Manifold Punishment/2

Manifold Punishment

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Punished More than Deserved

Sometimes, people are punished more severely than their sins call for. This position subdivides in how it explains why this is justified:

Natural Order

Since this world is run via natural order, it is possible that the nation might receive more than its proper share of retribution.

Sources:Keli YekarVayikra 26:18About R. Shelomo Ephraim Luntschitz, cited by Shadal Yeshayahu 40:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzattopinion brought by ShadalYeshayahu 40:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto,

"וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" – Keli Yekar explains this verse literally.  Hashem threatens the people that if they continue to sin they will pay seven-fold for their crimes, for Hashem will leave them to chance, which has no mercy.

"כִּי לָקְחָה מִיַּד י"י כִּפְלַיִם בְּכׇל חַטֹּאתֶיהָ" – According to the opinion brought by Shadal, this verse, too, should be understood literally.  The people did, in fact, receive double the punishment due to them. Hashem had given them into the hands of their enemies, who proceeded to afflict Israel as they wished, resulting in their inflicting more suffering on the nation than deserved.

Divine providence vs. natural order – This approach justifies the disproportionate punishment by viewing it as part of the natural order by which the world is run. However, the position divides regarding whether natural order is the norm or the exception:

• Natural order predominant – Hashem rarely intervenes to disrupt the natural running of the world, preferring to let nature takes its course.  As such, it is often possible to suffer from the vicissitudes of chance and human decisions. In addition, once Hashem unleashes His messengers to destroy, they are unlimited and indiscriminate, leading to the possibility that they might inflict unwarranted punishment.¹
• Divine providence predominant – Keli Yekar, in contrast, assumes that normally the world is run via Divine providence. Hashem only leaves the world to chance as a punishment for sins. This is the exact context in which the manifold punishment in Vayikra is mentioned. Hashem threatens the nation: "וְאִם תֵּלְכוּ עִמִּי קֶרִי... וְהָלַכְתִּי אַף אֲנִי עִמָּכֶם בְּקֶרִי", telling them that if they don't recognize Hashem's providence, but rather assume that what occurs to them is the product of chance,² Hashem will punish them accordingly and deliberately leave their fate to such chance.³

"וְהִכֵּיתִי אֶתְכֶם גַּם אָנִי" / "מִיַּד י"י" – Though this position assumes that the excessive suffering is actually inflicted by humans or natural forces, the verses nonetheless attribute it to Hashem since He is the one who begins the process.

Compensation in the World to Come? These sources might take one of two positions regarding the World to Come, in line with the different understandings of Divine providence above:

• Compensation – According to those who say that this world is generally run by nature, full justice is only meted out in the World to Come.  At that point, anyone who suffered excessively in this world is compensated, so no injustice is committed.⁴
• No compensation – According to the approach that the world is generally run by Divine providence, full justice is meted out already in this world.  In a case where Hashem intentionally hides His face, it is possible that the resulting afflictions are not compensated for in the Next World at all.  A lack of belief in Divine providence justifies the removal of that providence, even if this results in being punished out of proportion to one's crimes.

"אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי קָצַפְתִּי מְּעָט וְהֵמָּה עָזְרוּ לְרָעָה" – This verse in Zekharyah describes a reality in which other nations might punish Israel more than Hashem would have wanted, supporting the idea that Hashem does not always intervene to prevent undue punishment.  Sometimes the messengers He has chosen to inflict punishment go beyond their assignments.  There are several other examples of this throughout Tanakh:

• Egypt – The decision to not only enslave the Israelites but also kill all firstborns has been understood by several sources⁵ as going beyond Hashem's decree of "וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה".
• Assyria – Yeshayahu 10:5-11 suggests that though Assyria had been appointed Hashem's "rod of wrath" they attacked Israel beyond what Hashem desired. While Hashem sent Assyria "to take spoils," he was intent on destruction ("כִּי לְהַשְׁמִיד בִּלְבָבוֹ"), and as such merited his own punishment.⁶

Theodicy and collective punishment – The approach taken here has been used to explain other similar philosophical quandaries such as why the righteous suffer while the wicked prosper, or why collective punishment is justified. These phenomena, too, are understood to be the result of the natural order by which the world is run. For elaboration, see Theodicy – צדיק ורע לו and Collective Punishment.

Punished for Parent's Sins

Hashem's system of justice allows for the vicarious or collective punishment of children for their parent's sins, resulting in undue suffering of the descendant.

Sources:perhaps RashiYeshayahu 40:2About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki,⁷ R. Yosef KimchiYeshayahu 40:2Yirmeyahu 16:18, AbarbanelYeshayahu 40:2About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel #3,

"כִּי לָקְחָה מִיַּד י"י כִּפְלַיִם בְּכׇל חַטֹּאתֶיהָ" – According to these sources, this verse can be understood according to its simple, literal sense. The nation did get punished "double," once for their own sins and once for the sins of their parents, in line with the principle of "פֹּקֵד עֲוֺן אָבֹת עַל בָּנִים" (Shemot 20:4).

"וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" – The context of this verse is specifically the repeat offenses of the nation,⁸ which this approach understands as the continued sinning of successive generations of Israelites.⁹ Hashem warns the nation that if they continue in the path of their fathers, they will be punished severely,¹⁰ for both their own crimes and those of the previous generation.

"Seven" and "Double": Literal or figurative? While this approach reads the word "double" literally, it suggests that "שֶׁבַע" should be understood figuratively to mean "many" rather than seven specifically.¹¹ Other examples of such usage include Mishlei 24:16: "כִּי שֶׁבַע יִפּוֹל צַדִּיק וָקָם and Shemuel I 2:5: "עַד עֲקָרָה יָלְדָה שִׁבְעָה".

Collective or vicarious punishment? The verses in Vayikra speak of the collective punishment of both generations. Despite the initial punishments given to the first generation of sinners, the second generation continued in their rebellious ways, resulting in their double punishment. Yeshayahu, on the other hand, might be speaking of either vicarious or collective punishment for the sins of the nation's ancestors.

Why is this just? These sources seem to take it for granted that collective or vicarious punishment of children for their parents crimes is a legitimate and justified mode of Divine punishment.  For extensive analysis of how it works and why it is justified, see Are Children Punished for Parents' Sins. Several explanations which can easily be applied to our verses follow:

• Collateral damage – According to RalbagYehoshua 7:1About R. Levi b. Gershom, children suffer as a natural consequence of their parents being punished.¹² If Yeshayahu is speaking of the Messianic times, and comforting  those in exile, then this explanation is apt.  Though the people's own sins might not have merited them exile, they found themselves suffering there as collateral damage for their parent's crimes.
• Necessary for rehabilitation – Children who follow in the path of their parent's sins, as described in Vayikra, are so accustomed to sinning, that it is difficult to extract them from the cycle.  As such, they need double the punishment to act as a corrective.
• Collective body – U. Cassuto views the Jewish nation as a unified transgenerational community with a collective life of its own. Thus, he says, it is only reasonable that the actions of any generation or part of this body could impact any other generation.

"פֹּקֵד עֲוֺן אָבֹת עַל בָּנִים": Individual or collective? This approach views the principle of "פֹּקֵד עֲוֺן אָבֹת עַל בָּנִים" as applying on the national level, and not simply on the individual familial level.

Sin More Egregious than Appears

The sin for which the nation is punished is actually more severe than the verses makes it appear.  As such, the harsh punishment described is justified.

Sources:Sifra Vayikra26:18About the Sifra Vayikra, Eikhah RabbahIntroductionAbout Eikhah Rabbah, RashiVayikra 26:18About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorVayikra 26:18About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RadakYeshayahu 40:2About R. David Kimchi, Paneach RazaVayikra 26:18About R. Yitzchak b. Yehuda, RalbagYehoshua 7:1About R. Levi b. Gershom, AbarbanelYeshayahu 40:2About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel #2, Or HaChayyimVayikra 26:18About R. Chayyim b. Atar

"וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" – These sources amplify  the sin spoken of in one of two ways:

• Most of these sources claim that the seven-fold punishment is measure for measure punishment for the nation's seven-fold transgression.¹³ As such, there is a one to one correspondence between sin and punishment, not seven to one.¹⁴
• Ralbag, instead, maintains that the verses are speaking of a repeat offender, who, being mired in his sin, requires greater punishment to help him out of his morass than other sinners do.¹⁵

"כִּי לָקְחָה מִיַּד י"י כִּפְלַיִם בְּכׇל חַטֹּאתֶיהָ" – Radak¹⁶ explains that the "double punishment" refers to the two exiles, each a punishment for its own set of sins. The nation's many crimes (כׇל חַטֹּאתֶיהָ) merited them two stints in exile.¹⁷

"Seven" and "Double": Literal or figurative? Most of these sources read each of the terms literally, suggesting that Hashem speaks of either seven or two punishments (and not simply "many" punishments), to match either seven or two sets of sins.  Ralbag, however, apparently  reads "seven" as a figurative term for "many".

Who is punished? The commentaries on Vayikra understand the punishment to be inflicted on one generation, who has itself erred in multiple ways, while Radak on Yeshayahu assumes that the prophet is speaking of the nation's sins and retribution during two distinct generations. Radak is viewing the nation as a transgenerational body, and assuming that the prophet does not distinguish between afflictions suffered by ancestors and those suffered by later generations, comfort the latter as if they themselves had suffered two-fold.

Divine providence – This approach assumes that the world is run by Divine providence and that Hashem watches over the nation to punish it exactly as it deserves, and no more.  As these verses speak only on the national level, however, it is not clear if these sources would say the same regarding individual providence.

World to Come – The existence of a World to Come does not preclude justice in this world; thus Hashem never punishes Israel unduly.  It is also possible that the World to Come is reserved for individual justice, while all justice pertaining to the nation as a whole must be meted out already in this world.

Theodicy – Aspects of this approach can be used to address the lager question of unjust suffering of the righteous (צדיק ורע לו).  It is possible that, as in this case of disproportionate punishment, the phenomenon does not really exist, and is just a misperception. One who appears righteous to the outsider, might not really be as upright as he seems; his sins might be more numerous or severe than first thought, justifying his suffering.  For further discussion, see Theodicy – צדיק ורע לו.

Punishment Less Harsh than Appears

The verses' description of the punishment makes it sound worse than it really is.  As such, the nation did not really suffer more than deserved.

Sources:Ibn EzraVayikra 26:18Yeshayahu 40:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Eliezer of BeaugencyYeshayahu 40:2About R. Eliezer of Beaugency, Akeidat YitzchakTorah 37Torah 70Torah 88About R. Yitzchak Arama, AbarbanelVayikra 26:14Yeshayahu 40:2About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, ShadalShemot 21:17Yeshayahu 40:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, MalbimYeshayahu Beur HaInyan 40:2About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

"וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" – Though these sources agree that in reality the people did not suffer as much as the verse suggests, they differ in how they explain why the verse implies that they did:

• Intentional exaggeration – Hashem deliberately exaggerated when speaking of the people's punishment, so as to most effectively frighten them into obedience.¹⁸
• Unintentional exaggeration – Alternatively, the impression of excessive punishment is unintentional. 
• Figurative language –  In Tanakh, the number seven is often used to express a large quantity.¹⁹ As such, Hashem is merely relaying that the people will deserve a large punishment, not that they will get seven times their due.²⁰
• Relative punishment – According to Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel, the punishment mentioned is relative.  Hashem told the nation that if they did not improve their ways, they would be punished seven times the amount they had been punished previously (but in proportion to their crimes).

"כִּי לָקְחָה מִיַּד י"י כִּפְלַיִם בְּכׇל חַטֹּאתֶיהָ" – The general approaches mentioned above can be applied to the verse in Yeshayahu as well:

• Intentional exaggeration – According to most of these sources,²¹ the exaggeration is intentional.  When comforting another, it is natural to exaggerate the afflictions that the person suffered.²² Thus, Hashem, too, intentionally overstated the people's suffering so as to better comfort them.
• Unintentional exaggeration – Ibn Ezra, in contrast, suggests that the prophet was simply speaking in relative terms. Yeshayahu told the people that they received double the punishment that other nations received (because they sinned more than others).²³

"דברה תורה בלשון בני אדם" – This approach assume that Tanakh often expresses itself in the way that people do. As such, certain verses can best be understood in light of the norms of people's behavior and speech, recognizing that they use hyperbole and the like.²⁴

Empty threats – One might question whether Hashem's use of an empty threat is an effective tool to deter disobedience. If one exaggerates in describing a prospective punishment but does not carry it through, does it not lead the sinner to assume that other warnings of punishment can similarly be ignored?

Divine providence – This position assumes that the world is run via Divine providence, and that Hashem would never let the collective of Israel suffer if not warranted. It is possible, however, that individual providence works differently, and though the collective always gets its just due, individual Israelites do not.

Theodicy – The approach presented here to explain disproportionate punishment can be applied to the more general issue of "צדיק ורע לו".  In such cases, too, it only seems that someone is getting more punishment than deserved.  On closer inspection, however, it might turn out that the apparent suffering was actually not a punishment at all. For elaboration, see Theodicy – צדיק ורע לו.

"וְהָשֵׁב לִשְׁכֵנֵינוּ שִׁבְעָתַיִם אֶל חֵיקָם" – Just as it is the way of one who comforts to exaggerate the victim's suffering, so too it is the way of a victim to request that excessive punishment come to their enemies.

¹ See Rashi who understands the command to the nation during the Plague of Firstborns: "וְאַתֶּם לֹא תֵצְאוּ אִישׁ מִפֶּתַח בֵּיתוֹ עַד בֹּקֶר" in light of this phenomenon. Hashem tells the nation to stay indoors since once the "משחית" was given permission to destroy, it would not differentiate between Egyptian and Isarelite unless they stayed put in their marked homes.

² According to Keli Yekar, the word "קֶרִי"  is related to the word "מקרה," happenstance.

³ It is in such periods that nature takes over, allowing for "seven-fold" punishments.

⁴ One might still question why it is just to defer proper reward rather than receive it immediately.

⁵ See Shemot Rabbah, RadakBereshit 15:14About R. David Kimchi, and the Raavad who use this fact to justify why the Egyptians deserved punishment if they were only fulfilling a Divine decree.  For elaboration, see Divine Plans and Egyptian Free Choice.

⁶ See RadakYeshayahu 52:4About R. David Kimchi on Yeshayahu 52:4 who explains the phrase, "וְאַשּׁוּר בְּאֶפֶס עֲשָׁקוֹ" similarly to mean that Assyria afflicted Israel in an unwarranted manner, and as such, despite her acting on Hashem's decree, she deserved retribution for her excessive actions.

⁷ Rashi merely states that it is Hashem's manner to pay someone double for their sins without elaborating, but he brings a prooftext from Yirmeyahu 16:18, which he explains there as relating to children paying for their parent's sins.

⁸ Throughout the passage Hashem says, "וְאִם עַד אֵלֶּה לֹא תִשְׁמְעוּ לִי", "וְאִם בְּאֵלֶּה לֹא תִוָּסְרוּ לִי‏", "וְאִם בְּזֹאת לֹא תִשְׁמְעוּ לִי‏"‎‏ and the like, warning the people that if they keep sinning despite their punishments, they will receive more retribution.

⁹ The more common understanding is that it speaks of the repeated sinning of one generation.

¹⁰ See the next point, that this approach is reading "שֶׁבַע" as a means of expressing "severe punishment" but not necessarily "seven-fold".

¹¹ See Rashbam and Ibn EzraVayikra 26:18Yeshayahu 40:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra.

¹² Ralbag offers an analogy to a person punished by the confiscation of his property whose children will thus be poorer as they receive no inheritance.

¹³ See the lists of transgressions  brought by R. Yosef Bekhor ShorVayikra 26:18About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Or HaChayyimVayikra 26:18About R. Chayyim b. Atar. Each commentator finds seven sins in the immediately preceding verses in Vayikra, which speak of various iniquities committed by the nations.

¹⁴ The phrase "וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" appears three times in Vayikra 26 (verses 18, 24 and 28) ) and one final time (verse 21) with a slight difference, "וְיָסַפְתִּי .עֲלֵיכֶם מַכָּה שֶׁבַע כְּחַטֹּאתֵיכֶם" This version of the phrase might support the idea that the punishment was measure for measure - seven times, just like your (seven) sins.

¹⁵ This is similar to Hashem punishing children who continue in their parent's sinful path for both their own sins and also their parent's since it is harder for them to correct their ways.

¹⁶ See also the second possibility raised by Abarbanel.

¹⁷ According to this reading, the prophecy of Yeshayahu speaks of Messianic times. Yeshayahu comforts the nation by telling them that since they have already suffered through two exilic periods, their punishment is finally complete, and the ultimate redemption is at hand.

¹⁸ See ShadalShemot 21:17About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto regarding the rebellious son, who suggests that there, too, the Torah exaggerates his punishment, not intending for it to be carried through except under exceptional circumstances: "וזה אמנם כלל גדול, הרבה משפטים צריכים להאמר דרך גיזום ואיום, מבלי שיצדק להוציאם לפעל אלא בתנאים שאין מציאותם קרובה;"

¹⁹ See examples brought above and others listed by RashbamVayikra 26:18About R. Shemuel b. Meir.

²⁰ Both Rashbam and Ibn Ezra point this out, but it is not clear if they do so in order to address the theological question of the justice of Hashem's actions, or only to highlight that the verse need not be speaking of specifically seven punishments.

²¹ See R. Eliezer of Beaugency, Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel, and Shadal.

²² Abarbanel points out that an individual does not want to hear that they deserve their punishment, but rather that their suffering was more than their due. As evidence he points to Iyyov who was not comforted by the friends who told him that his suffering was just retribution for sins.

²³ Malbim raises a third possibility – that the people received double the punishment but for half the time.  Thus, if they were supposed to suffer 50 lashes a day over 10 years, they instead received 100 a day over 5 years.  He compares this to the enslavement in Egypt.  Though the people were supposed to be in Egypt for 400 years, they were instead there for only 210 years, but under much harsher conditions.

²⁴ Examples of such interpretation abound.  See Rashbam's understanding of the repetition in Esav's words "הַלְעִיטֵנִי נָא מִן הָאָדֹם הָאָדֹם הַזֶּה" as being the way of one who is in a hurry, or his dismissal of reading any significance into the fact the angels in Yaakov's dream first go up and then down, since "כן דרך ארץ להזכיר עלייה קודם ירידה."