Isaiah: The Greatest of the Later Prophets | Introduction Part 1

There are good reasons not to accept the Rabbi’s order of the books of the Bible—and we’re right to not follow it.

Welcome to Gateways, where you experience the Nevi'im Acharonim—the Later Prophets—through the teachings of Don Yitzchak Abarbanel, distilled into easy-to-follow lessons.

This is the first of three posts covering the Abarbanel’s introduction to to the book of Isaiah.

One of the most notable features of Abarbanel’s writing is how modest he is. While he is very confident in his own understanding, he never asks you to accept his point of view simply because he said it. Instead, he provides proofs and logic to make his point.

To make his wisdom more accessible, I’ve provided an abridged version first, which is about 1,600 words. If you’d like, you can read the unabridged version that comes in at over 4,250 words here.

In this post, Abarbanel raises the question of why the order of our bible—Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah—differs from what the Rabbis said of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah.

He argues that Isaiah comes first for five reasons,

1. Chronological

2. His stature

3. The quality prophecy

4. The number of prophecies concerning the redemption

5. The number of prophecies concering the resureection.

The first three reasons are covered in this post.

I’ve also added a brief takeaway section at the end of the abridged version, offering some reflections on how we can apply these ideas to our life.

My additions are in italics. I used bold to draw attention to some key words to faciliatate understanding.

~Jeff

Photo by Leon Natan

---

Abridged

Said Yitzchak the Spaniard, son of the minister, the honorable Yehuda Abarbanel of blessed memory, from the holy seed, from the house of David:

The Question: Why Did We Not Follow the Sages?

Regarding the order of the Prophets, we have found and seen the custom of the Jewish people, which differs from what our Sages of blessed memory said in the first chapter of tractate Bava Batra.

There, they said the order of the Prophets is: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Twelve (Minor Prophets). And they gave a reason for why Jeremiah is placed before, and Ezekiel and Isaiah after him—saying that the Book of Kings ends with destruction; and Jeremiah is entirely destruction; Ezekiel begins with destruction and ends with consolation; and Isaiah is entirely consolation. And so, they grouped destruction after destruction, and consolation after consolation.

However, our ancestors in exile did not follow that order, but instead began with Isaiah, followed by Jeremiah, then Ezekiel, and then the Twelve.

And with careful consideration, I see that their words are upright and complete in their reasoning—by placing the Book of Isaiah before the books of the other prophets—and this is for five reasons:
The first is based on chronology, and the others are based on superiority. I will now recall them as I remember:

First Reason: Chronological Order

What comes earlier in time deserves to be remembered before what came later. And it is known that Isaiah prophesied a long time before Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Therefore, it is fitting that Isaiah’s book comes before theirs. Just like the Book of Joshua comes before Judges, Judges before Samuel, and Samuel before Kings—based on the chronological order of the events—so too, Isaiah should come before Jeremiah and Ezekiel, according to the times of their prophecies.

For the prophetic books relate to one another the same way the historical books relate to one another.

Even though these three books—Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel—are like branches of the Book of Kings, since their content is the prophecies delivered to the kings mentioned in Kings: Isaiah prophesied to Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—kings of Judah; Jeremiah prophesied afterwards to Josiah and to his sons Jehoiakim and Zedekiah; Ezekiel prophesied during the exile of Jehoiachin, which was in the time of Jeremiah.

So, just like the Book of Kings first tells of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah before Josiah and his sons, likewise Isaiah should come before Jeremiah and Ezekiel—based on the order of the kings to whom they prophesied.

The Sages reasoning isn’t compelling

Now, the reasoning the Sages gave—to group destruction with destruction and consolation with consolation—is not compelling.

Why must destruction follow destruction, and consolation follow consolation?

Indeed, in the prophecies themselves we see that consolation follows destruction, to represent the “left hand pushing away, and the right hand drawing near.”

Even Isaiah himself prophesied about the destruction of the First Temple by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and also about the destruction of the Second Temple. So, it cannot be said that his book is entirely consolation.

Similarly, Jeremiah also prophesied many messages of consolation and redemption, so his book is not entirely destruction.

And in general, each of them prophesied both destruction and consolation—so why disregard the chronological order?

Second Reason: Isaiah’s Stature

The second consideration is from the standpoint of the prophet himself—that is, the greatness of Isaiah son of Amoz and the superiority of his family lineage over all the other prophets. As our Sages said in the first chapter of Tractate Megillah: Rabbi Levi said, "This teaching is a tradition handed down to us from our ancestors: Amoz and Amaziah were brothers." Therefore, Isaiah came from the royal family and the noble class; he was the king's nephew.

As an individual, he had the confidence that comes from being a noble.

We can also see his greatness from the strength of his heart in his rebukes. He had the heart of a lion, fearing no man and not relying on anyone. Even though he said about himself, "I gave my back to the strikers and my cheeks to those who pluck hair," the verse does not actually say that this happened, but rather that he was prepared to endure it for the honor of God. As he said: "The Lord God will help me, therefore I will not be ashamed, therefore I set my face like flint, and I know I will not be humiliated." This shows that he did not suffer shame from any person.

This also reflects his noble lineage, the pleasantness of his speech, and the beauty of his rhetoric—like that of kings and royal advisors who speak in a more refined and elegant way than most people. Because of this, the Sages said that Isaiah, in his vision when he saw the Lord in the year of King Uzziah’s death, was like a city dweller; whereas Ezekiel, in his vision by the river Kebar, was like a villager. So how could the Book of Isaiah come after the books of other prophets who were not of the same status and noble family?

Third Reason: Quality of Isaiah’s Prophecies

The third consideration concerns the form, meaning the structure of Isaiah's prophecies versus those of the other prophets. Here's the explanation: All prophetic experiences fall into two categories, as the Rambam (Guide for the Perplexed) explained: dreams and visions. This is based on the Torah's statement, "If there is a prophet among you, I, Hashem, make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream."

But what distinguishes a dream from a vision? The Rambam didn't fully explain. Still, from his own writings, we understand that there's no difference between dreams, visions, or appearances in terms of the One providing the prophecy, which is always God via the Active Intellect. Nor is there a difference in the recipient, because in either form, the prophetic flow reaches the intellect along with the imaginative faculty.

And don’t think the difference is that during a prophetic dream the senses are inactive like in sleep, but in a vision the senses remain alert like when awake. That’s not the case. According to the Rambam, whenever a prophet is in the state of prophecy, whether in a dream or a vision, their senses are suspended due to their soul's attachment to the divine realm. He brought proof from Daniel: "I saw the great vision, and no strength remained in me... I fell into a deep sleep with my face to the ground." This shows that even during a vision, the senses are inactive.

So the only difference between a dream and a vision lies in the prophet's state when the prophecy begins. If the person is asleep, it is called a dream. If the person is awake and going about their activities when the prophecy falls upon them, it's called a vision or appearance.

From this, we learn that dream-prophecy is a lower level than vision-prophecy. In a dream, the imagination is less restrained and may form chaotic or fabricated images, like other dreams, making such prophecy harder to understand and filled with metaphors and riddles. It needs much interpretation. But in a vision, since the person is awake and their intellect dominates the imagination, the imagery is more structured and clear, making the prophecy more pure, lucid, and direct.

This is why the sages said that Moses never received prophecy at night, as it says, "By day Hashem spoke to Moses" — to emphasize that his prophecy never came in a dream, which is a lower level.

You can see this distinction in the Rambam's Guide 2:41, where he says that the term "vision" refers to what God called "I make Myself known in a vision." It's also called "the hand of God" or "appearance" — an awesome experience tied to the prophet when awake. The Rambam hints that this waking state is the key difference.

Since Isaiah's level of prophecy was so elevated, he never received prophecy in a dream — only in visions and appearances. That’s why his book begins: "The vision of Isaiah son of Amoz, which he saw." This term "vision" denotes the highest form of prophecy. As a result, his words are clearer, more articulate, and use fewer metaphors and riddles, because of the clarity of his prophecy.

Conclusion

The conclusion: Isaiah's book, in terms of the form of prophecy, surpasses all others. That’s why it deserves to come first, both in order and in rank.

Takeway

There are so many different ideas that we can learn from this—I look forward to reading yours in the comments. To get the conversation started, here are some of my own.

1. Influence > power—While there were many prophets before Isaiah, he is the first whose role is exclusively about sharing God’s words with the world. From Moses through the Judges, the prophets were warriors and teachers.
   
   With the rise of the monarchy in the days of Saul, these roles split—with the kings taking responsibility for war and prophets taking responsibility for sharing God’s message. Samuel and Nathan rebuked King Saul and King David. Their message was limited to the kings of Israel. Isaiah is the first Jewish prophet to share his message not only with the kings of Israel, but also with the leaders, the laypeople, and other nations.
   

   As Rabbi Jonathan Sacks zt”l points out, we see that the prophets wielded influence—and we still remember their names and are inspired by their words. The kings had power, and most of them are forgotten. In another essay, Rabbi Sacks explains the difference between power and influence:

   
   “Power works by division, influence by multiplication. Power, in other words, is a zero-sum game: the more you share, the less you have. Influence is not like this, as we see with our Prophets. When it comes to leadership-as-influence, the more we share the more we have.”

   
   Personally, I’ve always been inspired by this idea. At work, I make a point to teach as much as I can and help others. By sharing my understanding—which, in a very practical way, helps me achieve my goals at work—I increase my influence.
   
   Isaiah was the first to truly embody this idea.
   

2. Use your position for good—As part of the royal household, Isaiah received a unique education and developed a strong sense of confidence. He used both of these qualities to advocate for justice on behalf of the poor and oppressed.
   
   In practical terms, we, too, should strive to use the advantages we've been given in life to assist others.
   

3. Embrace your strengths—Isaiah’s prophecy was qualitatively greater than that of Ezekiel or Jeremiah.
   

   Today’s generation is full of platitudes—“You can be anything you want to be if you set your mind to it,” and the like. Optimism and confidence are certainly advantages in nearly every field. Yet our priority should be to focus on the things we are naturally best at.
   

   Recognizing and appreciating how each of us is unique is crucial to our personal growth. For more on this topic, I highly recommend listening to Embrace Your Strengths: Marcus Buckingham or at least to his answer to the question “how do you identify your strengths?" which starts here.