that is like someone who leaves diamond mining to sweep the street; sweeping may be easier, but what is the payout? You chose the easy path that yields no benefit whatsoever, and that is vanity and emptiness.
Furthermore, says the Malbim: a person leaves something toward which he felt no love, or where the love was conditional on an external factor - there was a connection because he profited, and once the profit ceased, the connection was severed. But the bond between us, says the Holy One, blessed be He, was not conditional: "I remember for you the devotion of your youth, the love of your bridal days" - not because I owed you anything, nor for any self-serving benefit. And if so, there is no reason at all to break away.
And yet another profound principle: the reality of the Holy One, blessed be He, is an eternal reality, and one who cleaves to Him exists forever. And to what did you attach yourself? To vanity (*hevel* - breath and vapor). And what is *hevel*? The moment it leaves the mouth, it can hardly be seen, and certainly a second later it has no substance at all. Had you cleaved to Me, you would have been attached to eternity, an everlasting existence. Instead, you cleaved to vanity, reducing yourselves to "and became vain," to the status of nullity and chaos, for you attached yourselves to nothingness. "And you who cleave to Hashem your God are alive, every one of you, this day" - this is true, eternal existence. One who cleaves to eternity becomes eternal, and one who cleaves to vanity becomes vain; it turns out that you condemned yourselves to having no existence at all. If so, what logic was there in your fathers distancing themselves from Me?
וְלֹא אָמְרוּ אַיֵּה יְהוָה הַמַּעֲלֶה אֹתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם הַמּוֹלִיךְ אֹתָנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר בְּאֶרֶץ עֲרָבָה וְשׁוּחָה בְּאֶרֶץ צִיָּה וְצַלְמָוֶת בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא־עָבַר בָּהּ אִישׁ וְלֹא־יָשַׁב אָדָם שָׁם׃ - Neither did they say, 'Where is Hashem Who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, Who led us through the wilderness, through a land of deserts and pits, through a land of drought and the shadow of death, through a land where no man passed, and where no person dwelt?'
The Malbim explains: not only did they fail to distinguish between good and evil, but they did not even pay attention to the deficiency and harm that would result from abandoning Hashem. And this refers to the time when they were still in the wilderness. First, "Who brought us up out of the land of Egypt" - Hashem took you out of subjugation and slavery; you could have remained enslaved in Egypt, yet Someone took you out, so why did you abandon Him? Second, "Who led us through the wilderness" - after all, you were still in the wilderness, and is it conceivable to survive in the wilderness without Hashem's providence?
The verse enumerates three flaws of that place. In terms of the terrain - "through a land of deserts and pits [aravah ve-shuchah]," a place full of pits, while "aravah" refers to a wasteland where thorns and thistles grow. In terms of the atmosphere - "drought [tziyyah]," burning heat with foul air. And in terms of human habitation - "through a land where no man passed," a place full of sand and serpents. How could you not reflect and realize: precisely now I need the Master of the Universe, for I am in a place where survival is impossible without Hashem's providence - yet precisely now you make a calf and forsake Hashem?
Let us examine the precise wording in the Holy Tongue: "no man [ish] passed through it" and "no person [adam] dwelt there." What is the distinction between the two? The Malbim explains: "ish" is related to "yesh" (existence), and encompasses any living entity - even animals and birds; whereas the designation "adam" refers exclusively to the human species. "No ish passed through it" - no living creature, no existing being at all, ever passed there; and furthermore, the place was not even fit for human habitation.
Our Sages already noted this and asked: since no one even passed through, how could anyone have dwelt there? If no one even traversed it, how could it be conceivable that someone would settle there? They answered: every land that Adam HaRishon decreed for settlement became inhabited, and any land that he did not decree for settlement remained uninhabited. For the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Adam HaRishon everything in advance - every generation and its leaders, every generation and its sages, all the lands and inhabited areas. And any place where Adam HaRishon did not decree settlement was never settled.
The Malbim adds another reason: there can be a place where animals do not pass, yet human beings settle it nonetheless, because humans can go to an arid place and artificially divert rivers to it and level the land. Consider what is done in Saudi Arabia and other places, where cities are built right in the middle of the desert. Therefore the verse says "no ish passed through it" - no living being in the world even traversed it; and "no adam dwelt there" - although humans typically settle arid lands through artificial means, here they did not do so. Thus, it was a place where existence was completely impossible, and yet the Holy One, blessed be He, brought you there and provided for your sustenance - so how could you forsake Him and go worship idols?
The Malbim distinguishes between this and what is stated later in chapter 51, verse 43: "no man [ish] shall dwell in them, neither shall any son of man [ben adam] pass through them." There the text says "ben adam" rather than "adam," and there is a distinction: "adam" denotes the species as a whole, while "ben adam" refers to an individual person. Therefore, the meaning there is that no man [ish] will dwell there permanently, though someone might still pass through temporarily; and no "ben adam" will pass through even temporarily. He brings support for this from several other passages as well.
וָאָבִיא אֶתְכֶם אֶל־אֶרֶץ הַכַּרְמֶל לֶאֱכֹל פִּרְיָהּ וְטוּבָהּ וַתָּבֹאוּ וַתְּטַמְּאוּ אֶת־אַרְצִי וְנַחֲלָתִי שַׂמְתֶּם לְתוֹעֵבָה׃ - And I brought you into a fruitful land, to eat its fruit and its goodness; but when you entered, you defiled My land, and made My heritage an abomination.
"A fruitful land [eretz ha-karmel]" - a place planted like a forest and orchard. The Malbim notes that the term "karmel" always appears in contrast to wilderness, as in "and turns a wilderness into a fruitful land," an inhabited, flourishing area filled with trees in contrast to an uninhabited wasteland.
And here, the Malbim explains, the prophet moves to the next stage: after recounting the sins of the fathers, he addresses the children. I brought you into a fruitful land, and the purpose was twofold: "to eat its fruit" - referring to the physical bounty of the land, and "its goodness" - referring to spiritual bliss, for Eretz Yisrael is a holy place endowed with spiritual abundance. Yet instead of these two, the exact opposite occurred. Corresponding to "to eat its fruit" is "you defiled My land" - you committed deeds that prevent material success, for the abundance you were meant to receive cannot reach you once you have defiled the land. And corresponding to "its goodness," the spiritual bounty, the verse states, "and made My heritage an abomination" - a place that is the heritage of Hashem, endowed with holiness and supreme elevation, yet instead of serving Hashem there, you turned it into an abomination.
It is told that when Rav Kook arrived in Eretz Yisrael, several of the greatest Torah leaders went out to welcome him at the port of Jaffa. It is well known that although they disagreed with him very sharply - and Rav Kook held a minority view in his attitude toward those distant from Torah and mitzvos, and in his approach toward the early settlers, Eretz Yisrael, and the beginning of Israel's redemption, with the leading Torah figures of the generation opposing him - nevertheless, everyone appreciated his greatness, and no one disparaged his Torah stature. When there was a need to strengthen the agricultural settlements, Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, Rav Kook, and other Torah giants went out together on the famous "Settlement Journey" (Masa HaMoshavot), traveling among all the settlements in Eretz Yisrael to strengthen them in Torah and mitzvos.
At that gathering at the port, Rav Kook spoke and remarked on our verse: "And you came and defiled My land" - from here we see that you should come, even if you defile My land. For there were those who argued: What is this? People who commit transgressions and soil the King's palace have arrived here, which is dreadful! But he said: "And you came" - nevertheless, come. First of all, it is clear that this is not the literal meaning of the verse (the peshat), for the verse comes as an accusation and grievance, not as a command, and it does not mean "come even if you defile it."
It is told that one of the Torah leaders immediately stood up and said: I must protest against the words spoken here, for they cannot be said. The reason is simple: the Torah explicitly promises that when Israel provokes the Holy One, blessed be He, to anger in Eretz Yisrael, "the land will vomit you out." If so, what room is there to say "come even if you defile My land," when the Torah promises that it will vomit you out? Does it make sense that the Torah would call upon us to come, and then say that if you defile My land I will vomit you out? Certainly this is not the peshat, and certainly that is not how the verse should be understood.
הַכֹּהֲנִים לֹא אָמְרוּ אַיֵּה יְהוָה וְתֹפְשֵׂי הַתּוֹרָה לֹא יְדָעוּנִי וְהָרֹעִים פָּשְׁעוּ בִי וְהַנְּבִאִים נִבְּאוּ בַבַּעַל וְאַחֲרֵי לֹא־יוֹעִלוּ הָלָכוּ׃ - The priests did not say, "Where is Hashem?" and those who handle the Torah did not know Me; the shepherds transgressed against Me, and the prophets prophesied by the Baal and followed things that cannot profit.
The Malbim explains: There are four types of leadership here, four who wear the crown of leadership - the crown of Torah, the crown of Kehunah (priesthood), the crown of Malchut (kingship), and the crown of a good name, which corresponds to prophecy. The priests' purpose is to bring the Shechinah to rest in the House of Hashem, yet they "did not say, 'Where is Hashem?'" Those who hold the Torah ought to know Hashem through their Torah study - for one who studies Torah must know Hashem and see Him within the study - yet they "did not know Me"; and Rashi explains that "those who handle the Torah" refers to the Sanhedrin. "The shepherds," meaning the kings and leaders, "transgressed against Me." "And the prophets prophesied by the Baal" - and Radak explains that this refers to the prophets of the Baal rather than the prophets of Hashem - "and followed things that cannot profit."
The expression "those who handle the Torah" (tofsei haTorah) is very intriguing. The Malbim explains that this is a derogatory term - not "those who engage in Torah," but "those who seize the Torah." Even though today this phrase is used as praise, in the view of the Malbim it is negative. How so? Just like one who grasps a sword, grasps a bow, grasps a sickle, or plays a harp and flute - in all these cases, a person takes hold of something for his own need and benefit. So too with "those who handle the Torah": they engaged in Torah for personal gain and self-benefit, like an axe that one grasps in order to cut. Therefore, "they did not know Me" - each did so solely for his own needs, and not to know Hashem.
Rav Yitzchak Ze'ev Soloveitchik (the Brisker Rav) offers a wonderful explanation: What is the meaning of "the priests did not say, 'Where is Hashem?'" After all, the Shechinah was in the Mikdash, so why should they ask, "Where is Hashem?" Rather, it is written that the Shechinah made ten journeys leading up to the destruction of the Temple - from the Kaporet to the Keruv, from there to a station, and from there to another place, until it ascended to the roof and said: "I will go and return to My place." The kohanim should have noticed that the Shechinah was departing and wandering from place to place, and investigated: Where is Hashem? What happened that the Shechinah went into exile? Could our deeds be corrupt? Could our ways be improper? This is why it says that they did not pause to consider and say, "Where is Hashem?"
לָכֵן עֹד אָרִיב אִתְּכֶם נְאֻם־יְהוָה וְאֶת־בְּנֵי בְנֵיכֶם אָרִיב׃ - Therefore I will yet contend with you, says Hashem, and with your children's children I will contend.
Rashi explains: Even before I bring evil upon you, I will contend with you through the prophets, who are the true prophets; I still have a case against you. And the Malbim explains that "therefore" refers back to everything stated above: We have seen that your fathers sinned, and we have seen that I brought you to a fruitful land yet you continue to sin - therefore, I will contend with you. Moreover, you and your fathers sinned without cause, without benefit, and without gain, as it is said, "What wrong did your fathers find in Me?" and you have no answer as to what you found, why you abandoned Me, and why you strayed far - and if so, I have yet another claim to contend with you.
There is another fundamental principle here: since even the Kohanim did not say, "Where is Hashem?", it turns out that the hand of the princes, officers, and leaders of the people was foremost in this treachery - the rebellion began with the leadership. That is why the Holy One, blessed be He, says, "and with your children's children I will contend" - because there is hope. Had the rebellion originated from yourselves, why would I speak with the rebels? But if the rebellion came to them through corrupt education and leadership, then with the children I still have common ground to speak, for the children are like captured infants (tinokot shenishbu) and are not to blame. The treachery lay with the shepherds, the Kohanim, and the handlers of the Torah, and they were the ones who misled them - and since they were misled, I can speak with them and bring them back in repentance.
This is a deeply insightful point, and it reflects the difference between the Sephardic communities of the East and the emigres of Europe and Ashkenaz. In Ashkenazic lands, heresy had become institutionalized through two centuries of the Haskalah movement, producing people who were third and fourth-generation heretics to the Torah - and speaking with them is difficult. But with whom is it easier to speak? With those whom the leadership secularized and forced away from their religion. For such a person grew up in a home of Torah, guided by fear of Heaven and the path of Hashem, but the establishment took the children and stripped them of every spark of Torah and Judaism, and in worse cases even sheared their peyot and forced them to work on Shabbat. As is well known, an entire commission of inquiry investigated this matter, revealing terrible deeds that are recorded in the pages of history. With these children there is ground to speak, because heresy is not ingrained within them; rather, it stemmed from a leadership that was heretical and forcibly uprooted them from their religion.
The Malbim explains: since the hand of the princes, officers, and leaders of the people was foremost in this treachery, therefore "I will yet contend with you... and with your children's children I will contend," for there is still hope that the people will return to Me, since the heads of the people led them astray from the path. These words are veritable prophecy. One should not imagine that they were written only for their own time, for every prophecy that was committed to writing applies both to its own era and to all generations. The statement here speaks also to the future: I have common ground to speak with the children, because the leaders misled them; the heads of the leadership stripped them of the Judaism and fear of Heaven they had received. As is known, when they brought the immigrants here, they initially did not want to bring the elderly at all, bringing them only when there was no choice, wanting only the youth. Why? Because they said: We have no way to influence the elderly, but from the youth - as remembered from "Aliyat HaNoar" - we will forge a new breed of Jew, a Jew who needs neither Torah nor fear of Heaven. Regrettably, in large measure they succeeded. Yet, by Hashem's mercies, we see precisely what the prophet foretold: that their error can easily be demonstrated to them. It is far easier to bring this generation back in teshuvah, because they were misled, not because the heresy sprang from within themselves. And now the Holy One, blessed be He, proceeds to rebuke them for their deeds.
Chapter 2 opens with a comprehensive introduction to all the prophecies of affliction: although harsh suffering will come, Hashem's love for Israel endures and is never nullified, and those who strike them cruelly will yet be held accountable, stricken, and made to pay like those who unlawfully consume holy things and terumah. From here the prophet transitions to the rebuke: the Holy One, blessed be He, invokes the three merits - Avraham, who proclaimed His Divinity prior to the betrothal; the Revelation at Mount Sinai, which was the chuppah; and their following Him into the wilderness in an unsown land - and asks what injustice they found in Him. There is no injustice, no substance in vanity, and no benefit in the leniencies of idolatry, for one who clings to eternity becomes eternal, while one who clings to futility becomes futile. They did not ask, "Where is Hashem?", neither during the Exodus from Egypt nor in the uninhabitable wilderness; yet once brought into a fruitful land (eretz hacarmel), they defiled the land and turned Hashem's heritage into an abomination. The source of the ruin lay with the four bearers of crowns - the Kohanim, the handlers of the Torah, the shepherds, and the prophets - and precisely for that reason, hope remained for the children, who were led astray and did not rebel out of deliberate defiance. Regarding them, the Holy One, blessed be He, declares: "and with your children's children I will contend."