What are the implications of the word "Lo Sishtachaveh Lahem, v'Lo Sa'avdem"?
Sanhedrin 61b: "Lahem" implies "Do not bow down to them;" 'but you may bow down to a human-being like yourself.' "V'Lo Sa'avdem" precludes a human-being who is worshipped like Haman from the concession. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 29, who explains the difference.
Since the Torah writes "v'Lo Sa'avdem," why does it need to specify "Lo Sishtachaveh Lahem"?
Sanhedrin 61b: "Lo Sa'avdem" refers to worshipping an Avodah Zarah in the way that it is normally worshipped (such as exposing oneself and defecating to Pe'or, or throwing a stone at Markulis); 1 whereas "Lo Sishtachaveh Lahem" refers to bowing down (prostrating oneself) to an idol, even though it is not the way that that idol is normally worshipped.
Yerushalmi Sanhedrin, 5:9: To teach us that someone who performs a number of different Avodos 2 on behalf of an Avodah Zarah is Chayav for each one independently.
What is the significance of three instances in the Torah prohibiting prostration to an idol - one here, one in Parshas Mishpatim - "Lo Sishtachaveh Lei'loheihem v'Lo Sa'avdem" (Shemos 23:24), and one in Ki Sisa - "Ki Lo Sishtachaveh l'Eil Acher" (34:14)?
Sanhedrin 63b: One refers to 'k'Darkah' (i.e., that is the way that that particular idol is worshipped), once to 'she'Lo k'Darkah' (even if it is not the way that it is worshipped), and once, to render one Chayav for each Avodah - see the preceding question 20:5:0.2 .
What are the connotations of "Keil Kana"?
Rashi: It means that, when it comes to Avodah-Zarah, Hashem is zealous - He will punish the sinner, and not pardon him.
Ramban (in Pasuk 3): It is not befitting that Yisrael partners Hashem with any other being 1 - specifically Yisrael, Hashem's treasured nation, whom He singled out from all the other nations. 2
Seforno: Hashem does not want to share His Kavod with others. 3 Consequently, when people confer Hashem's honor upon another, He is zealous for the honor that has been conferred upon one who is unworthy of it.
Hadar Zekenim (to Pasuk 3): Hashem loves you so much that He wants that you will be slaves only to Him, and He is therefore angry with those who worship other gods.
Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael Ch. 38, p. 116): Why is this Hashem's way? Just like, if a married woman joins someone else, the result is "v'Kinei Es Ishto" (Bamidbar 5:14), so too when a person makes Hashem second, the result is Kin'ah. 4
Ramban: As this is akin to a woman who abandons her husband and goes with another man, or to a servant who adopts another master. It does not therefore apply to other nations, whom Hashem placed under the jurisdiction of the celestial bodies.
Seforno: Since there is no one who can in any way compare with Hashem.
Compare to Ramban (to 20:3) - "Kin'ah is ascribed to Hashem only regarding Avodah Azarah." Maharal thus continues his approach (cited above 20:3:6:2 ) - Avodah Zarah is connecting to the Chitzoniyus (external) forces in creation; it is called being "secondary." Also see above, 20:3:3 - Idolatry is called "Acherim" - thus the comparison to an adulterous woman with an Ish Acher. (See Maharal Chidushei Agados Vol. 2, p. 136, to Kidushin 30b.)
Why does Hashem wait so long before punishing the sinners?
Ramban and Seforno: He waits until their measure is full - since the generations go from bad to worse - before destroying them. 1
Seforno: Like Yarave'am ben Nevat, whose children and grandchildren followed in his footsteps. Ramban adds that we never find the term "Kana" in any context other than that of Avodah-Zarah. (The Pasuk in Bamidbar 25:11 implies that Hashem was zealous due to Zimri's Zenus, but we can say that it was due to idolatry - See Bamidbar 25:2 -3. (PF)
To whom is "l'Sone'ai" referring?
Rashi, Ramban, Rashbam and Targum Onkelos: It refers to those who go in the evil ways of their fathers. 1
Oznayim la'Torah: It refers to people who sin in order to anger Hashem (where there is otherwise nothing to gain by sinning). 2
In what manner does Hashem "visit the fathers' sins upon the children" and upon subsequent generations?
Ramban #1 (citing Ibn Ezra) and Targum Yonasan: It means that Hashem remembers 1 the sins of the fathers up to the fourth generation, waiting for them to do Teshuvah Hashem delays punishing the sinner; perhaps he will yet beget a righteous son. But if the son continues his father's sinful ways - and so on for four generations - Hashem will not grant such a delay for the fourth generation. Rather He will wipe out the memory of all of them. 2
Ramban, Seforno 3 and Targum Onkelos: Hashem avenges the sins of the father, even onto to the sons (if they do not do Teshuvah) 4 and destroys them, and then on to the grandsons or great-grandsons, 5 in the event that the measure of the previous generations are not full. 6 But the fifth generation is not punished at all for their ancestor's sin.
Moshav Zekenim and Hadar Zekenim (to Pasuk 3): Normally, Hashem waits until one dies - in case he will repent. However, if the fourth generation persists in evil, He destroys them immediately, due to the Chazakah [that they will continue to perpetrate evil].
Rosh (to Pasuk 6): For idolatry, Hashem punishes up to four generations even if one could not protest [against his family]. For other sins, one is punished for his own sin, and he is only punished for the sins of his family if he could have protested.
Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael Ch. 43, p. 133): Hashem visits punishment of a Rasha upon his son; and if he was very wicked then even upon his grandson, and so on. But certainly the Rasha himself is punished, and the closer generations more so than the further ones. 7
Ibn Ezra: "Pokeid" is like "Zocher," also in Bereishis 21:1.
Ramban asks - But if so, the Torah should state, 'He visits the sin of the fathers, the sons and the Shileshim - [all] upon the Ribe'im!' Furthermore, the same verb "Pekidah" (accounting or remembering) is applied to all these generations; it does not specify "punishment" for the fourth generation. What's more, Chazal calculate that Hashem's way in rewarding the Tzadikim is 500 times greater than His way in punishment of Resha'im (as Rashi cites). Whereas to Ibn Ezra's explanation, the Torah is not describing here Hashem's trait in punishment, (but rather that of Erech Apayim - His delaying anger).
Ramban: As in Shemos 32:34, and in Yeshayah 27:1.
See, for example, Bereishis 15:16.
Ramban comments that the similar Pasuk in Shemos 34:7, "Pokeid Avon Avos, etc...," should be explained likewise. But if so, is that phrase part of the 13 Attributes of Mercy - or is it a trait of punishment? Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Teshuvah Ch. 6, p. 165) - Unlike our Pasuk which concludes with the word "l'Sone'ai," Shemos 34:7 omits it. Therefore, our Pasuk is explaining Hashem's trait in exacting punishment (like Ramban), whereas 34:7 discusses His traits of mercy (like Ibn Ezra).
Maharal derives this from the extra "Vav" in the Aseres ha'Dibros of Sefer Devarim - "v'Al Shileshim," forming a list. This is then parallel to the reward of Tzadikim, which extends through multiple generations. (Whereas according to Ramban only one generation is punished; Ramban explains the Vav to mean "or" in this context. Also see 20:12:157:1, letter b. )
Why does our Pasuk state that Hashem extends punishment over three generations - "Banim," "Shileshim," and "Ribe'im" (and likewise in Bamidbar 14:18, in Moshe's Tefilah after the Meraglim); whereas Shemos 34:7 (the 13 Midos of Rachamim) states four generations - "Banim," "Bnei Banim," "Shileshim," and "Ribe'im"?
Ibn Ezra: Bnei Banim (grandchildren) are also referred to as Banim (children); this is implicit within "Shileshim, Ribe'im." 1
Ramban: "Banim" is the second generation, thus "Shileshim" means grandchildren. 2 In 34:7, the verse then explains that "Bnei Banim" means "Shileshim and Ribe'im."
Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael Ch. 38, p. 116): Our Pasuk introduces the idea that fathers' sins may be visited upon the sons. In answer to how far down, it specifies as far as Shileshim and Ribe'im (but no further). 3 But in the section of the 13 Midos, which is introduced by "I shall cause all of My Good to pass before your face" (33:19), it specifies all of them. 4
Ibn Ezra appears to be addressing this very issue. (Hence, Ramban understands Ibn Ezra to mean that Ribe'im are great-great-grandsons.)
Ramban counts the initial sinner as the "first" generation, such that "Shileshim" in our Pasuk means the same as "Bnei Banim" in Shemos 34:7 . Thus, all the sources concur that liability goes as far as great-grandchildren only.
Maharal implies that "Banim" alone would imply future generations in general; the Pasuk therefore must specify a limit.
This implies that Maharal views "Bnei Banim" as distinct from Shileshim -- in which case he holds like Ibn Ezra, that Ribe'im are great-great-grandchildren. But Maharal in Nesivos Olam (Nesiv ha'Teshuvah Ch. 6, p. 165; also see 20:5:4.2:3 from Nesiv ha'Torah) explains as does Ramban. (EK)
Why does Hashem exact payback, up to four generations specifically?
Maharal #1 (Tif'eres Yisrael Ch. 38, p. 116): It is fitting to punish only those descendants whose lifetimes overlap with that of the sinner. 1
Maharal #2 (ibid.): To sin is to deviate from being Yashar (straight), 2 and to veer towards the Chutz (outside). As explained above, the outside of an object has four sides. By attaching himself to evil, he and his offspring are stuck to "Chitzoniyus" for four generations. 3
Maharal #3 (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Torah, end Ch. 17, p. 74): A son, grandson, and great-grandson are considered as one generation. But any further than this fourth generation is no longer associated with their ancestor. 4
A person is capable of having a child at age 14, and a fourth generation (a great-great grandchild) from age 56 and up. But at age 70 his years in the world are up, such that the fifth generation is not considered to coincide with his own. (As above, Maharal understands Ribe'im like Ibn Ezra.)
The trait of a Tzadik is to walk "the straight and narrow" path of Yashrus; he does not veer out towards extremes. Whereas to sin is to veer to extremes after specific Midos (such as misplaced Chesed or misplaced Din - compare to Bereishis 40:10:1.2:9** ). This can have repercussions for up to four generations. (In the next Pasuk we learn that Tzadikim positively benefit their descendants for 2000 generations.)
On the contrary, one's offspring should relate to the Penimiyus (inwardness) of a person - just like the seeds of a fruit are found on the inside.
Maharal compares to Chazal - "Because Lot's older daughter preceded her sister (with pure motives), she merited entering the Malchus Beis David (Rus ha'Moaviah) four generations earlier than she (through Na'amah ha'Amonis)." We may derive that had the difference been only three generations they would be considered concurrent. Perhaps thus relates to the concept of Lavud (see above, 19:1:151.1:3*** ). (EK)
How will we reconcile this idea with the Pasuk, "u'Vanim Lo Yumesu Al Avos" (Devarim 24:16)?
Berachos 7a: The current Pasuk is speaking where the children follow the path of their fathers; 1 whereas the Pasuk in Devarim is speaking where they don't.
See Torah Temimah, note 35.
If Hashem punishes the third generation of sinners, how can there be a fourth generation?
Seforno: He destroys the third generation if they degenerate further, 1 and the fourth generation, if they continue along their grandfather's path without degenerating further. 2
See above, 20:5:4 answers 1 thru 3 .
Based on the Bechor Shor: The third generation is punished, but it is not killed before bearing children. However, the fourth generation is killed and will not beget a fifth generation.
Seforno: As occurred with the children of King Omri (See Melachim II 9:8-9 ).
Seforno: As occurred with the children of Yehu (See Melachim II 10:30 ).
How will we reconcile this Pasuk with the Pasuk in Navi, "ha'Nefesh ha'Choteis Hi Tamus" (Yechezkel 18:4)?
Makos 24a: 'Moshe Rabeinu issued a decree, and Yechezkel annulled it....' 1
Oznayim la'Torah #1: It is only a Mumar l'Hach'is (an apostate who sins in order to anger Hashem) whose children are punished for his sins, but not a Mumar l'Te'avon (one who sins with nothing to gain). 2
Oznayim la'Torah #2 (citing Abarbanel): It is only in connection with Avodah Zarah (the current Pasuk) that children are punished for the sins of their fathers; Regarding all other sins (the Pasuk in Yechezkel), it is only the sinner who is punished, not his children.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "[I visit the fathers' iniquity upon the children...] to those who hate Me - when they maintain the [evil] deeds of their forefathers." What is the source for this interpretation?
Gur Aryeh: The Torah teaches in Parshas Ki Seitzei," Fathers shall not be put to death because of children, nor children put to death because of fathers; [rather] each man for his own sins may be put to death" (Devarim 24:16) - thus we learn that a son who did Teshuvah is not punished for his forefathers' sins. But Gur Aryeh asks, even if the son continues his father's evil ways, let him be punished only "for his own sins;" why should he be punished twice-over? He answers that a father is like the roots (of a tree), and the son is a branch. When the son continues the path of his fathers, he is still part of the tree, which may be punished as one. But by changing his ways, he can break away and avoid this. 1
Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael, end Ch. 38, p. 117): Furthermore, when a Rasha has a son who is a Tzadik, but the grandson is a Rasha, because there is already a disconnect between grandfather and grandson they are not viewed as one. Chazal (in Mechilta) teach that Moshe rejoiced when he heard this! Klal Yisrael is inherently good, and consecutive generations of Resha'im are not found among them.
