| א וַיֹּאמֶר ה אֶל-אַבְרָם, לֶךְ-לְךָ מֵאַרְצְךָ וּמִמּוֹלַדְתְּךָ וּמִבֵּית אָבִיךָ, אֶל-הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר אַרְאֶךָּ. | 1 Now the LORD said unto Abram: 'Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto the land that I will show thee. |
 |
| Leipzig Mahzor, Abraham in Nimrod`s Furnace, ca.1320 |
לֶךְ-לְךָ -- Like Shelach Lecha for the meraglim, it was not an instruction, but acquiescence to an idea Avraham suggested. Not really. But lehanaasecha, for your own benefit, is surely not peshat. It is midrash picking up on the irregularity, and filling in the import based on immediate context, that context being the next pasuk, of וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל. (This a reaction to Rashi and then Gur Aryeh.)
The lecha is idiomatic. Get yourself a drink. Sit yourself down. It functions as an intensifier.
There might be a connection to the widespread Amorite migrations in Mesopotamia.
מֵאַרְצְךָ וּמִמּוֹלַדְתְּךָ וּמִבֵּית אָבִיךָ -- These are not three different places, but three ways of describing the same place. This is also an intensifier, to indicate to Avraham, and the reader, how much Avraham what Avraham is giving up. Compare with Hashem's instruction to Avraham later: ka na es bincha, es yechidcha, asher ahavta, es Yitzchak, with the associated midrash.
מֵאַרְצְךָ -- He is leaving his own country, and will be a resident alien in another land.
וּמִמּוֹלַדְתְּךָ -- and he is leaving the place he was born, and which fostered him. Maybe also the narrower neighborhood.
וּמִבֵּית אָבִיךָ -- and is leaving extended family behind. Perhaps this is not "house of your father" but rather "your bet av", which is an extended family group.
אֶל-הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר אַרְאֶךָּ -- This is putting faith in Hashem. He did not even know the destination, or the destination did not matter. Compare to the faith Avraham displayed later on by akeidas Yitzchak, with וְהַעֲלֵהוּ שָׁם לְעֹלָה עַל אַחַד הֶהָרִים אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ. I think it is possible there that Avraham was informed fairly immediately of the place, such that we can be told that וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת-עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת-הַמָּקוֹם--מֵרָחֹק.
Which movement was this? The three possibilities are:
- from Ur Kasdim to Charan
- or from Charan to Canaan
- from Ur Kasdim to Canaan
[יב, א]השם ציווה לאברהם ועודנו באור כשדים שיעזוב ארצו ומקום מולדתו, גם בית אביו.
See what various meforshim say. I think a strong case can be made for option 3.
I'll first argue for Ur Kasdim. We can point to Bereishit perek 15:
| ז וַיֹּאמֶר, אֵלָיו: אֲנִי ה, אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִיךָ מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים--לָתֶת לְךָ אֶת-הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת, לְרִשְׁתָּהּ. | 7 And He said unto him: 'I am the LORD that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.' |
This "brought thee out" indicated more than hidden Divine manipulation of historical events. There are difficulties with this interpretation, which are answerable.
The first difficulty is that the movement from Ur Kasdim to Charan already happened. Thus, at the end of the previous perek, 11:
| לא וַיִּקַּח תֶּרַח אֶת-אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ, וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-הָרָן בֶּן-בְּנוֹ, וְאֵת שָׂרַי כַּלָּתוֹ, אֵשֶׁת אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ; וַיֵּצְאוּ אִתָּם מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים, לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן, וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-חָרָן, וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם. | 31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran, his son's son, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there. |
If so, how could the Divine directive to leave Ur Kasdim come after Avraham had already left Ur Kasdim? The answer is ain mukdam eme'uchar baTorah. And I am not kidding here. The previous perek was concerned with genealogical data (the P stream), and so it brings us up to date with events until Terach's death. Both Rashi and Ibn Ezra note this ain mukdam. So Terach was said to die in Charan at the end of perek 11, yet we know the following:
Terach age at Avraham's birth: about 70, based on Bereishit 11:26.
Terach's age at death: 205, based on Bereishit 11:32.
Avraham's age when he left Charan: 75, based on Bereishit 12:4.
If so, Terach was 70 + 75 - 145, which was less than 205. Thus, Terach was still alive when Avraham left from Charan, in the next perek. The answer is that ain mukdam, and the next perek, a J stream, is zooming in to the micro level of what happened in Bereishit 11:31.
Interjection: I generally dislike calculations of this sort, which force us into sometimes difficult interpretations of pesukim. Who says we fully understand ambiguous pesukim, such as that Terach was 70 what he fathered three children, to mean that Avraham must have been the earliest, and such that this constraint will lead to a further interpretation down the road? Where the pasuk (11:32) tells us that Terach died in Charan, וַיָּמָת תֶּרַח בְּחָרָן, maybe this was intended to explain why he did not make the next leg of the journey, such that we see Avraham continued onward with Lot and Sarah. In other words, perhaps one call still say that Avraham only continued on after Terach's death, such that this portion is not necessarily ain mukdam. Yet the Divine instruction was what led them to leave Ur Kasdim, and so for this, at the very least, ain mukdam, or the transfer of macro-scale in P to micro-scale in J holds.
I do think that Avraham left his father while his father was still alive. But this was not abandonment. I think that after the move to Charan, Terach and his family were established there. Though Nachor, Avraham's brother, is not explicitly listed as one of those who traveled with Terach (the Samaritans add explicit mention of him and Milkah) from Ur Kasdim to Charan, we see later that his descendants, Betuel, Lavan, and Rivkah, are living in Charan.
I do think that Avraham left his father while his father was still alive. But this was not abandonment. I think that after the move to Charan, Terach and his family were established there. Though Nachor, Avraham's brother, is not explicitly listed as one of those who traveled with Terach (the Samaritans add explicit mention of him and Milkah) from Ur Kasdim to Charan, we see later that his descendants, Betuel, Lavan, and Rivkah, are living in Charan.
The next difficulty is that it seems that in the movement from Ur Kasdim, it is Terach who took the initiative: וַיִּקַּח תֶּרַח אֶת-אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ. The answer is that, despite the Divine command to Avraham, Terach was still officially the head of the household, and since he is travelling as well, he should be listed first.
Further, vayikach does not mean that there is a single actor. Rather, vayikach is a way of selecting multiple actors for the later specified action. We see that later action in the pasuk, where we have the plural: וַיֵּצְאוּ אִתָּם. (Compare this to my remarks on Vayikach Korach, where we are specifying Korach, Datan, Aviram, and On are the actors of the next verb, which explains there what was taken -- nothing at all.) Rashi says something which supports this:
| and they went forth with them: And Terah and Abram went forth with Lot and Sarai. | ויצאו אתם: ויצאו תרח ואברם עם לוט ושרי: |
Another difficulty is that leaving Charan was also part of the Divine command:
| ד וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָם, כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלָיו ה, וַיֵּלֶךְ אִתּוֹ, לוֹט; וְאַבְרָם, בֶּן-חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, בְּצֵאתוֹ, מֵחָרָן. | 4 So Abram went, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him; and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. |
While one could try to sever the first half of the pasuk from the second, it is clear that this is part of the fulfillment of the command. Rashi says it like this:
| from your land: Now had he not already gone out of there with his father and come as far as Haran? Rather, thus did He say to him, “Distance yourself more from there and leave your father’s house.” | מארצך: והלא כבר יצא משם עם אביו ובא עד לחרן, אלא כך אמר לו התרחק עוד משם וצא מבית אביך: |
But I don't think one needs to make this into a separate command, in order to accomplish the correct result of every movement being part of the Divine command.
Hashem, after all, had told Avraham אֶל-הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַרְאֶךָּ. So long as Hashem does not tell him to stop, for this is the land, Avraham is continuing. Further, see what the pasuk (11:32) stated: וַיֵּצְאוּ אִתָּם מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים, לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן. They had left Ur Kasdim to travel towards the land of Canaan. Then what? וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-חָרָן, וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם. They paused for a while there. But still, they had not yet reached the land of Canaan. At a later point, Avraham, Sarah, and Lot continued on this journey.
Next pasuk, 12:2:
| ב וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ, לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל, וַאֲבָרֶכְךָ, וַאֲגַדְּלָה שְׁמֶךָ; וֶהְיֵה, בְּרָכָה. | 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and be thou a blessing. |
One can read this as a positive result of the leaving (meshaneh makom meshaneh mazal). One can read it as an assurance despite the negative effects one usually encounters when leaving. The first is Rashi on pasuk 1 and the second is Rashi on pasuk 2. Rashi is drawing these admittedly contradictory midrashim from different sources. The first Rashi, from Rosh Hashanah 16b, Tanchuma; the second Rashi, from Gen. Rabbah 39:11; Tanchuma Buber, Chaye Sarah 6. Don't get a headache trying to resolve the two.
The dispute is whether וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ is a "therefore" or "and despite this".
Hashem had a plan from the beginning, to give this particular land to Avraham and his descendants. This plan encompassed the entire patriarchal narrative, even unto the sale of Yosef and the descent into Egypt. This is not meshaneh makom meshaneh mazal. Hashem is kol yachol, and had He wished to make Avraham wealthy in Ur Kasdim, and Sarah fertile in Ur Kasdim, He certainly could have. But this is how Hashem decided to shape history.
וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל -- Leave as part of My enabling this to happen.
וַאֲבָרֶכְךָ -- is this a positive spiritual blessing, or is it a way of conveying material success, directed from on high.
וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה -- See Seforno:
וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה. בִּרְכַּת ה' הִיא שֶׁיִּשְׂמַח ה' בְּמַעֲשָׂיו, כְּמו שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַבּותֵינוּ זִכְרונָם לִבְרָכָה: 'יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנִי בָּרְכֵנִי. אָמַרְתִּי לו: יְהִי רָצון מִלְּפָנֶיךָ.. וְיָגלּוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ עַל מִדּותֶיךָ' (ברכות ז, א). אָמַר אִם כֵּן הֱיֵה לִי בְּרָכָה בַּמֶּה שֶּׁתִּתְבּונֵן וְתִקְנֶה שְׁלֵמוּת, וּתְלַמֵּד דַּעַת אֶת הָעָם.
Thus, Avraham is a blessing to Hashem. I would simply say, "you will be in a state of blessing". Or, based on the next pasuk, "you will be referred to when people bless one another".
Next pasuk:
Think Bilaam. I'm rubber, you're glue. All blessing comes from Hashem, and so Avraham is above any attempt by humans to curse him. Further, those who ally themselves with Avraham and seek out his benefit will be rewarded, and the opposite for those who take an opposite position.
Thus, וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ כֹּל מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה, for those who ally themselves with Avraham. The alternative, which I prefer, is that Avraham's status will be so great that all families on the earth will bless one another to be like you. See the blessing to Ephraim and Menasheh, from Yaakov Avinu:
So Rashi, Shadal.
Next pasuk:
We should focus on why pasuk 4 and pasuk 5 are not mere repetitions of one another.
וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָם -- In similar fashion to "Just as Hashem commanded Noach, so did he do." The section began with לֶךְ-לְךָ, and so here we are told vayelech.
כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלָיו ה -- This is then the completion of the Divine instruction.
וַיֵּלֶךְ אִתּוֹ לוֹט -- Because Lot will feature in the individual, micro-level action. Note Sarah is not mentioned, though she had been in the previous perek.
וְאַבְרָם, בֶּן-חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, בְּצֵאתוֹ, מֵחָרָן -- This is the sort of concern that we saw in the previous perek, of establishing a Biblical chronology. How old was person X when significant event Y occurred?
Next pasuk:
The focus here is not fulfillment of the Divine directive. It is progression of the genealogical line, listing where each person moves. Compare וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם אֶת-שָׂרַי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-אָחִיו to the pasuk in the previous perek, וַיִּקַּח תֶּרַח אֶת-אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ, וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-הָרָן בֶּן-בְּנוֹ, וְאֵת שָׂרַי כַּלָּתוֹ, אֵשֶׁת אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ.
Also compare וַיֵּצְאוּ לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן in this pasuk with וַיֵּצְאוּ אִתָּם מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-חָרָן וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם. This is then the ending point of travel from Ur Kasdim to Eretz Kenaan, with the interlude in Charan.
וְאֶת-כָּל-רְכוּשָׁם אֲשֶׁר רָכָשׁוּ וְאֶת-הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן -- Perhaps to demonstrate an initial fulfillment of the Divine promise of reward, when Hashem told Avraham Lech Lecha.
וְאֶת-הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן -- Not a golem. These is the servant they acquired. As in the peshat interpretation Rashi offers (second):
Next pasuk:
עַד מְקוֹם שְׁכֶם -- See Shadal for an interesting imagined alternate Israelite history, were Shechem chosen over Yerushalayim by David Hamelech. Perhaps the 10 shevatim would not have rebelled...
וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי אָז בָּאָרֶץ -- Of course, they were there as well later. But recall that this was called Eretz Kenaan. This parenthetical remark explains that.
This has the flavor of a parenthetical remark. Should a parenthetical remark interact with pesukim in direct context? That is, can we say that the spark for וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי אָז בָּאָרֶץ is the following statement, that לְזַרְעֲךָ אֶתֵּן אֶת-הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת? Rashi suggests that only now were they in the land, but not before.
וְאֶעֶשְׂךָ לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל -- Leave as part of My enabling this to happen.
וַאֲבָרֶכְךָ -- is this a positive spiritual blessing, or is it a way of conveying material success, directed from on high.
וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה -- See Seforno:
וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה. בִּרְכַּת ה' הִיא שֶׁיִּשְׂמַח ה' בְּמַעֲשָׂיו, כְּמו שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַבּותֵינוּ זִכְרונָם לִבְרָכָה: 'יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנִי בָּרְכֵנִי. אָמַרְתִּי לו: יְהִי רָצון מִלְּפָנֶיךָ.. וְיָגלּוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ עַל מִדּותֶיךָ' (ברכות ז, א). אָמַר אִם כֵּן הֱיֵה לִי בְּרָכָה בַּמֶּה שֶּׁתִּתְבּונֵן וְתִקְנֶה שְׁלֵמוּת, וּתְלַמֵּד דַּעַת אֶת הָעָם.
Thus, Avraham is a blessing to Hashem. I would simply say, "you will be in a state of blessing". Or, based on the next pasuk, "you will be referred to when people bless one another".
Next pasuk:
| ג וַאֲבָרְכָה, מְבָרְכֶיךָ, וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ, אָאֹר; וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ, כֹּל מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה. | 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.' |
Think Bilaam. I'm rubber, you're glue. All blessing comes from Hashem, and so Avraham is above any attempt by humans to curse him. Further, those who ally themselves with Avraham and seek out his benefit will be rewarded, and the opposite for those who take an opposite position.
Thus, וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ כֹּל מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה, for those who ally themselves with Avraham. The alternative, which I prefer, is that Avraham's status will be so great that all families on the earth will bless one another to be like you. See the blessing to Ephraim and Menasheh, from Yaakov Avinu:
| כ וַיְבָרְכֵם בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, לֵאמוֹר, בְּךָ יְבָרֵךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר, יְשִׂמְךָ אֱלֹהִים כְּאֶפְרַיִם וְכִמְנַשֶּׁה; וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת-אֶפְרַיִם, לִפְנֵי מְנַשֶּׁה. | 20 And he blessed them that day, saying: 'By thee shall Israel bless, saying: God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.' And he set Ephraim before Manasseh. |
So Rashi, Shadal.
Next pasuk:
| ד וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָם, כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלָיו ה, וַיֵּלֶךְ אִתּוֹ, לוֹט; וְאַבְרָם, בֶּן-חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, בְּצֵאתוֹ, מֵחָרָן. | 4 So Abram went, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him; and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. |
We should focus on why pasuk 4 and pasuk 5 are not mere repetitions of one another.
וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָם -- In similar fashion to "Just as Hashem commanded Noach, so did he do." The section began with לֶךְ-לְךָ, and so here we are told vayelech.
כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלָיו ה -- This is then the completion of the Divine instruction.
וַיֵּלֶךְ אִתּוֹ לוֹט -- Because Lot will feature in the individual, micro-level action. Note Sarah is not mentioned, though she had been in the previous perek.
וְאַבְרָם, בֶּן-חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, בְּצֵאתוֹ, מֵחָרָן -- This is the sort of concern that we saw in the previous perek, of establishing a Biblical chronology. How old was person X when significant event Y occurred?
Next pasuk:
| ה וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם אֶת-שָׂרַי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-אָחִיו, וְאֶת-כָּל-רְכוּשָׁם אֲשֶׁר רָכָשׁוּ, וְאֶת-הַנֶּפֶשׁ, אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן; וַיֵּצְאוּ, לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן, וַיָּבֹאוּ, אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן. | 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. |
The focus here is not fulfillment of the Divine directive. It is progression of the genealogical line, listing where each person moves. Compare וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם אֶת-שָׂרַי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-אָחִיו to the pasuk in the previous perek, וַיִּקַּח תֶּרַח אֶת-אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ, וְאֶת-לוֹט בֶּן-הָרָן בֶּן-בְּנוֹ, וְאֵת שָׂרַי כַּלָּתוֹ, אֵשֶׁת אַבְרָם בְּנוֹ.
Also compare וַיֵּצְאוּ לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן in this pasuk with וַיֵּצְאוּ אִתָּם מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-חָרָן וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם. This is then the ending point of travel from Ur Kasdim to Eretz Kenaan, with the interlude in Charan.
וְאֶת-כָּל-רְכוּשָׁם אֲשֶׁר רָכָשׁוּ וְאֶת-הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן -- Perhaps to demonstrate an initial fulfillment of the Divine promise of reward, when Hashem told Avraham Lech Lecha.
וְאֶת-הַנֶּפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ בְחָרָן -- Not a golem. These is the servant they acquired. As in the peshat interpretation Rashi offers (second):
| and the souls they had acquired in Haran: whom he had brought under the wings of the Shechinah. Abraham would convert the men, and Sarah would convert the women, and Scripture ascribes to them [a merit] as if they had made them (Gen. Rabbah 39:14). (Hence, the expression אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ, lit. that they made.) The simple meaning of the verse is: the slaves and maidservants that they had acquired for themselves, as in [the verse] (below 31:1): “He acquired (עָשָׂה) all this wealth” [an expression of acquisition]; (Num. 24:18): “and Israel acquires,” an expression of acquiring and gathering. | אשר עשו בחרן: שהכניסן תחת כנפי השכינה, אברהם מגייר את האנשים, ושרה מגיירת הנשים, ומעלה עליהם הכתוב כאלו עשאום. ופשוטו של מקרא עבדים ושפחות שקנו להם, כמו (שם לא א) עשה את כל הכבוד הזה, (במדבר כד יח) וישראל עושה חיל, לשון קונה וכונס: |
Next pasuk:
| ו וַיַּעֲבֹר אַבְרָם, בָּאָרֶץ, עַד מְקוֹם שְׁכֶם, עַד אֵלוֹן מוֹרֶה; וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי, אָז בָּאָרֶץ. | 6 And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem, unto the terebinth of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land. |
עַד מְקוֹם שְׁכֶם -- See Shadal for an interesting imagined alternate Israelite history, were Shechem chosen over Yerushalayim by David Hamelech. Perhaps the 10 shevatim would not have rebelled...
וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי אָז בָּאָרֶץ -- Of course, they were there as well later. But recall that this was called Eretz Kenaan. This parenthetical remark explains that.
This has the flavor of a parenthetical remark. Should a parenthetical remark interact with pesukim in direct context? That is, can we say that the spark for וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי אָז בָּאָרֶץ is the following statement, that לְזַרְעֲךָ אֶתֵּן אֶת-הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת? Rashi suggests that only now were they in the land, but not before.
No comments:
Post a Comment