Exodus 20:5

Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;

Ver. 5. Thou shalt not bow down.] Images came first from Babylon. For Ninus having made an image of his father Belus, all that came to see it were pardoned for their former offences: whence in time that image came to be worshipped, through the instigation of the devil, who is, saith Synesius, ειδωλοχαρης; one that rejoiceth in images.

Am a jealous God.] Be the gods of the heathens good fellows, saith one: the true God is a jealous God, and will not share his glory with another, nor be served by any but in his own way. They that wit-wanton it with God, may look to case worse than that citizen in King Edward IV’s days did; who was executed in Cheapside as a traitor, for saying he would make his son heir of the crown: though he only meant his own house, having a crown for the sign. {a}

Visiting the iniquity.] This second commandment is the first with punishment: because men do commonly punish such as worship God in spirit and in truth. As therefore one fire, so one fear should drive out another i the fear of God, the fear of men. {See Trapp (for summary of Law) on "Exo 20:17"}

{a} Speed’s Chro.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to a thousand generations (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • reject (literally hate): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

And will be revenged on the contemners of mine honor.

By this outward gesture, all kinds of service and worship to idols is forbidden.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 5. Jealous God] This shows in a most expressive manner the love of God to this people. He felt for them as the most affectionate husband could do for his spouse; and was jealous for their fidelity, because he willed their invariable happiness.

Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children] This necessarily implies - IF the children walk in the steps of their fathers; for no man can be condemned by Divine justice for a crime of which he was never guilty; see Eze 13:1-9. Idolatry is however particularly intended, and visiting sins of this kind refers principally to national judgments. By withdrawing the Divine protection the idolatrous Israelites were delivered up into the hands of their enemies, from whom the gods in whom they had trusted could not deliver them. This God did to the third and fourth generations, i.e., successively; as may be seen in every part of the Jewish history, and particularly in the book of Judges. And this, at last, became the grand and the only effectual and lasting means in his hand of their final deliverance from idolatry; for it is well known that after the Babylonish captivity the Israelites were so completely saved from idolatry, as never more to have disgraced themselves by it as they had formerly done. These national judgments, thus continued from generation to generation, appear to be what are designed by the words in the text, Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children, &c.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(5) Nor serve them.—The idolatry of the ancient world was, practically, not a mere worship of celestial beings through material representations of them, but an actual culture of the images themselves, which were regarded as possessed of miraculous powers. “I myself,” says Arnobius, “not so very long ago, worshipped gods just taken out of the furnace, fresh from the anvil of the smith, ivory, paintings, stumps of trees swathed in bandages; and if I happened to cast my eyes on a polished stone smeared with olive oil, I made reverence to it, as if a power were present therein, and addressed myself in supplication for blessings to the senseless block” (Advers. Gentes, i. 29). “People pray,” says Seneca, “to the images of the gods, implore them on bended knees, sit or stand long days before them, throw them money, and sacrifice beasts to them, so treating them with deep respect” (Ap. Lactant., ii. 2).

A jealous God.—Not in the sense in which He was regarded as “jealous” by some of the Greeks, who supposed that success or eminence of any kind provoked Him (Herod. iii. 40, 125), but jealous of His own honour, one who will not see “His glory given to another” (Isa_42:8; Isa_48:11), or allow rivals to dispute His sole and absolute sovereignty. (Comp. Exo_34:14; Deu_4:24; Deu_5:9; Deu_6:15; Jos_24:19.)

Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children.—It is a fact that, under God’s natural government of the world, the iniquity of fathers is visited upon their children. Diseases caused by vicious courses are transmitted. The parents’ extravagance leaves their children beggars. To be the son of a felon is to be heavily handicapped in the race of life. That this should be so is perhaps involved in “the nature of things”—at any rate, it is part of the scheme of Divine government by which the world is ordered. We all inherit countless disadvantages on account of our first parents’ sin. We each individually inherit special tendencies to this or that form of evil from the misconduct of our several progenitors. The knowledge that their sins will put their children at a disadvantage is calculated to check men in their evil courses more than almost anything else; and this check could not be removed without a sensible diminution of the restraints which withhold men from vice. Still, the penalty upon the children is not final or irreversible. Under whatever disadvantages they are born, they may struggle against them, and lead good lives, and place themselves, even in this world, on a level with those who were born under every favourable circumstance. It is needless to say that, as respects another world, their parents’ iniquities will not be visited on them. “Each man will bear his own burthen.” The soul that sinneth, it shall die. “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Eze_18:20).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5. The command of v. 4 developed and emphasized.

bow down … serve] The same combination, Deu_4:19; Deu_8:19; Deu_11:16; Deu_17:3; Deu_29:26; Deu_30:17, Jdg_2:19 (D2[176]); and several times in Jer. [‘worship’ in these passages is in the Heb. bow down, as here].

[176] Deuteronomic passages in Josh., Jud., Kings.

a jealous God] who will not tolerate that the reverence due to Him, should be given to another,—whether to another god (Exo_34:14), or, as here, to an image worshipped, or, if an image of Himself, likely to be worshipped, as Divine,—and whose jealousy is described elsewhere burning like fire against those who thus dishonour Him. Occurring, as it does here, in a comment on the original command (see p. 192), the expression is derived probably from Exo_34:14. It recurs Deu_4:24 (with ‘a devouring fire’), Exo_6:15, Jos_24:19 (E), each time in a similar connexion: cf. the verb in Deu_32:16; Deu_32:21 (the Song; hence Psa_78:58). Jehovah’s honour is, however, intimately connected with that of His people: so his ‘jealousy’ may also be exerted, if circumstances permit it, on His people’s behalf, as Isa_9:7; Isa_42:13; cf. Joe_2:18, Nah_1:2, Zec_1:14, with the writer’s notes.

5. of them that hate me] The term is a strong one, and denotes those who persistently and defiantly oppose themselves to God.

5, 6. visiting …, and doing …] a further definition of Jehovah’s ethical character, as displayed in His attitude towards sin and goodness, respectively. The definition is based (Di.) upon Exo_34:7 (cf. Num_14:18, Jer_32:18), only with the two clauses transposed, so as to give the warning the first place, as the context here demands.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Thou shall not bow down thyself to them,.... Perform any worship to them, show any reverence of them by any gesture of the body; one being mentioned, bowing the body, and put for all others, as prostration of it to the earth, bending the knee, kissing the hand, lifting up of hands or eyes to them, or by any outward action expressing a religious esteem of them, as if there was divinity in them:

nor serve them; in a religious manner, internally or externally, by offering sacrifice and burning incense to them; by praying to, or praising of them; by expressing love to them, faith and trust in them, hope and expectation of good things from them, and the like. The reason of this second command, relating to the making and worshipping of images, next follows:

for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God; jealous of his own honour and glory, and will not give it to another; even to graven images, nor suffer it to be given to them without resenting it; and jealousy is fierce and cruel, and breaks forth into great wrath, and issues in dreadful scenes oftentimes among men; as a man that has reason to be jealous of his wife, and especially if he takes her and the adulterer in the fact, it often costs them both their lives, being so enraged at such an insult upon him, and such a violation of the marriage bed; and thus the great Jehovah, the God of Israel, their head and husband, is represented, in order to deter from idolatry, or spiritual adultery, than which nothing could be more provoking to him:

visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children; meaning chiefly, if not solely, the iniquity of idolatry; which being such an insult on his honour, "crimen laesae majestatis", is treated by him as high treason is among men; not only he punishes the authors and perpetrators of it in their own persons, which is meant by "visiting", but upon their children also, which are parts of themselves; and whatsoever is inflicted on them is the same as on themselves, and is an addition to, and a sensible aggravation of their punishment; and especially these are visited in such a manner, when they tread in their father's steps, and fill up the measure of their iniquity. So the Targum of Jonathan,"visiting the iniquity of ungodly fathers on rebellious children:

unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; as all idolaters must be thought to do, whatsoever love and affection they may pretend to God, by worshipping idols before him, besides him, along with him, or him in them: "the third and fourth generation" are mentioned, because sometimes parents lived to see these, and so with their eyes beheld the punishment inflicted upon their posterity for their sins, which must be distressing to them; or, however, these being but small removes from them, might impress their minds and affect them, to think what their sins would bring upon their descendants, who would quickly come after them, and share in the sad effects of their iniquities, and so be a means to deter them from them.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Adore. Protestants translate again, with the same view, as in the preceding verse, "thou shalt not bow down thyself to them," in condemnation of Catholics, who kneel before the cross. But do not they kneel, when they receive their sacramental bread, or when they ask for their parents’ blessing? Did not St. John, and other saints, bow down out of respect to angels? And were these all idolaters! We are forbidden, therefore, to shew any respect to strange gods. But we must honour the true God in his saints, referring all the glory to him. (Haydock) --- Hate me. Those who do not imitate their wicked ancestors, need not fear being involved in their punishment. (Menochius) (St. Augustine, q. 42; St. Gregory, mor. 15. 22; St. Jerome in Ezechiel xviii.) --- Sometimes, indeed, God takes away the lives of children and of subjects, to punish the sins of parents and of kings; but this may be no real detriment to the deceased. (Haydock) --- Grotius thinks, that this menace is directed against idolaters. Others believe, it may be placed at the conclusion of each of the commandments. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Not only inward reverence is forbidden, but also all outward gestures that naturally or customarily express reverence, whether bowing down the body, as here; or bending the knee, as 1Ki 19:18; or kissing the idol, or one’s hand towards it, as Job 31:27; Hos 13:2; one gesture being by a synecdoche named for all. To them, nor before them; for to bow to them, and to bow before them, are expressions in Scripture of the same extent and use, as appears by comparing this place with Lev 26:1 2Ch 25:14; and 2Sa 7:22, with 1Ch 17:25; and Mat 4:9, with Luk 4:7. Nor serve them; or, worship them, either inwardly in thy mind, or outwardly by any sensible mean or sign of worship given to them, as incense or sacrifice, vowing to them, or swearing by them, or the like. A jealous God, i.e. impatient of any partner in thy love and worship, and full of wrath against them that give my glory to images, Isa 42:8; as jealousy is the rage of a man Pro 6:34 against the defiler of his marriage-bed. God is pleased to call and account himself the Husband of his church and people, Jer 2:2 Hos 2:19; and therefore idolatry is called adultery, Deu 31:16; Jer 3:3,10; and God’s anger against idolaters’ jealousy. The word el properly signifies the strong God, and shows God’s ability to avenge himself, as the word jealous notes his readiness and resolution to do it. Visiting, i.e. remembering, inquiring into, or punishing, (as that word is commonly used, as hath been noted before,)

the iniquity of the fathers upon the children.

Quest. How can this be just?

Answ. 1. All are born sinners, and are children of wrath, and therefore justly punishable for their own sins.

Answ. 2. He speaks not here of eternal damnation, but of temporal punishments, in which there is no shadow of injustice; as appears,

1. Because the sins of parents are oft punished in their children, even in human courts, as is manifest in traitors, which practice being acknowledged to be just, it cannot with any sense be accounted unjust in God.

2. Because such external punishments have more good than evil in them, and are in many, and may be so in others, if themselves do not hinder it, instruments of the greatest good, exercises of their virtues and graces, and means of their eternal happiness.

3. Because children are a part and the possession of their parents, and therefore it is not unjust if they suffer with them, and for them.

Answ. 3. This is to be understood with an exception of repentance, and penitent children, as appears from Eze 18 And if any such be temporally punished for their fathers’ sins, God will abundantly recompense it to them some other way. But if children tread in their fathers’ sinful steps, it is but just that they should partake of their plagues.

Unto the third and fourth generation; and further too, as appears in the ten tribes, and afterwards in the two tribes, upon whom the iniquity of their fathers hath been visited now for many generations. But he mentions them in particular, partly, because a parent may live so long, and see the dreadful effects of his sin in his children’s children; partly, because so far the memory of a father may extend, and be matter of imitation to his children; and partly, to show the difference between his exercise of justice and mercy, as appears by comparing the next verse.

Them that hate me. This word is opposed to the conceit that idolaters, at least many of them, have of themselves, that they love God more than others do, because they love, and honour, and worship the creatures for his sake, and for those excellencies that he hath wrought in them; but this will no more excuse their idolatry, than it will excuse him that commits adultery with his friend’s wife, that he did it for his friend’s sake, and from the love he had to his friend, and for his relations.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them — This confirms the view expressed in the last verse, that idolatrous images are contemplated, not any and all productions of art. Images of Deity, whether under the form of man, or beast, or bird, or the luminaries of the sky, have ever proven a temptation and snare; and for a people just delivered from Egypt, where almost every object in nature was thus deified, such a most emphatic and particular prohibition was demanded. Jehovah therefore proclaims himself a jealous God, and only the shallow sentimentalist will find fault with such a designation of the God of Israel. In the nature of things he cannot undeify himself by giving his glory to another, and his praise to graven images. Isa_42:8. This would be as impossible as it is for God to lie. Here are closely brought together three divine names, JEHOVAH, ELOHIM, and EL. The Almighty and Eternal Being who bears these titles cannot allow his place and name to be taken by another any more than the faithful husband can allow adultery in his wife. This imagery is frequent in the Old Testament, and all idolatry is regarded as spiritual adultery.

Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children — Here is testimony to a law of heredity stamped upon the human race. Mankind are constituted a living, self-perpetuating organism, and one may, by hateful opposition to God, bequeath a curse upon his posterity which will extend unto the third and fourth generation. The word עון, iniquity, means the inherent badness of a perverted moral nature. This is the characterizing quality of them that hate the God of holy revelation. As an idol is a deceptive nothing, (1Co_8:4,) so all who make and worship idolatrous images are virtually the same as those who love and make a lie, (Rev_22:15;) and history shows how the iniquity of idolatry has been wont to propagate itself through many generations. Nor is idolatry the only mortal curse that is wont to be thus entailed. But this Scripture is not to be construed, contrary to Eze_18:20, to mean that children will be punished for their parents’ sins. Guilt cannot be entailed. The child may, physically and mentally, suffer evil consequences because of a parent’s sins, but no guilt of theirs is or can be justly imputed to him who had no part in the sin. The following table, by Lummis, of distinctions between natural consequences and punishment puts the subject in a clear light, and furnishes in itself a valuable study.

Distinctions to be made between Natural Consequences and Punishment.

1. All proper punishment must be deserved.Natural consequences may not be deserved.2. Punishment follows intentional wrong doing only.Consequences follow both intentional and unintentional wrong doing.3. Punishment follows wrong doing after judgment pronounced.Consequences may follow immediately after the wrong act. 4. Punishment is suspended the moment pardon has been declared.Consequences may follow indefinitely after pardon has been granted5. Punishment ceases when the penalty inflicted has been fully borne.Consequences follow as really after the penalty has been suffered as at any time after the wrong doing6. Punishment is visited only on the guilty.Consequences extend equally to the Innocent.7. Punishment is limited by justice.Justice is not applicable to consequences.8. Punishment comes directly from the will of the ruler.Consequences result directly from the constitution of things.9. Punishment is retributive.Consequences are admonitory10. Punishment can only belong where guilt or remorse has been felt.Consequences may exist where remorse is impossible — for example, upon dumb animals.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them. Every outward sign of honour was shown to images in the ancient world. They were not regarded as emblems, but as actual embodiments of deity. There was a special rite in Greece (Theopoea) by means of which the gods were inducted into their statues, and made to take up their abodes in them. Seneca says of the Romans of his own day pray to these images of the gods, implore them on bended knee, sit or stand long days before them, throw them money, and sacrifice beasts to them, so treating them with deep respect, though they despise the man who made them" (Ap. Lam_2:2). I, the Lord thy God am a jealous God. God "will not give his glory to another", (Isa_42:8 Isa_48:11) will not suffer a rival near his throne. He is not "jealous." as the Greeks thought (Heb_7:10, of mere success, or greatness; but he is very jealous of his own honour, and will not have the respect and reverence, which is his due, bestowed on other beings or on inanimate objects. Compare with the present passage. (Exo_34:14; Deu_4:24 Deu_5:9 Deu_6:15; Jos_24:19; etc.) Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children. Exception has been taken to the plain meaning of this passage by a multitude of writers, who dread the reproach of the sceptic, that the God of the Old Testament is a God careless of justice and bent upon revenge. But neither does society, nor does civil justice itself, regard the visiting of parents" sins upon their children as in all cases unjust. Society by its scorn punishes for their parents" transgressions the illegitimate, the children of criminals, the children especially the daughters of adulteresses. Civil justice condemns to forfeiture of their titles and their estates, the innocent children of those executed for treason. God again manifestly does by the laws which obtain in his moral universe, entail on children many consequences of their parents" ill-doing as the diseases which arise from profligacy or intemperance, the poverty which is the result of idleness or extravagance, the ignorance and evil habits which are the fruit of a neglected education. It is this sort of visitation which is intended here. The children and grandchildren of idolaters would start in life under disadvantages. The vicious lives of their parents would have sown in them the seeds both of physical and moral evil. They would commonly be brought up in wrong courses, have their moral sense early perverted, and so suffer for their parents" faults. It would be difficult for them to rise out of their unhappy condition. Still, "each would bear his own iniquity." Each would "be judged by that he had, not by that he bad not." An all-wise God would, in the final award, make allowance for the disadvantages of birth and inherited disposition, and would assign to each that position to which his own conduct his struggles, efforts, endeavours after right entitled him.

To say that the threat "applies only to such children as follow the sins of their fathers" Kalisch) is to empty the passage of all force. It applies to all; but the visitation intended consists in temporal disadvantages, not in the final award of happiness or misery.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

אל קנא A JEALOUS GOD — He is jealous to exact punishment, and does not pass over His rights by pardoning idolatry (Mekhilta). Wherever: the expression קנא occurs it signifies in old French emportement, English zeal, — determining to exact punishment.

לשנאי OF THEM THAT HATE ME — This must be explained in the same sense as the Targum takes it: when they retain in their hands (follow the example of) the evil doings of their ancestors (Sanhedrin 27b);

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

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, 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; 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; ‘yiphkod hashem’ (the Eternal will punish) the host of the high heaven on high., 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., 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. 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. 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. 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). 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, is to be explained (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. 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. From the words of our Rabbis, 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! — 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. You will find the hidden secret of visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children in the Book of Ecclesiastes. (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.

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.