The Parable of the Thankless Vineyard. Isaiah probably at a vintage festival, when Judæ ans from the country (Isaiah 5:3), as well as the inhabitants of Jerusalem, are present, comes forward as a minstrel. He sings this song of his friend's vineyard in light popular measure, making it attractive with beautiful plays upon words. He skilfully heightens the interest of his hearers, and by concealing the true nature of the vineyard he wins from them a mental self-condemnation. Then he throws off the mask and points the moral in a sentence made unforgettable by a pair of splendid assonances. The date is quite uncertain, but it may belong to the same period as Isaiah 2:6 to Isaiah 4:1
The minstrel sings of his Beloved. He had chosen for his vineyard the most suitable situation. It was on a hill for the sake of the sunny exposure, and as the soil was very fertile, it had the best position that nature could offer. He lavished also every care on its culture. He dug it up, for ploughing was impossible on the steep hillside, and cleared the ground of stones. Then he planted the soil thus prepared with choice vines. In anticipation of an abundant vintage he built a tower, not a mere watchman's hut (Isaiah 1:8), and hewed a vat (mg.) out of the solid limestone, into which the juice might run from the wine-press. He also planted a hedge and built a wall (Isaiah 5:5) round the vineyard. But when he came to gather the grapes he found only wild grapes. The poet now speaks in the person of his friend, and invites the judgment of the hearers on his own conduct and that of the vineyard. The people are silent: only one answer is possible to the question, Where does the blame lie? But they wait to see what fate is reserved for such ingratitude. The rhythm becomes heavier to reflect the darkening mood of the speaker as the doom is pronounced. The hedge is removed, the wall broken, and the wild beasts and cattle, no longer kept at bay, press in and ravage the vineyard. And the owner abandons it, untilled, unpruned, to thorns and brambles nay more, he promotes its ruin by bidding the clouds pour no rain upon it. Does the poet then disclose in these words the identity of the owner, since it is Yahweh alone who can command the clouds to withhold their rain? Not necessarily, for David could in his elegy lay a similar ban on the mountains of Gilboa (2 Samuel 1:21). Only in the closing verse is the well-kept secret revealed, that Yahweh is the Beloved and Judah His thankless vineyard. It comes with a crash that reminds us of Nathan's Thou art the man! And it is expressed in words which his hearers cannot forget. The assonances cannot be tolerably reproduced in English: He looked for mishpat and behold mispah, for ts e daqah and behold ts e- aqah. The meaning of the word rendered oppression is uncertain; it is generally translated bloodshed. The cry is the cry of the oppressed.
Isaiah 5:1. The text is uncertain, but has not been satisfactorily emended.